Single-player action games...only get them from the bargain bin?

[phoenix1967]

With the predominance of multiplayer, RPGs, and various other genres, it seems to me that the single player action game has really lost it's appeal as a Buy-at-Release or Reserve-worthy genre.

I mean, even if they're GOOD (which many of them are), why would you buy it at release? I've only bought 1 Action-Adventure title at release in the last 3 years, Bioshock. And even that is considered more of a shooter-adventure.

When I see games like Ninja Gaiden, God of War, Assassin's Creed, Mirror's Edge, and various other iterations of the action genre come out I can't help but think "Why would I pay $60 for this?" and then go into a self-dialogued list of all the features it doesn't have to make it worth the money at release. The lastest upcoming effort in this list for me is likely to be [Prototype].

Don't get me wrong, all of the games I've mentioned above are really good/great games. However, nothing makes them stand out for me to want to pay $60 for them. $20 or less...sure (maybe even $30). But $60? I just don't get it.

Maybe the aspect that's driving me to this opinion is the lack of replay value in said games of this genre? Because it's not like this with RPGs, imo, because you can play RPGs repeatedly from so many different points of view, and they also frequently offer a vast amount of content in terms of game time played/game price paid ratio to warrant the $60 purchase.

What determines the value of a single-player action game for you? What makes it worthy of $60 vs deciding to wait until it's a bargain title?

[Sirgin]

I'm having a hard time understanding why I would pay €60 (or sometimes even €70) for any game.

It just feels a bit like a waste to get a game for that price when there's hundreds (if not thousands) of older good games I haven't bought/played. And those usually don't come with the €60 price tag.

[Tan]

As collectors/gamers, we have the luxury of looking long term at these games and deciding if $60 can be validated.

Mass Effect? Beat it 3 times already. That's 3 $20 games worth of value in a year and a half. By the time the next system rolls out I'll probably have 200 hours put into it. The same can be said for any of my $60-70 RPGs. Forza 2 probably has a good 80 hours put into it even if I subtract the 15-20 just spent painting cars.

Assassin's Creed on the other hand, I waited until it was $19.99 new before I bought it. With the achievements, it's only worth that to me because it may be years before I ever sit down and beat it again. Don't get me wrong, I'm having fun with it but until it gets a sequel or two it won't really endear itself to me as a series I anticipate.

RPGs are worth $60 to me. So are racing sims like Forza or Gran Turismo. Sequels to beloved franchises like Splinter Cell absolutely. Fortunately between all of that I'm only looking at paying $60 for maybe 3-4 games a year. Just about everything else is a case by case, mostly falling in the $30 or less category, $10 if it has a short single-player campaign or newer sequel.

[Barracuda]

Very few games are worth paying $60 for me. I usually wait until I can find a game for $20 or less. That being said I will buy a game for $60 if I know I will get alot of use out of it (Fallout 3, Halo 3, Guitar Hero). I like to wait until a generation is over and then go back and buy the games for a few bucks. It works for me.

[Tondog]

For a single player action game, I don't generally care if I spend $60 on it. What matters most is to what extent I enjoy the game. Sure, people may brush off Mirror's Edge as a short game, but I don't see that as a problem. It's so damn good, that I don't mind paying $60 and giving EA a vote to continue making bold, innovative titles like it. The problem with waiting so long to buy innovative titles like Mirror's Edge is that you're not giving your vote for these companies to continue being creative, and by the time you get to a title, the company may have decided to not do a sequel or not pursue other games like it.

But of course, that's not true with all games. If it's a single player game that I don't think is particularly interesting or is doing anything to advance gaming as a medium/artform, I'll wait for the price to drop.

Am I the only one who thinks this way? Making purchases as a vote for innovation?

[Cobra]

I feel the same way. Not just with games but anything, voting with your wallet is the best way to be heard. So as you can imagine, I take each game as it comes. If I really like it I'll get it.

[hXd]

With the economy and my lack of money, I can only afford the bargain bin lol.

[phoenix1967]

Mass Effect? Beat it 3 times already.

Did you play it through on Insanity difficulty yet? And did you like the DLC (I DL'd it, but haven't had the chance to play through it yet).

...Am I the only one who thinks this way? Making purchases as a vote for innovation?

No doubt it's a valid argument. A part of me probably bought Bioshock at release for the same reason.

I think the same can be said for movies. People tend not to discriminate enough when it comes to moviegoing, imo. They plunk down their money on what's new from the major studios and consequently miss out on the indy gems that are out at the same time.

It's a fine line.

[Haoie]

Call me a loner, but I prefer a game where I don't bother interacting with others.

[Tan]

Mass Effect? Beat it 3 times already.

Did you play it through on Insanity difficulty yet? And did you like the DLC (I DL'd it, but haven't had the chance to play through it yet).

I started a save file and played through until I was able to leave the Citadel but that's about it. The measly few points earned for an insanity run-through isn't worth it, especially since I've already capped out my character at level 60 and the last two character achievements are tedious at best.

The DLC is pretty cool. It requires a bit more strategy than most missions and the Batarians are pretty nasty. Apparently they've announced more DLC but few details are available at this point.

[Tondog]

Call me a loner, but I prefer a game where I don't bother interacting with others.

Meh, nothin wrong with that really. Comes down to individual preferences.

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

When I bought games, if it was something I wanted to support I would buy it new. Still much the same, I just don't buy many games anymore. I am, however, going to buy Empire: Total War when it comes out.

[modest9797]

My Last Games bought at release
- Crackdown - Action/Adventure - Early 2007
- Halo 3 - Shooter - Fall 2007
- FEAR 2: Project Origin - Shooter - 2 nights ago

As you can see, I don't buy too many games at release, and 2 of them are shooters.

I usually only buy games at release if it is part of a series that I really like.

[cant-grow-up]

Like many have said before me I buy pretty much all my games used no matter what the genre is. I just cant bring myself to pay $60 for a game, when I know in a matter of weeks I can get it used cheaper.

[Tan]

We should all be thankful that games are cheaper now than they've been in almost 30 years!