Personally, I disagree. I think games should be priced for however much developers/publishers think games deserve to be, not based on what content can maximize a person's fulfillment of that purchase. For example, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 released in 2011 and its campaign can be completed in 6 hours with endless hours of multiplayer, special ops, etc. However, Skyrim boasts over 200 hours of content without multiplayer. Does Skyrim not deserve to sell for $60? Certainly sold plenty of copies at that price.
Another point is, what if someone purchases a game but only for the single-player and doesn't care about multiplayer? Should they be given a $20 discount since they're only interested in the single-player?
Basically, what I'm saying is I think it's good too if games lower their prices because they'll attract more sales but I don't think any particular game deserves to cost more than another just because it has more content/multiplayer (unless it's on PSN/XBLA).
Sorry I should've elaborated. I'm sure you know there are games that are 10-20 hours long, and then there are games 30+ hours long (there are few games that are inbetween that time length). Games that are 10-20 hrs long should be worth 40, and those others should be worth full 60. There are also few single players games that you mentioned that are more than 100+ hours in length (the bethesda games are one, and so are some atlus games).
Also I respectfully disagree with that logic - you should pay what you get. If all games (like the 12 hour uncharted games, with a mulitiplayer that nobody even plays) continues getting the 60 dollar treatment, it just looks bad. I see plenty of "people like me" that wait for a price drop or wait till a new game gets on craigslist before they buy the game. It's just how it is. And I'm by no means a cheap person, either, and do I love games (and game development) to death, and I do wish more games cost different prices for their quality and quantity. Now, here's some logic to think about: why do some breads (or other food products) of different quality and quantity cost more than others? Why do some clothes cost more than others? Why do some computer mice cost more than others? Now, why do ALL games (great quality and bad quality alike) cost the same? Think about it.
The price of a game should not depend on how many hours of playtime one receives. It should be judge into how much effort was put into the product. Take the games Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time vs Dragon Ball Z Budokai Tenkaichi 2. Tenkaichi 2 has a story mode that is 40 plus hours long while the Sands of Time is only clocks in around 10 to 12 hours. Prince of Persia is the better game because of care tha put into making the game. Tenkaichi is repetitive and gets old quickly. A more current example would be Uncharted vs. Dynasty Warriors. Are you really suggesting that it is ok for Dynasty Warriors to cost $60, but unfair for Uncharted to cost the same amount? Dynasty Warriors is as repetitive as can be. Yes, it takes hundreds of hours to finish the game a 100%, but the gameplay is extremely shallow. Uncharted has high quality production values and enough incentive to play the game multiple times. The enemies do not just stand there and do nothing as you keep hitting them again and again. Uncharted is obviously a better game despite not being as long as Dynasty Warriors. Experience is greater than how the length of a title. If length is the main factor a person chooses to purchase a one title over another, then he or she does not value gameplay all that much.
Uncharted may not be a good example on your part, actually, b/c I personally think uncharted is one of the most shallow games ever created. I (and I think a lot of my friends) will agree to WATCH a let's play of uncharted 3, rather than play it. THAT's how shallow that game is.
You do have a point though - it really depends, like i SAID, on quanity AND quality. I don't think you read that part. I also love it how some people on the forums look foward to insulting another (ie, implying I don't "value" gameplay) if they don't agree with their opinions. Please just stop that, the backlash is not needed.
It really depends on quantity and quality, and so far no one has argued why games ALL cost the same. All games should cost differently - this is seen in other products like electronics (ie, cameras, computers) and clothing (ie, peacoats vs hoodies). What's the difference? That the price is "sticky" (economics term)? It's absurd, and developers can easily lower down their price if they wanted distributors to do so. Anyway, I'm not checking back on this forum. This is something for you gaming "kiddies" to think about.