So Call of Duty: Black Ops just came out. It's $60, which is no surprise. PC games used to cost $50, but in reality game pricing has been very reasonable given the rate of inflation. I've read some analysis of past game pricing for old systems like NES and SNES, and the pricing today, adjusted for inflation, should actually be $90-100. To make up for this disparity, more and more games have expansion packs and downloadable content being released for them, as well as Special Editions. But looking at just the base game, $60 should be a bargain.

So here's my take on the $60 PC game. I'm ok paying $60 for a game that is fun, well-made, and is something special. Starcraft 2, while being based on the original Starcraft, is a completely new game with a new engine and loads of new features. Not to mention it has a professional e-sports following with an entire country behind it (I am speaking of course to South Korea).

A game like Black Ops, on the other hand, to me feels like more of an expansion. It is built off of Treyarch's previous game engine for Call of Duty: World at War and builds on previous Modern Warfare games. A new one is released every year come Christmas time. Generally, each new game has some additional features and a new (short) action-packed storyline. The original Modern Warfare was $50 and was something special. It really set itself apart from previous Call of Duty games and did something different (it was also the last Call of Duty game I purchased). $60 for Black Ops, or Modern Warefare 2 for that matter, is not something I can stomach. If these games are to be released every year with nothing but a new (short) storyline and new features, they should really be expansion packs with pricing to match -- $30 or $40 tops.

Tags	call of duty   black ops