{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
6/19/2016 11:36:53 PM
38
Should Games be sold at full price if they are lacking certain content?
With the content included or not included in games today, are the prices of today's games justified?
I believe that depending on what content the game includes the price should be lower than the typical $59.99 US or whatever it is in other countries. Because they are such an easy example. Look at FPS games. FPS games that only feature a Campaign or only feature Multiplayer must meet certain requirements before the developer is allowed to charge full price for the game. If it only features a campaign, that campaign had better be atleast 12-15 hours in length on average on the easiest difficulty. Anything less isn't worth $60.
Same with a FPS that is only Multiplayer. If you don't have a minimum of atleast 15 maps and feature some form of FFA, TDM, CTF, KoTH, Dom, Demo, S&D, etc. You know the typical FPS game modes, you don't get to charge $60.
Opinions? Ideas? Thoughts?
-
I like how you are stating your feelings as facts but then ask for opinions. Pretty funny. I think it's an entitled question. If you can't afford to plop 60$ on a game you shouldn't be getting it. If you believe for a single minute that the game might not be worth your money then don't buy it. Overwatch to many isn't worth 60$ on consoles. I say it is. and i'm -blam!-ing poor. I'd also love to know your source for where you got those arbitrary numbers stating the mandatory amount of content to be worth the price. Please do link it.
