Support NeoGAF

[Yoboman]

$60 supports AAA quality games, just like movie theatres support the $100 million + movie market

Imagine the movie market just became Netflix shovelware

Having a the Gamepass model is great for games that have passed their initial sales spike, but is detrimental to big AAA visions

 

[GymWolf]

Do polygon ever writed a decent article in their life??

 

[Al Abaster]

I haven't paid full retail for a game in years. I rarely pay more than $19.99 for any game, and frankly considering the rapid decline in the quality of games and the rapid infestation of every game with politics I doubt I'll be buying any games at all anymore. Maybe every couple of years if some franchise release I'm interested in comes along.

The constant "gay lifestyle appreciation" crapola in games was becoming tedious enough. Now they're mostly all gone over the edge with "inclusion" and "multicult" and every other sort of idiocy. Games are gone the way of television. Pure brain death.

 

[Boss Mog]

I can't believe Patricia Hernandez is still working. I just remember her from when she joined Kotaku which is right about the time it started to go down the crapper and I stopped paying attention to them. I remember that in every article she wrote she had to mention the fact she was raped, she'd always slip it in, even when talking about Mario Kart or something.

I don't think I've ever payed $60 for a game, even at launch I can usually get them for $40-50 but if you wait just a few months you can usually get them all in the $10-20 range. The only exception is of course Nintendo games which is why, among other reasons, I don't own a Switch despite liking Nintendo.

 

[TheWanderingOgre]

As soon as day one mandatory patches, on disc dlc, microtransactions et all started to gain traction, videogames stopped being worth anything close to 60euros and we see them above 60 all the time.

Streaming is not an alternative though, get out of here with that crap.

 

[Fushitsusha]

Rather spend $60 on a game than even just 60 seconds on a Polygon article.

 

[Damigos]

Thank god for Jim Sterling

 

[Rhysser]

Spending $60 on a video game doesn't make has never made sense any more, unless it's Soulsborne

 

[Yoboman]

As a grown adult I just don’t see $60 as expensive. Especially as I’m buying far less games than I once might have

$60 for something that could last me 10 hours, 30 hours or hundreds of hours is a bargain

 

[Fake]

Are polygon/eurogamer staff those who get Switch games day one? Are NS games more expensive tham $60?

 

[CuteFaceJay]

They are somewhat right. I used to buy games all the time and rarely did I actually play them then rather than 5 months later. Backlogs and IRL are things to take into consideration.

My backlog is silly stupid seeing as I only play ForzaH4, GTA V & BF4.

 

[Starlight Lotice]

Idiots

Thread Title should be "Spending Time reading Polygon isn't relevant to Gaming anymore".

As much as I don't like the idea that games cost £40/$60 they do cost millions to make and they want to make a profit on them.

 

[Animagic]

Transpolygon said it so it must be true.

When all games are streaming only or subscription based only it will be when I stop playing new releases and dive into all the shelved games I never finished.

 

[Saber]

You could use your brain for once and wait for a discount? And is not like people buy games everyday.

I do this all the time, why is so hard?

 

[Explosive Zombie]

"Reading Polygon doesn't make sense anymore"

 

[Quezacolt]

Sorry Polygon, but i'd rather spend 60 dollars and have something that is mine, than pay for a service wich wont let me even play the game installed as soon as i stop paying. Recently i got astral chain full price, and i would do it again, it was worth every cent.

 

[Fuz]

 

[FranXico]

"Reading Polygon never made any sense"

FTFY

 

[V4skunk]

If the leftists get their way, there won't even be video games any more. It just won't be possible to make them, unless they think people will make them for free.

 

[Fuz]

Sorry Polygon, but i'd rather spend 60 dollars and have something that is mine, than pay for a service wich wont let me even play the game installed as soon as i stop paying. Recently i got astral chain full price, and i would do it again, it was worth every cent.

Kinda related. Just a few days ago Bandai closed the auth server for Puzzle Quest 2 on mobile. The game is not an online game. The game had no expiration date. I bought the full version. I can't play it anymore.
I'm desperately trying to get a refund from Google. I don't care for the money (it was less than 4 euros), but as a matter of principle: I was the rightful owner of that game (which I hadn't finish yet, btw). Google is saying "fuck you", for now.

