Download the entire XBL Marketplace catalogue for only $897.38 -- act now!

Does it also count those pointless FIFA, NBA, NFL, Teams themepack? Even all of those other themepacks, which really have nothing to do with gameplay. Those can really add up.

Oh shit... M$. Yes, I know people are sick and tired of "M$", but this makes me wonder, do titles really need to cost 60 dollars now?

Take X-men 360. Do you really think it should cost 60 dollars when the PS2/Xbox/GC version costs 40? There is no update on that game except the fact that it runs on 360.

Also, why are games costing more if they still *fit* on DVDs? They are the same amount of content. In fact, by generating some content dynamically instead of statically, they are *saving* time.

Developers are ripping us off.

no thanks I'd rather spend that cash on a ps3

-boots

First off, let me just say that I agree with you on the fact that $60 for a game is too high. As an owner of an X360, I feel that sting every time I'm in EB Games. However, I can't help but point out the irony in your statement. I say this because I've watched, for months on end now, as you have defended anything that says "Sony" on it. That said, yes, these games can fit on DVD's...yes, developers are ripping us a new one. So my question to you is: How ripped are you going to feel when you pay $70 or $80 for a blu-ray disc that's got game content capable of fitting on a DVD as well? I'm just wondering if you're aware that the PS3 will be an even bigger rip off, by your own logic, than the X360 games. I'm not coming out in support of MS here (yes, M$ is stupid and old...it should be $ony, if anything, since the PS3 is the reason for your second mortgage..), but I'm just curious if the only reason you're even posting in this thread is to cheap-shot Microsoft one more time, or if you are genuinely feeling cheated and will feel that way when PS3 comes out as well.

As far as the price of the catalogue, I can see how it would drift that high. Of course, the Arcade games add up quickly..and the different little versions of "horse armor" don't hurt either. Seeing as how the only thing I ever bought from Xbox Live was a gamerpicture pack for BF2 (well, and of course the gamer picture of Ethan Thomas from Condemned), it hasn't dented my pockets. I like options though, and it's nice to know if I ever do get a craving for a good classic title, at least the option is there.

Just my thoughts on it.

"Developers are ripping us off."

Typically, it's the publishers that do that.

Boots,

Yeah some games should cost $60... most shouldn't but some should (Big name blockbuster type games). Considering the price of a game hasn't changed in the past 20 odd years a slight price increase is justified.

If you purchased a game in 1986 for $50 in todays money that would be about $89 today.

Everything else has gone up in price and generally provides me less entertainment than video games so I think that some games easily justify the price.

Still fit on DVDs? You're one of those Blu-ray's storage capcity is somehow going to be filled people aren't you. :) I just don't see a relevance to how much crap you shove on your disk and how much you should pay for it. If I want a game so jam packed full of FMV/Cinematics I'll buy a movie.

What's scary is with the price of the PS3 and the reports that Blu-ray discs are expensive to produce what are PS3 games going to sell for? Sony has to make up the difference between production cost and sales cost quickly...

Would be odd to see PS3 be a huge hit but without a lot of games purchased it would bankrupt Sony.

-Hunting Phoenix

Ah crap...that's what I get for trying to type a quick message at work..lol. You are correct I believe.

Eh....

Microsoft isn't worth it. (i mean really, why give Bill Gates anymore money?)

Go buy Top Spin 2 or Rockstar's Table Tennis. Both are released at $40.

Go buy Uno on XBL. It's only $5.

#2 it cost more because developers are spending "more" $$$$$ on making games for the next-gen systems

"Considering the price of a game hasn't changed in the past 20 odd years"

Where the hell did you used to pay £50 for your Amstrad CPC/Spectrum games? Were they gold-plated?

I've seen this article way too many times today. I wonder how much Sony's online media would total to? Or all of Nintendo's back-catalog offerings? Just keep that in mind. I'd like to see the 6 month comparison mark for all three systems.

boots, we'll probably see a lot of this "matching" content while the old consoles are still around. It will take a bit for the masses to jump into the next generation. We are just too impatient to notice.

#10... Dollar sign not Pound sign. And I was thinking more along the lines of King's Quest. Maybe I'm wrong but I remember games costing $50 (again dollar sign) for as long as I can remember. My quick googling provided me with no useful proof.

#12 is supposed to be a response to #11 not #10, sorry.

Boots, why are you bagging on MS for charging $60 for Xbox 360 games when it's third-party publishers who are charging $60? All new MS games cost $50, same as they did on the original 'box. It's been my assumption that third-party titles will cost whatever publishers feel like charging for them. That's why Table Tennis is $40 and Oblivion is $60. I'm sure third-party PS3 titles will cost $60, as well.

Also, just because next-gen games still fit on DVDs doesn't mean they cost less to develop. I'd be willing to bet that next-gen titles come closer to filling out the DVDs than titles from the PS2/Xbox/GC gen. What's more, I have no idea what goes on behind the scenes and drives developers' costs. But presumably it would cost more development wise to make games for an unfamiliar system like the 360, Wii or PS3 than it would a system you've been making games for for four or five years.

Some of the XBox Live Arcade games are worth the money. But some little addon packs i don't really care for. As long as they don't crap the game and then charge for you to download the game the way it was supposed to be. I'm don't mind.

http://www.generationplay.com/

All I know is that I have definitely gotten $60 worth of gameplay out of Oblivion so far, and I was perfectly happy to spend a little extra to get the Frostcrag tower (WELL worth it) and the Orrery missions.

Horse armor? Pfeh. But when the pirate add-on is available, I'm probably going to grab that.

Add-on content is defenitly a good thing. Who doesn't want more of a good game? The things you should really argue over is value of what you are buying and quality control. Whatever company is offering additional content better make sure what they are offering is more substantial than "horse armor".

As long as the game you put in your system is whole, and not half-assed so that you're forced into upgrading it with more purchases (read episodic content), then I'm happy.

As far as buying more content in an episodic format, I'm against it IF you have to fork out $60 for the first few installments, then keep buying more and more. If you buy a whole game then can buy episodic add-on levels and more story, expanding on the universe, than I'm all for it.

I also wonder if additional content will cure "sequel-itis". Could one game steadily evolve into another through additional content? Could you just keep adding new missions and levels until you have a complete second game? If so, would you really need to release full-on sequels?