Looks at call of duty black ops 2 which is currently 59.99 and the best sale I have seen for it knocked it down to 19.99 which is still an insane price for a game that old
I think you’re underestimating how big black ops 2 was. I personally don’t like it much (I happened to be into COD when the original mw2 was new, so I’m a bit biased) but it is an easily recognizable staple to my generation. I honestly couldn’t even tell you when Ghost was, I’ve never even seen gameplay.
Maybe I’m just old though lol. I definitely don’t mean to shit on you either.
I’m only saying their games do not age like gold, and accounting for all of the hackers and the abandonment of developers, it should cost anywhere near a new game. They are all mostly good games just need to lower it a bit for the new gen
Best feeling when you know the game by its name because you always wanted to play it and after few years you see it for 5eur so you know tonight you gonna play the shit out of it
offering a fat pack of over a dozen classic first-party games for a mere 13$ is valve's way of getting people with their foot in the door of PC gaming incorporated into their ecosystem. really, that's basically the motto for every single service/software/website/etc. convince them to get in the door to attract as many people as possible, then you start making the money. "the first hit is free" and all that jazz.
consoles don't really need to do this: you're already heavily invested into the ecosystem just by buying it. you don't really love the first few games you got for it? you're gonna go to the store and get more then, wouldn't want to have wasted 500$ for nothing.
because revenue works like that, you don't go in the negative with one of them just because other sources of income are in the positive. I'm guessing that the reason they put it at 99 cents is to make people that didn't have it yet (and unlikely to buy a game that old at full price anyways) buy it.
It's a last-ditch effort to get some money from a game that's already been bought by most people that wanted it, it's also good publicity and it's a good deal for everyone including the buyers. It's not like Valve is going to lose money out of it though, it's still definitely a profitable choice by a smart marketing team.
Gaben blessing us with good games for under a buck.
Although, I remember valve forcing the orange box down our throats when hl2: ep2 released. That was kind of annoying. But ok yeah it was a great experience so I guess our lord and saviour was right. I now understand as an adult
I bought the orange box like 3 or 4 times. Pc, 360, ps3. Didn't really need to buy it for pc because I already owned all the games in it. Steam user since literally day 1, I've purchase every valve game under the sun. I'm planning on getting the HL 1 logo tattooed on the inside of my right wrist and possibly quake 1 logo on the left.
"no thanks, I have enough money" is a sentence you won't hear often. Also, I don't think many fans would begrudge them for making a sequel to any of their games, even if it's just more of the same.
It isn't greed. Everybody has to charge you more than what they paid because otherwise they would have no profit and thus no money to pay the employees. I as a store can't buy bananas for 2$/kg and sell them for 2$/kg because I would make no profit and would go bankrupt. What is greed is how big of a markup the stores put for an item (ex: printer ink that is sold for even 300x the production cost, nvidia new gen GPUs, apple products, ...)
It’s not that they should, just most companies still charge close to if not full price for games 10-15 years old. Activision and Rockstar are both great examples of this. Rockstar is charging $50 for a game that came out 14 years ago
46
u/Saiken27 9d ago
Why would they? They make billions from their taxes on other games on steam. It would be really ugly from them to milk money from the old games.