520°

The $17,500 video game

Think $60 video games are too expensive? You won't hear any argument from us, but you might from JJ Hendricks, a collector who just paid a clinically insane $17,500 for an obscure NES game from 1990.

Read Full Story >>
videogames.yahoo.com
F3NIX DX5425d ago (Edited 5425d ago )

insane price tag...but I wouldn't consider this game the holy grail of gaming. The holy grail should only go to games that are rare and made a huge impact on games...This game reminds me of Mario Allstars for SNES, It was like 6 games on 1 cartridge I believe.

kornbeaner5425d ago

The article says "Game Collecting" not "Gaming"

UnwanteDreamz5425d ago

Agreed, GI recently compiled a list of the most valuable video games and this is at the top.

Montrealien5425d ago (Edited 5425d ago )

they put them up at that price, but not everyone buys them.

s8anicslayer5425d ago

Two words to summarize hendricks; Dumb Ass!

MEsoJD5425d ago (Edited 5425d ago )

do you know what you get with that much money???

Damn I would get a new car or something not extremely rare game with bad graphics.

Marcelles255425d ago

ID BUY 35 PS3'S....PUT THEM TOGETHER AND MAKE A SUPER COMPUTER CAPABLE OF PLAYING 20 GAMES OF CRYSIS AT ONCE.....WHAT A WORLD

Bnet3435425d ago

This is why I never trade in my games. I know Halo 2 Collector's Edition will be worth something 50 years from now. Still got it.

D2ThaEasy5425d ago

I regret trading in this game to gamestop for 10 cents :(

Kaneda5425d ago

want to buy mine? maybe 5K dollars..

Giriath5424d ago

@Kigmal.

Halo 2 Collector's Edition was produced in quite a lot more than 26 copies...

Bnet3435424d ago

Notice how I said 50 years from now. In 50 years I'm pretty sure anything Halo will be worth something.

Beast_Master5424d ago

yes and in 50 years this game will be worth millions.

table5424d ago

In 50 years people will release what an overrated pile of horse sh*t halo is. Well, not the first one it was good. Halo3 is probably the worst game i've played this gen. Unreal tourney 3 is also a close contender for overrated tripe.

iWillNotBeIgnored5424d ago (Edited 5424d ago )

I understand why people collect things they like & also things that they like that are EXTREMELY RARE but I'll never understand people who collect "rare" trash. One man's trash is another man's treasure I guess.
I'm curious as to what this guy does for a living though.
If it's "an investment" I don't think it is a wise investment.
He "invested" in a GOLD COLORED cartridge. Maybe he should have invested in some... you know... REAL GOLD instead. lol.

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 5424d ago
guitarded775425d ago

I think it's stupid, but if he's got the cash and it's what he wants who am I to judge.

randomwiz5425d ago

Even if I had the cash, I wouldn't spend 17k on something like this.

El_Colombiano5425d ago

I would. Yes yes, it is INSANE, but had I had the opportunity, I would have bought it. I like collecting games.

meluvulongtime5425d ago

If I had the money to collect video games. I can't say I'd go for the most rare because that sometimes just means buying crappy games. The most rare turd is still a turd. I think I'd rather go for mint condition great games, but hey if they enjoy it that's all that counts right.

UnwanteDreamz5425d ago

Unfortunatly some of the best games ever made even in mint condition are worth very little to collectors.

SaiyanFury5424d ago

If I had the cash, and I was that big into collecting the rarest games, I'd totally do it. Would I do it myself, no, but I wouldn't judge the guy. Hell, people spend way more on other collectibles, like somebody spent 500,000 dollars on the model of the Enterprise-D that Paramount used in filming Star Trek: The Next Generation. The guy's a collector, and as such is willing to spend obscene amounts of money on things that we non-collectors do not value.

nycredude5424d ago

I think everyone is missing the point here. This is an investment, just like stocks and bonds. It may seem like a stupid move and he may seem retarded now, but in like 10 years or longer, when and if he sells it for like $50,000 or more, then he will look like a genius.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 5424d ago
SKUD5425d ago

To be rich and stupid. Now thats the life....

antoinetm5424d ago (Edited 5424d ago )

Sure is better than being poor and bitter now isnt it?

STICKzophrenic5425d ago (Edited 5425d ago )

"Think $60 video games are too expensive? You won't hear any argument from us, but you might from JJ Hendricks, a collector who just paid a clinically insane $17,500 for an obscure NES game from 1990."

That statement is retarded. They state we won't hear any argument from them that $60 is too expensive (meaning they think it's a fair price) then state that you might hear an argument from Hendricks that $60 is too expensive, despite him paying $17,500 for a game. Why would he argue that $60 is too expensive???

That makes no sense whatsoever.

Snake Raiser5425d ago

"Think $60 video games are too expensive? You won't hear any argument from us,"
Actually I think that means that they wont argue with you if that is what you think.

UnwanteDreamz5425d ago

LMAO Snake is right. Reading comprehension FTW!

Giriath5424d ago

I hope you're not American or British STICK, because I'm Swedish and I understood that perfectly fine.

STICKzophrenic5424d ago

Different people different (mis)interpretations, but my point stands about why you would get an argument from Hendricks. Why would he argue a $60 game is too expensive?

DuneBuggy5424d ago (Edited 5424d ago )

Gaming has never been cheaper really.
Case in point.A original Atari 2600 in 77' had a list of $199.99
Thats almost $700 in todays money after adjusting for inflation.
And a copy of that crappy 2600 Pac Man in the early 80's cost almost 90 bucks after adjusting for inflation.

VenomCarnage895424d ago

how do you still not get it? the writer of the article will not argue that games cost alot. that was said already by snake. so if you actually read it carefully, you see that they mean the exact opposite for hendricks, which could only mean he would give you an arguement.which means hendricks would not agree with us that $60 is to expensive. get it yet?

just in case you dont:

"Think $60 video games are too expensive? You won't hear any argument from us, but you might from JJ Hendricks"

I (insert name here) think $60 is too expensive. the author will not argue with me. thus meaning he agrees with me, which means he thinks $60 is too expensive to.
Hendricks would argue with me, meaning he disagrees with me about games being expensive.which means he thinks $60 is not very much money. i think $60 is alot of money,but he says "no way, i just paid $17,500 for a game, $60 is not much at all"

there, hopefully you got it now.

orange-skittle5424d ago (Edited 5424d ago )

You must be one of those kids that needs pictures to comprehend what you're reading. Do you look at the menu and point at the picture and say "I WANT THIS!" I clearly understood what the author was trying to say. He said you wont hear an agrument from them about the $60 price tag on games because they agree it's too high. How hard is that to understand.

Example: If you think STICKzophrenick is douche bag, you won't hear an argument from us"

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 5424d ago
Show all comments (57)
60°

MSI releases new RTX 4060 Ti bundle that fans of Monster Hunter will love

MSI celebrates the 20th anniversary of Monster Hunter with this unique bundle that features a matching RTX 4060 Ti and game controller.

260°

Why Xbox believes it must cut costs and close studios

Companies, particularly public companies like Microsoft, need to grow.

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
gold_drake12h ago

i mean its pretty simple, they spent close to 30 billion in acquiring activision, they thought they'd make it bk no problem, and that didnt happen.

its just shit that because of MS's miscalculation alot of people lost their jobs.

Jingsing8h ago

This is exactly what many people said would happen including the CMA and FTC. Lies lies and more lies and they allowed a $69 billion buy out to happen.

gold_drake8h ago

oh yeh it was 70 billion. that was my bad haha even worse.

thesoftware7308h ago(Edited 8h ago)

gold,

You can't be serious, right?

Do you think that MS thought they would make 80bill in a year & Half? They haven't even released titles under MS yet, lol.

But in fact, that A/B revenue is already paying off, look at the last earnings call. That $80 billion is long-term money, my guy, no sane person/company would think they would make that back in any short-term situation, it's a long-term investment.

Let's play silly then. If MS's reason for laying off staff and closing studios was due(which it really was not) to the A/B deal, tell me what Sony's reason was for past studio closures, the recent 900-person layoffs, closing Sony London, shutting down Dreams, and closing Japan Studio? Zipper? Psygnosis? cuts at all their internal studios.

Keep in mind, you are claiming MS's reason is because of the A/B deal; please explain Sony's reason.

