The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Not for me though. I personally have found myself caught in the trap of complaining about value for money, for a lot of things non-gaming, but nothing comes close to causing as much contraversy. What developers seem to be doing to which gamers seemed to have turned a blind eye to, is making an awful lot of unworthy profit. To make a game costs quite a handful of money depending on the type, but just think about it, only one disc is carrying all of the generated information created by the developers and then it's just being copied millions and millions of times. Games used to be between 20 to 30 pounds for all kinds of systems, now I've seen some for over £60!
Fair enough, the principal remains that these copies are produced for everyone to have the opportunity of playing the game, but why and when did the prices start to go up? What's wrong with games ranging like they used to, between 20 and 30 quid? Is it because of the whole next generation mallarchy that we're paying more for games that aren't even up to standard? If it is, something's gone wrong somewhere.
It would even work at an advantage for developers if they lowered their price. It would introduce a wider audience of interest selling much more than it probably does now. One of the main reasons why the population of non-gamers is so big is because they think that games are over priced for their worth, that is why there were more people who owned Mega Drives, Snes's and Master Systems, because they were sensibly priced and most games were value for money. Now it seems as though real gamers are being forced mentally into buying a game that they really like. Things could be easier.
Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft; lower your prices and you'll receive a lot more profit and earn a lot more respect. Only if the majority of their games were actually ground-breaking then ..yeah! ...why not hold quite a high price? But unfortunately the majority of games around for each "next-gen" console lack in depth, so they shouldn't be so expensive. Yes it may be the primary developers like Rare and not the actual console manufacturer that make the games, but surely the console holder should have a say in the matter of price.
The only way I can see any game being worth its asking price is if it lasted forever. Impossible? Maybe, maybe not. It's our human nature to get bored of seeing the same thing over and over again, which makes this so impossible, but then what if games had a way of thinking for themselves, meaning they could create what they think will benefit the buyer. This is a very wild idea (believe me, I'm surprising myself here) but who knows. There always remains a possibility with time on our hands, it may look impossible now but never in the near future.
But you can't really slack developers for doing what's only human. Put it this way, if I was in their shoes I wouldn't be complaining about value for money, but I would certainly spot this flaw seeing that I'm the empathising type, and try to correct it.
My new book is coming out soon called 'Thinking Of Others'(I wish), maybe developers should take a leaf out of it for OUR own good.
KK
Fair enough, the principal remains that these copies are produced for everyone to have the opportunity of playing the game, but why and when did the prices start to go up? What's wrong with games ranging like they used to, between 20 and 30 quid? Is it because of the whole next generation mallarchy that we're paying more for games that aren't even up to standard? If it is, something's gone wrong somewhere.
It would even work at an advantage for developers if they lowered their price. It would introduce a wider audience of interest selling much more than it probably does now. One of the main reasons why the population of non-gamers is so big is because they think that games are over priced for their worth, that is why there were more people who owned Mega Drives, Snes's and Master Systems, because they were sensibly priced and most games were value for money. Now it seems as though real gamers are being forced mentally into buying a game that they really like. Things could be easier.
Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft; lower your prices and you'll receive a lot more profit and earn a lot more respect. Only if the majority of their games were actually ground-breaking then ..yeah! ...why not hold quite a high price? But unfortunately the majority of games around for each "next-gen" console lack in depth, so they shouldn't be so expensive. Yes it may be the primary developers like Rare and not the actual console manufacturer that make the games, but surely the console holder should have a say in the matter of price.
The only way I can see any game being worth its asking price is if it lasted forever. Impossible? Maybe, maybe not. It's our human nature to get bored of seeing the same thing over and over again, which makes this so impossible, but then what if games had a way of thinking for themselves, meaning they could create what they think will benefit the buyer. This is a very wild idea (believe me, I'm surprising myself here) but who knows. There always remains a possibility with time on our hands, it may look impossible now but never in the near future.
But you can't really slack developers for doing what's only human. Put it this way, if I was in their shoes I wouldn't be complaining about value for money, but I would certainly spot this flaw seeing that I'm the empathising type, and try to correct it.
My new book is coming out soon called 'Thinking Of Others'(I wish), maybe developers should take a leaf out of it for OUR own good.
