EA Raises Prices Of Next-Gen Games To £54.99/$80

Omar

Forum Overseer
May 29, 2005
34,262
181
0
39
Addison, TX.
#61
[QUOTE="DuhWhitePanda, post: 6144168]1) Why are you buying 5-8 games a month!? Can you even get through that amount of games per month?
2) I hope they are not new releases. God I hope you're talking about Steam games.
3) I think people are forgetting most games decrease in price after a few months. (Not specific to you)To call people stupid and get all mad over the price of a game just makes you look childish.

And no, paying $80 for a certain game that I know will get a ridiculous amount of play time through the course of a year doesn't bother me. As I stated, I'm paying over $500 just on the hardware alone. I'm not going to cry because I have to pay another $80 for a quality game with a ton of replay value.

Believe me, I can sympathize with people on this, but I think people are just blowing this out of proportion. EA rarely makes new franchises so for the most part you know what you're getting with them. Its all about how much value you put on a game.[/QUOTE]

paying more for a game doesn't necessarily mean more replay value or time. it is more likely to mean better lip sync (mo cap), actors, shit that takes a lot of money but provides little value at times...e.g. engine, graphics, sound etc.

there are games on the PS2 that gave you more bang for the buck than on the PS3. I can go back to the SNES days and talk about games that gave you more replay value than most anything nowadays.

don't confuse more money with necessarily bigger longer games.
 
Sep 1, 2006
4,783
31
48
39
So-Cal
#62
[QUOTE="DuhWhitePanda, post: 6144168]1) Why are you buying 5-8 games a month!? Can you even get through that amount of games per month?
2) I hope they are not new releases. God I hope you're talking about Steam games.
3) I think people are forgetting most games decrease in price after a few months. (Not specific to you)To call people stupid and get all mad over the price of a game just makes you look childish.

And no, paying $80 for a certain game that I know will get a ridiculous amount of play time through the course of a year doesn't bother me. As I stated, I'm paying over $500 just on the hardware alone. I'm not going to cry because I have to pay another $80 for a quality game with a ton of replay value.

Believe me, I can sympathize with people on this, but I think people are just blowing this out of proportion. EA rarely makes new franchises so for the most part you know what you're getting with them. Its all about how much value you put on a game.[/QUOTE]

Yeah I have time to play...and yeah new releases, PS3 and 360 games (I hate pc gaming lol)

It's kinda my job reviewing...(I don't really work because of an accident I was in, plus the wife makes enough that I can just draw and game all day lol)

I could understand if you're paying for a nice long game... But we're talking ea, they shouldn't even be charging 60$ for most of their games (I think any of their sport titles shouldn't be more than 15$ even...) Only a completely insane person would think paying 80$ for a madden game is a good value.

I'm interested to know... What EA game would you have been happy to pay 80$ for current gen?

Out of the 5 EA titles I have paid for (ie not ps+) I think mirrors edge is the only game worth the 60$ (the other 4 being, dragon age 2, saboteur, dead space 1, and Dante's inferno... All bought for 20$ or less)
 
Last edited:
#63
[QUOTE="Sufi, post: 6144182]paying more for a game doesn't necessarily mean more replay value or time. it is more likely to mean better lip sync (mo cap), actors, shit that takes a lot of money but provides little value at times...e.g. engine, graphics, sound etc.

there are games on the PS2 that gave you more bang for the buck than on the PS3. I can go back to the SNES days and talk about games that gave you more replay value than most anything nowadays.

don't confuse more money with necessarily bigger longer games.[/QUOTE]

Never once did I say it meant a longer game. I'm coming at it from this stand point. People who buy BF, they play that shit until the breaks come off. Now while not being a BF fan, I am an NBA fan. I can see myself sticking well over 200 hours into NBA Live with the franchise mode and online match making. People who buy BF stick days and days into the online portion of the game. You tell them that they are stupid for paying $80 for a game which they will spend that much time playing. It's illogical, which is why I stated that it depends on how much you value the franchise you're buying. With Dead Space, I only play the campaign. There is no way in hell I'm paying $80 for that game as after 8-15 hours its over and will never be touched again.