 

[prag16]

That's why I wait like a month and get it for $40.

Yep. I buy MAYBE one full priced game per year. Wait a month or two, get it for $40. Or wait closer to a year and get it for $20. Wait a few years and get it for under $10. These are all viable options, and superior to never owning any of our games ever again. F U Polygon.

 

[Quezacolt]

Kinda related. Just a few days ago Bandai closed the auth server for Puzzle Quest 2 on mobile. The game is not an online game. The game had no expiration date. I bought the full version. I can't play it anymore.
I'm desperately trying to get a refund from Google. I don't care for the money (it was less than 4 euros), but as a matter of principle: I was the rightful owner of that game (which I hadn't finish yet, btw). Google is saying "fuck you", for now.

Yeah, wich is why i rarely buy digital games, most of them were gifted to me, and on console, all the games i have already have everything on disk, so far i havent bought a single unfinished game. I don't trust these companies to respect me as a consumer and not take away what i paid for, wich is one reason why i will never support any gaming streaming service, nor do i care for PS+, or game pass or anything like that.

 

[mejin]

MS PR, Forbes and Polygon....a coordinated attack this week.

 

[bobone]

Young people will continue to not care about owning property.
They will also continue to have zero attention span; and never see anything through to the end.

So a subscription service is perfect for them. And it might end up making more money for the companies too if you combine it with tons of microtransactions.


Also, $60 is dirty cheap for a product that took literally millions of man hours to complete. So stop bitching about prices.

 

[bosnianpie]

I only pay full price for a handful of games every year, it's the titles I really, really want and I will gladly pay a little extra for them. The real issue is about ownership. I want to own the things I pay for.

 

[Bryank75]

Press Reset: The Story of Polygon - financed by Microsoft for $750,000

Thought Indie Game the Movie was overboard? Well heres PRess Reset. The Story of Polygon. You know that website that still isnt officially live yet? http://www.theverge.com/gaming/2012/8/21/3245100/polygon-press-reset-teaser-trailer

www.neogaf.com

Was about to post this.... Polygon always have an agenda. Saw through it the minute I saw it was from them....
You highlight it nicely though!

 

[Kadayi]

Personally never really gotten the griping about price on AAA. Generally you get plenty of bang for your buck in terms of time investment. If something appeals to me I buy it. If I'm unsure then I will wait for a sale.

 

[alabtrosMyster]

Polygon shilling for you-won't-own-a-single-game-in-your-library streaming and game-pass subscriptions?

lol normies

Even tho they have been options for years now and nobody took "the opportunity" - sadly with major players behind the push it may end up like music in a couple of years.

Was about to post this.... Polygon always have an agenda. Saw through it the minute I saw it was from them....

I was about to blame this on "access" media -- but financed media is a whole other can of worms (I mean I get publicity revenues for your target audience, despite the possible conflict of interest, but wholesale selling off is on another level, like Eurogamer did a few years back with MS - and I suspect some of their Digital Foundry content is "sponsored", however I have no proof of this, this is just something I assume when I watch their videos).

 

[Bryank75]

Even tho they have been options for years now and nobody took "the opportunity" - sadly with major players behind the push it may end up like music in a couple of years.

I'll support PlayStation and Nintendo unless they go all digital.... then I'll find another hobby.

I hope many will join me in the boycott if it comes!

 

[cormack12]

Sponsored content

According to the IAB, native advertising contains six different types of ad units: in-feed, promoted listings, in-ad with native element, paid search, recommendation widgets, and custom. Sponsored articles fall into the in-feed subgroup.

In other words, sponsored articles amount to advertising on a media outlet in the form of editorial content that looks like it's supposed to be there. Brands value this because association with a publication and exposure to its audience can drive awareness, traffic, conversions, and leads.

Sort of mirrored in the fact the headline is wrong, the author promotes the GamePass model (assuming the content is available on a subscription platform) and lastly discredits the model.

Yep, reads like a tiresome Polygon article.

 

[hunthunt]

Maybe for those weird people that bough docens of games yearly and never play them, but for normal people like me I dont see the problem in investing $60 in games like God of War, The Witcher 3, Red Dead Redemption or Horizon Zero Dawn every 2 or 3 months

 

[Virex]

Why Polygon exists doesn’t make sense anymore.

This article is clearly a shill article from Polygon. Who is behind the shilling could me Microsoft for gamepass or it could be many others

 

[Three]

Paying $60 for a video game hasn’t made sense for years now. Just wait six weeks and get the game for up to 50% off of the early adopter premium price.

The video game industry preys upon the impatient.

As for Game Pass or whatever other subscription service, I have a hard data cap— so downloading games often isn’t a reasonable option. I’d rather buy the physical copy after a few weeks and conserve at least some data.

exactly, though $60 isn't the early adopter premium price anymore when buying the game. Some companies do $100 'ultimate' editions to prey on the impatient who want to play the game earlier.

 

[alabtrosMyster]

I'll support PlayStation and Nintendo unless they go all digital.... then I'll find another hobby.

I hope many will join me in the boycott if it comes!

I'm all set with an emulation PC plugged on my TV, so I can still play old games (up to the Nintendo Wii anyway) no matter what!

Why Polygon exists doesn’t make sense anymore.

Well that 750k contract should make sure they stick around a couple more months at least.

 

[PhilipDoesMatter]

I agree. Gimme one subscription per publisher and we are good.

 

[mckmas8808]

I agree with the article.

Game Pass and digital sales is how I get my games. I might buy 1 game a year at full price.

You can't agree with the article, because one person's opinion can't make something true. Consumers worldwide say buying a game at $60 makes sense.

 

[zenspider]

I don't see the world where I don't prefer to self-curate my gaming, rather than pick from the trough with all the other slobs.

Her idea of, "well, if it's bad, I didn't waste my money!" It's like: well, you did, because you fucked your value proposition.

This way of thinking overvalues the games you're not interested in and undervalues the ones not in the trough.
If a game I want isn't in the trough, I effectively pay $70 with the meter running.

And what about the resources of your time and attention? I'd rather pay the premium to value mine.

Try as they might, video games are not quite yet a commodity. I appreciate saving a buck as much as anyone, but I'm not going to have my tastes and wants guided by affordable content pipelines in my hobby. It's enough in the TV/Movie space I care less about.

 

[New Yorks Finest]

I'll gladly drop $60 for CyberPunk..AAA quality gms do deserve the price tag, plus developers has to bring in bacon home to feed mamacitas and fam in general.

 

[johntown]

I would rather pay $60 for games that I want than $9 a month indefinitely for games that I don't want. Why don't some people understand that in the long run you pay way more for subscriptions then you ever will buy games outright (of course there are a few exceptions).

 

[Raven117]

I buy games when I want to. Thanks polygon

 

[Northeastmonk]

I went ahead and bought Gears 5. I also finished it on Game Pass the night before I got the key. Looking back, I think it really depends on the "replay" value of the game. If its a one-and-done then fine, subscription is fine, but not if I want to replay the game. Its kinda messy if you think about it. I finish Gears 5 on Game Pass, knowing that I entered my key, but I don't get the Ultimate edition. So when Game Pass goes away, all the side stuff does too? I'm left with a vanilla version? This whole "play early" in a medium where the first 1-2 weeks are when the game is considered "hot" is driving where people get their games from.

How many journalists wait a month to make their review? They more than likely get the game early, write their review, and then all the drama unfolds as people read it/decide to buy the game. If you care about that type of thing then you're typically up there, day 1, playing the game. The develop says, "subscribe and play early". Even if you paid $65 on an online store, your preload still sits, unless of course you planned it to where you have some sub service or the more expensive version in order to play early.

The days of paying $65 at GameStop and having it on the release date are going away. The people who are the faces of gaming always get their copies early. There's no sense in GameStop saying you'll have it Day 1 because you can get it earlier now.

 

[Caffeine]

polygon is finally realizing you can vote with your wallet in 2019. I get games for way under in the 30-43$ range hell the last game I bought at full price was modern warfare 3 back in 2011. I could care less about play early and if they want to increase the price of games good luck with selling units.

 

[ruvikx]

I would rather pay $60 for games that I want than $9 a month indefinitely for games that I don't want. Why don't some people understand that in the long run you pay way more for subscriptions then you ever will buy games outright (of course there are a few exceptions).