Hofstaderman8h ago

You actually still defending them? Sheesh.....

gold_drake8h ago

this is not a sony vs MS debate. dont make it something it isnt.

and of course not, but im pretty sure they thought they'd make more money after the deal. they didnt, and closed off some studios.

its pretty insane to think there is any other reason for the closure of studios in this case.

romulus238h ago(Edited 8h ago)

(It really was) due to the Activision Blizzard deal and the loss of physical sales due to gamepass. You keep bringing up Sony in all your posts about this, stop deflecting and trying to change the topic, this is about MS and what they are doing.

BehindTheRows7h ago

Has nothing to do with Sony. Stay on topic.

notachance7h ago

once in a while you see someone too invested in their make-believe console war that everything happened has to be connected to said war…

a bit of banter between fans is normal, this crusade you’re doing now isn’t.

Chevalier7h ago

Wow idiotic. You bring up very old closures not that there haven't been recent ones from Playstations, but, seriously stop deflecting. This has NOTHING to do with Playstation.

Does Playstation got $3 trillion behind them and daddies wallet? No they don't so stop making a fool of yourself.

Xbox has never been profitable really and they just keep losing money so between their worst hardware sales, terrible 3rd party sales and now terrible 1st party sales.

Gamepass numbers that are no longer being announced shows their numbers after 3 years of missed targets has flatlined. Plus their recent gains up to 34 million were ONLY because they folded Gold members in too. Absolutely take your idiotic rhetoric out of here. Keep on topic without deflecting.

S2Killinit7h ago

Ayayayay with these xbox/MS excuses.

Reaper22_2h ago

How dare you mention Sony! Everyone here knows when Sony closes a studio and lay off workers it was the right thing to do. Even when they bought Gaikai and fired almost everyone it was the right thing to do.

Gamers can be such hypocrites sometimes.

andy851h ago

Is it? That's revenue not profit. Completely different.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1h ago
thesoftware7305h ago(Edited 5h ago)

Drake,

"this is not a sony vs MS debate. dont make it something it isnt."

You are correct that it's not an MS Vs Sony Topic, but when exaggeration and imagination mix from a one-sided social group, similar examples are needed to ground radical thoughts; in this instance, the example was that shutting down 3,4,5, even 6 studios during a restructure/ buyout/acquisition is not some anomaly(it can suck) that has to be dissected or spell doom and gloom.

"But I'm pretty sure they thought they'd make more money after the deal. They didn't, and they closed off some studios."

But they did make more money, a lot, actually; the last earnings call showed a huge growth in profit, almost all due to A/B revenue.

"its pretty insane to think there is any other reason for the closure of studios in this case."

The fact that they did make money, kinda throws this out the window, and besides, you don't wake up and say, hey let's close a studio, you look at the output, you look at the dev as a whole, the long term and short term, you weigh it against all other studios and goals, you keep key members, ect..then you close if they are the weakest links...which by MS analysis they were.

Again, I will make a small Sony comparison, just so some of you can understand and see past the bias; Insomniac, ND, and Bungie have made some of the best games ever created, yet Sony saw fit to cut jobs in every of these studios, even tho Insomniac & ND are the biggest producers of PS games, leagues ahead better than Tango and Arkane, yet, they saw cuts, mind you, while being the TOP produces of PS first party. They were told to cut costs, and more jobs may be on the line, and Bungie is being threatened by a hostile Sony takeover. Put that in perspective, as I know that layoffs and dev closures are different, but if the best of the best is getting cut off, it is less than surprising, that lesser studios are closing.

@Cheva,
My response fits well with your comments as well. You even went on to prove that the dev closures are not just due to A/B acquisition. Then you point out Sony has less money than MS, inferring that MS should keep devs open that they see as lesser earners, while Sony having less money makes it okay to close them. lol...it doesn't work that way.

gold_drake5h ago

im not reading all of that. u have ur opinion, i have mine.

thats rly it.

but this aint sony vs ms.

ApocalypseShadow5h ago

You're trying to compare a 100 billion company to a company that has 3 TRILLION worth. SIE has to live or die on their own. And in turn, PlayStation has helped the main company again and again. Sony has to balance out what is working and not working in the company.

While Xbox has Daddy Warbucks footing the bill to keep the platform afloat. They have been bleeding money from Nvidia hardware in the OG Xbox, the RROD fiasco, the attempted 2013 DRM nonsense and the lies about being the most powerful console in the world and the losses of paying out millions to prop up a service hoping it catches on with enough subscribers to justify its existence.

