- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Don’t buy SW: Battlefront 2
Posted on 11/13/17 at 7:24 pm to partywiththelombardi
Posted on 11/13/17 at 7:24 pm to partywiththelombardi
quote:
If it is a 100 dollar game just say it. I dont mind that. I hate the idea of conceit or bait and dig deeper.
Really don't get why people would complain about having the option to NOT pay what the game should really cost.
I saw I got downvoted for my previous comment, but that wasn't me wishing that they cost that much. We're just fortunate that games are still the price tha they are. If you read all the horror stories about development times and grueling work schedules for some of these people, I'm really surprised we haven't seen a price hike in some time.
Posted on 11/13/17 at 7:36 pm to sicboy
I'd rather go back to just getting a complete game even if it was at a flat higher rate.
Ea is awful and really turned me off of COD with DLC b.s. they don't even attempt to give you a decent experience anymore, Madden is annually recycled, and Battlefront 1 was awful.
I really just don't trust them at all.
Ea is awful and really turned me off of COD with DLC b.s. they don't even attempt to give you a decent experience anymore, Madden is annually recycled, and Battlefront 1 was awful.
I really just don't trust them at all.
Posted on 11/13/17 at 7:48 pm to sicboy
quote:because you market a game at a certain price point to make it sound competitive just to bring it home and realize every feature that used to be price included is now a blocked commodity because they realized there was a value for those options
don't get why people would complain about having the option to NOT pay what the game should really cost.
Now those are additional costs. You also in same instances scale back on basic campaign modes to where the game is empty without DLC. Again this is mostly a EA gripe. I hope that company gets Blockbustered.
Their greed has ruined many of their franchises for me.
This post was edited on 11/13/17 at 7:51 pm
Posted on 11/13/17 at 8:25 pm to sicboy
quote:
I saw I got downvoted for my previous comment, but that wasn't me wishing that they cost that much. We're just fortunate that games are still the price tha they are. If you read all the horror stories about development times and grueling work schedules for some of these people, I'm really surprised we haven't seen a price hike in some time.
Agree and disagree. The market should find an equilibrium where the producers are making games/content that is profitable where consumers are happy to pay whatever cost that may be and value it appropriately.
If there is this much contention, on average, things will shift somehow. This was part of the price of chasing HD before it was cost effective to create it. Budgets have been accelerating since the Xbox/PS2 gen, and ballooned over the last two gens.
I actually do think the hesitancy of a cost raise is that games will be priced out of the target audience market. Once you get to that $100 consumer buying patterns change, even if it doesn't seem like it is that much. You know they'd be doing it if they thought they could make money that way.
I wouldn't say people are "fortunate" at all, but companies have decided that profits are better keeping core games prices at $60. Let's not act that the $60 is altruistic.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News