$60 games = inevitable
- Thread starter koam
- Start date
Mr_Furious
Member
eventual price drop to $20 = inevitable
heavy liquid
Member
Fuck them. What's inevitable is that I'll buy even less games if this happens, and become even more of a cheap-ass gamer.
Naked Snake
Member
"Fuck them. What's inevitable is that I'll buy even less games if this happens, and become even more of a cheap-ass gamer."
That's exactly what I was thinking, it's sad but true.
That's exactly what I was thinking, it's sad but true.
Late Stage Marxist
Member
Mainstream movies generally cost $50,000,000-$100,000,000 to make these days, but even if you factor in both the movie ticket and the DVD, it only ends up costing the customer $30. The game industry is just being greedy.
I'm fine with $60 AAA games. But that means companies have to stop flooding the market with crap. Studios that miscalculate are going to go bankrupt trying to sell crap games for that much.
This price point will also speed up piracy and drive sales of DVD and bluray writers and HDLoader clones.
This price point will also speed up piracy and drive sales of DVD and bluray writers and HDLoader clones.
Wyzdom said:
I prefer both, actually. I like the recent habit of making action-adventure games with some RPG elements last about 20-25 hours on first playthrough. Some of my favorite games of the past year fall into this category, like MGS3, RE4, and Shadow of Rome.
They're just long enough so you can enjoy them without getting bored and since replays allow you to skip cutscenes and whatnot, another quick play through can be had in a few hours.
Longer doesn't necessarily mean better.
And even a AAA game might get boring after a while. After the uniqueness has worn off, the game might just get tedious. It's about being fresh and new and engaging over a decent amount of time. Pikmin 2 is a great game for me, but I am having trouble finishing it because it's lost that sparkle it had after the first 20 hours.
More is more, but it doesn't mean it's better that way. If the market shifts like this, I am going to go into cheap gamer mode and simply buy less games or wait till the price drops on them.
What the market needs is more penetration is all. If they can sell more units, still at 50 bucks a pop with the same profit percentages per unit, they make more money.
Fucking greedy bastards.
And even a AAA game might get boring after a while. After the uniqueness has worn off, the game might just get tedious. It's about being fresh and new and engaging over a decent amount of time. Pikmin 2 is a great game for me, but I am having trouble finishing it because it's lost that sparkle it had after the first 20 hours.
More is more, but it doesn't mean it's better that way. If the market shifts like this, I am going to go into cheap gamer mode and simply buy less games or wait till the price drops on them.
What the market needs is more penetration is all. If they can sell more units, still at 50 bucks a pop with the same profit percentages per unit, they make more money.
Fucking greedy bastards.
dynamitejim
Member
Eh, figures. The DS and PSP have upped the prices in the portable market for hardware and software and I don't see many people complaining. Don't see why the same wouldn't apply to the consoles.
I've been preaching about the dangers of a price increase for awhile. Developers and publishers might be banking on the increase next generation, but there's going to be a rude awakening for many if this is the route that most will take. Not even a handful of publishers will be able to get away with an increase now.
How many of us are actually paying full MSRP these days? Companies need to look at that before they shoot themselves in the face with greed.
How many of us are actually paying full MSRP these days? Companies need to look at that before they shoot themselves in the face with greed.
The Faceless Master
Member
it's a good thing that i'm not one of those people that care if my game has a greatest hits/player's choice/platinum hits banner on it 
I think the $49.99 price point for standard game is pretty much set in stone with consumers for the time being. Publishers go over fifty bucks at their own peril, it's like the $299 ceiling for a console. Anything over that risks sacrificing significant sales.
Exceptions are "special editions", which have been proven to move at $55 or $60, and games that include extra accessories like SOCOM, etc. But some analysts and publishers are taking the success of limited editions to mean that the market is ready for a $10 push on game prices across the board.
I don't think that's the case. For a special edition to exist, there has be be a regular copy of the game to be differentiated from. What makes an SE attractive is a perceived extra value and content beyond a more pedestrian copy of the game. Otherwise there's nothing to disguise the naked price hike that it is. And consumers will take notice.
