Board 8 > If games cost $120, would you buy half as many games?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Less than half as many. I already never buy console games new; those few that I do are always on sale to some extent (ex. SMG2 for $35). Portables would drop as well assuming they doubled, I'd be much less willing to buy... say, OoT 3DS at the point where it's just a remake with little new content.

--
http://www.nbc.com/parks-and-recreation/exclusives/ron-dancing-animated.gif

I buy very few new games, so I'd probably buy just as many new games then as I do now

--
~Peaf~

red sox 777 posted...
Video game prices have fallen in real dollars since then, and prices are set so rigidly now that I think companies haven't really tested the elasticity above $60.

It was only with this generation with Xbox 360 etc that prices were raised from $50 to $60, not that long ago. And just recently PC games have started raising from $50 to $60, so prices aren't really standing still.

Personally, I would not buy any games new if they were $120 dollars, in say the next 10 years.

--
One Piece: Pirates with style!
-= Metal Gear Solid: Tactical Espionage Action =-

SmartMuffin posted...
$120 is past the mental block where I won't buy stuff for entertainment, except for rare circumstances. I wouldn't buy any games at that price.

If you've purchased two $60 games, you already have spent $120 on entertainment. Am I the only one around here capable of basic math?

I'll buy a burger at Applebees on two separate occasions for $10 each time. I won't pay $20 for an Applebees burger in one sitting.

Same deal with games. Is it that hard to understand?

I'm pretty sure if this happened I'd just start pirating everything. If that wasn't possible... probably more than half, but I'd wait for price drops or get used games more often.

I would not be buying anything. I purchased three games for $60 last year. With Dark Souls coming out, that'll be two games that I'll have purchased this year and I won't be buying a third. I don't even see myself buying another game next year, not at release for $60. Of course that could change if something I'm really hyped for comes out. I barely play games now, so yeah.

--
GameFAQs isn't going to be merged in with GameSpot or any other site. We're not going to strip out the soul of the site. -CJayC

I don't buy any games at $60 anyway, so paying $120 for any game is just ridiculous.
I could use the time to beat more games anyway =|

--
2010 Game of the Decade Contest - some guy named Black Turtle won the guru for this
http://backloggery.com/articuno2001/sig.gif

No, I've rarely if ever bought a 60 dollar game. Usually 50 is my high point.

--
Run, run, run, or you'll be well done!
---

I would buy 1/4 as many new games.

--
thengamer.com/guru thengamer.com/xstats board8.wikia.com
You should search for The Show, the cool podcast featuring Guru Champ Black Turtle!

I've bought maybe 3 game for 60 dollars so no.


But say that we were in an alternate universe where games slowly inflated to $120 instead of $60 I think gaming companies would be selling less than half the amount of games. And any off-brand game for $120 would do horribly.

I have not paid $50 for a game in years. So, I would not buy a game for the equivalent of $120 today. Inflation changes things, though, but you get my point >_>

--
Zachnorn Everything = overrated.
http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/4503/qrcode857546.th.png

Interesting. I wonder if the elasticity for casual gamers would be different. If you're only buying one or two games a year, you might still buy the same amount even paying double.

--
90s games > 00s games

substantially less

like noneish

because that would be insane

--
For your BlAcK TuRtLe.
At least Kupo has class and doesn't MESSAGE the people -Dr Pizza

It depends. There's a couple games where my limit is pretty high - I'd pay a lot of money for Suikoden VI or Warcraft 4. Most games outside of that, probably not. It's not like I have a set amount of dollars only for buying video games, games are only one possible thing I could spend my money on. If the price doubled, I'd look at almost all games and say "that really is not worth my $120. I'll just eat out 10 times instead." As it stands now, I rarely think $60 is worth it. I start being interested in a game when it hits around $20.

For games I'm hugely hyped for, I'd still buy on release (sucker, I know, but it'd only be once every two years at best!). But for everything else I'd probably just stop buying altogether, instead borrowing/renting, or occasionally buying used.

The best way for companies to make extra money of video games is surely not by jumping the base price up 100%, but through cheap DLC (see how much Activision makes off all those map packs for the CoD series, for example).

--
Praise the Black Turtle, Game of the Decade Guru Champ.
(Well, I never promised creativity, did I?!)

Skyrim and Mass Effect 3 are the only announced games i would pay 120 for. There are 6-8 announced games i would/will buy at normal price. So less?

--
Warning_Crazy
i am not black turtle as i did not win the guru

Games with good multiplayer, yeah. But good games like Lords of Shadow or inFamous or even Valk Chronicles, probably skip out on.

--
Donny: Are they gonna hurt us, Walter?
Walter: No, Donny. These men are cowards.

