Lastgengamer said:                        "$100 buck? Damn, I guess I'm just getting the standard edition which is $5...WTF $60 bucks?? It all started when Activision had the audacity to start charging $60 for the PC version of Modern Warfare 2. Activision realized that after the success of Modern Warfare, they can pretty much charge any amount they please for the sequel and PC gamers would still flock to buy it. Of Course, if you’re into the multiplayer aspect of Modern Warfare 2, then the game comes packed with hundreds of hours of game play, so it’s safe to assume that Activision, somehow, got away with it, but when Assassin’s Creed 2, a single player game with absolutely no multiplayer and a horrible DRM that serves to punish legit buyers, is selling for $60 and the upcoming standard editions of Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 are also selling for $60 too, things have gotten too far ,and we can see that a new trend is emerging. Of course, you may come and point out the fact that console games cost $60 too. Why should PC gamers have to pay $50 when console gamers have to pay $60? Well, On top of the $50 that publishers set for their games to be sold on the console, they will also need to pay about, or more than, $10 per copy licensing fee to Microsoft and Sony respectively in order for them to sell the games on their console in the first place, which you guessed it, you pay for, but, unlike console gaming, there are no licensing fees for PC games. In fact, Microsoft, themselves, offers publishers to put the “Games for Windows Live” in their games free of charge. After this, we can only deduce that publishers who price their games $60 on the PC earn more money per game sold on the PC than do they earn per game sold on the console. When someone asks on a forum, what is the reason behind all this pirating? A number of answers can be heard, such as “because I can” or “because games are too expensive”. The fact that games are becoming more expensive should in some ways exacerbate the whole pirating issue publishers are ranting about, and when publishers like Ubisoft deter customers by raising the price tag and by forcing a completely unnecessary DRM to play a single player game and then complaining about low sales is just really pathetic. As for Blizzard, I have no doubt that, no matter, the price tag that are put on their games, their games will sell like hot cake. Of course, is the raising in price tag necessary? Is Activision getting a little too greedy? I will have no doubt that some of you do think that Blizzard games are worth every penny of that $60, and that you can recoup the money lost by restricting yourself from $10 worth of beer, but remember, by thinking like this, you are advocating the new trend. http://www.grandtheftpc.com/2010/04/why-are-pc-gamers-paying-60-now.html

Because there is this little thing called inflation which it seems is totally unknown to most of the people on this forum......

Are theaters ticket the same price than 10 years ago ? Is gas the same price as 10 years ago ?

Heck is a can of soda the same price ?

Nope......

A $10 increase for new PC games is uncalled for as that price difference between console and PC games goes straight into the licensing fee publishers pay to the hardware manufacturers. No fee for PC platform games means that the extra $10 is being charged simply because publishers feel they can.

That's fine. It's the simplest way for publishers to increase their per unit margins by a whopping 20% by doing nothing but raising prices, but one has to wonder what the PC gaming consumer response will be.

I can understand why Activision would charge an extra $10 for MW2 ("we like the extra $10 profit per unit, and we know consumers will buy the most anticipated game of the year anyway"), but if this becomes the standard for new game pricing, it does eliminate one of the big perks of PC gaming.

Ubisoft did the same thing with Assassin's Creed 2 with a $59.99 MSRP along with their odd "always online" DRM that's added another inconvenience to playing the PC version (added to the fact that it was released well after the console version). One has to wonder how much this has effected sales.

Of course not all games can artificially keep their prices at the initial MSRP like MW2 (finally on sale this weekend on Steam, but will be back at $59.99 like it is at most retail outlets after Monday) and consumers always have the option of waiting for a sale. But for an anticipated title, most consumers aren't going to do this and so the game publishers may be playing is that they simply hope to scoop up as many sales at a higher price before dropping sales require price adjustments.


Anyway, my personal response is to simply buy the console version of a game if I find it for less or it's just more convenient due to limited installs or online checks on PC. Case in point: Assassin's Creed 2 is currently selling for $30 vs. $60 on PC. If I really want to play any game again on PC with "wow" settings, I can always pick it up much later when it's slashed in price.

I'm buy the special edition of ANY Blizzard game anyway, so I guess it doesn't matter to me.

Also, Assassin's Creed 2 was $60, but it had more content than the console version (much like the PC version of the original game).

