安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
此主题已被锁定 
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
To be perfectly fair, many people lose persepective and get pricing wrong, and they're usually the ones trying to make a narrative that games have either gone up in a certain measure regularly, or they're trying to say they haven't gone up enough.
The sad reality is (for them) that none of it is true. Not least of which because the real reason is ONE thing only - what people are prepared to pay. Not cost of living, nor region, nor anything (though they are integral WITHIN what people are prepared to pay).
I've banged on about this many times but I'm lucky in that I got into gaming VERY early on - in the late 1970s, due to my dad getting me into electronics. The first hobby computer kits were sold through amateu electronics mags, so I jumped on board quickly. Plus, apart from one brief blip, I never sell anything. So I still have all that stuff.
And one of the things I still have are magazines - I have on my wall in my stairway a double page spread of the announcement for Centipede for the Atari VCS (so evem before they started calling it the 2600) £29.99 RRP.
To put this into perspective this is when the average weekly wage for someone of around 21 was just over £100. A THIRD of your weekly wage for one cartridge. And unlike to day, where you rarely find that RRP on the shelf (thanks to supermarkets), these were available at that price. You would be REALLY lucky if you found someone sellling with even a quid off.
Of course, we didn't get the video game crash like America did, though there was some effect - mostly in hardware sales. Companies like Acorn over estimated and it took them down. But even then, game cartirdges held their price and the computer equivalents (mostly on tape) were as a rule of thumb £10 cheaper (so about £19.99).
So, yes, those $70 games did exists indeed, but they were very much outliers - treated with the same sort of approach from consumers as a double album versus a single album (when CDs were £11.99, and double albums between £16.99 and £22.99).
Very few actually bother to check perspective and if they did, they'd realise it's not as it first seems.
The ZX Spectrum had what is essentially a glimmer of how Steam works these days - it had gone long past it's sell by date, and it was rife for "greatest hits" style reissues. Not really done before this. And that made a new price entry point - around £7.95. Often these weren't just single releases either but small compilations.
Those prices largely stuck the same for years. Last game I bought full price on release was Elite II for the Amiga, again £19.99 (but I did get a few quid discount as it was HMV, and I was a DJ). That's early 90s.
Come the PS1 era when I really got back into gaming in a big way (thanks to disability), the new games were coming out at £29.99. No change still. The re-releases and such is where there was some movement - instead of the £7.95 of the early ones, you had either £9.99 or an even cheaper £6. So there was now two tiers of budget priced games.
And every single time a new generation has come around, publishers have tried to test the waters with "ooh games will have to be costlier" and it usually is a blanket £10 increase, and it almost never happens.
Oh yeah ... because the city is the problem with the game. And the city is the only thing the game consits of. There are no mechanics that were re-usable. A game is but its level graphics.
And you ignoring points or rather not understanding them doesn't make them invalid.
Didn't even bother to read the rest, tbh.
true saturation is for example where youu're selling TV's or cars in a given location and you've reached the point whereeveryone has two of your cars in their garage already. Barring an accident.. not one will be buying any cars for a few years yet. Same for TV's, Toasters, Houses, COnsoles, etc. But games/enterttainment work differently.
You can saturate the market with say superhero movies and then turn around and sell the same market Rom-COms, AAnd then turn around and sell it Horro, Thriller, Action, Sci-FI...etc, etc
THe market will generally always buy more, and after while you'll loob back around to SUperhero movies.
DOn't buy what you don't like. Thats good but you don't have to justify it by asserting something thatts not actually true by any objective manner. That the things you like are supported by millions upon millions of consumers who are not you, indicates thats its not about anti-consumer, just anti-you.
All of that extra money goes to the top executives who already make millions of dollars a year for doing virtually nothing. Sometimes they lay off most of the staff that works under them, but otherwise they don't do anything.
This. It's amazing how many people will blindly throw full price money at a game, then act all shocked when it's buggy. You're paying to be a beta tester.
There isn't a single game out there that you must play on release. Be patient and pick up the ultimate edition or whatever with all of the problems fixed and the DLC included for less than half of the original price. Pay less, get more.
Totally worth it to have patience and pick up games whenever the right moment is there.
I hate that talk about inflation. Yes, prices rised everywhere. *Maybe* your wages rised accordingly (most likely it didn't). But even if, there is the catch that with rising wages you usually have a rising standard of living.
The spare money - which is what you use for luxury items like games stayed largely the same. If game prices where rising accordingly, they'd simply priced themselves out of their main market. You can see how this will go with LEGO which will have a serious problem (not they don't already have enough) next generation because they are pricing themselves out of the children budget, so less children will play with LEGO and built fond memories that will lead to sales as AFOL and for their children.
Their are two quotes I like:
One from a acquainted hearth surgeon. "I had too little money as a student, I had too little money as an assistant doctor, and I still have to little money now."
One from a US millionaire asked about his yearly income of some 100s of thousands of dollars: "Once I spend it all, there too is nothing left."
They haven't in more than a decade. They don't want my money.
Not every money is worth getting. Every business know there's customers not worth their money.
because people like you that don't care about how much money they pay for a game
the devs kept increasing the price because of the demand
sure but then the store prices should be different from area to area
if they want to stop piracy then they should lower the prices
80$ for a game is a third or fourth of a monthly income in lots of countries