Tamron said:
The problem is, because game production costs so much now, more often than not, games tend to be shorter than they would normally have been, or take much longer between itterations to make, so people already believe that the asking price is too much, even though it's definitely less than it used to be, the idea of raising the prices further by $10-20, making the average new game $69.99 - $79,99, while for a good cause, and bringing the prices to meet their 1995-1999 ranges, would result in a large portion of people moving away from buying new, and either run the risk of collapse, or run the risk of more people opting for used, which reduces the total sales of each game further. The only real counter for this would be ingame advertising or a shift in pricing model, with more dlc, two counters that have been tried already and have almost unanimousely been slaughtered by gamers. They wont pay more for the game, and the alternatives to increase revenue will be mostly rejected too, but at the same time, everyone expects more than they actually get, and want that additional content to be at no extra cost too. The next video game crash is going to be driven, almost entirely, by peoples sense of entitlement. |
now that you mentioned that....Devs can make money from ingame advertisements and stuff. That makes a lot of sense but you give people the oppotunity and they could start calling the Developers corporatists and sellouts. With the DLCs I dont know, people always complain about that and do DLCs really sell that well? You still have people accussing these developers of cutting content from the original game to sell as DLCs. Remember back in the day when we had unlockable items and content like if you finish the game you get two extra chapters or storylines as in Resident Evil 4. That was awesome. If that came as a DLC today...gamers are so used to those types of extra stuff...
