Have you ever felt the need to say something controversial just to get attention? Admittedly most of us try to stop that after we grow up. Even so, you occasionally might slip into it as an adult.
Often though, once grown up, the others around you clearly identify your comment for what it is and yourself as an attention needy wretch who deep down, just wants to be loved.
On a completely unrelated subject, Evan Wingren, a financial analyst for KeyBanc Capital Markets has just said via CNBC that: “Gamers aren’t overcharged, they’re undercharged.”
Well, if he wanted attention, he’s certainly got it, but I’m not sure he’s going to like the feedback. Before you go preparing your virtual vitriol to throw all over him, I’ll at least let you know what he said.
In brief, his comments have largely been prompted by EA’s u-turn of in-game microtransactions in Star Wars Battlefront 2. Put simply, he feels that these poor game developers/publishers spend far more per hour in creation costs (when compared to film and TV) and as such the cost for a game is more than reasonable. Even worse he suggests game prices are too cheap!
Ok, take a moment to calm down and I’ll state very concisely why he is entirely wrong and afterwards you may wish to alter his job title from ‘analyst’ to ‘colossal ****’.
I’ll try and keep this brief, and yes, I appreciate that even you, my friends, may not all necessarily agree with me here. There are exceptions to most rules after all. One of the key points, which I will return to later, is what I feel is the critical factor this analyst completely ignored. Value for money!
His suggestion likens me to a car dealer saying ‘well, you can have the frame, but since it cost us so much to make in man hours, you’re going to have to pay extra for the engine’.
Games are not cheap. As a kid, I was lucky to get 2-3 a year. Now I’m older that number has increased a little, but even so, I struggle to think of the last major title (from an AAA developer or publisher) that I really got value for money from. It was probably GTA5 and that’s about 4 years old now.
Now, value to money in itself is subjective. For example, do you base this ‘value’ on the experience or the time taken to play? Generally speaking, I think most games consider it a combination of the two factors. Abzu, for example, only takes about 4-5 hours to complete. However, the journey is so fantastic that it represents its value. Particularly since it’s a reasonably inexpensive game at circa £10-£20.
This does draw onto my final key factor here. Price. Some of the best ‘value for money’ games I’ve played recently are indie games. Dead by Daylight, PUBG etc. have generally given me the most pleasure for a minimal amount of money.
I think that most gamers would agree that today, the best value for money gaming is seen in indie titles.
So, to Evan Wingren, my point is simple. I’ll agree with you when I feel that I’m getting value for money. Until then, I’ll still call-out garbage DLC and pay-to-win microtransactions as the cynical cash grabs they are.
What do you think? Is he right? If so, why? What was the last game you played that you felt was value for money? – Let us know in the comments! And just in case you need to calm down, here’s a picture of a laughing monkey.
As one of the most popular online games lately, it’s no surprise that Xbox fans…
We've finally reached the month of November, and that means one thing for Xbox users:…
For those who haven't had it on their radar, this week we take a new…
An overclocker from the MSI team has managed to push the Kingston Fury Renegade CUDIMM…
It seems that NVIDIA wants to launch its next products ahead of time. We are…
The trend of upgrading storage from traditional hard drives to SSDs has become increasingly popular,…