The article is good, but I agree that the headline taken out of context is highly misleading.
In the context of the article it makes sense. But out of context it appears to be saying that all games should cost a lot less than $60, which really isn't the point.
In fact to justify a luxury price point you just have to give people something they really want. For example, right now lots of people are paying $150 to get into the beta for Elite: Dangerous, a game that I presume will be substantially cheaper in full release:
If $60 is insane then $150 is totally nutballs, yet that is what a nontrivial slice of people are paying, because this beta is giving them something they want that they can't get any other way.
(Note: In the alpha, people were paying $295!)