what makes up the 60 euros for you?

BlitzKrieg

sooo recently bought two games off xbox marketplace

Braid and Bionuc commando rearmed.

Before making these purchases I did a look around for video clips etc and a reoccuring theme was alot of people shooting down both games with the old *looks cool but its not worth xx dollers/euros/sterling etc.

Up until recently I'd put alot of xbox arcade games down purely over length, being based off classic arcade shooters or similar they always tended to be glossed over short games. And that always explained the price to me.

But recently between Ikaguri, Bionic Commando and Braid these are quality substantial highly playable games (though rock hard in one case) and paying the equivilent to 12-15 euros for each one is well deserved.


Now I know the real breakdown for the price of games today is development cost, marketing etc etc.

But to you, on a personal level when you hold a game down, how do you break down the price, what about the game makes it worth the 60 euros you put down on it. What is it that gets you to buy a game at full price rather then waiting til its cheaper


So breaking down 60 euros

15-gameplay

5-length

15-multiplayer

15-aesthetic (yes this does include graphics)

10-developer

MooseJam

No game is worth 60 quid never mind 75 for some PS3 games, I buy the 14.99 ones in game or 2 for 25, all the new releases eventually end up in there

jonski

MooseJam wrote: »

No game is worth 60 quid never mind 75 for some PS3 games, I buy the 14.99 ones in game or 2 for 25, all the new releases eventually end up in there

Is it my imagination or does it take the Wii games a long time to make it to that price range ?

Kiith

20 - Story
20 - Gameplay
10 - Length
5 - Multiplayer
5 - Aesthetics

MooseJam

jonski wrote: »

Is it my imagination or does it take the Wii games a long time to make it to that price range ?

haha thats PC games, I think the console games stay at the inflated price

johnny_ultimate

I think the whole 2d factor is a huge barrier to people paying full price for games. If something like Geometry Wars - which I think is the purest old school videogame I've played in ages - was released at full price, most people would gasp because of the simplicity of the gameplay, even though it is hugely addictive and contains huge amounts of game time. Same with Braid - look at all those moaners complaining on Kotaku and the like that its 3 euro more expensive than any other game. If it was something 3d like Portal, no-one would have an issue. When its 2d, people care about their fiver no matter how wonderful and innovative the game is (and Braid is worth every cent).

When you see something like MGS4 with massive production values and so on, you do feel like you spent your money well though.

Creamy Goodness

my breakdown

30 - developer

20 - gameplay

2.50 - graphics

5 - story

2.50 - length

dazftw

Gameplay : 20
Length : 5
Multiplayer : 20
Graphics : 5
Story : 10

Fanny Cradock

I'm confused by the developer category. Is this not like saying, 'I really like books published by Penguin and I'll only buy hard covers to support them'? Other than reputation, I would never consider the developer when purchasing a game.

BlitzKrieg

dont get publisher and developer mixed up

publisher would be like penguin, that would EA or TAKE 2 etc

while developer would be like Valve, Blizzard, Relic, Dice etc which is like the author of a book.

I'd consider a developer when buying a game, I expect certain quality when I buy from the developers I named above.

steviec

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

dont get publisher and developer mixed up

publisher would be like penguin, that would EA or TAKE 2 etc

while developer would be like Valve, Blizzard, Relic, Dice etc which is like the author of a book.

I'd consider a developer when buying a game, I expect certain quality when I buy from the developers I named above.

Yea but developer isn't quite the same as author.

It's not unusual for a developer to consist of 100+ people and to have multiple entirely seperate teams working on different projects, with only a small amount of cross over.

I'd certainly take more / less interest of a game based on developer, but I'd consider reviews more important.

BlitzKrieg

steviec wrote: »

Yea but developer isn't quite the same as author.

It's not unusual for a developer to consist of 100+ people and to have multiple entirely seperate teams working on different projects, with only a small amount of cross over.

I'd certainly take more / less interest of a game based on developer, but I'd consider reviews more important.

A director of a movie is only one part of a 100+ team with multiple teams etc. yet you consistenly get people who go to films based on who is directing them

i take your point with multiple projects though rockstar especially are notorious for pushing their gta cred behind projects that have none of the gta developers behind it


But I would personnally pay attention to developers, especially with pc games.

I mean companies like Blizzard and bioware have huge credibility behind their names which has again and again proven to deliver.

Retr0gamer

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

I mean companies like Blizzard and bioware have huge credibility behind their names which has again and again proven to deliver.

But on the other hand if there is a massive shake up in a developer the quality of their products can change. Just look at Squaresoft, I used to buy anything with their name slapped on it and now they are just shovelling out huge amounts of drivel.

I'd really only buy a game based on the developer if it was a small team that consistently deliver, some one like Treasure or Level 5. Still I'd check reviews first. I still hurt after being stung with Freak Out, a dire game from the normally consistently brilliant Treasure.

For me I can't split it into categories. It's totally different for each game I buy. I can however sum it up. If the a game is good and deserves my attention I'll buy it.

Fanny Cradock

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

A director of a movie is only one part of a 100+ team with multiple teams etc. yet you consistenly get people who go to films based on who is directing them.

Good point. However, I don't think that you can really compare the two. One would imagine that it is the film director's vision and style that shapes the film. A specific director is sought because he/she will put a certain unique slant on a film. Can you say the same about games? I wouldn't say so. The analogy of a record label might be more appropriate. Many labels - and I'm talking about the smaller ones - would be synonymous with a particular type of music. Assuming you are into that type of music then it seem fair to say that you would like the label in general.