From: MoogleKupo141 | #063
substantially less

like noneish

because that would be insane

--
http://img.imgcake.com/VincentLauw/WHATCHUMEANgifym.gif

Certain games -- Civilization, Street Fighter, Uncharted -- I probably would. Most games? Nope. I don't mind paying $60 for games I'm interested in, but I wouldn't pay double for them, except for a very select few.

--
peace comes from within

Yeah multiplayer would be a key component on a lot of purchases. A series like Street Fighter or Timesplitters or Starcraft you could probably justify the price over the long term. Tougher to do for single player games.

A game for $120 would basically have to be Final Fantasy 1 through 10 to be a worthwhile deal.

--
It's F-Zero. F-ZEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERO!
http://img.imgcake.com/RedShifter/trisisofasscendsjpguv.jpg

I'd pretty much stop buying games except after the price drops. A lot.

--
I do because I can.....and because I'm bored.

I almost never buy new games these days anyway, so if a game is good enough to break through "I don't have 60 bucks to spend on this," honestly it has a very good shot of also breaking through "I REALLY don't have 120 bucks to spend on this."

although I could answer this better if I had any current-gen consoles I guess >_>

--
~Tommeri Uranius Bombaldi the Fourth, esq.
(aka not Krakenprophet)

Probably the same amount.

My threshold for what I consider as "expensive" is largely determined by games. Which is why I never buy like...furniture or eat out at expensive restaurants--think how many steam games I could get for that price!!!1!1!1!!!

--
Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision

Less then half. Games are very elastic to me

--
yE frE me Kweku Ananse Papa
me:http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/1508/masterplumgm3.jpg

Almost definitely would buy more than half. I don't just go out and buy games, they're all based on educated opinions about the game, so I have no qualms about tossing what I feel is still a pretty fair price for games that I'm at least assuming I'll thoroughly enjoy. It would impact other spending habits moreso than itself; probably less fast food indulgence, and such.

--
I'm too tired to drive anywhere, anyway, right now, do you care if I praise Black Turtle?
Call me numbers.

SmartMuffin posted...
what the hell is wrong with all you people?

assuming you've purchased more than one game in your lifetime, you can afford to buy a game for twice as much

Some people have value for their money for what they buy.

Is a game going to give me $120 worth of enjoyment? Doubtful, usually.

--
Xbox GT: PrivateBiscuit1
Down with Zhang. Let there be Biscuit!

Probably 1/4 as many, at best.

--
If you like Blitzball, try Captain Tsubasa II (in English) for NES!
Top games: http://unikgamer.com/users/vlado-309.html

SF, Pokemon, Diablo 3, traditional DQ and etc things that I can easily play for 100+ hours then sure.

--
caps

It wouldn't change my habits at all. I already buy as many games as I have time to play (not a whole lot). Money doesn't limit my gaming, time does.

--
EndOfDiscOne
http://www.newsgroper.com/files/post_images/Thom_Yorke---.jpg

The only two games I've invested that much money into are Everquest and WoW, because of the monthly fees. Paid on an installment plan, maybe I'd pay $120, but otherwise no. I refuse to buy more than one game system at a time because I don't want to dump the money into it, so why would I pay that much for a single piece of software?

I'd have to *REALLY* want a game to pay that much for it, which means it would have to be a sequel to something I've already played and loved. How many new series do you think they would actually make if that were the case? (Answer: even fewer than now, if that's possible.)

If they were that expensive, I'd have sold my consoles.

I am going to buy two new games this year and that's a busy spending year. I don't have the time to spend on game, and $60 for a game has already pushed me to only get the "top tier" GotY candidate games and I still feel like I'm overpaying a bit (in that I'm giving up more money than I get enjoyment). I can't think of a game in the last five years that gave me $120 worth of enjoyment.

--
"nah, it's not my team if I drop pitchers for merely being horrible" -War13104

I don't even buy 10 games at 60 a year. Hell, 5 if that. They're all collectors editions too so uh that's the only way I'd spend that much. Really nice ce sets sure. Othereise same standard of wait until they're sub 20. I do know my getting games feom other means would increase though

--
The King Wang.
Listen up Urinal Cake. I already have something that tells me if I'm too drunk when I pee on it: My friends. - Colbert.

red sox 777 posted...
Also, I'm making some assumptions here. The increase in price to $120 would HAVE to be justified in some way. Either the dollar falls in value (in which case you're paying the same amount in real dollars), or the quality of video games doubles, or the demand for video games somehow rises in which case the price increase seems justified by market forces.

I suppose that if tomorrow, the exact same video games we have now doubled in price and no other conditions changed, then yeah, sales would plummet, at least in the short term. But that's a ridiculous assumption and a completely unrealistic scenario and I guess I just assumed red sox wouldn't bother asking such a pointless question.

It is justified though- $120 now would be the same price as video games had in the mid-1990s after adjusting for inflation. Video game prices have fallen in real dollars since then, and prices are set so rigidly now that I think companies haven't really tested the elasticity above $60. The relevant question for companies is: would sales fall in half? If they would fall by less than that, then they would make more money charging $120.