As far as jacking up prices on "must have" games like Madden and GTA, I also think it's a bad move. Sure, it's extra revenue, but at the cost of bad will from the fans.
Theoretical Scenario:
For football, last year you had ESPN 2K5 at $20 and Madden at $50. Let's say this fall there's only Madden 2K6, and it's selling for $60. Even Joe Sixpack is going to scratch his head and say, "Sixty dollars? Ten more than any other game? Well, where's that there ESPN game for $20?" The game clerk is likely going to explain that EA bought themselves out of competition and there's no more ESPN. It's not going to take a genius to put two and two together and realize EA is shaking him down for an extra $10 or $40 more than he paid for the same game last year.
Now he might still walk out of the store with that game, but he's also going to walk out with a bad impression of EA that will influence future purchases of their games.
Exceptions are "special editions", which have been proven to move at $55 or $60, and games that include extra accessories like SOCOM, etc. But some analysts and publishers are taking the success of limited editions to mean that the market is ready for a $10 push on game prices across the board.
I don't think that's the case. For a special edition to exist, there has be be a regular copy of the game to be differentiated from. What makes an SE attractive is a perceived extra value and content beyond a more pedestrian copy of the game. Otherwise there's nothing to disguise the naked price hike that it is. And consumers will take notice.
As far as jacking up prices on "must have" games like Madden and GTA, I also think it's a bad move. Sure, it's extra revenue, but at the cost of bad will from the fans.
Theoretical Scenario:
For football, last year you had ESPN 2K5 at $20 and Madden at $50. Let's say this fall there's only Madden 2K6, and it's selling for $60. Even Joe Sixpack is going to scratch his head and say, "Sixty dollars? Ten more than any other game? Well, where's that there ESPN game for $20?" The game clerk is likely going to explain that EA bought themselves out of competition and there's no more ESPN. It's not going to take a genius to put two and two together and realize EA is shaking him down for an extra $10 or $40 more than he paid for the same game last year.
Now he might still walk out of the store with that game, but he's also going to walk out with a bad impression of EA that will influence future purchases of their games.
Wow.
"Hey, 95% of games are selling below expectations... Let's make them more expensive!"
I can see doing this on guaranteed-to-sell titles, like your Halos, Maddens, and Final Fantasies. But if B-list games are all tanking and seeing price drops in a few months now at $40-50 (as they are, more than ever), raising the price is not going to trigger some nutty reverse-psychology shift to get people buying. Maybe for launch titles, as those sell regardless, but once the libraries expand, this shit will certainly not stick.
I love how they reference the movie industry, yet they don't even look at how it thrives. 20m dollars is nothing in the movie industry, that can be made back easy... and why? Because movies are affordable, people that want to see a movie can justify the cost, many times even if they're only halfway interested in the concept. Games, while they dont have as much of a market, still have a much bigger one than what they're reaching. There are mow many millions of PS2 owners? And yet a game doesn't even have to break a million units to be considered a huge success. Most games don't even get near half a million in their entire life on the shelf. This isn't the signal of a price point that is working for most games, and a market whose customers feel that the products are reasonably priced.
"Hey, 95% of games are selling below expectations... Let's make them more expensive!"
I can see doing this on guaranteed-to-sell titles, like your Halos, Maddens, and Final Fantasies. But if B-list games are all tanking and seeing price drops in a few months now at $40-50 (as they are, more than ever), raising the price is not going to trigger some nutty reverse-psychology shift to get people buying. Maybe for launch titles, as those sell regardless, but once the libraries expand, this shit will certainly not stick.
I love how they reference the movie industry, yet they don't even look at how it thrives. 20m dollars is nothing in the movie industry, that can be made back easy... and why? Because movies are affordable, people that want to see a movie can justify the cost, many times even if they're only halfway interested in the concept. Games, while they dont have as much of a market, still have a much bigger one than what they're reaching. There are mow many millions of PS2 owners? And yet a game doesn't even have to break a million units to be considered a huge success. Most games don't even get near half a million in their entire life on the shelf. This isn't the signal of a price point that is working for most games, and a market whose customers feel that the products are reasonably priced.
dynamitejim said:
There are some of us that have complained. I'm one of those critics. I won't pay more than 30 dollars on a handheld game. That's works in Nintendo's favor sense their price structure resembles the GBA. Third parties, on the other hand, aren't going to get my cash if they continue on that path. I'm not sure where Sony's PSP prices are going to be, but I hope they follow Nintendo on the price range as well.
