Comments on: Does Price Equal Worth on XBLA?

By: DigitalSkyline

DigitalSkyline — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 01:11:55 +0000

The problem with the arcade is that the games are non-transferable, and 90% of the games are garbage. Burn me once, your fault, burn me twice, my fault. Take Lumines for example… that was complete rip off. I can’t sell it, and I can’t even give it away. So basically I wasted my money.

And in a REAL economy, you can buy sell trade, and prices naturally go down with time. But since it’s a closed economy and a rigid monopoly, there is no recourse for bad product. People have to pay full price, and take their chances that the features you get by unlocking the demo turns out to be worth the dough. Unfortunately 90% of it isn’t.

By: s2k7a

s2k7a — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 00:25:42 +0000

hey its all about capitalism, i think worth should equal price, and somewhat based on effort, we do need to make a profit. for example, if you spend a year making a short crappy game, the price should be very low, if you spend a year making a very epic game, the price should be higher (no duh). but on XBLA nothing should be so freaking amazing it would be over $10….

By: a 360 friend

a 360 friend — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 17:49:36 +0000

There shouldn’t be any game over $10 agreed!

By: 7854

7854 — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 20:44:22 +0000

There shouldn’t be any game over $10.Even the originals are much cheaper on a disk.Now if they released Jedi knight dark forces 2 i would pay since the original still goes for a mint and isn’t BC….grrrr

By: Invincible Tiger: The Legend of Han Tao XBLA

Invincible Tiger: The Legend of Han Tao XBLA — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 15:52:14 +0000

[...] Xbox LIVE Arcade title announced by Namco the other day. In the midst of our discussion about the worth of Xbox LIVE Arcade titles, I wonder where this one will stack [...]

By: Col Hartman

Col Hartman — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 07:30:33 +0000

We need better deals or SALES…come on MS make it happen! Who is teh director of XBLA games anyways?

By: Tony Winsta

Tony Winsta — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 03:20:00 +0000

“standard” when i see that word i think about how Xbox 360 games are all normally 60$ and then theres the game thats not worked on that hard and there 29.99$

But then after time games go down in price

so what i dont understand is why wont that happen to arcade games i mean really if there gonna price something that high there will be a spike in sales if its a good game and then it wil die down.. then people that dont pay that price will wait and pay a lower price and that would be the best way to go

By: xino

xino — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 07:28:38 +0000

I’ll only pay 800 or 1500 for a good arcade game!

800 was well spent on REZ HD, love that game so much, always play it now and then!
800 on Duke Nukem 3D, it was good and bad, the good, made me remember one of the best FPS of all times, bad the online may be dead now since I stopped playing it after Soul Calibur 4 release.

800 for Worms 3D was a wasted money! I was hoping there will be more weapons and all. Since it said “get the full game for more levels, xbox live multiplayer and much more.” I thought the much more will be that there will be more weapons.

Now I will be cautious and will only buy games I think will be worth it and last forever. I won’t try and think ahead, what ever it says we’ll get in the full version, will be what we’ll get

A game that will soon get my money will be Dish Washer. and Battlefield 1943?

By: Intangible 360

Intangible 360 — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 16:49:06 +0000

Of course just like anyone else I would like to pay the minimum possible for everything I spend money on, but what motivation is there for Microsoft to institute such a policy if, like you said, lots of people buy it anyway?

If I am to be honest I also have to accept the fact that something cannot be objectively “too expensive”. The right price for you, for me, for Microsoft, for the publisher and for all sorts of other people vary a great deal. So while I would like to see what Deaconblade is proposing happen, I’m not sure that the right pressures exist for it to occur. However, I join you in the hope that prices are more consistently, on average, brought in line with our expectations.

By: Nanakai

Nanakai — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 00:35:26 +0000

‘If a game is more difficult to develop and contains more content why shouldn’t a developer be able to charge appropriately.’

Just as if a game has been easy to develop (i.e. a port) and contans no extra content, shouldn’t we pay in points appropriately.

‘If their game is too expensive and no one buys it then let them learn their lesson the hard way.’

It’s not as simple as that. Castle Crashers is too expensive, but thanks to the hype lots of people have downloaded it. So the only lesson learnt there is that if Microsoft can big it up, then people will pay regardless.

By: DeaconBlade

DeaconBlade — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 21:01:52 +0000

i’m saying there should be a standard to go by. think of it as a tier system i guess. just something so we dont’ see prices all over the place ya know. much like there is with themes and picture packs. there’s a standard there. it could be more or less depending on the quality but generally, we know what to expect price wise.

By: Intangible 360

Intangible 360 — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 20:52:56 +0000

OK I’m definitely not understanding your position then :S What do you mean by standard? Are you saying that there should be a price ceiling and perhaps arcade remakes (except maybe the likes of Bionic Commando Rearmed) should all have a set mandatory price?