• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Opinion A 2 hour movie is about $9... here, hear and hair me out ;)

Sorcerer

Member
Jul 4, 2012
4,314
301
800
I don't think its quite apples to oranges. Games have the same content as movies then just repetition. Not like you are experiencing 70 hours of unique entertainment. Basically a game is just an interactive movie, with activities to keep you busy.

I think to myself how would I make the Phantasy Star movie? The game has literally about 30 minutes of story (if that) and the rest is just grinding in between the story bits. But I do love grinding for the story bits.
 
Last edited:

ZlleH

Member
Dec 21, 2020
306
503
330
Your OP is based around Spider-Man: Miles Morales, a launch title for the Sony PlayStation 5, a Sony first party platform exclusive, and one of the first titles to bear the new Sony price point that has dozens of threads and lots of discussion elsewhere in the industry. The only other party to confirm they'll be raising all of their prices to the same price point is Activision. Other publishers have commented they're looking at it - which is corpo-speak for "We'll see how much shit they get before we jack our prices too". So, whether you wanted it to be or not, this is a thread about Sony's price point and how its not so bad if you perform mental gymnastics to support it.
I think we will have to agree to disagree.

He could have told me he was buying a Switch game for his kids and we would have the same conversation about price of games.

So you can assume all you like about my intention, that is your right, but It was not about a specific company.

I've learn long ago it's easier to move a mountain than to change someone's mind on the internet, so I won't even try.
 

RoadHazard

Member
Dec 9, 2008
20,814
3,784
1,245
Gothenburg, Sweden
No, not really. Why are we comparing gaming to movie theaters? Why don't we compare it to Netflix? Netflix costs me 15 dollars a month and I get countless hours of entertainment.

When going to the cinema or buying a game you pay for exactly what you want to experience, and you get it day 1. On Netflix you watch what they think you should watch, and you won't get any brand new movies (except for stuff they produce themselves).

Sure, Netflix is very cheap per hour of watched content (if you use it a lot), but the comparison was between going to the cinema vs buying a game. Now, some games last 15 hours while others last 150, and it's up to you which ones you want to spend your money on.
 
Last edited:

Justin9mm

Member
May 9, 2018
1,726
1,350
405
Melbourne, Australia
It's not a good or relevant comparison. You can also spend $20 to buy a basketball that gives you years of entertainment.

Compare it to other games for the best comparison. Time alone is not enough to make your value judgements though. There's some games that can have you grinding the same repeated content for dozens of hours.
I somewhat agree with you but I think cinema vs gaming is a good comparison. Watching movies and playing games is similar entertainment that can be compared.

Comparisons have to be similar.. Putting cost of a basketball vs a video game under the guise of entertainment is not really a fair comparison because the cost and effort put into making that ball is not the same/similar.
 
Last edited:

Yselacrey00

Banned
Nov 20, 2018
1,304
1,603
520
When going to the cinema or buying a game you pay for exactly what you want to experience, and you get it day 1. On Netflix you watch what they think you should watch, and you won't get any brand new movies (except for stuff they produce themselves).

Sure, Netflix is very cheap per hour of watched content (if you use it a lot), but the comparison was between going to the cinema vs buying a game. Now, some games last 15 hours while others last 150, and it's up to you which ones you want to spend your money on.
So then compare it to buying a Blu-Ray, that would make more sense. Not a lot of people buy those things though, so that shows you how people aren't willing to spend money on movies.
 

BigBooper

Member
Feb 28, 2018
3,630
4,204
680
I somewhat agree with you but I think cinema vs gaming is a good comparison. Watching movies and playing games is similar entertainment that can be compared.

Comparisons have to be similar.. Putting cost of a basketball vs a video game under the guise of entertainment is not really a fair comparison because the cost and effort put into making that ball is not the same/similar.
I don't agree that going to a theater to watch a movie is similar to buying a game. The price of going to a theater is paying for how you experience the movie, as well as what you experience within the movie. Buying a game is paying for what you experience within the game, and in the case of physical games, something you can display, loan to someone, or resell. There's very minor similarities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 93xfan

TheMay30thMan

Member
Aug 23, 2018
1,015
1,657
535
I really don’t understand the need to justify a purchase by forcing an arbitrary subscription model on it. If you paid $70 for a new game and you’re happy about it, thats totally fine. Bringing up how many dollars you spent per hour just makes you sound like you’re desperately trying to excuse the purchase. Plus it makes zero sense. You own the game, don’t you? Why measure it by hours per dollars when you’re can replay it whenever you want?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZywyPL

Redlight

Member
Feb 5, 2014
1,357
2,897
655
Gaming an expensive. Comparing the price to to movies just feels like an attempt to justify some games going up to $70. It's a reach.

You can buy music which has, effectively, infinite enjoyment attached to it. If my favourite ever album was $1000, would that be fine because it's good 'value per hour' deal compared to movies?
 

Sejan

Member
Sep 28, 2018
869
1,080
520
It’s not a perfect comparison, but it’s definitely worth considering the length of a game at purchase. I wouldn’t be satisfied if I got 500 hours of content in a “watching paint dry simulator” if I was bored to tears even if it were technically a good value. I think the equation needs to factor in the value of the experience itself in addition to the length of experience.
 

Justin9mm

Member
May 9, 2018
1,726
1,350
405
Melbourne, Australia
I don't agree that going to a theater to watch a movie is similar to buying a game. The price of going to a theater is paying for how you experience the movie, as well as what you experience within the movie. Buying a game is paying for what you experience within the game, and in the case of physical games, something you can display, loan to someone, or resell. There's very minor similarities.
I think your missing my point but ok
 
Last edited: