Pricing Games By The Hour Is Some Absurd Shit (The Jimquisition)


Green Man Gaming believes it can formulate an hourly price for its games, but this “Average Cost Per Hour” nonsense is… well, nonsense!

__
Twitter:
Facebook:
Jim’s Big Ego (No Relation):
Bandcamp of the Sax Dragon –
Nathan Hanover –




There are 46 comments

Add yours
  1. RamRod13

    I kind of like the cost per hour rating. When it comes to single player, I actually prefer a really well done short game because I don't have enough time to dedicate to a very long game anymore. I can pair the dollars per hour metric with the overall rating to find something that works better for me.

  2. agnosticgo

    I like to know if a game is 'short' although short isn't really a measure of how long it takes to play a game. A game with endless and mindless unnecessary filler is worse then a game that is too 'short'. I am a single player game fan and play games for the stories, if a game can tell a story in 14 or so hours and takes 50 hours to do it, that doesn't make it 3 times better that generally means I'll get bored of the game a couple of hours in and uninstall it and not buy anything made by the same people for quite a while, that means that a 14 hour game becomes a two hour game and if I spent 60 dollars or more on it, that is only slightly less expensive then going to the cinema and at least at the cinema you get a big bucket of popcorn.

  3. Nick Armor

    I got Super Mario Bros All-Stars about 20 years ago and I still play it semi-regularly. I wonder what the cost per hour of that is?

  4. DPM

    Imagine if they had to put a price on GTA V based on gameplay time, I don't think anyone would be able to afford it because people still play it to this day and most likely have hundreds if not thousands of hours on their belt.

  5. Victorya Kujisawa

    bs, what is with games that have many content like fallout/skyrim/anno do i have to pay for them around 300chf? because i played over 600hours. another bs idea pay for any hour you played + taxes =P

  6. SilentShadowLT

    You call the number of hours spent by a person on the game objective. I'm fairly certain you'll also agree that the game's price is objectively a set number. As such, dividing one by the other gives an objective value. The real question is, is the game worth that $/hr price tag. A lot of games these days are both short and shit, but still cost a fortune — the statistic is quite valuable. Even if the site wouldn't make that calculation for us, I'm fairly certain we would silently do it in our minds anyway.

    If I hear that the game's 100 hours long, I know that even if it isn't that good, I'll have something to mindlessly do. Though you might consider it a waste of time, I still find my self in need of such games at times. After all, how you choose to spend your time falls under the subjective label.

  7. Ira Jacobs

    It's not a very USEFUL metric, but I don't see the harm in them providing it. If some dumbass is going to buy a game based on the fact that it takes 32million hours, and see that it's a really grindy game, welp, enjoy your garbage. End User reviews are always going to be the most useful info, just make sure to read both positive and negative.

  8. HoH hoch

    I don't think it's the cost per hour that's the issue here. People just need to decide if that price they're paying per hour for "completion" of the game is worth it. Sure two 60 dollar games that are both five hours long will have the same price per hour, but if one is balls to the walls orgasmic and the other is utter shit, one can argue that one of those games has a price per hour worth paying for.

  9. Elim Rawne

    they will never calculate humanities' decision-making because we're all a bunch of ever changing frakkers and proud of it! Machine learn thís you wankers! Nice episode Jim, cheers.

  10. Ben Bristow

    The notifications not on by default is a good thing IMHO. Don't want notification spam on your phone for every channel if you're subscribed to loads, you can still see your subscriptions on the homepage when you want to watch YouTube.

    If you're really obsessed with a YouTuber then you can hit the bell.

  11. Yaboi

    When was the last time you had a very limited budget with which to decide what games you're going to play? I for one have to be very picky with what games I buy, because I have to pick games with some decent longevity, that'll last me a few days at the very least. I think you're missing this.

  12. Bound4Earth

    I think the episode has a great point of view, but to an extent. Brothers: a Tale of Two Sons is a great example of this. It is a great journey, but at only two hours you end up losing regardless of how much bullshit you place on the thoughts afterwords, it still ends up being price at an insanely high 10 dollars an hour, yet doesn't provide that much more then any mainstream game. Therefor even Battlefield and CoD provide similar experiences. They give you similar hours of game-play and the storytelling is just as gratifying and they have multiplayer which means value for your dollar, depending on your point of view. It is useful when looking at all of the data. Just as claiming original story equaling 2 hours for $20 is worth more then 10 hours for $60 dollars plus multiplayer. In the end, even if the story is clever and original (which brothers was not), you still only get 2 hours for $20 with no replay-ability, whatsoever. Just claiming the amount of content alone should be thrown out for some opinion of the content is just bullshit, because subjective things are subjective to everyone in differing ways and hours that you can play a game, says more then what you get out of it due to the subjective nature of that entire process. I respect you and will continue to do so in the future, but to claim that money spent per hour of game-play is a garbage metric and should be thrown in the trash is just ignorant. Brothers is an example of a great experience, but just like the AAA games, is way overpriced and not a measure of anything meaningful without the other data points. By itself may be less meaningful, but with everything else taken into account we could have eliminated Brothers from the charts, not a bad thing imo. It was a decent story over better then average game-play for an insane price. Art and story alone, do not always equal great games and we should also keep that in mind Jim.

    TL;DR: I think throwing game-play per hour based on costs into the trash completely is an ignorant point of view. In the grand scheme of things, cost per hour, can play a very important role and even help developers of games, like Brothers, price their games fairly (instead of hiding behind the ignorant overpriced art logic) and help them sell even more copies at the much more reasonable $5 price tag. Overpriced art, is still overpriced at the end of the day.

  13. Nicky Wilson

    Wow that was a good slam Jim. Fight Simon Miller next please. Its like batman vs Superman of YouTube podcast world.

  14. MrZurb

    Buying a game which can be completed in 3 hours for 60€. This would be great indicator for that kind of games.

  15. Garrette

    As i'm getting older, I just can't be bothered with hundred hour games. Most long games are full of filler content. Games that sit around the 4-20 hour mark are the most appealing to me because I will actually be able to finish them.

  16. Dan Bahlert

    This concept might be good to combat micro-transactions since it then becomes needed info to know the average MT spent by each player.

  17. HRK

    if You Have That Much God Like Strength, Just DO! THAT!
    A Few Times A Month My Friend, You'd Have A Physique To Match That inner Strength.
    i Consider Myself A Buff Nerd.

    You've Given Me Hours of Information(& Laughs,So)
    My Gift 2 You is My Greatest info That i Figure Out & Used 2Cut Down Some, Weight Lifting is Just Simple Math.

    Always Lookit A Mirror(Not! 4 Vanity)…
    To Get An idea of What Your Results Look Like,When!, They Start Working.

    Addition=Repetition
    Multiplication=Sets
    Subtraction=How Many Sets Left
    Division(i Usually 4Get That1 M8…) But i Think it=Something Like if You Can Count To 10,

    Count To 10 On Every Lift or Exercise & Then
    Start The Count Over & Remember Your Sets.
    You Can increase Repetitions When Your Comfy, Good & Ready =)

    i'm Not A Physical Trainer or A Health Nut But, i Know That Method Works,
    Because i Spent The Time Applying My intelligence For 4Years in High School,
    So Much They Banned! Me!(…Those Weak Chickens!)

    From The Schools Weight Room, All Because i Started Embarrassing & Out Lifting All The Football Players(Losers =)
    Lifting The Very Last Bars On The Machines & The Heaviest Dumbbells On The Shelves >=)
    …Bitova Rap There(Almost)

    &…i Became The Lead On The Volleyball Team,
    Although i Always Hit The Ball 2The Ceiling Thou(Still Brought Us To Victory), So…i Became Too Stronk XD.
    i Mention This Cause You Seem Like A Smart Lad.

