jawa asks... what are your thoughts about videogame value?

What are your thoughts about videogame value?

I was inspired by our other-side-of-the-world GRcadian, the fabulous Lime, to ask folk about a thorny topic... "value" in videogaming!

Videogaming at home has been around for over 40 years now and it has grown massively in popularity. Let's chat about our opinions on the value that it has offered over teh years; and maybe even contrast and compare!

Just to get your brain going, I have compiled a table listing videogame prices for various systems over the years; and their equivalent shelf price were they on the market in 2020. Of course, the table doesn't list all formats nor does it recognise all of the budget titles available - it is focused upon general market pricing.

So... have a think and then please select all of the options which are reasonably close to your own thinking. As ever, feel free to post commentary, too!

Thanks again to Lime for suggesting this topic! . And, yes, I said "Nintedo Wii U" on that table. D'oh!

I know costs are going up, but they are still making strawberry float tons of money it just seems they want all the money so are upping prices. Wankers.

Pedz wrote:I know costs are going up, but they are still making strawberry float tons of money it just seems they want all the money so are upping prices. Wankers.

Yeah, it has pretty much always been expensive to buy games on the "cutting edge" but, outside of budget gaming, to me it does feel that the platform holders are really pushing up profit margins in this new gen.

It's surprising looking at some of the costs in that table. It's hard to imagine that people really bought N64 games at launch... and that Mega Drive and PS1 games cost equivalent is £88

. SNES games would have been a few quid more than that, too!

But.. at least you got the whole, complete game - in a physical format with a case and a manual - for that price. Cutting-edge games may be a bit cheaper now but they are often the "entry cost", with extra characters, levels and other stuff costing more.

Can there be a poll option for 'Jawa thinks I live the other side of the world but I don't' ?

I'll make a proper comment later!

Master System games being £58 in todays money is insane.

I believe it's up to each individual to identify the value of a game.

For example, I would be willing to pay full price for Mario Odyssey II or Breath of the Wild II day one. But that's a rarity for me, otherwise I'm happy picking most games up a year or so after at a decent reduction. That way I save money and drive up the level of value I get from the game.

These days the only games I tend to buy at launch are Nintendo’s main games, everything else I tend to wait on sales.

I do tend to have a weird sub conscious pricing structure of what I am willing to pay for a game, for example, a boxed PS5 game I’ll be happy paying £20-25 max. Indie downloadable games I tend to be comfortable paying around £5-10, no real reasoning behind this as I get just as much enjoyment out of indies as main AAA games but it’s just the way my brain tends to look at them.

I do think though there is more choice for gamers these days and you can get games for real cheap if you hold out.

Lime wrote:Can there be a poll option for 'Jawa thinks I live the other side of the world but I don't' ?

I'll make a proper comment later!

...

. Oh! My GR database must be... *wrong*! Dang, Lime, I know what I've done... For some reason I confused you with Supachipz! My memory banks aren't as reliable as they once were; more 3k rather than 2Tb. Don't worry, though, as I still remember the famous "Vote Lime!" saying :toot:

.

£1 per hour is the threshold for "good value" and I don't believe in inflation

Another good topic Jawa.

It’s a real mixed bag. Some Publishers make an awful lot of money. When you see it, it’s hard not to either want games to be cheaper, or expect better working practices or environments, looking at you CDProjekt….

However, for many years now I am reluctant to buy games on launch. I think the age Of the internet means you can find out if the game is any good and what bugs exist, before waiting a bit for the price to drop, and then pick up 6 months later for a better price, or with DLC, possibly from GOTY editions.

Back in the day, school playground, everyone would play the same game at the same time and talk about it in the playground. Part of the community and being with the crowd. You would pay £30-£40 or more and the value would come from rinsing the game.

Practices have changed now. Arguably with online multiplayer games there is infinite value, and so in some respects you get far more value for your money now, than we ever did before. I don’t blame the industry for trying to take some extra cash from that one game (halo/cod/bf/fortnite etc) as they don’t get the money from new titles given the time and cost to develop. However, it’s been taken too far in many respects - activision!

It’s up to people, and they have a view of value. I will never pay £70 for a purely SP experience. Represents poor value to me, especially nowadays when there are so many other games around. Seems there are more released now than ever. A game plus internet for online MP, probably £70 and I have done this through Xbox/360 generation with Halo 2/MW4 other cod titles and BF4 and Live. However, some of the value wears off… same cod re-released with a new skin for another £50. Nope….

Gamepass is a real game changer for me. Access to all MS stuff, and EA, and loads of other games. Even at £10 per month it’s good value (I would probably buy Forza Horizon 5 and halo at £50 each). So to get all the other titles too, incredible. Even more so, it make the £70 SP title look pretty much redundant. Just wait 6 months….

You wait 8/10 months after launch of a game you tend to get it at a cheaper price plus any bugs/issues will likely have been patched out so you also get a better experience.

I can't believe that back in the day I spent the equivalent of £20 on this:

that was a lot of pocket money wasted.

This is obviously from before the days of instant reviews and youtube previews.

These days, for me there is ridiculously good value to be had. With with the amount of digital 'sales' there are, it's a while since I've bought anything for much more than £10 (aside from Nintendo 1st party releases).Games like Horace, Blossom Tales, Golf Story and Virtua Racing have given me hours of good quality entertainment for just a few pounds each.

I value my time so much more these days, so if I'm not enjoying a game, I'm much more likely to 'bin' it than struggle through to try to get value from what I've spent on it. Stardew Valley seems to fall into this category, I definitely boarded the hype train on that one.

Overall, I think games are better, and cheaper than ever - if you don't want or feel the need to be at the bleeding edge.

