So which games have the best cost-to-fun ratio?

By Ethan Sprouse | Manor Ink

Video games: the go-to for passing the time at home when you have nothing else to do. Love them or hate them, they are here to stay. But with inflation and game systems improving, the cost has risen a lot. It seems like everywhere you look, all you see is $70 price tags. When did this happen? Is there any escape?

A “triple A” game is a game produced by a large game company that typically comes with the stereotype of being overpriced and lacking any real “meat.” An “indie game” is a game produced by a small, independent team that evokes the opposite stereotype. But many people don’t like indie games. Why? For one, their play times tend to be fairly short, and most people aren’t as familiar with producers like Team Cherry as they are with big companies like EA Games.

But what I am here to talk about is the price you pay for a game per hour of play. Of course, I am only one person, and my opinion may not represent the views of all players. But I’ve taken what appears to be the general consensus for the time people enjoy a particular game, and divided the game’s cost by the hours of play to come up with a valuation.

The results? The AAA games tend to be very expensive while not being playable for more than a couple days before becoming repetitive. On average, you spend $1.20 per hour of play, with “Arkham Knight” being a strong outlier. Conversely, indie games were staggeringly cheaper for similar if not longer playing times where the game was fun to play. With an average cost of only 12 cents per hour, indie games were shockingly cheaper.

I acknowledge that this “experiment” is relatively flawed, as I only had a pool of five games per producer category, and also I only compared the cost to my personal enjoyment of the game. But I believe this still gives a good baseline for further researching comparison between AAA games and indie games. It’s likely, though, that your best investment as a gamer is an indie product.