    Oh & if You Do Take My Factoid of an Opinion(Still Fact!)
    Use Instrumentals That Move You To Get Up & Out of Bed(You'll Know When Your Shoulders Start2 Shimmy),
    Like Video Game Music or OC Remixes of VG Music, John(TB, Rest His Soul) Liked Them As Well, Or Classical Music.
    Those Are What i Find Pretty Refreshing =)
    Seen As it's Text…i Hope i Don't Come Across As Smug-_– Not My intention, Have Good! Day Jim =)

  18. android927

    How can you possibly argue that a simple metric, one that can be calculated by taking the cost of a game and dividing it by the average total playtime, is "100% subjective"? The formula (Cost of Game) / (Average Playtime) is always going to give you the same result when given the same inputs, so it is by definition not subjective.

  19. Nod Music

    I'd say beyond my personal opinion, it's not all that useful because i might have tried a game – sunk 1-4 hours in, have a good impression it will be a great game but have too much life stuff going on and never get back on it (The last of us) and thus bring the avg. down. This is usually all down to whats going on in my life when i try to play something (or buying too many games at once). Some games i pick up at the right time and can sink tonnes of hours into (tomb raider game) but still think it was pretty shit and not worth the time or money. Maybe something like avg time to complete main content would be better and avg time beyond…

  20. Strazdas

    Youtube is doing cirrect with subscriptions. I want your (and everyone else) channel to show up on subscribtions list and on subscription feed but i NEVER want to have a notification about a new upload. Im not going to drop what im doing to watch a video, i watch them when i have time to watch them and i can open your channel for that.

  21. Brendon Andrews

    I've been doing the cost per hour for games since.. well… I can remember. It's how I judge what I feel like spending on certain games.

  22. MMOJunkie

    i dunno, I played fallout new vegas for over a thousand hours and I paid £5 for the game and all the dlc, thats about £1 for every 200 hours of playing, that's value for money compared to AAA games that end after 4 hrs and cost £50+, admittidly I am a fan of post apoc rpg's and I will gladly destroy my social life to just gank one more raider, but I agree with you, it is a bit silly to put a value on a game by the averages.

  23. Olika120

    Time for me to make an open world game with a flat map that takes about 10 hours to get from one end of the to the other one

  24. Victor Cross

    Someone just pointed me at this video. The COST of something is not equivalent to the VALUE of something. Avg Cost per Hour is in fact a valid metric. Especially in conjunction with other metrics.

  25. くんマフムード

    so what about a game like bloodborne, how can we price that one? a game that you can literally speed run in a few hours or spend 100 of hours in depending on how you play it, rather than this bullshit, isn't it better if we price games by their uuum ……. quality? maybe?

  26. Yankesik

    The only use of this statistic is if you are seriously low on money, and want to buy a game that will take care of your free time for as long as possible, for as little as possible.

  27. Derek A

    I've been of the opinion for a long time that games are far too long these days. The problem isn't actually the length of the game; it's the trade-off that comes with it. All things being equal, the shorter the game, the more depth it has. Alternatively, the longer the game, the shallower the experience. It's possible to make a long game that has depth (think Witcher 3), but it takes more resources than most publishers are willing to devote to it.

    I'd rather have deep games that last 10 – 20 hours than boring grindfests with mediocre sidequests that are 100+ hours long.

  28. Agusloquillo

    That Dungeon Keeper Mobile example you provided was fucking brillant, Jim. A contradiction which completely flies in the face of the "average cost per hour". You great, great man.

  29. Thomas Lucock

    I always value quality time over length of time. Take MGS Ground Zeroes vs Phantom Pain. Ground zeroes is short and to the point, tells the story it needs to tell, and is endlessly replayable though the different play styles, whereas the Phantom Pain is what feels like a 12 hour game stretched out to 120 hours.


Post a new comment