This just in, Activision-Blizzard wants your money

Part of it is "Activision charges what you will pay, and you WILL pay for Starcraft"

Another part of it is probably inflation and rising costs of development

Ail said: Lastgengamer said:                        "$100 buck? Damn, I guess I'm just getting the standard edition which is $5...WTF $60 bucks?? It all started when Activision had the audacity to start charging $60 for the PC version of Modern Warfare 2. Activision realized that after the success of Modern Warfare, they can pretty much charge any amount they please for the sequel and PC gamers would still flock to buy it. Of Course, if you’re into the multiplayer aspect of Modern Warfare 2, then the game comes packed with hundreds of hours of game play, so it’s safe to assume that Activision, somehow, got away with it, but when Assassin’s Creed 2, a single player game with absolutely no multiplayer and a horrible DRM that serves to punish legit buyers, is selling for $60 and the upcoming standard editions of Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 are also selling for $60 too, things have gotten too far ,and we can see that a new trend is emerging. Of course, you may come and point out the fact that console games cost $60 too. Why should PC gamers have to pay $50 when console gamers have to pay $60? Well, On top of the $50 that publishers set for their games to be sold on the console, they will also need to pay about, or more than, $10 per copy licensing fee to Microsoft and Sony respectively in order for them to sell the games on their console in the first place, which you guessed it, you pay for, but, unlike console gaming, there are no licensing fees for PC games. In fact, Microsoft, themselves, offers publishers to put the “Games for Windows Live” in their games free of charge. After this, we can only deduce that publishers who price their games $60 on the PC earn more money per game sold on the PC than do they earn per game sold on the console. When someone asks on a forum, what is the reason behind all this pirating? A number of answers can be heard, such as “because I can” or “because games are too expensive”. The fact that games are becoming more expensive should in some ways exacerbate the whole pirating issue publishers are ranting about, and when publishers like Ubisoft deter customers by raising the price tag and by forcing a completely unnecessary DRM to play a single player game and then complaining about low sales is just really pathetic. As for Blizzard, I have no doubt that, no matter, the price tag that are put on their games, their games will sell like hot cake. Of course, is the raising in price tag necessary? Is Activision getting a little too greedy? I will have no doubt that some of you do think that Blizzard games are worth every penny of that $60, and that you can recoup the money lost by restricting yourself from $10 worth of beer, but remember, by thinking like this, you are advocating the new trend. http://www.grandtheftpc.com/2010/04/why-are-pc-gamers-paying-60-now.html   Because there is this little thing called inflation which it seems is totally unknown to most of the people on this forum...... Are theaters ticket the same price than 10 years ago ? Is gas the same price as 10 years ago ? Heck is a can of soda the same price ? Nope......

Naturally. But by the same logic, should console games be priced at $70 now to cover the licensing fee? It still costs more to publish on console.

For all that people complain about the cost of new games, with the exception of the jump from the 6th to 7th gen (PS3 and 360), most games (non-budget titles) have pretty much retailed for $50 for as long as I can remember.

I can only interpret market tests to increase the price of PC games as attempts to regain lowered revenue in response to dropping sales rates, whether that's due to piracy or more gamers buying console, I won't venture to guess.

I havent bought a PC game since 2008. That was BF2 at $10.

If you buy 20 PC games at $50 each then your spending $1000 on games, im sure you can spend an additional 10 per game. While im not gonna argue devs are fucking over PC users, like IW is, i will argue that most devs need that additional $10.

It's very upsetting that this is starting to happen, because that always used to be a draw of PC games along with mods or...torrents.

Well doesn't suprise me.

Activision and Ubisoft are two biggest assholes in the industry and both are most hated companies by pc gamers

For years there were no problem since they were producing showelvare and at most average games but that changed when Activision merged with Blizzard and suddenly Activision now has 3 of the biggest most wanted franchises in PC game (Diablo, Starcraft, Warcraft).

At least we still have Sega and EA plus all the small East/Central European companies producing great games.

I don't have to buy the games if I don't want to. It's not a thing we need to live. It isn't food or drink. It isn't a place to live etc etc. They can charge whatever the fuck they want. I don't give a shit. If it is worth the money. I will buy it, if it isn't I won't buy it. It is that simple.