Price Paid... Is this possible?

[logical123]

I know we have talked about the fact that we can't have 'values' for games on the site, because that turns it into a rarity guide. How about a space when you are adding games to put how much you paid for them? I know many put this in the comment box, but with that space, you can then have a simple (I would come to believe, at least) little script that could add up all of the costs, average them out, etc. Then, maybe on the game pages, have the average PAID by people who own those games and have set a paid price, not a 'Value' Persay. I know many people will say that on the market today, FFVII can fetch USD65-80, but many have only paid USD5-25. Whaddaya guys think? 

[Sirgin]

It's an interesting idea but not too easy to make happen. You'd also need the possibility for Euros and Pounds , ... And what if a European member imports US games but pays in Euros for them? You'd need to have up to date exchange rates, etc....

Oh and to keep the amount of strokes among RFG members down it's maybe best not to include a "Total collection cost" script.

[NES_Rules]

A problem I see with that is, what happens when you buy games in a lot? Or you buy the same game twice at different prices? Those are the reasons I quit putting the prices I paid in the comment box, things just get too messy.

Oh and to keep the amount of strokes among RFG members down it's maybe best not to include a "Total collection cost" script.

Yeah, I don't think I'd really want to know of all the money I've spent on games.

[Sirgin]

Oh and to keep the amount of strokes among RFG members down it's maybe best not to include a "Total collection cost" script.

Yeah, I don't think I'd really want to know of all the money I've spent on games.

Haha, yes exactly

[Tan]

Also, what happens of 5 people own a title and 3 of them got it for free? The value statistic of the game is cut down because of it. Or if 50/100 bought ChronoTrigger new back in the day, the other 50 who paid through the nose for it in recent years look a lot more extreme by comparison. If we had say 5000 collections listed it might work, only then would there be enough people to average out more accurate numbers. It's the same problem with the top 100 or bottom 25. Not enough members rating them or members total for an accurate assessment.

Besides, one person's $0.25 flea market thrift is someone else's $100 sealed treasure.

[Sirgin]

It's the same problem with the top 100 or bottom 25. Not enough members rating them or members total for an accurate assessment.

That has been changed into the Top 50 games now

But on a serious note: Everything NES_Rules and Tan said is very true, making this all the more complex to have it done right. I think there are other features that could be improved upon first that aren't as complex as this.

[Tan]

It's the same problem with the top 100 or bottom 25. Not enough members rating them or members total for an accurate assessment.

That has been changed into the Top 50 games now

Yes but it was changed from the top 100 to top 50 because the 51-100 list had some odd choices and dubious selections because the ratings had fewer votes and didn't represent the actual opinions of the consensus.

[logical123]

Aww fine. But is it possible to add this as a section of your collection, unrelated to the game pages? So that you can see how much you have spent, and you can show off you deals in your own collection.

[St0rmTK421]

That's kind of what the notes section was meant for.  It would be hard to standardize a field for payment, since there are so many different kinds of currency.