Increased price on PC games: does it really bother you?

Price increases happen all the time. A bottle of Coke used to cost 5 cents, right? Is a 20% increase in the price of PC games really that awful, considering that we've been paying $50 or less for nearly two decades?

Meh. I'll always wait for price drops anyway.

No idea what you're talking about, games cost the same here, which is still more than NA (euros).

The prices ain't increased....

Modern Warfare 2, Assassins' Creed 2, Starcraft 2, and Supreme Commander 2 have been selling for, or getting preorders at places like Best Buy for $59.99. guynamedbilly

Modern Warfare 2, Assassins' Creed 2, Starcraft 2, and Supreme Commander 2 have been selling for, or getting preorders at places like Best Buy for $59.99. guynamedbilly

There are preorders available for Diablo 3, it too is 60$ and surprisingly there are idiots that already got scammed by those "awesome" offers and we all know it'll take at least another year and a half, maybe two or more, to see Diablo 3 release, a price is the last thing Blizzard will announce right now, even if it's only to retailers.

Meh. I'll always wait for price drops anyway.

HenriH-42

I wont buy a PC game that costs any more than 50 dollars. Hell I usually wont buy one thats anymore than 30 dollars unless I really really want it. Only 2 games I have wanted bad enough to not wait for the 30 dollar price range in the last year are Mass Effect 2 and Dragons Age. I can wait on the rest.

Modern Warfare 2, Assassins' Creed 2, Starcraft 2, and Supreme Commander 2 have been selling for, or getting preorders at places like Best Buy for $59.99. guynamedbilly

I honestly don't care how much the games cost. If it is something I want I'll either justify paying the price or not. The last PC game I bought over 55 was WCIII when it released at MSRP $55, and for me that extra $5 didn't keep me from buying the game due to some terrible hatred for Blizzard having bumped up their price point.

It's not increased??? And if it was i dont really care.

Yes, because I used to be paying less for far superior games and now I'm paying more for games I don't really want, but I won't know if they're any good until I try them and then I can't return them when I don't like them.

Edit: Wait, I'm an idiot. Games have always been the same price, it's just how much I'm willing to pay for them that has changed. Now I'm willing to pay far less.

they haven't increased outside modern warfare 2, which I refuse to buy.

Its not the price increase that should annoy us. Its the quality of the pc version which day by day becomes a more simplified port and they fill it with DRM and other crap. ^All that and they ask us more money for that crap plus games come out later than the console versions.. It is like saying to pc gamers that they dont want to buy their games and they will do everything in the power to make consoles get more sales.dakan45

I disagree. Take the Bad Company 2 beta in PC against the PS3 beta. Even if the gameplay is very similar the quality -in technical aspects- is like night and day, and in the gameplay there's some nice touches making the game a bit more "hardcore" to appeal the PC users. Some games suffrered the PC to console syndrome, as F.E.A.R. 2, but in most of situations no sacrifices were made.

In fact, most of multimillion seller games as Oblivion, Fallout, Mirror's Edge, Mass Effect 1 & 2, Dragon Age: Origins... and even japanese games as Lost Planet, Devil May Cry, Resident Evil 5 and Street Fighter IV are saying at your face: buy the PC version! Aside from a few exceptions -that in any case are better in PC, technically- as MW 2 the PC ports usually worths the money.

if a demo is released, i dont mind, cos its not a crazy amount of money to spend on a game you've tried already. but how devs expect people to splash, and take a huge gamble on something they might hate, is beyond me

I disagree. Take the Bad Company 2 beta in PC against the PS3 beta. Even if the gameplay is very similar the quality -in technical aspects- is like night and day, and in the gameplay there's some nice touches making the game a bit more "hardcore" to appeal the PC users. Some games suffrered the PC to console syndrome, as F.E.A.R. 2, but in most of situations no sacrifices were made.

In fact, most of multimillion seller games as Oblivion, Fallout, Mirror's Edge, Mass Effect 1 & 2, Dragon Age: Origins... and even japanese games as Lost Planet, Devil May Cry, Resident Evil 5 and Street Fighter IV are saying at your face: buy the PC version! Aside from a few exceptions -that in any case are better in PC, technically- as MW 2 the PC ports usually worths the money.Ondoval

Nice, now which one of those games made higher sales on pc and had superior graphics with very detailed graphics menus and capabilities that it made it stand out as a pc game and not a game ported from consoles to pc?

