http://www.forbes.com/2006/12/19/ps3...sivegames.html

Thought this was an interesting read, regarding the $60 price tag of games today.

Interesting article. Thanks for the info. It's wild to think about when so many great games like Okami, Beyond Good And Evil, Ico and Psychonauts go largely unsold costing their companies millions while total crap can really sell well, especially licensed crap. No wonder there are so many movie and kiddie show tie ins -- much less risk in them.

This is really not the place to just repost digg links

This is Video Game Talk, the story concerns the price of video games, hence it's appropriate. I don't visit Digg and caught this from another site, hence the posting here to discuss this with fellow DVDTalkers. What's your point?

It's just superfluous, heres the talkback
theres 93 comments there, not much more to be said, how much talkback where you got it, why didn't you discuss it there? It's almost a week old (it hasn't been here all week for a reason (people are talking about it elsewhere)).

Also this is becoming a problem throughout the forum, people just reposting digg top page stories, people don't come here for the same cookie cutter web links there are everywhere else

And not to be overly rude it’s a pet peeve of mine

Well I don't go to digg or whatever website it is on, so I'm glad it was posted here.

Who died and made you the forum police?

Thanks for posting the link.

(WTF is digg?)

Exactly what I was gonna say.

Do we have to check "digg" before discussing something here now?

I agree, what is digg?

This game looks awesome and I wanted to make a thread asking since I really want this, but is this game planned for PS3 or even Wii?

Another asking "what the heck is Digg?" And who cares? It's news to us here and this is where we turn for to get news related to video games. Why chastise fumanstan for giving us a link to said news?

Its published by MS so that would be a resounding No for other platforms.. in this month's EGM (basically the gossip section) there were indications that MS would be trying to publish a Gears sequel every other year with a Halo game (not necessarily a direct sequel, but related game like Halo Wars, etc) in the year between the Gears game. So a major franchise game every year for the 360.

Digg is /. with an attitude.

Digg is fucking awful.

Things can only be discussed on one website?

Thanks for the story, fumanstan. It was interesting to learn why video games are becoming more expensive. I wonder how much the greatest hits titles will be in this generation. Will they still be $20?

There are to types of people in this world. Those with guns and those that digg. You digg?

Ditto. To both.

You do not need to pay $60 for GOW unless you can find it on sale. I paid $40 plus taxes for it or you can get GOW under $45 (after shipping & Free taxes) at buy.com with $20 off google checkout.

Here's an article: "Why I Won't Pay $60 for a Game"

bold pls

I think that last time I plaid over 50 for a game was the launch period for n64, where I paid 59 for Mario and 75 for Killer Instinct.
Never again, with the pace game prices fall lately. There are too many platforms, games and competition for games to go higher than $50 and be sustainable for too long.
I'm shocked that the used Xbox360 section of my EB has games priced for $50!
Maybe I'm getting old, but $50 is a brand spanking new game to me!

I'll be pretty pissed if Halo3 is above 50... if it is then they are just gouging.

There have always been these factors contributing to development costs.
There have always been high development costs, liscensing, packaging and marketing for games. Yeah games have gotten more complicated and more detailed, but the tools have far exceeded those hurdles. Now developers have more APIs built in to the console and ready made game and physics engines.
Developers choose to rush games to market and rushing a game costs more development money to inscrease bandwidth. Developers choose to encourage more detailed graphics and next-generation hardware (which doesn't garantee more sales) which demands even more resources. They are essentially choosing to raise game prices.

There seems to be a lot of backlash against this trend latley (Enix moving from PS to DS being a strong example, growing Nintendo Wi support and dwindling PS support being another).

Nintendo seems to be the leader of low-cost, high-sales franchises. They are especially experienced at creating new franchises that although are inferior in graphics (compared to Gears) far out sell it and with miniscule development costs, make a ton more money. Examples being Pikmin: Advanced/Batallion Wars. Nintendo seems to drop any partner that burns money developing any quality of game (Rare, Silicon Knights).

I, for one, welcome our new Digg overlords.



And it was a pretty interesting article IMHO. I had actually thought the "actual" work on games was a lower percentage than they showed, but it makes sense that all the extra graphics and complexity require more time and better programmers.

It still doesn't explain why games like Quest64 exist.

Why does Gears of War cost $60? Because gamers will still buy it at that price. It is as simple as that.

P.S. Who cares about digg?

Why Gears Of War Costs $60
Rachel Rosmarin, 12.19.06, 1:50 PM ET

It was posted 2 days ago, so it's not a week old. This a forum so that OUR MEMBERS can discuss things with each other. It's not a problem at all, you just have a silly pet peeve.