BF2S Forums Why $59.99 for PC games?

=NHB=Shadow wrote:

I'm going to buy Starcraft 2, but it has to be $60 or less lol.

Pre-order is only $50 at Amazon.

they want you to move to a console

Blade4509 wrote:

Doctor Strangelove wrote:

Blade4509 wrote:

Piracy raises costs, which raises piracy. FUCK

Supply and demand man.

Games cost way more in Australia than in Russia because Russians pirate more games than Australians.

False, read up on supply and demand and get back to me. Pirating games raises the cost because they sell less.

Aside from MW2 and StarCraft 2, the price of PC games has stayed the same since 2004. In the cases of both MW2 and SC2, the games sold 10 million copies before they came out, and as such Activision realized that no matter how shitty or expensive the game is, that all the fan boys would buy it anyway.

Piracy does not drive up the cost of games, and there is no real proof that in the long run it causes a drop in income for the publisher. If a toothpaste company isn't selling toothpaste they wouldn't increase the cost, that would cause less people to buy their toothpaste. If they can't sell then they need to turn the price down to a point where they can. Where as with Activision's case, they knew that no matter what they would sell, and as such they drove the cost up, and you should be lucky that they don't charge $70 because they could totally get away with it.

Tetn1s wrote:

I always thought that use PC gamers were cooler because we didnt overspend on our games. I, for some reason, really hate this new price tag on these new games. Im starting to feel like a console nub now, only thing left is the 4 year olds who think they can outcuss you.

Why the new price tag? I know companies want more buck for their bang, but as long as that price tag stays at 59.99, im not even gonna think about buying it.

What really pisses me off is when Infinity Ward think they can steal $10 from our wallets and release an unfinished game like that, but when other people start doing the same, then that just cuts the cake right there.

1. We overspend on our systems, not our games.
2. The new price tag makes it 'fair' for console gamers and gives PC game companies more money per sale.
3. You're not alone in hating the $59 price tag. What I hate even more are advertised 'features' like keyboard, mouse, key binding and graphics customization. This stuff is not new, and they're not fooling PC gamers into thinking that these are new features. Luckily, most of us seasoned vg vets have a decent library to fall back on in these (cliche coming) tough times.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2010-01-15 21:10:12)

ruisleipa wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

1. We overspend on our systems, not our games.

If you overspend then you're not doing it right, obviously. And don't forget the games companies get fuck all from sales of PCs! So they couldn't care less what you spend on them. As someone said earlier, the ONLY reason console games are more expensive generally is cos Microsoft/Sony take a royalty from each game sold. About ten bucks apparently.

We do overspend on our systems as PC users though. Build me a computer that can play crysis for 300 bucks.

SEREMAKER wrote:

take for example MW2 ........ if no one had pre-order this game or no one bought this game the 1st week of release it would have sent a huge ripple effect to every marketing company ie EA ....... that ppl are tired of paying high dollar for games




what will be the breaking point $ for ppl on buying games ?

tradein at gamespot works fine for me for xbox 360 games..

i used to trade in PC games back in the day with some company.

Last edited by specialistx2324 (2010-01-16 11:43:37)

Blade4509 wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

1. We overspend on our systems, not our games.

If you overspend then you're not doing it right, obviously. And don't forget the games companies get fuck all from sales of PCs! So they couldn't care less what you spend on them. As someone said earlier, the ONLY reason console games are more expensive generally is cos Microsoft/Sony take a royalty from each game sold. About ten bucks apparently.

We do overspend on our systems as PC users though. Build me a computer that can play crysis for 300 bucks.

It would require some old parts and good deals, but I made my current desktop for almost that (2.7 GHz Dual core, 8800GT, 2GB RAM). You dont need a monster of a machine to PLAY crysis, you just need a monster to play it at the maximum settings without significant lag.

Blade4509 wrote:

We do overspend on our systems as PC users though. Build me a computer that can play crysis for 300 bucks.

well, it deopends on what you COULD spend that determines overspending, no? You want to play Crysis so you need to spend, I dunno 600 bucks say. But then you want the latest and greatest graphics card and soundcard and speakers and whatever, so you spend 2000 when you could have spent 600. You have overspent. You are an overspender. Overspending has occurred. You also have 1400 less to buy games with.

You're preaching to the choir there Finray. I spent alot on my rig and because I am a performance and graphics whore. Mostly graphics. SLI 295s for example. Consoles do fine with the games the developers make. PC games are much more beautiful and that's what turned me to PC, well that and the social aspect. As far as I'm concerned PC deserve to be more expensive due to quality. I don't want them to be more expensive, but if they were I would understand.

Miggle wrote:

Finray wrote:

Blade4509 wrote:

We do overspend on our systems as PC users though. Build me a computer that can play crysis for 300 bucks.

Show me a console that can perform as good as a pc of the same price.

We spend more on computers, but its justified because they perform better.

show me a console that can play good games.

oh wait.

PS3 can play Burnout.

Miggle wrote:

Finray wrote:

Miggle wrote:

show me a console that can play good games.

oh wait.

PS3 can play Burnout.

I am aware of that. I happen to have it on both PS3 and PC, and it is overwhelmingly better on PC.

Despite being a direct port.

But it's still good on PS3?

Miggle wrote:

Finray wrote:

Miggle wrote:

I am aware of that. I happen to have it on both PS3 and PC, and it is overwhelmingly better on PC.

Despite being a direct port.

But it's still good on PS3?

not since i got it on PC.

But it WAS good on PS3, before you got the PC copy?

Miggle wrote:

Finray wrote:

Miggle wrote:

not since i got it on PC.

But it WAS good on PS3, before you got the PC copy?

irrelevant.

Uh huh.