[QUOTE="SomaXD, post: 6144183]Yeah I have time to play...and yeah new releases, PS3 and 360 games (I hate pc gaming lol)

It's kinda my job reviewing...(I don't really work because of an accident I was in, plus the wife makes enough that I can just draw and game all day lol)

I could understand if you're paying for a nice long game... But we're talking ea, they shouldn't even be charging 60$ for most of their games (I think any of their sport titles shouldn't be more than 15$ even...) Only a completely insane person would think paying 80$ for a madden game is a good value.

I'm interested to know... What EA game would you have been happy to pay 80$ for current gen?

Out of the 5 EA titles I have paid for (ie not ps+) I think mirrors edge is the only game worth the 60$ (the other 4 being, dragon age 2, saboteur, dead space 1, and Dante's inferno... All bought for 20$ or less)[/QUOTE]

NBA Live and BF4 if I can get a party to play with. From a single player aspect, to you Madden may not be worth it, but to someone who play sports games and shooters, its totally worth it. Its all about how much time that you are going to spend with the game that determines its value and that's what people are not getting.

Unlike you, I dont review games. Thus I'm perfectly fine paying $80 for a couple of multiplayer games that interest me until the heavily single player focused games, like Bioshock and the Last of Us, drop to $20-$30. That is how I buy my game. Well that and the Steam sales.
 

Omar

Forum Overseer
May 29, 2005
34,262
181
0
39
Addison, TX.
#64
[QUOTE="DuhWhitePanda, post: 6144168]And no, paying $80 for a certain game that I know will get a ridiculous amount of play time through the course of a year doesn't bother me. As I stated, I'm paying over $500 just on the hardware alone. I'm not going to cry because I have to pay another $80 for a quality game with a ton of replay value.

Believe me, I can sympathize with people on this, but I think people are just blowing this out of proportion. EA rarely makes new franchises so for the most part you know what you're getting with them. Its all about how much value you put on a game.[/QUOTE]

i think the problem is semantics here. really you should be saying that "if" the game has the immense value that justifies the $80 tag.

Having an $80 tag doesn't necessarily mean that though. I got from your post that $80 is nothing when you know it will give you more replay value.
 
Sep 1, 2006
4,783
31
48
39
So-Cal
#65
[QUOTE="DuhWhitePanda, post: 6144239]Never once did I say it meant a longer game. I'm coming at it from this stand point. People who buy BF, they play that shit until the breaks come off. Now while not being a BF fan, I am an NBA fan. I can see myself sticking well over 200 hours into NBA Live with the franchise mode and online match making. People who buy BF stick days and days into the online portion of the game. You tell them that they are stupid for paying $80 for a game which they will spend that much time playing. It's illogical, which is why I stated that it depends on how much you value the franchise you're buying. With Dead Space, I only play the campaign. There is no way in hell I'm paying $80 for that game as after 8-15 hours its over and will never be touched again.



NBA Live and BF4 if I can get a party to play with. From a single player aspect, to you Madden may not be worth it, but to someone who play sports games and shooters, its totally worth it. Its all about how much time that you are going to spend with the game that determines its value and that's what people are not getting.

Unlike you, I dont review games. Thus I'm perfectly fine paying $80 for a couple of multiplayer games that interest me until the heavily single player focused games, like Bioshock and the Last of Us, drop to $20-$30. That is how I buy my game. Well that and the Steam sales.[/QUOTE]

with madden youd pay 80$ for a game thats fundamentally the same each year with minor changes? why not demand a core 15$ game that gets yearly updated rosters and features via paid updates? they already announced that they are going to be using 2 engines... so now you wont even be paying for an updated game graphically, all youll be paying for is roster changes and little stuff that doesnt even amount to 80$ worth of features... this legitimately makes my brain hurt as to why anyone would spend money for sports games. Id seriously rather pay for the core game and then 5-10$ for the yearly roster change... i really dont see an 80$ value a year in sports games (to be fair... i HATE sports lol)

and i deleted BF3 after the first day (not even worth the free PS+ download) if i pay 80$ for BF4 i better get free server hosting (none of this bullshit 3 month rentals) and free premium service, and whatever other DLC they decide to cut from the main game so they can charge instead.
 