Only one i can think is dragon age which is being in development on pc for sometimes now. That means that it was designed with pc in mind. With pc control, settings and menus also it follows the old pc focus trend.

Capcom is the only japanese company that cares for pcs. Capcom has bad ports in the past and now they take their steps on pc since they always were console focused. But its diffirent than the rest of the devs because bethesda, iw, dice, bioware always focused on pc. But now their games are becoming more of a port by every release. Eg: everyone will agree that the pc version of cod 4 was better than the pc version of mw2 and the pc version of mass effect was better than the pc version of mass effect 2 in terms of how much work they put into the pc version! However i wouldnt say that capcom's devil may cry 4, or resident evil 5 or street fighter 4 or lost planet are games that say to your face "Buy the pc version" They are well design but they attract more console crowd. Anyway i wish re5 had good sales on pc because i really liked the game and the fact that its well optimized with plenty of graphical options. Also i dont think that mirrors edge or mass effect or mw2 did as well the consoles.

The fact that the mw2 and mass effect 2 pc version quality standards have been lowered does not make the pc fanbase to buy more mw2 copies. It results to the opposite i am afraid and that was my original point. If you release cod4 and then you lower the pc version qualities of mw2(eg: dedicated servers and tweaks in gameplay mechanics) and set the price to 60 bucks, dont expect the pc gamers buying more copies!!

Now, i do understand you played a game called bad company 2 which seems to cancel all my points. Thats because dice is trying to get money from pc gamers by laughing at IW and fixing all those things you people complain about. Thats nice,also the fact that they release the game at the same does as the consoles is also nice. Unlike other ea or products like mirrors edge. But i just saw assasin creed 2. Now the thing is that nothing has been anounced about bad company 2 costing 60 bucks or have some sort of new crazy drm like assasin creed 2. Lets wait till some complains arise.

Anyway, i hope that does not happen but lets pick mw2 and mass effect 2. Its obvious that cod4 and mass effect pc versions were very well designed but the sequels have lowered that quality. i heard people saying that mass effect 2 lacks some graphics settings. What i am trying to say is that, cod4 and mass effect also were good efforts on pc. But the gamedevelopers payed less attention to the sequels. So maybe bad company 2 is doing its first effort now on pc. But if bad company 1 was on pc. I am sure that the second game would have lower values on pc than the previous just like mw2 and mass effect 2 did. I guess both companies focused on consoles because they made more money. Right now dice does not clearly now if a "battlefield" game will have good sales on pc or if the console sales will outnumber them. They bet that after IW fiasco they will do well and they work on improving the pc version for that same reason. But if they had released Bad company 1 on pc and the console sales were higher, then they would make bad company 2 just like mw2 and mass effect 2.

[QUOTE="Ondoval"] I disagree. Take the Bad Company 2 beta in PC against the PS3 beta. Even if the gameplay is very similar the quality -in technical aspects- is like night and day, and in the gameplay there's some nice touches making the game a bit more "hardcore" to appeal the PC users. Some games suffrered the PC to console syndrome, as F.E.A.R. 2, but in most of situations no sacrifices were made.

In fact, most of multimillion seller games as Oblivion, Fallout, Mirror's Edge, Mass Effect 1 & 2, Dragon Age: Origins... and even japanese games as Lost Planet, Devil May Cry, Resident Evil 5 and Street Fighter IV are saying at your face: buy the PC version! Aside from a few exceptions -that in any case are better in PC, technically- as MW 2 the PC ports usually worths the money.dakan45

Nice, now which one of those games made higher sales on pc and had superior graphics with very detailed graphics menus and capabilities that it made it stand out as a pc game and not a game ported from consoles to pc?

Only one i can think is dragon age which is being in development on pc for sometimes now. That means that it was designed with pc in mind. With pc control, settings and menus also it follows the old pc focus trend.

Capcom is the only japanese company that cares for pcs. Capcom has bad ports in the past and now they take their steps on pc since they always were console focused. But its diffirent than the rest of the devs because bethesda, iw, dice, bioware always focused on pc. But now their games are becoming more of a port by every release. Eg: everyone will agree that the pc version of cod 4 was better than the pc version of mw2 and the pc version of mass effect was better than the pc version of mass effect 2 in terms of how much work they put into the pc version! However i wouldnt say that capcom's devil may cry 4, or resident evil 5 or street fighter 4 or lost planet are games that say to your face "Buy the pc version" They are well design but they attract more console crowd. Anyway i wish re5 had good sales on pc because i really liked the game and the fact that its well optimized with plenty of graphical options. Also i dont think that mirrors edge or mass effect or mw2 did as well the consoles.

The fact that the mw2 and mass effect 2 pc version quality standards have been lowered does not make the pc fanbase to buy more mw2 copies. It results to the opposite i am afraid and that was my original point. If you release cod4 and then you lower the pc version qualities of mw2(eg: dedicated servers and tweaks in gameplay mechanics) and set the price to 60 bucks, dont expect the pc gamers buying more copies!!

Now, i do understand you played a game called bad company 2 which seems to cancel all my points. Thats because dice is trying to get money from pc gamers by laughing at IW and fixing all those things you people complain about. Thats nice,also the fact that they release the game at the same does as the consoles is also nice. Unlike other ea or products like mirrors edge. But i just saw assasin creed 2. Now the thing is that nothing has been anounced about bad company 2 costing 60 bucks or have some sort of new crazy drm like assasin creed 2. Lets wait till some complains arise.

Anyway, i hope that does not happen but lets pick mw2 and mass effect 2. Its obvious that cod4 and mass effect pc versions were very well designed but the sequels have lowered that quality. i heard people saying that mass effect 2 lacks some graphics settings. What i am trying to say is that, cod4 and mass effect also were good efforts on pc. But the gamedevelopers payed less attention to the sequels. So maybe bad company 2 is doing its first effort now on pc. But if bad company 1 was on pc. I am sure that the second game would have lower values on pc than the previous just like mw2 and mass effect 2 did. I guess both companies focused on consoles because they made more money. Right now dice does not clearly now if a "battlefield" game will have good sales on pc or if the console sales will outnumber them. They bet that after IW fiasco they will do well and they work on improving the pc version for that same reason. But if they had released Bad company 1 on pc and the console sales were higher, then they would make bad company 2 just like mw2 and mass effect 2.

I only hate it if I see crappy or average games charging more. If a game is going to charge more, it better well be justified. And I'm talking about justified in the eyes of the gamer, not the developer. In reality, the market generally will pay the market price. The reason why game prices seldom have increased over the last ten years compared to other consumer products is because the gamer market has cleary indicated that it is not willing to pay much more for games. Console games were slow to make the jump to $60. PC games have been slower.

? Most of this post is just misinformation.kevy619

Some games are console based and ported to pc, some games are pc based and ported to console... get over it.kevy619

I quite like it, because I like seeing PC gamers freak out. I was a console gamer mainly until this Summer, so I don't mind at all paying 60 bucks for a game.

[QUOTE="kevy619"] ? Most of this post is just misinformation.dakan45

Nope, he was right, you are, again, talking about ME 2 which you didn't even play and it's far better than ME1 I don't see this people that agree on ME 1 being better, that you speak of. You have no idea how ME 2 is, so let's just stop about making assumptions. You either play the game and express your anger with valid arguments or you find other things to bash because nobody will care about your opinion much if you have no idea what is that which you want.

MW 2 is not PC focused.

Dice "made" Mirror's Edge. Saying "other EA games" won't make your argument valid, Mirror's Edge is better on PC and that is a fact (I played the Xbox version too), it's a great port, it's better in every way. If they would have released the DLC at the same time with the console version it could have passed as a genuine standalone PC version, that's how great it was, but fact is, it was a port, tho that doesn't make it less PC focused.

PC made DICE in the FPS section and they know it, you don't have any argument to prove that they don't care about the PC version, all you do is assume things because of money. But, hey, you clearly know what DICE knows or knows not, right?

I don't agree with kevy, this isn't "half misinformation" this is misinformation at its finest.

I want to see the price get bumped up again, and watch and laugh as the anti-piracy preachers slowly stop wasting their breathe over words that will change nobody's mindsets anyways.

[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="kevy619"] ? Most of this post is just misinformation.DanielDust

Nope, he was right, you are, again, talking about ME 2 which you didn't even play and it's far better than ME1 I don't see this people that agree on ME 1 being better, that you speak of. You have no idea how ME 2 is, so let's just stop about making assumptions. You either play the game and express your anger with valid arguments or you find other things to bash because nobody will care about your opinion much if you have no idea what is that which you want.

MW 2 is not PC focused.

Dice "made" Mirror's Edge.

PC made DICE in the FPS section and they know it, you don't have any argument to prove that they don't care about the PC version, all you do is assume things because of money. But, hey, you clearly know what DICE knows or knows not, right?

I don't agree with kevy, this isn't "half misinformation" this is misinformation at its finest.

You clearly said that ME 2 is worse than ME 1, based on what? what people say? how to you know they aren't making fun of you?

Problem is, what is "your" argument since you just proved you haven't got one. There are a few textures that look a little sloppy, tho overall the quality is greatly improved. ME 1 didn't have AA either, your point? and this time you can actually force it in ME 2, unlike ME1. Also, was there a need for the inventory? enlighten me, why did you need an inventory for ME, imo it was horrible, redundant and it sucked, it shamed the game, because it lacked content to fill the inventory, same weapons, upgrades, parts that made little to no difference (now you have "lots" of different weapons, not just a few and stupid parts to make them feel new) are those things so awesome that you want to see them again? the worst thing of ME (other than empty planets on side missions) was the inventory imo, and now it's gone.

The ONLY feature that is mission from ME 2 is Vsync, which is easily enabled in the nvcp, is it a bad port because of that?

Anyway, my only question...did you play the game or not?

If you did:Ok I accept your opinion even if it's entirely misinformation.

If you didn't: Why are you continuing this discussion? you clearly know nothing about how it performs, how it looks, how it feels, how it plays, yet you're talking about all those aspects. Oh right, because you heard other people, but how much do you care about other people over your own opinion? If you don't like the game, drop the talk, don't spread misinformation and assumptions, if you are interested in it, get the game and play it, it's a lot better than ME 1 and it's even more PC focused that the first :/.

Don't compare a piece of crap like MW2 with ME2 just because they both have M in the name and a 2. And since I'm talking again about ME 2 and you, I found another 9 planets that aren't related to the main quest or loyalty missions and they are just as great, fun, intense, and extremely different and detailed, so around 13 or 14 planets, which could stand as DLC, any one of them, every single one is better than the BDtS DLC from ME 1 which was average so the comparison doesn't say much.

You clearly said that ME 2 is worse than ME 1, based on what? what people say? how to you know they aren't making fun of you?

Problem is, what is "your" argument since you just proved you haven't got one. There are a few textures that look a little sloppy, tho overall the quality is greatly improved. ME 1 didn't have AA either, your point? and this time you can actually force it in ME 2, unlike ME1. Also, was there a need for the inventory? enlighten me, why did you need an inventory for ME, imo it was horrible, redundant and it sucked, it shamed the game, because it lacked content to fill the inventory, same weapons, upgrades, parts that made little to no difference (now you have "lots" of different weapons, not just a few and stupid parts to make them feel new) are those things so awesome that you want to see them again? the worst thing of ME (other than empty planets on side missions) was the inventory imo, and now it's gone.

The ONLY feature that is mission from ME 2 is Vsync, which is easily enabled in the nvcp, is it a bad port because of that?

Anyway, my only question...did you play the game or not?

If you did:Ok I accept your opinion even if it's entirely misinformation.

If you didn't: Why are you continuing this discussion? you clearly know nothing about how it performs, how it looks, how it feels, how it plays, yet you're talking about all those aspects. Oh right, because you heard other people, but how much do you care about other people over your own opinion? If you don't like the game, drop the talk, don't spread misinformation and assumptions, if you are interested in it, get the game and play it, it's a lot better than ME 1 and it's even more PC focused that the first :/.

