It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Is a common sense one.

Since the 1980's when something atrocious like Parker Brother's Frogger was sold for $50 on the Atari 2600 the world, in general, was a much less populated and therefor wealthier place.

I think many of us have been sitting around the past five years considering how dreadfully broke we are but deluded into believing that most others around us are filthy rich.

It was pointed out to me just recently that most people in most countries have been facing financial hardship over the past decade.

I find it a horrific shame when I see the time, detail and effort put into something like Lego Marvel Super Heroes yet the game can only sell for ten dollars.

However, at the same time, most feel it a horrific shame to spend over ten dollars during this era when we have credit agencies on our back and can't even afford quality clothes for our children let alone ourselves.

I can understand a well produced game like Castelvania being released for over fifty dollars but for many of us it would be destructively spiteful to those who depend on us to go ahead and spend that amount of money on a video game.
avatar
carnival73: Is a common sense one.
Always a bad start to an argument.
avatar
carnival73: Since the 1980's when something atrocious like Parker Brother's Frogger was sold for $50 on the Atari 2600 the world, in general, was a much less populated and therefor wealthier place.
This is a zero sum fallacy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-sum_fallacy
avatar
carnival73: I think many of us have been sitting around the past five years considering how dreadfully broke we are but deluded into believing that most others around us are filthy rich.
Actually most people think that others are much closer to themselves in income than reality. There have been serveral studies on this.
avatar
carnival73: I find it a horrific shame when I see the time, detail and effort put into something like Lego Marvel Super Heroes yet the game can only sell for ten dollars.
Where did you get the 'can only sell for ten dollars' bit? The console versions certainly go for a lot more in AU. (Edit: Even in the US steam store it is $30. Cheapest AU console version is $50)
avatar
carnival73: However, at the same time, most feel it a horrific shame to spend over ten dollars during this era when we have credit agencies on our back and can't even afford quality clothes for our children let alone ourselves.
I don't follow your argument. If your person circumstances don't allow such spending, fine. If you are in a circumstance that does allow it, keeping the money because others couldn't pay it only makes everything worse.
avatar
carnival73: I can understand a well produced game like Castelvania being released for over fifty dollars but for many of us it would be destructively spiteful to those who depend on us to go ahead and spend that amount of money on a video game.
Really? What about people who have cars? Or run air conditioning? Or pay to get their hair cut? And this is before getting started on things like private jets etc.
Post edited February 18, 2014 by _Bruce_
I always thought the best argument was so that homeless people could play them.
Attachments:
gaming.jpg (83 Kb)
avatar
carnival73: Is a common sense one.

Since the 1980's when something atrocious like Parker Brother's Frogger was sold for $50 on the Atari 2600 the world, in general, was a much less populated and therefor wealthier place.

I think many of us have been sitting around the past five years considering how dreadfully broke we are but deluded into believing that most others around us are filthy rich.

It was pointed out to me just recently that most people in most countries have been facing financial hardship over the past decade.

I find it a horrific shame when I see the time, detail and effort put into something like Lego Marvel Super Heroes yet the game can only sell for ten dollars.

However, at the same time, most feel it a horrific shame to spend over ten dollars during this era when we have credit agencies on our back and can't even afford quality clothes for our children let alone ourselves.

I can understand a well produced game like Castelvania being released for over fifty dollars but for many of us it would be destructively spiteful to those who depend on us to go ahead and spend that amount of money on a video game.
Well for most people in this world, the economy is pure garbage now so charging someone $50 for a game today is either insane or a huge dick in your ass move no matter how great the game is. The world we live in today is nothing like the 1980s and the 1990s when people made more money, more people had jobs and everything other than games was cheaper. Things are so bad now that people will hold onto $10 like gold.
Post edited February 18, 2014 by monkeydelarge
avatar
tinyE: I always thought the best argument was so that homeless people could play them.
Those fuckers always beat me at Starcraft...
avatar
monkeydelarge: Well for most people in this world, the economy is pure garbage now so charging someone $50 for a game today is either insane or a huge dick in your ass move no matter how great the game is. The world we live in today is nothing like the 1980s and the 1990s when people made more money, more people had jobs and everything other than games was cheaper. Things are so bad now that people will hold onto $10 like gold.
Your position is not supported by facts.
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MeanNetWorth2007.png]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MeanNetWorth2007.png[/url]
Note that this IS adjusted for inflaction, but still shows a huge increase. It also shows that the early 90s actually weren't very good.
Post edited February 18, 2014 by _Bruce_
avatar
monkeydelarge: Well for most people in this world, the economy is pure garbage now so charging someone $50 for a game today is either insane or a huge dick in your ass move no matter how great the game is. The world we live in today is nothing like the 1980s and the 1990s when people made more money, more people had jobs and everything other than games was cheaper. Things are so bad now that people will hold onto $10 like gold.
avatar
_Bruce_: Your position is not supported by facts.
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MeanNetWorth2007.png]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MeanNetWorth2007.png[/url]
Note that this IS adjusted for inflaction, but still shows a huge increase. It also shows that the early 90s actually weren't very good.
My position is supported by facts. What I see with my own eyes is more real than some Wikipedia page. Maybe I was wrong about the 90s and 80s being so great but for most people in this world, the economy is pure garbage today. And yes, things are so bad now that people will hold onto $10 like gold.
avatar
monkeydelarge: My position is supported by facts. What I see with my own eyes is more real than some Wikipedia page. Maybe I was wrong about the 90s and 80s being so great but for most people in this world, the economy is pure garbage today. And yes, things are so bad now that people will hold onto $10 like gold.
The problem with personal perception is it is biased with emotion and imperfect memory, which are NOT facts. Most people remember the past as better than it was. Most people ignore much of positive change and focus on negative aspects.