Buffy4ever
Banned
I will wait for the prices to drop to $20, or till a game hits the greatest hits. To me this game prices haven't changed in over 10 years, so we need to raise the price is BS. Some Snes and Genesis games did cost $60 to $70. When the PS1 first started I remember alot of games costing $60. It was a relief when you could finally get some games for $4o in the late PS1 era. I cna see more people not buying game, especially the casuals. This stunt may take down the game industry.
Belfast said:
I hear you of course. I meant that it's better to be triple A with 15 hours instead of so-so 25 hours game.
Everybody thinks they are making good games when they make it and truth is that most games aren't good. If they put more efforts into longer because of the prices getting higher, it's gonna push the "filler content". Games are bad enough dude, no incitative to give the risk of making worse games please.
And yeah the perfect lenght for a good game is around 20-25.
Naked Snake
Member
trippingmartian said:
But many more people watch/buy movies than play/buy video games, that's why games have always been more expensive than movies so they can break even.
When/If video games become as "mainstream" as movies, only then will the the two mediums cost the same to the end consumer (assuming similar budgets for both).
Pedigree Chum
Banned
Fuck that shit, I'll be buying fewr games if that's the case. Speak with your wallets people, I'm going to be more of a cheapass gamer than I am currently if this keeps up.
Mr_Furious
Member
No it won't. If companies start seeing a huge slump in sales due to the imposed price hikes, I'm sure price drops will likely occur. Certain high profile games may command higher prices and companies will get away with that but there will always be multiple price tiers to cater to different demographics.sonic4ever said:
Aruarian Reflection
Chauffeur de la gdlk
Teddman said:
I think you're giving Joe Sixpack WAAAY too much credit.
Uncle Dukey
Member
$60 is usually too much for me. I admit that I bought the Half-Life 2 silver package, so maybe big games like Blizzard's for example can get away with it due to the fanbase... but for most games, I would wait for price drops or just rent..
It's a good thing there are so many good games from this gen that I still haven't touched. It's another good thing that they'll be like ten dollars by the time new consoles are out.
I'll get a few must-haves and then stick with games from the current consoles until new stuff hits $20. Which I hope will be soon because nobody wants to pay 60-75 dollars (they mentioned a 50% raise in there). Then again maybe everyone will do this and the 2-3 must haves per console will stay above 50 for a year and a half while everything else bombs and hits the bargain bin the week after release.
I think a gaming crash might be good. We could all find new hobbies but keep posting on the GAF. MAF can tell us how he traded in his sailboat in a bottle collection for model trains and troll the Warhammer painters. Someone else can post sales numbers for new cross-stitching patters which we can reply to with laughing smilies and pictures of bombs and things that sound like bomb. Good times.
I'll get a few must-haves and then stick with games from the current consoles until new stuff hits $20. Which I hope will be soon because nobody wants to pay 60-75 dollars (they mentioned a 50% raise in there). Then again maybe everyone will do this and the 2-3 must haves per console will stay above 50 for a year and a half while everything else bombs and hits the bargain bin the week after release.
I think a gaming crash might be good. We could all find new hobbies but keep posting on the GAF. MAF can tell us how he traded in his sailboat in a bottle collection for model trains and troll the Warhammer painters. Someone else can post sales numbers for new cross-stitching patters which we can reply to with laughing smilies and pictures of bombs and things that sound like bomb. Good times.
Musashi Wins!
FLAWLESS VICTOLY!
I'm thinking of putting more of my money where my ideals are....and investing more gaming time and income into independent developers. That would probably mean spending more of my gaming time on the PC and not grabbing every hot sequel/franchise game that comes out but...I don't know. It's important to me that those avenues exist in music and film, etc. but the options are very different in gaming. I'd like to think that eventually there could be avenues of niche development that still maintained a certain quality, but that can't happen unless there is a real alternative market.
that's pretty f@#$@#$ awesome btw.
that's pretty f@#$@#$ awesome btw.
masud said:
Yes, we'll have another crash like we did when Super Nintendo and Genesis games went for $59.99-$69.99, some for even $79.99-$99.99.
