No.
Most games aren't worth their $60 retail prices, if you ask me. That's not a complaint against the quality of the games themselves, but a complaint against the price point relative to what the product is. Most of the games I like are between 8 and 12 hours worth of content, and you're lucky if it's designed to have any replayability. $60 is just too much for most games, and always has been. Anything above that, and the appraisal is as a collector's piece and it's certainly exceeded the value of the game experience. As long as game collecting remains hot, the price will not cool off.
every game is worth it's retail price in the very beginning, people want to join in on the hype train not to mention that games with lower production costs had a lower retail price from the very start with sometimes only 20$ brand new for a physical copy in stores. Your also paying for the experience of the newest games wich also has it's price.
Also don't forget that it costs allot of money to produce a game, while the packaging and CD might be a couple of dollars or even allot less, the value is in the content that people had to spend time and resources on to produce not to mention the adds to promote a game if you want the game to be sold well.
Without those high retail prices companies won't gain enough money to make a profit or make a new game.
As far as expensive games go, there are only a few games that are totally worth it for the price point.
However if you have enough cash I would throw that statement out of the window since plenty of those expensive games are excellent wich many would love to play and in those very few instances even better than some of the better classics.
I have to disagree. Every new game, or near every new game is precisely worth $60? I think that $60 is more like a number that just stuck. Taking a look at all of the variables - not every game, including games with larger budgets costs exactly the same to produce and promote. Some of them don't engage in any promotion and are still $60. Some of them are just HD revamps, or compilations and they're $60.
This is the integral flaw in the business model of video games. So they spend a fortune to produce a niche product (relatively speaking), and this is a problem. They feel like they need to charge a high amount to profit from the product, but many people do not buy brand new video game precisely because $60 to many work-a-day people is a lot of money to drop on something that isn't necessary to have,
and there are tons of them out there on the market for the same price point, so there's no way most of them are going to do very well. And yet, price is not flexible. Lots of publishers and developers found out the hard way, what happens when you spend spectacularly making something and then nobody wants, or likes it.
The seemingly logical thing to do, would be not spend so much money producing a game, and still make it a good enough game that it'll sell well and make a profit. I often pick up new releases that are considered "budget" titles on PS4, but that doesn't equate to being a bad product in today's market. There's plenty of good games that didn't cost a tremendous fortune to make, and didn't spend heavily on adverting that are worthwhile. I'd think publishers make lots of money on Steam when they decide to drop the price of their games down.
The way I see it, out of ten people there may be one willing to plunk down $60 to have that brand new release, while the other nine will hold out for a price drop to something like $30, or less. There's no way they were going to get $600 out of all of those potential customers on day one, but maybe they could have gotten $300, instead of allowing a third party to profit from reselling used copies from which they'll never see a dime. I'm not even claiming to be a business minded kind of person, but that seems logical to me.
