In the 8-bit days, there was a "budget" class of games that cost £2-3 in GB compared to £9-10 for full price games. These games were typically simpler or poorer, but there were notable exceptions.
Pay More For Better Games?
- Thread starter Davaris
- Start date
I'm a dev and from what I've seen over the years the vast majority of games are made to be as simple and cheap as possible. Why? Because the vast majority of players don't like games that make them think and the only way to make a profit from low priced games is to target the majority.
So I thought one way around this problem is for a dev to make a high quality artistic product, as opposed to a "business" one and charge a premium for it.
Think about it. A six pack of beer is dirt cheap. Why? Because it is mass produced in a factory and it appeals to a large number of people. A very expensive bottle of wine is expensive because it takes a long time to make, it appeals to a small number of people and it requires people with craftsmen like skills.
There are examples of premium items in all areas of our economy. So why aren't games doing this? I want games that are more than just running mazes and killing monsters and products like that require time, money and craftsmen.
EDIT:
This would make a great article for my website.
So I thought one way around this problem is for a dev to make a high quality artistic product, as opposed to a "business" one and charge a premium for it.
Think about it. A six pack of beer is dirt cheap. Why? Because it is mass produced in a factory and it appeals to a large number of people. A very expensive bottle of wine is expensive because it takes a long time to make, it appeals to a small number of people and it requires people with craftsmen like skills.
There are examples of premium items in all areas of our economy. So why aren't games doing this? I want games that are more than just running mazes and killing monsters and products like that require time, money and craftsmen.
EDIT:
This would make a great article for my website.
Unkillable Cat
Mildly Dipped
I wouldn't mind paying "premium" money for a "premium" product.
That said, when was the last time a "premium" product was released in the gaming market?
That said, when was the last time a "premium" product was released in the gaming market?
I remember my collector edition HL2 what a joke that was all I got was a DVD disk, shitty little book and a shirt that was XXXL, way to fucking big.
the "art book" with heaps of illustrations & explanation turned out to be as small as a pocketbook with 10cm drawings in it tops. all art you could get off the HL2 website.
yup, that's the last time i'll let myself get fooled into a collector's edition of a hyped title.
yup, that's the last time i'll let myself get fooled into a collector's edition of a hyped title.
.
When I floated this idea at a dev forum one of the experienced developers suggested something like this, because ordinary people wouldn't feel like they were getting their moneys worth otherwise.
Another developer said if you wanted to charge higher prices, you'd have to beat your competition in one area and the area I'd want the game to excell in is roleplaying options. The more I examine Fallout the more details I see. Its damned intimidating.
Most devs just make games that are essentially run a maze kill a lot of monsters. For my money I'd want something I could play again and again with vastly different experiences depending on how my character was put together.
So this got me thinking. How about a smaller game that was more like a module from the old days, that has lots of details packed into it, but at the same $19.95 price as a casual game?
When I floated this idea at a dev forum one of the experienced developers suggested something like this, because ordinary people wouldn't feel like they were getting their moneys worth otherwise.
Another developer said if you wanted to charge higher prices, you'd have to beat your competition in one area and the area I'd want the game to excell in is roleplaying options. The more I examine Fallout the more details I see. Its damned intimidating.
Most devs just make games that are essentially run a maze kill a lot of monsters. For my money I'd want something I could play again and again with vastly different experiences depending on how my character was put together.
So this got me thinking. How about a smaller game that was more like a module from the old days, that has lots of details packed into it, but at the same $19.95 price as a casual game?
But if they give more, material content-wise, peripheral of the game, then it adds a lot more feeling to the game. Fallout was known for the spiral binding and the Vault Dweller's Guide. Ultima, for both the manuals and the additions they offered with each game.
I could cite more examples, but I think that's enough. It is all about the feeling of the game, and drawing the person in. It isn't always done with first-person, that is perhaps the most puerile form of "immersion", as it's eye candy, not brain candy. All of the quality games I mentioned and could use as examples were primarily brain candy.
That is what the CRPG genre really stands for, brain candy. Given the amount of mindless crap out on the market, the presence of a sophisticated, and developed game that tickles the mind, would be quite welcome.