#67
[QUOTE="SomaXD, post: 6144325]with madden youd pay 80$ for a game thats fundamentally the same each year with minor changes? why not demand a core 15$ game that gets yearly updated rosters and features via paid updates? they already announced that they are going to be using 2 engines... so now you wont even be paying for an updated game graphically, all youll be paying for is roster changes and little stuff that doesnt even amount to 80$ worth of features... this legitimately makes my brain hurt as to why anyone would spend money for sports games. Id seriously rather pay for the core game and then 5-10$ for the yearly roster change... i really dont see an 80$ value a year in sports games (to be fair... i HATE sports lol)

and i deleted BF3 after the first day (not even worth the free PS+ download) if i pay 80$ for BF4 i better get free server hosting (none of this bullshit 3 month rentals) and free premium service, and whatever other DLC they decide to cut from the main game so they can charge instead.[/QUOTE]

I pay it because I can. Sure its not worth $80 because of what they pack into it, but its worth $80 to me because of the time I spend on it and the experience I get from playing with other people online.

I can ask the same question about any single player game. Why do people pay $60 for The Last of Us? Its a single player game with multiplayer that I'd never touch. People do it though. My brain hurts as to why anyone would buy that game day one or get excited by a MGS game. Just take your PS3 controller to a theatre instead of buying a MGS game :icon_thumright:


See how utterly stupid that sounded. Its different strokes for different folks. People who play EA games play them religiously and get their value out of what they pay. EA knows this, EA will get away with charging more, and most customers probably wont feel like they got ripped off.

I wont feel bad when I pay $80 and spend the majority of the PS4 gaming drought playing a EA sports game while others are only complaining that Sony has no games.
 
Last edited:

jj03

Elite Guru
Apr 7, 2007
5,178
39
48
45
#71
How can ea raise prices for next gen games when i imagine games will be less difficult to program for given the more pc innards in ps4/360? If it is true, i just won't buy their games. Period..again, if it is true..then fuck you ea.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 2
 

dakidx

Dedicated Member
Dec 30, 2007
1,187
1
0
29
#72
yea EA's gonna have to make their own console and sell games at whatever price they want. See who picks up the tab then.
 

daLa

Veteran
May 22, 2006
4,779
21
0
www.myspace.com
#73
[QUOTE="Sufi, post: 6144719]but what exactly was your question? i'm tring to get the context here. they could be talking about current prices.[/QUOTE]

I told them about the whole GAME UK confirmation thing about a price raise for PS4 games, and I asked for confirmation of such information.

And that's what they said:
EA Support
I don't have any info on any price changes.
 
#74
[QUOTE="daLa, post: 6145164]I told them about the whole GAME UK confirmation thing about a price raise for PS4 games, and I asked for confirmation of such information.

And that's what they said:
EA Support
I don't have any info on any price changes.[/QUOTE]

So that one guy of EA Support who answered your question has no info. ...but that does not mean there are no infos about the price yet at all! I clear denial sounds different from that statement.

Anyway, we'll see....
we as customers have much power, as we just saw by MS do their 180. We could give EA our answer, too, if they really will make prices like rumored here.
 

Fon

Master Guru
Oct 5, 2009
6,141
159
0
33
@Home
#75
[QUOTE="Slaystation, post: 6145271]So that one guy of EA Support who answered your question has no info. ...but that does not mean there are no infos about the price yet at all! I clear denial sounds different from that statement.

Anyway, we'll see....
we as customers have much power, as we just saw by MS do their 180. We could give EA our answer, too, if they really will make prices like rumored here.[/QUOTE]

Just do what many others have been doing this gen, protest your displeasure with your wallets. I don't know why Electronic Arts would inflate prices like that but a move like this will blow on their faces.
 

rene2kx

Dedicated Member
Jan 23, 2011
1,345
9
38
#77
Still not confirmed by EA themselves. I have no reason to take the word of Game uk as the official word. Where did the 80 usd price tag even come from? Through a currency conversion or what? They wont raise the price that high in the states, it would clearly backfire.
 

daLa

Veteran
May 22, 2006
4,779
21
0
www.myspace.com
#80
[QUOTE="ps3freak18, post: 6146038]I'm surprised EA hasn't come out and said this is false. This looks really bad on them if it's not true.[/QUOTE]

I'm surprise mostly on how people here are going off by this bit of rumor, I mean there's no official confirmation of this, and people are going about EA like they already confirmed this.