Not questioning that you or those around you are doing it tough. But most people are doing better than they were 20 years ago.

The economy today is nowhere near the 'pure garbage' that it has been historically.
avatar
monkeydelarge: My position is supported by facts. What I see with my own eyes is more real than some Wikipedia page. Maybe I was wrong about the 90s and 80s being so great but for most people in this world, the economy is pure garbage today. And yes, things are so bad now that people will hold onto $10 like gold.
avatar
_Bruce_: The problem with personal perception is it is biased with emotion and imperfect memory, which are NOT facts. Most people remember the past as better than it was. Most people ignore much of positive change and focus on negative aspects.

Not questioning that you or those around you are doing it tough. But most people are doing better than they were 20 years ago.

The economy today is nowhere near the 'pure garbage' that it has been historically.
I highly doubt your facts are facts. Governments like to mess with the "facts" you know? They don't want people to know how bad things are. So after taking that into consideration, I trust what I see and all signs show, the economy today is worse than it has ever been in the USA. I can't be sure of how it is in Australia right now because I'm not living in Australia right now. But we are all connected so you can be sure, things will be bad for Australia in the future.

Okay, I don't expect you to take me seriously considering my avatar is an angry capuchin monkey and you don't know me in real life but check this out.
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/fake-employment-numbers-and-5-more-massive-economic-lies-the-government-is-telling-you
http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/how-government-lies-about-the-economy/
http://economyincrisis.org/content/government-media-lying-about-unemployment-numbers
Post edited February 18, 2014 by monkeydelarge
avatar
monkeydelarge: I highly doubt your facts are facts. Governments like to mess with the "facts" you know? They don't want people to know how bad things are.
How silly of me not to realise that economics is just a conspiracy by the man.
avatar
monkeydelarge: Okay, I don't expect you to take me seriously considering my avatar is an angry capuchin monkey but check this out.
And because we are in conspiracy land blogs are more correct than wikipedia.

I certainly understand that some figures (particularly unemployment) are presented and counted in ways to make the current government look better. But anyone who thinks the world (and/or US) economy is in a worse state than 20 years ago is just plain wrong.
avatar
monkeydelarge: I highly doubt your facts are facts. Governments like to mess with the "facts" you know? They don't want people to know how bad things are.
avatar
_Bruce_: How silly of me not to realise that economics is just a conspiracy by the man.
avatar
monkeydelarge: Okay, I don't expect you to take me seriously considering my avatar is an angry capuchin monkey but check this out.
avatar
_Bruce_: And because we are in conspiracy land blogs are more correct than wikipedia.

I certainly understand that some figures (particularly unemployment) are presented and counted in ways to make the current government look better. But anyone who thinks the world (and/or US) economy is in a worse state than 20 years ago is just plain wrong.
Why are you putting Wikipedia on the pedestal of ultimate truth? You are obviously blind to the world. It must be nice living in that bubble of yours. Is there a disco ball in there? That would make it even more awesome.
Post edited February 18, 2014 by monkeydelarge
avatar
monkeydelarge: Why are you putting Wikipedia on the pedestal of ultimate truth? You are obviously blind to the world.
It's not, but it is a lot better than tin foil hat blogs, or people who claim to understand world economics based on seeing people around them doing it tough.
avatar
monkeydelarge: Why are you putting Wikipedia on the pedestal of ultimate truth? You are obviously blind to the world.
avatar
_Bruce_: It's not, but it is a lot better than tin foil hat blogs, or people who claim to understand world economics based on seeing people around them doing it tough.
What I say is not just based on seeing people around me doing it tough. You obviously lack common sense if you think things are so much better today. Yeah, everyone who doesn't believe in everything their government says wears a tin foil hat, yeah sure, that makes a lot of sense..NOT. The middle class in the USA has been destroyed but noo...things are better than ever today. MY ASS. 30 years ago the country still had a fairly large manufacturing base, we actually produced things that were sold overseas. Today, we have a service based economy which = SHIT. Oh and everywhere you go in the country, people with college degrees desperately fighting for a job at Mcdonalds is another sign that things are worse than ever.

Clearly my emotions have caused me to hallucinate because everything is so much better today compared to the 1980s and 1990s...NOT.
Post edited February 19, 2014 by monkeydelarge
avatar
_Bruce_: Your position is not supported by facts.
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MeanNetWorth2007.png]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MeanNetWorth2007.png[/url]
Note that this IS adjusted for inflaction, but still shows a huge increase. It also shows that the early 90s actually weren't very good.
You may want to take a closer look at that chart. The blue line represents the net worth of the top 10% of families (net worth of $3-4M and above). Note that the other lines, representing the net worth of the remaining 90% of families, have remained pretty much flat.

As for the OP's point, I'd contend that the strongest argument for keeping game prices low is economics 101- there is an absolute glut of games available, supply has absolutely skyrocketed, and since the amount of games people can play in a given amount of time has not changed demand has not changed significantly. With supply up and demand constant, the optimal pricing point decreases. In simple terms, when there are currently hundreds of good to great games available in the $10-20 range (including fairly recent AAA titles on sale), asking people to pay $50-60 for a game is a much tougher sell.
avatar
DarrkPhoenix: The blue line represents the net worth of the top 10% of families (net worth of $3-4M and above).
Yes, this is a really big problem.

avatar
DarrkPhoenix: Note that the other lines, representing the net worth of the remaining 90% of families, have remained pretty much flat.
Nope, look closer. Everyone about the top 50% have seen huge increases in percentage terms, just less in absolute terms compared to the top 10%. Harder to see but 25-50% has also seen gains. Agree than the bottom 25% haven't improved (no assets).
Post edited February 18, 2014 by _Bruce_