How much is a game worth?/Would you spend $300 on a single game?

I'm willing to part with it all and lose my family.

It's true, though. Plug it in for yourself: moneychimp.com/calculator/compound_interest_calculator.htm

And, I just realized something, you didn't quote what I said:

I'd pay 300 bux for a game, provided it was a game that kept me entertained for 300 hours with loads of fresh entertainment, new locations, and maybe various quantities of game play. Give me a game that's 20 gigs, spent ten years in development, is as detailed as every MMO in every shitty MMO manga and about twenty times as large as any sandbox fantasy world. As a side note, i've held a long-standing belief that a game is worth a dollar or so for every hour of entertainment you get out of it; JRPGs give a lot of value for money, action games not so much. If a game kept me thrilled for 300+ hours, i'd argue 300 bux is a fair price. Not a lot of games that can do that, though, outside of ultragrind like going for a level 9999 character in Disgaea.

Time is more valuable, since you can't get it back. A game is only worth buying if it's worth spending the time to play it. That's why you never try shit like FFXIII or Other M just for laughs. No value in such torture, even for free.

$3 is the sweet spot. $10 is pushing it. $30 is fuck no territory.

That's not how anything works. It's absurd. Getting THAT kind of return on any investment is impossible unless you're going high-risk, which only rich people can afford to do. Rich people don't play video games.

Which makes you wonder why people suffer through the 30 hours long cutscene experience that is MGS4 even after hearing all about how shit it is.

The most money I’ve ever payed for a used game was twenty bucks for a copy of Silent Hill 2. I’ve only ever payed full retail price a handful of times, the most recent being Yakuza Zero.

the thing is though, with the video game industry video games typically new video games loose their value over time because the cost of a video game is based upon consumer interest of said video game, it's why fucking gta5 is still at release value and why lots of other Triple A titles are now bargain bin liners.

it also explains why alot of really older video games are now really expensive

I would pay 60$ for a game that at least provided 200 hours worth of gameplay.

Well, aren't you the lucky man. I heard that The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim is being ported to the Nintendo Switch!

Not interested in that game.

What if I told you my grandparents were loaded and I was their favorite grandchild because I'm not a gay tranny like all the others?

I'd say you deserve the money, but Holla Forums would be screaming, pissing their panties and saying you don't deserve it.

I would find it extremely unlikely that you'd be in an entire family of gay trannies without having some serious mental problems of your own, and also be a little bit confused.

If they're both gay and transsexual, wouldn't that make them straight…?

Also, good job accepting charity based on doing nothing but existing, I guess.

the games today haven't inflated on the base price, in appearance. i'm not ok with 'multiplayer only' or endless microtransaction models.
it's always been a 'how much will people pay' model for videogames though. the sad thing is that the f2p model makes the most money since people will pay very large amounts to gain the advantage over other players.

I'm one of those faggots that would gladly pay ~100 for a good retro game, though 300 isn't going to happen. Anything modern though? 5-20 bucks at most barring very few exceptions, like an english translated SRW.

120+ hours of blissful fun = full price 60$
All other good games not ubisoft or EA = 30$ or less depending on how good and how many hours out of them.
All ubisoft and ea games = buy used and may god have mercy on your soul

Not the whole family, just the current gen. Also, I'm definitely fucked up, but in a browses 8ch past midnight kind of way and not a Bernie 2020 kind of way. My grandparents were super conservative, just like me.

And yes, my sister wants me to call her my brother, but she dates, and plans to marry, a dude.

I feel bad though because I always hated visiting family and usually tried to avoid them.

which game recently did that?

Last one for me was Demons Souls
others before that: Vice City, some SaGa titles, and most King's Field games.

Also, you're right. I don't like receiving charity when I'm the one who least needs it, which is why I'm still living in a $250/month apartment and going to school.
Sage for blogpost.