I could cite more examples, but I think that's enough. It is all about the feeling of the game, and drawing the person in. It isn't always done with first-person, that is perhaps the most puerile form of "immersion", as it's eye candy, not brain candy. All of the quality games I mentioned and could use as examples were primarily brain candy.
That is what the CRPG genre really stands for, brain candy. Given the amount of mindless crap out on the market, the presence of a sophisticated, and developed game that tickles the mind, would be quite welcome.
oh man i woul pay a tiny bit more, but not $200.in all honesty, the lack of good game these days has led me to playing whichever game has the best physics or graphics... because its all thats left that isnt under-produced.
honestly, ive all but stopped gaming these days.
its just not worth my time anymore except for rental with a friend so i can shoot him inthe head for a bit and then get rid of it when it bores the fuck out of me. (usually within 24 hours)
After this discussion I'm starting to think the premium price thing won't work. The high price would make it too much of a temptation for people to pirate the game instead of buy it. If games could be made so they couldn't be copied, it would have a chance of success, but I can't see that happening any time soon.
Now I think the only chance for real CRPGs is for small affordable module type games to be made. So instead of "saving the world", you can solve a mystery or do something else in a small area.
I read an interview with Jeff Vogel a while back and he said his next game was going to be much smaller and more detailed than his previous games. I guess he'll have to let his players know what he is doing, or they'll be pretty annoyed when they play it and see how small it appears to be on the surface.
I got to that point a long time ago. When I stopped playing, it was because I thought I had outgrown them. But then I played Fallout and realised it wasn't me it was them; The AAA's aren't making games for people like me, they are making them for casuals. Then I started learning how to make games myself and realised how difficult (almost impossible) it is to make games that are as good as the original Fallout.
Davaris said:
After this discussion I'm starting to think the premium price thing won't work. The high price would make it too much of a temptation for people to pirate the game instead of buy it. If games could be made so they couldn't be copied, it would have a chance of success, but I can't see that happening any time soon.
Now I think the only chance for real CRPGs is for small affordable module type games to be made. So instead of "saving the world", you can solve a mystery or do something else in a small area.
I read an interview with Jeff Vogel a while back and he said his next game was going to be much smaller and more detailed than his previous games. I guess he'll have to let his players know what he is doing, or they'll be pretty annoyed when they play it and see how small it appears to be on the surface.
I got to that point a long time ago. When I stopped playing, it was because I thought I had outgrown them. But then I played Fallout and realised it wasn't me it was them; The AAA's aren't making games for people like me, they are making them for casuals. Then I started learning how to make games myself and realised how difficult (almost impossible) it is to make games that are as good as the original Fallout.
im being rasied in a generation of fucktards, and i apologize for my peers. times like this i think i ought to start burning people down.i am the same way, i mean, it got to the point where i refused to buy games, and started pirating everything. i admit to getting a certain amount of appeal out of nice graphics... but without a story its just hollow. my god could you only imagine if they made games looking as pretty as oblivion and half life 2, in terms of graphical detail anyway, and actually gave them role playing features.
id jsut about shit. and id get back into gaming right quick.
this is why i still have high hopes for fallout 3, while ive come to agree that it should be a spinoff not a sequel, i still hope this game will be very enjoyable nonetheless.
I'm just going to be honest - I'd pay £30-40 and no more.
I'm only a teenager, I'm not spending any more than that and, to be honest, the amount of newcomers you'd turn off with a £100 price-tag would just be too many.
I love Fallout and all of the games in its series (POS excepted) but I don't really want to be paying over the odds for it, when there will be games of a similar quality, although not in the Fallout universe, for half of the price.
I'm only a teenager, I'm not spending any more than that and, to be honest, the amount of newcomers you'd turn off with a £100 price-tag would just be too many.
I love Fallout and all of the games in its series (POS excepted) but I don't really want to be paying over the odds for it, when there will be games of a similar quality, although not in the Fallout universe, for half of the price.
DirtDigger2000
First time out of the vault
Sander said:
Most entertainment media follows this rule.
A good book costs just as much as a bad book.Given subject matter and book type.You will get gharged an arm and a leg for a good/bad historical book but not nearly the same for a fiction book be it Joan Collins,Stephen King,Koontzz,or Who the Fuck is this Author.A good movie on DVD or in the theaters has a comparable price,or in the latters case the same price,be it a gem or a turd.
