{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
8/6/2015 4:40:31 AM
4
I'd be curious to know the average age of the people who think the price is not too high. I have the money, and think it's too much for the amount of content. I've been gaming since the Atari 2600 and a Tandy pc were your only options. I've watched and experienced the growth of gaming systems verses the price and content of what we got for what we paid. Anyone else remember getting games that the story line actually took weeks or months to beat? Compared to today where even on the hardest difficulty a cod game can be beaten in an average work shift worth of time, or way less. I will still buy it regardless of how I feel about it. I'm a gamer at heart and always will be. I just feel that we are getting the short end of the stick and they know enough of us will buy it anyways. Game on people!
English
-
I look at it a bit differently. I remember the games back in the Atari days, and they were not cheap. Very early 80's when we got an Apple IIE, the new games like Miner 2049er and Loderunner were like 40 bucks a pop, and that was 35 years ago. Games today, for the quality you get compared to the old school stuff, are a steal.
-
Edited by theBigDalt: 8/6/2015 7:13:10 AMWell, you need to take into account that games are simply much more expensive to make now. Game development now is consistently over $20 million for most AAA games, while many IPs exceed $50 million. Now, anything at $10 million or more was extremely rare before the 2000s. Meanwhile, games have costed the same. You also need to include inflation. There has been an ~82% inflation since just 1990. No offense to you or your gaming past because I'm just an early 90s kid. I've played plenty of games, though. Development even from the games when I was a kid on systems like SNES and Genesis didn't cost nearly as much or require nearly as many developers as they do now. Games back in the day didn't need things like 3D animators, network specialists, network security experts, and a group of developers to stick around after the game releases for maintenance. Furthermore, the industry is just volatile and pretty unstable for most developers. Seriously, only the top 20% of games make a profit. Studios are constantly being established and quickly going under. Before you think to yourself, "Wow. This is totally not enough for $60". Just think about how the industry has evolved and where video games are now compared to the yesteryears. That's not to say that all games are worth the money or even that Destiny is. I'm just saying that games now can't really be compared to games of the past, especially the old Atari days. Games and the industry in general are nothing like they were.
-
or you can just look at what else is available for similar cost...
-
Again, like I said, it's just something to keep in mind when comparing games of today to games from the past. I agree, there's plenty of games today that offer much more than Destiny as far as content goes. There's also plenty of games that offer less. My point wasn't meant to defend Destiny or Bungie, but to bring up a big aspect of the gaming industry that is seemingly always absent when people compare modern video games to those of the 80s and 90s. It's a completely different beast now and that's all I was saying.