And we'll have another crash like when Playstation and Saturn games initially sold for $54.99-$59.99 each. And Nintendo 64 games were selling for $59.99-$69.99.
Yes, yet ANOTHER crash is comi-- oh, wait.
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
This industry is greedy as all hell because they know they have an "addictive" product. Videogames are nowhere near the addictive factor of movies, to judge from the attitudes of the average gamer vs average movie-goer.
The problem for big game publishers is that game rental and used software sales continue to rise from all accounts. Hiking prices further and further risks driving more people into the arms of rental and used games. Sure, hardcore (fanatics) will pay anything. Back in the 16-bit days of $70 cartridges, the gaming demographic was much more confined to kids (prime gaming addiction targets) and young adult hardcore. They'd pay anything for their games/bug parents until they bought it, no matter the cost.
But the gaming industry has spent so much time and trouble to expand and lure in the casual gaming masses. J. Allard gets up and makes a keynote where his vision of the future is EVERYBODY playing videogames.
The problem is that those casual masses are not the hardcore. They're not the addicts. Hike prices on them and we may find out they just go back to buying DVDs.
The problem for big game publishers is that game rental and used software sales continue to rise from all accounts. Hiking prices further and further risks driving more people into the arms of rental and used games. Sure, hardcore (fanatics) will pay anything. Back in the 16-bit days of $70 cartridges, the gaming demographic was much more confined to kids (prime gaming addiction targets) and young adult hardcore. They'd pay anything for their games/bug parents until they bought it, no matter the cost.
But the gaming industry has spent so much time and trouble to expand and lure in the casual gaming masses. J. Allard gets up and makes a keynote where his vision of the future is EVERYBODY playing videogames.
The problem is that those casual masses are not the hardcore. They're not the addicts. Hike prices on them and we may find out they just go back to buying DVDs.
Aizu_Itsuko
Member
Just a reminder to everyone:megateto said:
The average cost for a game in Europe is $75-80.
Games are released months after the US release, which (for example) means that we got to play titles like FFX 1 year after the japanese release. Some games like Xenogears, Parasite Eve, and many others were never released. Period.
Black borders, squashed images, less fps (60>50, 30>25, ghosting), 17.5% slower, jumpy framerates, features removed (GT4 doesn't support progressive scan here, 1080i am cry; Resident Evil Outbreak is NOT online, yay), games in foreign languages (think about GAF reactions if ONE big title were released in the US in Japanese), etc.
Systems cost 50% more.
Guess what? Sales are still high. In fact, Europe is still growing as a market and could become the biggest market in the future.
If game prices are set at $60 in the US next gen, people will complain (a lot), but they will still buy the games anyway. At best it could hurt the small devs, combined with the higher budget needed to produce next gen content, but the likes of EA will laugh at these comments all the way to the bank.
And, as much as I dislike it, we can't reasonably expect costs to stay the same forever. It makes no sense.
100Bullets
Member
Like in any form of entertainment rising costs in development and the like are usually passed down to the consumer. Is that a bad thing? Well, yes and no. Yes because no one wants to spend more money then they have to on something and no because hopefully with such an increase in production costs this will translate into a much better done product. We should wait and see an actual price increase before saying that we are going to stop buying videogames because some titles still ship at really low prices like Katamari Damacy and NARC.
If this ever cause a crisis it could be benefiting the industry.
It it's what it takes for the big publishers to die and to finally distribute money more equally within the industry it could be nice.
Games could refocus a little more where they were before and we could see a rise of new games and niche markets. Small devellopers could rise making GOOD games instead of "the lastest graphic effect that kills all".
Maybe this industry needs to break down to return in full force and with better products.
It it's what it takes for the big publishers to die and to finally distribute money more equally within the industry it could be nice.
Games could refocus a little more where they were before and we could see a rise of new games and niche markets. Small devellopers could rise making GOOD games instead of "the lastest graphic effect that kills all".
Maybe this industry needs to break down to return in full force and with better products.