As for the Nintendo Switch Online expansion pack- which is what made me think about this - it compares unfavourably with the other console offerings, particularly MS's gamepass. The scope of the package feels just too limited to be priced as it is. If there had never been legitimate ways to play the games available before then I might feel differently, but I've owned many of these several times over and to be paying to rent them seems 'poor value'

I expect to sign up imminently

.

Ironhide wrote:Master System games being £58 in todays money is insane.

I tend to agree, Ironhide, although I think you've highlighted a great point - that we have to consider the tech at the time of release rather than today. In 1987, that £20 price point was steep compared to 8-bit micro games but roughly equal to the newer Atari ST (16 bit) games; and the cart was instant loading. Consoles were the hot new thing even though they were basically computers with the keyboard removed.

Current gaming tech is always pretty expensive and I sometimes wonder if the smart approach - in terms of value - would be to stay a generation behind. Right now, PS4 and XBO have a massive range of decent games at far more attractive prices.

Drumstick wrote:I believe it's up to each individual to identify the value of a game...

A top shout, Drum, as - IMHO! - I sometimes wonder if, particularly nowdays, we get lost in assessing games from our own perspective and thinking we're "right" about it rather than accepting that we all have different tastes. As an example, I pay out roughly seven to eight quid a month for my Fallout 76 sub and some (many!) folk would say that's crazy. But I love playing the game and get good value from it; to me, it's worthwhile.

ITSMILNER wrote:These days the only games I tend to buy at launch are Nintendo’s main games, everything else I tend to wait on sales...

Definitely, IM. I always used to be one for "day one" game purchases; I got caught up in the hype and enjoyed the buzz of anticipation. Even so, in the past couple of years, I've learnt the lesson that - in terms of value - it's far better to wait a while. Prices drop quickly, especially if the game is not an instant hit.

OrangeMKN wrote:£1 per hour is the threshold for "good value" and I don't believe in inflation

I admire your strong stance, Orange!

Bertie wrote:...Back in the day, school playground, everyone would play the same game at the same time and talk about it in the playground. Part of the community and being with the crowd. You would pay £30-£40 or more and the value would come from rinsing the game...

Bertie, absolutely, I do feel that there is extra excitement and fun in playing a game as it's released. Waiting six months is better value... but you do miss some of that frisson. Nowdays I usually do wait for a price drop and I prefer doing so; but often other folk have moved on from the game and that chat levels have dropped. It can be a tough balance!

Lime wrote:I can't believe that back in the day I spent the equivalent of £20 on this...

...This is obviously from before the days of instant reviews and youtube previews...

It's... Lime! Posting live from the UK and not Australia! :lol:

.

Haha, yeah, back in the day we quite often relied on the "back of the box" info when choosing games. Even so, I was heavily into computer mags then and I loved reading the reviews (which often didn't even have screenshots in those early days!). As per today, though, I still enjoyed getting a mix of games... good and bad!

Lime wrote:...Overall, I think games are better, and cheaper than ever - if you don't want or feel the need to be at the bleeding edge...

I think that's a crucial point, Lime - there can be great value in gaming... if you hold back from the "latest stuff".

Lime wrote:...As for the Nintendo Switch Online expansion pack- which is what made me think about this - it compares unfavourably with the other console offerings...

...I expect to sign up imminently

. I do kinda suspect that many folk will be the same; especially the bulk of the market who don't really read too much online about gaming.

- - - - - - - - - -

A big shout out again to Lime for suggesting (insisting ) that I start this thread discussion .

OrangeMKN wrote:£1 per hour is the threshold for "good value" and I don't believe in inflation

I doubt I'd have paid over a grand for Civ V.

Ironhide wrote:
OrangeMKN wrote:£1 per hour is the threshold for "good value" and I don't believe in inflation

I doubt I'd have paid over a grand for Civ V.

I think I probably have paid several hundred for F76 :dread:

. But it has been worth it 8-)

.

jawa_ wrote:Haha, yeah, back in the day we quite often relied on the "back of the box" info when choosing games. Even so, I was heavily into computer mags then and I loved reading the reviews (which often didn't even have screenshots in those early days!). As per today, though, I still enjoyed getting a mix of games... good and bad!

I'm perhaps being a little unfair about my (equivalent to) £20 purchase. It came as a twofer with this masterpiece:

I remember it being so bad that you could move your 'specman' into the area reserved for ghosts in the middle. :simper:

Lime wrote:...I remember it being so bad that you could move your 'specman' into the area reserved for ghosts in the middle.

A timed-exclusive feature for the Speccy :datass:

. It was pretty funny how you could publish such rip-off versions of games in those days. Sometimes they worked out well, though... I recall Commodore's Jelly Monsters on the Vic as being an excellent Pac-man copy, whilst Superior's Killer Gorilla was an ace Donkey Kong clone for the Beeb. But, yes... there were tons of bad copies :lol:

.

Ironhide wrote:
OrangeMKN wrote:£1 per hour is the threshold for "good value" and I don't believe in inflation

I doubt I'd have paid over a grand for Civ V.

Of course not, but if it was pay-as-you-go £1 an hour I couldn't personally begrudge it

I’m not getting involved in this debate, because my opinions on it are both unpopular and inconsistent. But life is too short to get hung up on the price of a game. If I want it, I’ll buy it.

It's rare I'll buy a new game these days unless it's something that I really want and I'm sure that I'll get my money's worth. It's rarer still that I'll go past the £30 mark so am happy to wait for a price drop. £70 for a game? Get strawberry floated. I don't give a gooseberry fool how good it might be.

Also, Game Pass happened.

jawa asks... what are your thoughts about videogame value?

Which of these options matches up with your thinking about videogame value? Select all that apply!

Who is online

Affiliates