I looked at the Xbox gamepass (which as a first-time subscriber I could get for 2 euros here for 2 months) & there are only 2 games I'd play on the list: Gears 5 & Metro Exodus. Is that worth 2 bucks for a couple of months access? Maybe, but I couldn't imagine paying the full gamepass price of admission just to basically rent a collection of games which aren't my own choice.

As for the $60 on a game pricetag (usually 69.99 euros here, at least on console, i.e. pc is a lot cheaper from sites like cdkeys) it depends entirely on the game. Something like a good long RPG (Witcher 3, Fallout 4) or a multiplayer shooter with 100 hours+ of gameplay? Sure, because it's worth the money if it's good. I got Uncharted 4 full price at launch & didn't regret it. But I'd say 90% of my own purchases are from the PlayStation store when they're on sale. 20 euros or lower is my usual go-to pricetag or thereabouts for a game, i.e. I don't pay 60, I don't subscribe to anything (I'm no longer a member of PlayStation plus) & I get to keep my own purchases (because I do revisit game years later).

Last gen I was someone who regularly bought used games for 15 euros or less from Amazon's private sellers, whereas this gen I've substituted used game purchases with the PS store special digital offers (same price range). It's all equal to same for my wallet. And in both cases I own everything.

 

[Saruhashi]

Very strange article.

If the thing I want costs X now and I want to get it now then paying X makes sense.
You can say "well why not wait 6 weeks" and I could say "I don't want to wait 6 weeks" and the discussion is basically pointless at that point.
You can also say I'm dumb but, hey, I can fucking afford to be dumb so we are all good.
Though Polygon says "foolish" but what's the difference really?

Here's what I like. If I game I am REALLY keen on has a decent special edition then I want to jump on the pre-order for that, take the release day off, enjoy my game when I pick it up early on release day. Sit down with my headphones on, some good beers and some lovely food and enjoy my game before all the Internet discussion gets going etc. If that makes me some kind of gullible dumbass then, fair enough. I've decided that's how I want to do things.

Something like PES or MK11 etc that I know for sure I am going to play a bit online I will buy digitally once I read some reviews and I'll probably have that installed and ready to go at midnight on release. Again, I don't feel that this is foolish since I enjoy the community stuff in those early days.

OK, she has a point on subscriptions. Many of the games I own will probably get played over a limited period, even if that is a year or two, and then never played again. So why pay 60 bucks a time for them when I can pay 120 a year or whatever? Valid point. I still want to have some library of "go to" games though. So I could maybe do a bit of both. That doesn't make me "foolish" though.

Apple Arcade just feels like a TERRIBLE example here. Sure, if the games I am buying are ALL short indie games then maybe it's appealing but at this point the discussion has left the realms of 60 buck games. I think Sayonara Wild Hearts is less than 15 bucks on Switch (too lazy too look it up but I know it aint 60 bucks). PLUS when it comes to indies there should actually be more encouragement to support the developers buy paying full price, I think.

Netflix is also a poor comparison because I just don't feel like Netflix has all that much quality content compared to the amount of mindless garbage on the platform. A big part of Netflix's successful content seems to revolve around viral marketing getting people in to watch a popular thing instead of having actual good content. I would say if you love movies then spending 50 to 100 bucks a month going to the cinema would be better value than a Netflix subscription.

I'm just one of those "foolish" people who buys full-price games on release day though.

Company A: "We are selling this thing at this price, do you want it?"
Why is it that the gaming community in particular has a bit of an issue with this basic premise?

Everyone seems to go a bit nuts if they think the thing is too expensive or if they don't want it.
Even small things like Nintendo Labo. It's a toy for young kids, basically. Nintendo does the announcement and you have grown-ass adults screeching "WTF IS THIS SHIT NINTENDO". Fuck, calm down a bit.

I'm just not getting what's stupid about saying "OK, yes, I would like that thing and yes I am willing to pay that price so give it here"?
If it's 50% off in 6 weeks then fine. I either learn my lesson or I say actually I don't mind that.

 

[New Yorks Finest]

I would rather pay $60 for games that I want than $9 a month indefinitely for games that I don't want. Why don't some people understand that in the long run you pay way more for subscriptions then you ever will buy games outright (of course there are a few exceptions).

$9 is peanuts a month..especially if all new releases would get included. Imagine for $9 you about to rock New Ghost Recon, later in the month Modern Warfare..and son on, you get the picture. It would work for me as I don't stick with gms for long no time and get bored...fast.

