The latest buzz about Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2's price on the PC has got me thinking. This game represents two of the biggest complaints I hear reitterated in gaming communities this generation, that games are too expensive and that they are sick of being shoveled sequels every year that lack innovation.

Thinking back to my childhood and teenage years I remember playing the same few games over and over, year after year, without getting bored of them. These days there are very few single player games that I go back to a second time, let alone multiple times. Maybe the increase of narrative based game play and the ever increasing complexity of games is responsible for this, but I think if more time was spent on the development of games their replay value would increase.

Of the few single player games that I have replayed in recent years, almost all of them have been made by Valve. Half-Life, HL2, and it's episodes have seen dozens of combined replays from me. Metal Gear Solid is another series I have replayed again and again. So what really sets these games apart from others? Development time and a focus on quality rather than deadlines and multiple iterations seem to be the big difference here.

So my question for everyone is, if developers/publishers spent more time (and subsequently money) on game development, but it resulted in longer, more detailed, higher quality games, that could last you many years of enjoyment instead of 8 hour shots of adrenaline, would you pay a higher price at retail? I think I would. I could justify paying 80 dollars or so for a game if it was something I knew I would be playing again and again for many years. If more time was spent making games they wouldn't need to make a sequel every year either.

As of right now, games are rising in price, but shrinking in size and scope. I see this as a big contradiction. It's kind of nice having so many new games come out all the time, but I'd rather have fewer games that were of higher quality. When you can replay a game dozens of times, it doesn't matter as much if the sequel is 3-4 years away.

To really cement this strategy, something else needs to be returned to it's former glory. What I am speaking of is the demo. Game demos seem to be a lost art these days. An increased MSRP for higher quality games would HAVE to bring back these lengthy, high quality, demos.

Perhaps even a new type of sales model is in order. With digital distribution publishers could deliver chunks of games instead of the full package or nothing all. What I mean by this is that you could spend, say, 20 dollars and get the first 1/4th of a game. If you don't like it, you don't have to buy the rest, but if you do, you can buy the whole package.

This wouldn't be episodic, the whole game would be available from the get go for people who know they want it, but these pay for "demos" would allow people who are on the fence to find out if they really want it or not. It would also generate more sales numbers, people who wouldn't normally buy the entire game might be willing to pay 10-20 dollars for a chunk of it instead.

There has to be a trade off though, we can't simply expect all the rewards without making some sacrifice ourselves. If we, the consumers, can compromise with developers, it could result in a better gaming world for all.