Blazer

Only games in my opinion are worth €60.
1. BF1942/BF2- Have over 700 hours in 3 years playing multiplayer on BF2. Still my favourite today and still playing it.
2.COD1/2/4: Great all round single player mode and great multiplayer as well.

I don't class Wow etc as you're paying for the game first of all and then the subscription on top of that.

BlitzKrieg

But on the other hand if there is a massive shake up in a developer the quality of their products can change. Just look at Squaresoft, I used to buy anything with their name slapped on it and now they are just shovelling out huge amounts of drivel.

Oh I'd agree, developers can easily fall from grace for many reasons (much like everything else, writers, directors, bands etc etc) I am not saying who developed a game should be the reason to buy a game.

In my original post it was one of the elements I put down (and a small one at that) of where I feel my money is going when I put down 60 euro for game. 10 euros of 60 euros I willingly put down for a game is there because the developer has in the past delivered in some fashion. Yes in some cases the developer might not have any past titles I have played or have made a title that I didnt like, then yes I would be a bit more reluctant to pay the full 60 for a game. But it wouldnt be the only factor, its just one of many I actually pay attention to.

Is Freak Out really bad? shame I kicked myself in my earlier post cause I kept giving pc examples and couldnt think of any really good console ones and I literally booted up Ikarugi right after that post.

Good point. However, I don't think that you can really compare the two. One would imagine that it is the film director's vision and style that shapes the film. A specific director is sought because he/she will put a certain unique slant on a film. Can you say the same about games? I wouldn't say so.

Oh god yes I would say so. Depending what developer is behind the game has a huge influence on how it plays. Much like how depending which director you have can make a basic action film unique, having certain developers behind a first person shooter can make it unique. Blizzard (again *sigh*) have kept a very unique and consistent style and vision to their games and their gameplay has the same structure underneath it all that is uniquely Blizzard. How about DICE and the upcoming Mirrors Edge, a very unique venture by a developer so closely associated with a mutliplayer focused series with lots of tank and guns.

The analogy of a record label might be more appropriate. Many labels - and I'm talking about the smaller ones - would be synonymous with a particular type of music. Assuming you are into that type of music then it seem fair to say that you would like the label in general.

I am not well versed in music production (hence why I use film analogies) but music labels sign on specific musicians, they are not the artists themselves correct? Games Developers are the artists they are the ones who create the material that makes a game Yes much like musicians and filmmakers you get developers who will stick rigidly to one or two genres, others can shoot off wildly into other genres but bring their own styles from the previous one with them (Treasure when they made platformers brought alot of shooter elements into the games )

Retr0gamer

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Is Freak Out really bad? shame I kicked myself in my earlier post cause I kept giving pc examples and couldnt think of any really good console ones and I literally booted up Ikarugi right after that post.

Yep, Freakout really is that bad. It involves walking around dreadful looking, tiny and boring levels grabbing the disproportionate tits and ass of badly modelled girls and being bored until you have enough points to tackle one of the bosses (Even I couldn't make this **** up). Boss battles are okay but there's only 9 of them and the game lasts less than 2 hours. It's obviously a tech demo released as a full game.

On the other hand Ikaruga is a game so good I was willing to pay for it on xbox live despite having played it to death on the gamecube.

Zillah

The developer category makes no sense. If you're a fan of a particular developer then you have a reason, presumably that they make games that have good stories/graphics/multiplayer whatever. If the developer does a good job on a game then it should score highly in the other categories anyway. And if it didn't then what the hell does the developer category actually represent?

Or do you mean that the money is spent as something of a gamble hoping they'll pull through in the other categories?

BlitzKrieg

The developer category makes no sense. If you're a fan of a particular developer then you have a reason, presumably that they make games that have good stories/graphics/multiplayer whatever. If the developer does a good job on a game then it should score highly in the other categories anyway. And if it didn't then what the hell does the developer category actually represent?

my god the vulcans are out in force tonight

firstly a logical response would be just because someone likes games by a certain developer doesnt mean that the game scores high in all the other catagories. Games by EPIC tend to have no storyline or a crap storyline, but this is made up by them having fantastic multiplayer and graphics.

I threw it in there because there have been games I have looked at in shops that initially dont appeal to me but then I see who developed it and I take a double take. Like Treasure for example I bought Ikaruga mostly based on my fondness for the developer from my mega drive days. Without it being a Treasure developed game I would have been much much more hesitant to buy it.

Though in your favour, I would actually find the developer catagory would be more of a reason for caution then jubilee like you said good developers tick all the other catagories. They also tick specific catagories too, in some cases like the above with Epic these can be good things, you know they will give alot of multiplayer support and mod support. They can be more often though bad things, habits or trends that certain developers do that dont sit well with me on a personal level. From how the controls always feel heavier with a first person shooter from Epic then it does with one from Valve or ID, to certain traits that to everyone else is fantastic but to me, p*ss me off to no end.

I mentioned Blizzard way too many times here, and you might assume I love Blizzard games from that.

honest truth I dont.

I love RTS games, but at the same time I HATE worker units and Blizzard has some hard on that their RTS games always seem to need the player having 5-10 worker units running around drives me up the f*cking wall. So I am actually much more cautious with Blizzard RTS then with say one by EA LA or Relic because they tend to have less focus on worker units then Blizzard.

Complete personal taste, you can find thousands who have no problem with worker units, but me I hate them and I know Blizzard love them, so its always a caution I have with them.

I currently have alot of joy for Relic because they have designed a system to actually make worker units fun to use.