You aren't really accounting for the cost to manufacture/produce media, which has gone way down since the mid-90s. You also have to look at other factors, such as the cost of entry for consumers, and the overall health and breadth of the industry. You'd also have to push collusive business tactics across the board to get this type of profit margin to work. And you're missing any real discussion about hardware sales, licenses, peripherals, etc. Do you value profit margin, stability, revenue, or...?

--
Donny: Are they gonna hurt us, Walter?
Walter: No, Donny. These men are cowards.

Mini-article about the elasticity of video games. Personally, I would buy almost no games if they were priced at $120.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110216/23141213139/maybe-super-cheap-video-games-are-helping-not-destroying-video-game-industry.shtml

--
http://img.imgcake.com/tyder21/Colinbearanimationjpgza.jpg

Hell no, it's rare I spend $30 on a game these days. With all the other forms of entertainment out there, there just isn't a need to buy a game if it's $120. There will always be cheaper options at that point and very few people would bother with the $120 on games that are a more casual purchase. Sure you'll hook hardcore fans of any one game and you could probably sell your Call of Dutys and your Zeldas for that price, but even then anyone with any doubts at all about the quality won't buy them. Not when I can buy 8-12 high quality PS3/360 games for the same price.

--
http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/9984/roflbotg.jpg

From: tyder21 | #085
Mini-article about the elasticity of video games. Personally, I would buy almost no games if they were priced at $120.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110216/23141213139/maybe-super-cheap-video-games-are-helping-not-destroying-video-game-industry.shtml

One thing that does need to be mentioned about some of those figures is that a lot of those price drops that saw big revenue gains were limited-time sales, like Steam weekend sales. Everyone was buying it at the same time because the low price was only available for 3 days. If that was the normal price, I doubt they'd be able to sustain that level of sales long-term.

Not saying lower prices across the board wouldn't increase revenues, just that it's not necessarily as much of a no-brainer as the article makes it seem.

--
Black Turtle spilled my diet soda!

I'd probably pick like... 3-4 games per year to buy, then ask for maybe 2 for christmas or something

--
~Zen

Interesting. Perhaps the $120 price point would work for those games that get most of their sales the first weekend, like Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest in Japan. I have to imagine the elasticity on those is pretty low. If you're going to skip work/school and camp out/stand in line for hours for it, an extra $60 isn't going to deter you.

--
90s games > 00s games

Japanese people already have to pay $100 for most of their big titles.

--
Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest son of a ***** in space.

Around 1/4

Definitely just wait for must-haves and NEVER buy anything before hearing reviews and word of mouth.

--
Menji - www.last.fm/user/menjii
You got to put me on. Come on! Come on!

paying $60 for games is already a joke unless you're certain it's going to be GotY or something

The only games I've actually bought in the past year have been during Steam sales when they drop below $10. So I'd buy the same amount.

--
C _ _ H _ _ E _ _ S _ _ T _ _ E _ _ R _ _ _
http://img.imgcake.com/chestaga1gifun.gif \ http://bbg-games.com \ http://twitter.com/BennFried

From: Liquid Wind | #092
paying $60 for games is already a joke unless you're certain it's going to be GotY or something

That's even more of a joke since there will be a GOTY edition out soon enough with extra content and a lower price.

--
http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/9984/roflbotg.jpg

I'd probably by less than that.

--
or a special pair of boots that have magnets on the bottom so you can do some things that have never been possible before.

That's even more of a joke since there will be a GOTY edition out soon enough with extra content and a lower price.

yeah but sometimes you want to play a great game as soon as it's out, do see where you're coming from though...there's so many great games for $10-20 on steam(without even waiting for sales...), I pretty much don't bother with big publisher releases now unless there's a good deal on them

I do see the appeal in playing a big franchise game at launch, but it always makes me cringe to see a game I paid $50 for in the $20 bin a year later, especially when there's little to no multiplayer.

--
http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/9984/roflbotg.jpg

I wouldn't buy any games new if they cost that much. I know "adjusted for inflation" older games were expensive, but most people here weren't buying their own games when the SNES was still an active system, and it's just the number that makes the difference. Looking at $120 is just "What the heck" compared to looking at $60.

--
http://i848.photobucket.com/albums/ab48/Leonhart4/Squall.jpg

Flipping the script, if games were suddenly $30 new, would you buy twice as more? I think I would, I'd be much more likely to try out a game I'm on the fence about and probably not buy used games at all at that price.

--
or a special pair of boots that have magnets on the bottom so you can do some things that have never been possible before.

I have not purchased a game at full price in a long time. I don't even know when the last time I did that was. That being said, I would buy approximately 0 games at $120 a game.

--
My Japanese alter-ego.
Hey all this is Bartz btw.