Don't compare a piece of crap like MW2 with ME2 just because they both have M in the name and a 2. And since I'm talking again about ME 2 and you, I found another 9 planets that aren't related to the main quest or loyalty missions and they are just as great, fun, intense, and extremely different and detailed, so around 13 or 14 planets, which could stand as DLC, any one of them, every single one is better than the BDtS DLC from ME 1 which was average so the comparison doesn't say much.

DanielDust

You clearly said that ME 2 is worse than ME 1, based on what? what people say? how to you know they aren't making fun of you?

Problem is, what is "your" argument since you just proved you haven't got one. There are a few textures that look a little sloppy, tho overall the quality is greatly improved. ME 1 didn't have AA either, your point? and this time you can actually force it in ME 2, unlike ME1. Also, was there a need for the inventory? enlighten me, why did you need an inventory for ME, imo it was horrible, redundant and it sucked, it shamed the game, because it lacked content to fill the inventory, same weapons, upgrades, parts that made little to no difference (now you have "lots" of different weapons, not just a few and stupid parts to make them feel new) are those things so awesome that you want to see them again? the worst thing of ME (other than empty planets on side missions) was the inventory imo, and now it's gone.

The ONLY feature that is mission from ME 2 is Vsync, which is easily enabled in the nvcp, is it a bad port because of that?

Anyway, my only question...did you play the game or not?

If you did:Ok I accept your opinion even if it's entirely misinformation.

If you didn't: Why are you continuing this discussion? you clearly know nothing about how it performs, how it looks, how it feels, how it plays, yet you're talking about all those aspects. Oh right, because you heard other people, but how much do you care about other people over your own opinion? If you don't like the game, drop the talk, don't spread misinformation and assumptions, if you are interested in it, get the game and play it, it's a lot better than ME 1 and it's even more PC focused that the first :/.

Don't compare a piece of crap like MW2 with ME2 just because they both have M in the name and a 2. And since I'm talking again about ME 2 and you, I found another 9 planets that aren't related to the main quest or loyalty missions and they are just as great, fun, intense, and extremely different and detailed, so around 13 or 14 planets, which could stand as DLC, any one of them, every single one is better than the BDtS DLC from ME 1 which was average so the comparison doesn't say much.

DanielDust

Modern Warfare 2 is currently priced at $60 and it is still selling well. The standard price will increase by $10 making the PC even more lucrative for each copy sold. Publishers will be more willing to put their games on the PC, giving us more variety of games to play.Jd1680a

The thing that annoys me the most is that digital games cost more than retail. The entire point of digital (originally) was to bring cheaper games to customers because it is far cheaper for the company for a gamer to download their product from them than having to go through the hassle of shipping and packaging. Obviously this ideal got lost some where along the way.

[QUOTE="guynamedbilly"]Modern Warfare 2, Assassins' Creed 2, Starcraft 2, and Supreme Commander 2 have been selling for, or getting preorders at places like Best Buy for $59.99. adamosmaki

I quite like it, because I like seeing PC gamers freak out. I was a console gamer mainly until this Summer, so I don't mind at all paying 60 bucks for a game.

Grodus5

PC gamers are buying S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and other games at 2 $ in Steam. In terms of software PC is the most cheap platform, and in terms of hardware is matter of how good is your tv screen.

Too much pirate downloads, you just type on google the name of the game torrent and u donwload it for free, so the price got a lil bit up. .alt i think they didnt had to rise the prices. .but what'eva

[QUOTE="adamosmaki"][QUOTE="guynamedbilly"]Modern Warfare 2, Assassins' Creed 2, Starcraft 2, and Supreme Commander 2 have been selling for, or getting preorders at places like Best Buy for $59.99. guynamedbilly

[QUOTE="adamosmaki"][QUOTE="guynamedbilly"] So, you are just making stuff up as you go then? I never said all pc games everywhere were selling for $59.99.guynamedbilly

Starcraft 2 preorder from Gamestop

Supreme commander 2 preorder

All $50 and i'm gonna repeat my self is not 2 is not 3 games is only 1 game at $60

and my point is that all new pc games releases are $50 or less with 1 exception