quote:
Originally posted by AG3:
AG3 (Topic: Surprised by Crescendo):
It's too bad, really. The average gamer has this mentality that a game should never cost more than a set price, say $50. Regardless of how much work went into the game, how good it is, and how long it lasts, it should never cross this line. This means that G-Collections can sell short, low-quality ero-games that people buy at $50 a piece, but if they translated a big, high-quality game that lasts 5 times longer, they couldn't charge even $150, because almost everyone would think "$150 for ONE game!? No ******* way!", instead of looking at the content you actually get for that money.If customers didn't do that, and were willing to pay based on the actual work involved in translating each game (using current ero-games length/prices as a standard), the chance of seeing high-quality games would be much bigger. Longer doesn't necessarily have to equal better, but it's a starting point.
There are good reasons why this is the case. Games are valued not just with respect to other games, but with respect to other items as well, in general.
$150 approaches many people's utility bills per month. $150 is way more than I pay on my cell phone for a month. $150 approaches the price of a used video game system.
You also have to go by what you can reasonably expect people to pay. People have budgets, they budget their entertainment money, and they'll say "I can buy 3 other games for this one". Note that even Metal Gear Solid 2, and FFX, and other big names can't get away with charging more.
Comparatively one game might be worth more money than another, but that is just one factor. The market has decided that games as a whole are almost never worth more than $50.
As to "GC's selling short low-quality erogames at $50" ... well, yes, they are. As more and more titles come out - and better titles - they will be competing with themselves, so to speak, and will have far more difficulty continuing to charge $50 for the likes of Kango 2 and Tsukushite Agechau 4. The answer to this isn't necessarily "they should then be selling the better games for more" but "they should be selling the crappy games for less".
Why there isn't a real budget label kind of deal for gaming is an entire other kettle of fish.
Now, $150 seems a bit high; but if Crescendo were $55 or so, and other games were like $35 ... this would be along the lines of what you suggest. Unfortunately one of the immediate effects is that sales of Crescendo go way down! One of the reasons XChange was so popular, for example, is undoubtedly its being very cheap. While Crescendo would generate incredible buzz and win critical acclaim, it likely would never get the commercial success it needed. This pricing strategy seems doomed to failure.
[edit: lerns two spel]
[This message has been edited by Nandemonai (edited 12-06-2004).]
