See, here's the problem with that. Take the witness for example. A game that when it launched attracted criticism for its price all over the internet. Many people said 40 USD is too much for a puzzle game or an indie game. I have never seen or noticed this many complaints about a game's price. Yet, the game apparently has sold extremely well despite the number of complaints. Many bought it but expressed a disappintment in its price anyway. Its genre and the fact that it's indie (or at least perceived as one) made people consider it too expensive. We don't know how much it would have sold had it been cheaper.

In other words, I don't think it's that simple.

It does not matter the cost of development, playtime, replayability, size, type of distribution or quality.
The only thing that matter is how much money will consumers pay for it.

I value games on fun/enjoyment. I'm not fussed about 200 hours of meh content. However I would happily stump up full asking price for a shorter game if it was amazing fun.

I feel like there is no universal way to figure out what a game costs because everyone places different value on different things.  For example when I ask myself 'was that price justified' I go with a gut feeling about how much I enjoyed it, and I really like Battlefront.  Thus I think that $60 was fine, while you disagree.

But with Destiny, for example, I cannot believe that I paid $60 for what came in the base game. ugh.

I don't price a game, no time for it.

Time is money. Every minute wasted reading about each game and its flaws, budgets etc.. would mean another dollar lost.

I just go int a store ask what is new and if t sounds alright buy it.

Only time I notice news about a game is when the VGChartz hor topics has like 5 threads about it lol.

Have you played Journey? If so, did you like it? Would you pay $60 for it?

Personally, I may find it the 2nd best video game I've ever played, but I'd still feel ripped off, had I paid $60. It's too light on content and replayability doesn't mean much to me.

I haven't played Journey so I can't really comment.  But I agree that just because something is fun doesn't automatically justify a high price tag.  I've been playing the shit out of Rocket League but I don't think I would have paid more than...I don't know...$40 for it?  Its just a gut thing.

This. While very basic, it's the only truth that can be applied. Consumers established a consensus that 60$ is appropriate for regular games. They don't give a sh** about how expensive it was to produce a game, that doesn't affect them in their buying decision at all (well, the most of them, some exceptions always exist). If a game had to cost very large amounts, it's not the consumers fault. Developers should rather think about how to keep costs low while reaching their aimed quality.

If a developer charges less than 60$, it trys to expand the number of sales. Pricing is one of the measures that can be taken to do this. Looking at Nintendo, they usually charge 50 or even less for their first party games. Looking at PS4 games, they cost 70€ here, some even more, which I myself consider way too high. You could counterattack me here and say that they still sell like hotcakes, which is undoubtedly true. I salute Sony here, they took that risk and got rewarded. It works well, so they shouldn't change it for now. It brings me back to the consensus I mentioned earlier. But for me, it's too much.

As a matter of fact, paying 70€ for a game is one of the main things that keep me away from buying a PS4. I'm buying WiiU/3DS games between 30/50€ and paying 70 is a big leap for me. I can buy two 3DS games for the prize of 1 PS4 game, and it seems a bit too much for me. 

Certain games I've put in 100 hours plus (Oblivion, Rollercoaster Tycoon, Halo 2) some a few hours (Uncharted 2) i happy to pay £40 for all those as the quality and fun i had was worth it.

But The order 1886 was bout six hours gameplay but i felt just as it stated getting good it ended and left me unfulfilled.