KK
There have been no replies to this thread yet.
Not for me though. I personally have found myself caught in the trap of complaining about value for money, for a lot of things non-gaming, but nothing comes close to causing as much contraversy. What developers seem to be doing to which gamers seemed to have turned a blind eye to, is making an awful lot of unworthy profit. To make a game costs quite a handful of money depending on the type, but just think about it, only one disc is carrying all of the generated information created by the developers and then it's just being copied millions and millions of times. Games used to be between 20 to 30 pounds for all kinds of systems, now I've seen some for over £60!
Fair enough, the principal remains that these copies are produced for everyone to have the opportunity of playing the game, but why and when did the prices start to go up? What's wrong with games ranging like they used to, between 20 and 30 quid? Is it because of the whole next generation mallarchy that we're paying more for games that aren't even up to standard? If it is, something's gone wrong somewhere.
It would even work at an advantage for developers if they lowered their price. It would introduce a wider audience of interest selling much more than it probably does now. One of the main reasons why the population of non-gamers is so big is because they think that games are over priced for their worth, that is why there were more people who owned Mega Drives, Snes's and Master Systems, because they were sensibly priced and most games were value for money. Now it seems as though real gamers are being forced mentally into buying a game that they really like. Things could be easier.
Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft; lower your prices and you'll receive a lot more profit and earn a lot more respect. Only if the majority of their games were actually ground-breaking then ..yeah! ...why not hold quite a high price? But unfortunately the majority of games around for each "next-gen" console lack in depth, so they shouldn't be so expensive. Yes it may be the primary developers like Rare and not the actual console manufacturer that make the games, but surely the console holder should have a say in the matter of price.
The only way I can see any game being worth its asking price is if it lasted forever. Impossible? Maybe, maybe not. It's our human nature to get bored of seeing the same thing over and over again, which makes this so impossible, but then what if games had a way of thinking for themselves, meaning they could create what they think will benefit the buyer. This is a very wild idea (believe me, I'm surprising myself here) but who knows. There always remains a possibility with time on our hands, it may look impossible now but never in the near future.
But you can't really slack developers for doing what's only human. Put it this way, if I was in their shoes I wouldn't be complaining about value for money, but I would certainly spot this flaw seeing that I'm the empathising type, and try to correct it.
My new book is coming out soon called 'Thinking Of Others'(I wish), maybe developers should take a leaf out of it for OUR own good.
KK
Fair enough, the principal remains that these copies are produced for everyone to have the opportunity of playing the game, but why and when did the prices start to go up? What's wrong with games ranging like they used to, between 20 and 30 quid? Is it because of the whole next generation mallarchy that we're paying more for games that aren't even up to standard? If it is, something's gone wrong somewhere.
It would even work at an advantage for developers if they lowered their price. It would introduce a wider audience of interest selling much more than it probably does now. One of the main reasons why the population of non-gamers is so big is because they think that games are over priced for their worth, that is why there were more people who owned Mega Drives, Snes's and Master Systems, because they were sensibly priced and most games were value for money. Now it seems as though real gamers are being forced mentally into buying a game that they really like. Things could be easier.
Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft; lower your prices and you'll receive a lot more profit and earn a lot more respect. Only if the majority of their games were actually ground-breaking then ..yeah! ...why not hold quite a high price? But unfortunately the majority of games around for each "next-gen" console lack in depth, so they shouldn't be so expensive. Yes it may be the primary developers like Rare and not the actual console manufacturer that make the games, but surely the console holder should have a say in the matter of price.
The only way I can see any game being worth its asking price is if it lasted forever. Impossible? Maybe, maybe not. It's our human nature to get bored of seeing the same thing over and over again, which makes this so impossible, but then what if games had a way of thinking for themselves, meaning they could create what they think will benefit the buyer. This is a very wild idea (believe me, I'm surprising myself here) but who knows. There always remains a possibility with time on our hands, it may look impossible now but never in the near future.
But you can't really slack developers for doing what's only human. Put it this way, if I was in their shoes I wouldn't be complaining about value for money, but I would certainly spot this flaw seeing that I'm the empathising type, and try to correct it.
My new book is coming out soon called 'Thinking Of Others'(I wish), maybe developers should take a leaf out of it for OUR own good.
KK