Once enough consumers say "Charge me more!" then pricing will rise accordingly.Since entertainment is art,and art is subjective,there is no way to say charge me,because of my personal feelings,$15 for a movie or $80 for a game because i believe it rocks,All of the involved media type will rise in price once the majority of the market is willing to pay a higher cost.
Paying more for quality in the entertainment industry is a beautiful dream..but it is only that.
I think you've just hit on what could be done to change things for the better. The type of game we like needs its own name and definition, so it doesn't have to compete with the shovelware. Think of simulations. People are willing to pay much higher prices for them even though they use the same technology as games.
Perhaps instead of calling Fallout a Role Playing Game, it should be given a different name and a definition. The first step would be to identify all of the rules that made Fallout what it is without regard to its setting, so these rules can be used in any setting. The next step would be to give that definition a copyrighted name, so any game maker that wanted to use the name would have to satisfy all of the requirements of the definition.
This is something that NMA could do to empower its players. If a game does not satisfy all of the requirements of their definition, the game makers would not be given permission to use the name.
EDIT:
I wish I could think of a better name than Role Playing Game to describe the type of game Fallout is, because it doesn't cut it for me. Role and Playing have a place. But Game? No way. For me it is like the difference between someone who calls themselves a Magician and someone who calls themselves an Illusionist, a Magician sounds childish while an Illusionist seems more grown up and credible.
Perhaps instead of calling Fallout a Role Playing Game, it should be given a different name and a definition. The first step would be to identify all of the rules that made Fallout what it is without regard to its setting, so these rules can be used in any setting. The next step would be to give that definition a copyrighted name, so any game maker that wanted to use the name would have to satisfy all of the requirements of the definition.
This is something that NMA could do to empower its players. If a game does not satisfy all of the requirements of their definition, the game makers would not be given permission to use the name.
EDIT:
I wish I could think of a better name than Role Playing Game to describe the type of game Fallout is, because it doesn't cut it for me. Role and Playing have a place. But Game? No way. For me it is like the difference between someone who calls themselves a Magician and someone who calls themselves an Illusionist, a Magician sounds childish while an Illusionist seems more grown up and credible.
Unfortunately, while the genres are fairly clearly labeled in what they stand for, not all keep to that classification. Or they do like what some developers were doing, and add in a few stats, and try to bill an Action-Adventure game as a CRPG because of that, trying to cash in on the RPG crowd.
Fallout IS the epitome of the role-playing genre, even if the genre doesn't resemble what it should, and that is why Fallout was hailed as the old-school true RPG champ...and hence the full title.
RPG started out as a sub-genre of Adventure, as did dungeon crawler and others. The genres are there, and would work if the publishers treated them right.
Again, the problem lies in the greedy publishers, ignorant developers, a dumbed-down audience, and misrepresented products.
Fallout IS the epitome of the role-playing genre, even if the genre doesn't resemble what it should, and that is why Fallout was hailed as the old-school true RPG champ...and hence the full title.
RPG started out as a sub-genre of Adventure, as did dungeon crawler and others. The genres are there, and would work if the publishers treated them right.
Again, the problem lies in the greedy publishers, ignorant developers, a dumbed-down audience, and misrepresented products.
I was going to edit my post but you beat me to it. Anyway here's my addition:
So instead of renaming the type of game, would it be better to create a strict definition of a quaility CRPG?
The definition could be put a prominent place as a challenge and any games that met the criteria would be given an honorable mention on the same page.
It would be an endorsement which I don't think you guys would like, however I think it could work because it does not require money and it would give developers (both AAA and Indie) something to work towards.
The hardest part would be getting everyone to agree on what should be in it.
Anyway here's my addition:So instead of renaming the type of game, would it be better to create a strict definition of a quaility CRPG?
The definition could be put a prominent place as a challenge and any games that met the criteria would be given an honorable mention on the same page.
It would be an endorsement which I don't think you guys would like, however I think it could work because it does not require money and it would give developers (both AAA and Indie) something to work towards.
The hardest part would be getting everyone to agree on what should be in it.