 

[Danny Dudekisser]

Sorry Polygon, but i'd rather spend 60 dollars and have something that is mine, than pay for a service wich wont let me even play the game installed as soon as i stop paying. Recently i got astral chain full price, and i would do it again, it was worth every cent.

No, dude, ur wrong:

 

[Northeastmonk]

Where's my Polygon article about buying a game multiple times in order to support the developers? Is that just a millennial thing?

 

[ROMhack]

Hmm i wrote a similar thing yesterday...

Rob Fahey's piece at the bottom is quite interesting...

He describes Apple Arcade as an inevitably of a market that has decreased the cost of games to the point where it has impacted people's perception of value. Has to be said that yes, the tendency for mobile games to price themselves as low as possible does seem to have changed people's willingness to pay, say, $20 for a mobile game on iOS.

I don't think that situation is close to being as bad on PC but I think he's right in saying that as GaaS become more normalised it may make the idea of 'free games' more expected. It is indeed different to how it was five years ago when the relative price point of a $20 indie game seemed like great value compared to the $50 you'd pay for an AAA game.

We're also seeing this in the AAA sphere though. Gears of War 5 is 'free' for Game Pass players whereas it's $60 for PC players. Obviously there's a lot of different in the value of perception. Of course in the former instance it's Microsoft trying to incentivise people to join their ecosystem by buying an Xbox One. I wonder how things will be in 10 years time.

Anyway, I think she has two points here:

1) That the perceived value of a cheaper product is naturally appealing (e.g. game pass)
2) That it can lead to hollow experiences due to lack of investment, much like Netflix when you realise 90% of it is crap you don't care about.

I actually agree with both of her points. The latter because I find I get more value out of concentrating on one thing at a time. The perceived value of choice and sense of value is often very hollow to me. I learned this by collecting a stupid amount of games in my Steam library which I never ended up playing (honestly, a waste a money).

Personally I'm fine paying $60 for a game I really want. Much better than paying a lower price for games I play just for the sake of it.

P.s. I'm not convinced the headline actually matches the article well.

Apple Arcade just feels like a TERRIBLE example here. Sure, if the games I am buying are ALL short indie games then maybe it's appealing but at this point the discussion has left the realms of 60 buck games. I think Sayonara Wild Hearts is less than 15 bucks on Switch (too lazy too look it up but I know it aint 60 bucks). PLUS when it comes to indies there should actually be more encouragement to support the developers buy paying full price, I think.

I agree and this was the premise of the point that started this debate - Mike Rose's evaluation of the cost of indie games on Steam. He surmised that it's in the favour of indie developers to price their games at a higher rate because the people who really want them buy them anyway. It's the shovelware shit that people tend to hold off on.

Your whole post is good though. I think it's a reflection of the difference between casual gamers and, uh, not casual gamers (loath to use the term but w/e).

 

[johntown]

$9 is peanuts a month..especially if all new releases would get included. Imagine for $9 you about to rock New Ghost Recon, later in the month Modern Warfare..and son on, you get the picture. It would work for me as I don't stick with gms for long no time and get bored...fast.

Yeah that is why I said there are exceptions. What I like and prefer is not the same as others. The Polygon article assumes everyone is more like you with gaming and the $9 monthly model seems to make more sense in your case. As for me it would be total waste of money.

 

[mckmas8808]

Very strange article.

If the thing I want costs X now and I want to get it now then paying X makes sense.
You can say "well why not wait 6 weeks" and I could say "I don't want to wait 6 weeks" and the discussion is basically pointless at that point.
You can also say I'm dumb but, hey, I can fucking afford to be dumb so we are all good.
Though Polygon says "foolish" but what's the difference really?



I'm just not getting what's stupid about saying "OK, yes, I would like that thing and yes I am willing to pay that price so give it here"?
If it's 50% off in 6 weeks then fine. I either learn my lesson or I say actually I don't mind that.

The bolded is SO true! It's very odd to tell someone they are wasting their money on something that they themselves have determined is worth it to them. If we think it's worth it to spend $60 on Gears 5, CyberPunk 2077, Spider-Man, etc then what's the big deal?

It's as if Polygon is getting paid to influence the gaming market to go the streaming route or something.