Is your $60 better spent on a new modern title or retro games?

[seether]

This is something that I think about a lot.

Sixty bucks buys a lot of retro, depending on the system. And potentially a few uncommon/rareish titles.

Modern games depreciate rapidly so even without the comparison unless the game is awesome or has a lot of replay value, $60 can feel like a raw deal.

Would you rather spend $60 on a single modern title or have a $60 budget for retro games?

Or is this an unfair comparison because you can of course buy used modern games or wait for them to go down in price? If so - would you just generally prefer to buy modern or retro games?

[wartoy]

retro

[kamikazekeeg]

Depends on the game, but I'm generally getting more game value out of most 60 dollar modern games.  Depending on how old a retro game is, you could be buying a rare or uncommon game, but only get an hour or two of gameplay out of it.  Maybe you'll replay it a few times over the years if its really good.  If I pay 60 dollars and get Red Dead Redemption 2, I'm getting a game that I'll spend dozens of hours with.  Or it's a modern multiplayer game that I'll dump over a 100 hours into, like I do with most Battlefield games.

This isn't a guarantee with every 60 dollar game, some push the limits of that value for sure, and of course they will not hold any serious value, but I generally don't buy games for their value specifically, but whether it's a game I like.

[desocietas]

Hard to say for me right now... I just spent $60 on a complete GBA game yesterday... hope it looks legit when I receive it next week!

[seether]

My thing is why not both.

Retro is relatively affordable to just do pick ups as and when feel like it. Plus my fave thing is finding good deals out in the wild which is impossible to predict so I wouldn't be able to earmark money saved from not buying a modern game and immediately put it to work at getting (good) retro games. Hoovering things on eBay isn't my style and I don't know if and when I'm going to find something retro I want to acquire.

That said, even without making the comparison about where the funds could go I don't like to spend full retail on games. If I do it's certainly no more than twice a year that games could be exciting enough to me to justify doing that.

I think the best thing then, is to buy what you want when you want it without hard and fast rules and trying to split hairs between whether buying retro or modern is better is a fruitless thing to do. It's sort of an apples to oranges comparison. I can't even begin to wrap my head around new title vs. retro splurge.

For me the answer is sort of 'neither' - because I rarely feel compelled to buy a new modern title at full price and because I rarely find a retro game I want to acquire - I typically keep this hypothetically $60 in my pocket. Money is spent either when a modern game really excites me or I come across an awesome retro game in the wild, both of these are rare occurrences and therefore it isn't an either/or scenario for me.

[aliensstudios]

Both

[chrismb]

It depends on the game. I don't think it has anything to do with it being retro or not tbh. I will happily spend 60+ $ on Red Dead Redemption 2 but I also happily spent around 90$ for Shenmue so...
If the game is good then it's good not matter if it's modern or retro.
I'm also pretty good at buying a lot of games with not a lot of money lol so knowing me with 60$ I could still get like 4-5 modern games (obviously not new lol)

[thebaconstrip]

Depends on the title. Something like Mario Odysee or Breath of the Wild is a 100% buy, but sometimes I buy more questionable titles, even though I know I want to expand my retro collection. Typically I go through phases of collecting for certain game systems, recent ones being the switch and N64.

[droaa]

Neither considering that thanks to outside factors I havent payed full $60 on new releases and anything retro I dont think up to this point I have spent $60 on a singular item and honestly dont want to. Any single retro game I do want are below $60 as it stands.

[kashell]

It depends on the game.

[hoshichiri]

I almost never buy new releases at full price, it seems silly- unless I'm sure I'm going to play it right away, it makes a lot more sense to wait & get it cheaper later (used or otherwise).

I jump back & forth between buying retro & used, depending on what's around & how much it costs. Maybe one week I'll get lucky & find a Genesis game at a local shop for a good price. Maybe the next week Gamestop puts a new release I want on sale.

More often than not, I buy what's cheap, whatever that is. I'm buying a fair amount of Wii/PS3/360 stuff right now. Good window for cheapness on those at the moment. Also Wii U- not really 'cheap' right now, but it was such a short run for the system I figure it'll be harder to get much cheaper later anyway.

[sworddude]

Doesn't really matter not to mention to for example speedrunners a short arcade game will be played for hours and hours it really depends on the player wich game will be enjoyed allot.

[azure]

Think it's completely up to the game/player.

I enjoy some retro games much more than some current games and vice versa. Think it really depends on the individual when it comes to valuing specific games and comparing them.

Content wise modern games obviously can pack more in, but the enjoyment factor of a games value is a case by case basis I think.

[oldgamerz]

Modern in my opinion. Second hand games have no business being more that $30 maximum, since most second hand stuff is old. But I don't even like spending $30 unless the game is really good. Modern games often cost more in the long run since new consoles are close to $300 US  plus $60 US for a game it is a working mans thing.

[bikingjahuty]

Unless it's a game that I'm super hyped about i rarely buy new games when they first come out. I always make a judgement call with any game and ask myself how much is a specific game worth to me personally and how badly I want to play it. As a result I don't buy a ton of modern games since their value continues to slip more and more (typically) over time. There have been those rare occasions where I held off on getting a modern title only for it to skyrocket in value and me kick myself later on for not getting it, but this is the exception thank goodness.


As for retro games, they've been out for a long time and their prices are usually pretty stable. Occasionally a game will get the attention of some huge youtuber or something else will shine a light on it again, resulting in a value spike, but for the most part I feel like retro game prices have normalized over the past couple years. Holding off on maybe a potential price crash on games, I feel a lot more confident buying a retro game at full price than a new game since I can be more certain it's price isn't going to go down in the near future.


So in conclusion, I feel like $60 is better spent on retro games, at least if you are concerned with the value of the game maintaining close to what you paid. However, one thing aspect I didn't mention is value for your money, which I believe newer titles definitely have the edge on retro games, but that is sort of a subjective thing anyways.