In the case of all-around shitty games with no redeeming aspects, like most licensed games and other shovelware, or for games released before they were finished like Sonic 06 or whatever else, then there is no reason to play the game. But FFXIII is a finished game, that squeenix thought was ready to publish. There's some redeeming aspects, like the art direction and parts of the battle system, but since the level design was shit and the story was uninteresting, it failed.

Are you sure it's not just R* being greedy jews, not letting their game be discounted since they basically have a monopoly over their own formula? Activision hasn't let a single Call of Duty game go on Steam for under $10, despite the first four being way too old to be sold at that price. The demand for those games aren't that high, but they keep it at that price anyways.
Prices on old games are only high when it's a rare game that only printed a certain amount. Combine this with the game actually being good, and the price will be very high due to good old capitalism. Digital sales, or even physical sales with shitloads of copies (like AAA console gaming), don't apply to this logic, since the supply is always able to meet the demand

You do understand that you're paying ~100 bucks to some random dude who's making a profit off you, not the people actually responsible for the game, right? You should look at purchases as a reward for the developers making a great game, and an encouragement for them to make more good games. No matter how much you pay for a copy of D2, WARP will never make any more games like it since Kenji Eno is dead (RIP). Even if that money did go to someone responsible, they won't care since they're too busy chasing after mobile games or other cancerous trend.

the SaGa games were great but there hasn't been anything lately like that

I wouldn't pay a fifth of games current price now. Thanks OP

That's why I don't think I've paid more than ten dollars for a game in about a decade now. I tend to collect remasters when they are on deep, deep discount. I don't know what young people are playing these days or do they go back to play better but older games?

When I was a kid, I occasionally convinced my parents to buy me full-price PS2 games on launch. Once I started to accumulate money, I realized how fucking retarded that was. I've never spent more than $20 of my own money for a single game ($40 for a series/anthology). If a game is priced at $60+, the devs are either greedy Jews or don't know how to manage a budget. In either case, it's not my fucking problem. Anyone who purchases a full-price title and then proceeds to spend more money "to complete the experience" deserves to lose it, and any company Jewish to pull it off deserves their winnings. I don't care if whales destroy the industry, there are enough good games already in existence to last me a lifetime since I take my time and have other hobbies.

If games are "art," then developers should either pick the career out of love even if they starve or do it for free as a hobby rather than a career. If games are "art," then the game should be a one-time piece of artwork, and you should only get paid substantially for it that one time.* Games are also information, so there should be no restriction on copying them. The word art is used loosely. I feel the same way about most "intellectual property." Giving creators a head start is fine, how many years I don't know but it's way too long now and keeps expanding. Milking something you made some years ago for shekels and restricting the growth of our culture is not okay. You better be actually working for any money you make. If everybody only had to work one day in their lives, what would the world look like today?

* I have no issue with selling copies on physical media. You are doing the work to create the copies for the buyer, or are paying somebody else to do the work to create the copies for the buyer.

So to answer the question, for a copy of the game I would not ideally pay more than $30-$45 for quality physical media. For a paid download, less than that. If available for free, I would do that. I do pay much too high for Nintendo games until I get their games for free later, and sometimes I buy the copies anyway just because and then sell them later at a loss. Because I'm not a jew :^) and I try to vote with my wallet or support certain creators. There's also something special about buying a game then making copies of it to keep it safe forever or to share with your friends. It's your information, you will always own it. That's how it should be, and that's how I treat anything I make and upload here. I do it for free.

$5-15
No, not even under the grinding boot heel of Weimart Republic Inc.

Wise words there user.

OP, the problem with pricing games is a problem in economics known as "Price Discovery"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discovery

Price Discovery is a process between sellers and buyers and can be determined in many different ways. Supply and Demand is a good example. but there are other ways of gauging the prices of assets, another common way is through various forms of auction

Games are worth the price people are willing to pay for them, and the satisfaction of the seller with regards to the games gross against its budget

I do, and i do try to support devs who make games i like when possible, but these days they're very few and far in between, and it's getting to the point where i've just about given up on modern games for the most part.

I also like having a copy of my personal favorites on hand as opposed to fucking around with emulators.

That depends on the game. If somehow the only way to play Bayonetta 3 was to purchase it for 300$ I would. In fact that is pretty much what I did to play Bayonetta 2 by buying a Switch for it.

In a couple decades $300 dollerydoos for a game will probably be common due to inflation.

The highest return from savings you can get at a bank in my country is just over 2%.

But the question is, how much would the value of that money inflate over that same 20 years? Would there even be a real net profit by the end of it?

...

Most jrpgs get their big 60+ hours of play time from excessive grinding and stupid shit like making you play the game more than once to get the real ending.

That's not something you want in your browser history

Probably there wouldn't be much profit on a single dollar. That's why investing only really works when you start with millions of dollars already.

Stocks and Bonds don't guarantee a fixed rate of return.

Why not?

You mention Shitface like he had anything to do with Monkey Island, besides "ride the coattails after being a general freeloader."

see you on the way down

Am I the only one mad that demos have basically died?
I can't remember the last time I saw one in any form, from like a disc with a magazine, attached with some other product, or just available on steam. Those were the best way to judge the value of a game.

origin still has demos, you get 10 hours of play time of games not fully released yet.
Demos are just betas now

The last games I remember seeing enter and leave beta after a public beta have been Ark SE and Darkest Dungeon.
Both of which had paid betas for some reason. One of which put out fucking DLC while in the beta.

They kind of got replaced by let's plays. You can look up any game and see exactly what it's about in five minutes.

$300 + accessories so the fucking thing doesn't have to break. Or just wait for a Steam release.

Adjusting for inflation doesn't exactly work here because the price of games hasn't increased accordingly in the past 30 years. Just look at the OP image, big new games were in the $60 range even then.

...

im not willing to pay 60 bucks for video game
what makes you think i would ever pay more?
ive been burned so much ive started to boycott most of the videogame companies due to their shitty practices an pirate 99% of the games

I remember an interview with Romero where he talks about Doom being worth, in current dollars, the same as a AAA game today.
Don't know if he's right, but it doesn't sound too out there.

But enough about Israel,

I spent 250 on bloodborne, but I probably wouldn't have if NuGames weren't all dogshit and lootcrates.

Well, this is also because of Moore's Law. Back in the day, Doom and Super Mario WERE the AAA games, and were at the cutting edge of available technology. However, technology has progressed so quickly that the cost of making games per customer is less (well, minus the goddamn advertising), so the price is also less. It's why the first cars were only available to the rich, and then production costs lowered enough so that everyone can buy them.

The price of a new game is $100 burger bucks, what the fuck are you talking about?

i think the problem here is nuance is lost on people and they assume that billion dollar production games and 1 man team games should be one unified cost like some sort of circle of hell where communism won. It really depends on the game. i would like to only pay 20-40 for games and still can but i get limited to mostly indie games and jap games because of how inflated AAA budgets are getting where that $60 price point don't cut it and can't get raised without losing massive sales so you get shit like loot boxes to try to recoup costs instead of lowering the massive budget and being forced to optimize

There's not going to be a profit off one dollar because most exchanges already charge you $2 per transaction. Some brokers have begun to waive those fees under certain conditions, however.

Over the very long run, a diverse portfolio with ETFs and reinvesting the dividends can at least shield your money from inflation. If you're looking at a 15 year horizon, you'd have to sell off your entire holdings in the middle of a 2010-style recession to actually lose money. With a horizon of 20, 25 years you'd probably need to do it at the bottom of a Black Monday, and you'd probably still break even.
The "stock trading is for Wall St. career lobbyists, insider traders and Jews" is a meme that has worked marvelously for these very people by keeping the population at large out, perpetuated by retards who HAVE to have 100% of their money instantly available AT ALL TIMES.