They're not comparable if Xbox isn't allowed to live or die by its actions. It's subsidized. Revenue isn't profit. And if they were profiting on their own, they wouldn't be closing developers. If they were profiting, they wouldn't need Daddy Warbucks spending 80 to 100 billion buying up 3rd party publishers to sustain a loss leading platform.

They stopped announcing game sales, stopped announcing hardware sales, stopped announcing game pass subscribers, they are putting games on their competitors platforms but you're telling us that they are doing great even after killing jobs and closing developers at Xbox.

Stop drinking the Kool aid. You're drunk.

WelkinCole56m ago

I am pretty sure MS knew this would happen and this was part of their plan. I mean if anyone with half a brain can see this happening I am pretty sure a multi billion company like MS knew this would happen

The whole strategy in buying Beth and Acti/Blizzard is for

1. Buy established games they can have under xbox because they have done a horrible job in building their portfolio internally for the past 15 years

2. Following from 1, try and boost xbox competitivenss against a dominat PS which MS after 3 tries still can't crack

3. Follolwing from 2, try and weaken Playstation dominance by taking out these massive multiplats from the PS

4. Following from 3, try and profit off from the PS domiance with selected games they will still have on the PS to make money like COD

5. Obviously get the IP's by buying them instead of creating them which again as I mentioned in number 1 they have been woeful in doing

None of these had anyting to do with keeping all the devs they accuried. MS has always been very shitty to Devs under them. Look at what happned to Bungie for example.

I believe MS in court truely mean it when they said they had to do something because PS was just too dominant. This was their last roll of the dice.

And from the looks of things. It has not panned out as MS had hoped. PS5 is still as dominant as ever and xbox is still behind. Worse still their MP's they got is not irreplaceable as they thought. Starfield? lol!. There have not been any major shift in momentum in this console war in their favor so now its time to start cutting their loses and it starts with the most expensive cost for any company. People.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 56m ago
anast8h ago

They are going to use AI for a large portion of the game development process. Upper management need bonuses and the shareholders need more money. So, people will lose their jobs.

Skuletor8h ago

Maybe they were already using AI to make business decisions, which would explain why they closed Hi-Fi Rush's studio, then said they need more games like Hi-Fi Rush not long after that announcement.

Crows908h ago(Edited 8h ago)

They shouldn't have bought any studios. Some is okay...but they went on a shopping spree...stupid

Einhander19727h ago

The better question is why did Microsoft buy publishers for a service they were subsidizing they knew couldn't support.

And why are so many websites trying to make people feel sorry for Microsoft instead of truly criticizing the fact they are closing studios and killing jobs that would have been fine if Microsoft themselves hadn't gotten involved.

Quit feeling sorry for Microsoft and start feeling sorry for the industry and the all the gamers who are actually losing out.

THIS IS MICROSOFTS FAULT.

RNTody7h ago

The first thing that happens after any major acquisition or merger is a consolidation of the whole new portfolio, which includes cutting any excess, bloat or portfolios that don't fit the larger MO of the big boy. So far, it's been par for the course with Microsoft and that's why gamers have been so against this acquisition. Tango Gameworks is the beginning. You think Microsoft wants to pay to keep small timers like Ninja Theory in business?

There is absolutely zero evidence to suggest that Microsoft will improve any of these studios, but plenty to suggest that they will get rid of what they don't need and hold onto the IP. The real agenda of the acquisition was always to acquire The Elder Scrolls, Diablo, Fallout, Call of Duty, Candy Crush etc. that will create millions in passive revenue stream for Microsoft regardless of where the games release. Microsoft simply wants their cut.

Because of Games Pass Microsoft has no interest in investing in new IP which is risky and requires creative talent they can neither nurture nor manage. Game Pass has also not grown in the way Microsoft expected it to, even post acquisitions. Therefore the logical thing to do, without serious money makers to release, is to cut as much cost as possible.

Show all comments (33)
70°

RTX 50 series cooling tested up to 600W, but users want Nvidia to fix the adapter first

Nvidia is allegedly testing GPU coolers to handle up to 600W for the 50 series, reigniting discussion of melting 16-pin connectors.