Mods should lock this thread, it's misleading and doesn't offer accurate information.
 
#81
[QUOTE="DuhWhitePanda, post: 6144168]1) Why are you buying 5-8 games a month!? Can you even get through that amount of games per month?
2) I hope they are not new releases. God I hope you're talking about Steam games.
3) I think people are forgetting most games decrease in price after a few months. (Not specific to you)To call people stupid and get all mad over the price of a game just makes you look childish.

And no, paying $80 for a certain game that I know will get a ridiculous amount of play time through the course of a year doesn't bother me. As I stated, I'm paying over $500 just on the hardware alone. I'm not going to cry because I have to pay another $80 for a quality game with a ton of replay value.

Believe me, I can sympathize with people on this, but I think people are just blowing this out of proportion. EA rarely makes new franchises so for the most part you know what you're getting with them. Its all about how much value you put on a game.[/QUOTE]

I buy that many games a month as well if not more. "Why" has nothing to do with it. Most are used but during the holiday season they are new and he is right the extra $20 is ludicrous. However prices are determined by supply and demand. If demand dictates a $80 price tag then blame free enterprise not EA. As of now all major retailers in the US are still showing regular prices...

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
 
Jun 4, 2007
13,612
320
83
#82
http://www.insidegamingdaily.com/2013/02/27/ea-execs-predict-next-gen-games-to-cost-70/

“I think, typically, at the start of a cycle, you’ve seen the pricing raise, say, to $69 for a core piece of software. And then over the life of those, that’s drifted down to introduction price, typically now around $59. We haven’t yet set pricing on our gen 4s, but you probably see a similar trend to that during the start of the next cycle.”
EA execs made that comment back in feb. Let them go ahead and charge more. I'll gladly give my money to gamestop with a used copy of the game.
 

FatesServant

Elite Member
Jul 6, 2006
1,919
9
0
#86
Unless I am wrong, this has yet to be officially confirmed. I will choose to disregard the rumor until it is confirmed by EA themselves. THat said, it doesn't make a difference to me at all. I can't think of a single EA game that I have bought this entire generation (I imagine there's got to be one in there somewhere) but I've never bought a sports game (outside GT5, which was a christmas gift), and I don't play the battlefield series or really any other shooter series save Resistance and Killzone. Anyways, like I said, I doubt they would do this - sales would go down precipitously. After all, with the whole gamer outcry against Xbox one DRM policy, I imagine game developers are on their toes now. Gamers just wont tolerate being screwed over in this day and age.
-FatesServant
 

FatesServant

Elite Member
Jul 6, 2006
1,919
9
0
#87
Unless I am wrong, this has yet to be officially confirmed. I will choose to disregard the rumor until it is confirmed by EA themselves. THat said, it doesn't make a difference to me at all. I can't think of a single EA game that I have bought this entire generation (I imagine there's got to be one in there somewhere) but I've never bought a sports game (outside GT5, which was a christmas gift), and I don't play the battlefield series or really any other shooter series save Resistance and Killzone. Anyways, like I said, I doubt they would do this - sales would go down precipitously. After all, with the whole gamer outcry against Xbox one DRM policy, I imagine game developers are on their toes now. Gamers just wont tolerate being screwed over in this day and age.
-FatesServant
 

bariton1

Superior Member
Oct 20, 2006
625
13
0
40
Berlin
#88
Fuck EA big time. With their Malware on PC called Origin, the terrible customer support and now the raising prices for retail games i only wish them the worst. Hate this company with passion. And if this means i have to skip again almost every EA game (Dead Space 1 and Mass Effect 2 were the only games i bought from EA in this generation) than it should be so. They already fucked up my beloved Sim City and so many other great games. EA is ranking with Bobby Kotick (Activision-Blizzard) on Top 1 of the most shitty game companies in the world.
 
May 29, 2007
4,289
31
48
40
.....pss..behind you
#89
Origin ain't so bad.

Was AWESOME for them to give away any 1 game download for free after completion of their survey last year.

Was even more kind of them for neglecting to put a 1 time use/1 per customer limit on said survey.... Who remembers that epic F up? Lmao
 
Last edited: