psycho_snake
I went to WAGs boutique and all I got was a sniff
$70 sounds insane. Sony or any other dev would not be arrogant enough to price the games that high.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
OPM: Big leap in PS3 coverage for April issue
- Thread starter MassiveAttack
- Start date
ErasureAcer
Banned
Looks like I'll be renting games more often if the prices are going up $20.
psycho_snake
I went to WAGs boutique and all I got was a sniff
Nothing is confirmed, so there really is not much to worry about. Sony have never really priced games higher than their competitors, so im expecting PS3 games to be similar to Xbox360 game prices. Im expecting the games to be around $50 - $60
D
Deleted member 1235
Unconfirmed Member
if it's 70 USD for a game, even thinking of Euro or Aus/NZ game costs makes me feel a wee bit sick.
psycho_snake
I went to WAGs boutique and all I got was a sniff
I wasnt old enough to remember what effect it had on nintendo, but I do know that they were the dominanty force and their main competitors were sega, who are not as strong or threatening as MS or Nintendo. Even though Sony have a huge amount of marketshare, they will lose that to their rivals if their prices are too high. If Sony don't satisfy the customers, then the customers will opt to buy a more affordable system.RaijinFY said:
If Sony are THAT confident in their PS3 to jack up the machine's price and artificially inflate the prices of games and they think it will work, they are wrong.
They are going to get the same amount of money maybe but a smaller userbase that's for sure. After that everybody will ask "why isn't this market growing?".
Some business man have really no idea where this industry is going (hint: it resembles something in your bathroom)
They are going to get the same amount of money maybe but a smaller userbase that's for sure. After that everybody will ask "why isn't this market growing?".
Some business man have really no idea where this industry is going (hint: it resembles something in your bathroom)
open_mouth_
insert_foot_
System Price: $399
Games: $50-$60
I can't imagine prices being any higher. Sony wouldn't allow it.
Games: $50-$60
I can't imagine prices being any higher. Sony wouldn't allow it.
Musashi Wins!
FLAWLESS VICTOLY!
Mrbob said:
That's personally what I believe. I think there will be a feature cut or two to accomadate that, and GAF will alternately pretend it doesn't matter or gnash their teeth without purpose.
At least I hope so. Otherwise I'm just going to keep buying handheld games more.
Kabuki Quantum Lover
Member
open_mouth_ said:
Yeah, that's my max comfort zone right there. It's not like I wouldn't pay $70 USD for a good game, but it certainly would be buying less of them if that were the case. That being said, I'm sure the game price scale will be slightly elevated, but not extremely elevated. There's no fucking way I'd pay $70 for a multi-platform game, but if a Team ICO game came out at that price (and say with a shitload of extras on the disc), then $70 isn't the worst thing.
I really do hope the cost is contained. I want a PS3, but I don't want to have to resort to selling stuff in order to raise funds.
Nightbringer
Don´t hit me for my bad english plase
Can you say me the equivalent of a 39.800 ¥ system without Japanase taxes and with US taxes included.
Sony ever has launched their consoles in Japan for 39.800 ¥
Sony ever has launched their consoles in Japan for 39.800 ¥
DenogginizerOS
BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
I agree with those that say this is hype to create a sense of relief when the system and game prices are announced at $399.99 and $59.99, respectively. I will buy a PS3 and games for those prices. If higher, Sony is stupid (and we know that is not true).
I just hope they get all the important facts out as quickly as possible... Release date, pricing, final controller etc. Though I suppose that they'll keep most/all of those for E3 (+ their own reveal show).
Also, please OPM for the love of God, don't waste everyone's time with bs just because it's "April".
...and since this turned into a pricing prediction post, I say $450.
Also, please OPM for the love of God, don't waste everyone's time with bs just because it's "April".
...and since this turned into a pricing prediction post, I say $450.
SolidSnakex said:
Yeah, it's always seemed to me, at least in videogames, Sony understood consumer-price relation better than anyone else. They might see an opportunity or need to raise the "standard" console price up to $399, but I don't think there's any way they can justify a $69.99 MSRP for games. I mean, even on PSP, they started charging $49.99 for most games standard. Most publishers quickly realized that this was not "the magic pricepoint", and lowered the starting prices of their games to $39.99. A bit high still, but far more reasonable. I think that's even a trend being seen on Microsoft's Xbox 360. I've seen a couple of 3rd party games lately with $49.99 pricepoints. I have a hard time justifying spending $50 on most of the games out there right now, so watching them jack up prices to $60 and potentially $70 is not something I'm willing to accept.
Sony or Microsoft really have NOTHING to do with these high prices. 1st Party games will most likely always be reasonable.
It's EA/Activision/Most other 3rd Parties charging an extra $10 - $20 for a widescreen mode and some higher resolution textures. Like always, I have no doubt that the price will settle down after a couple of years, but early adopters am always screwed.
It's EA/Activision/Most other 3rd Parties charging an extra $10 - $20 for a widescreen mode and some higher resolution textures. Like always, I have no doubt that the price will settle down after a couple of years, but early adopters am always screwed.
Dr. Kitty Muffins
Member
$70 dollar games? I may have to find a new hobby......seriously. I'm getting priced right out of the market, here. I was already expecting to be forced to pick up one of these twoards the mid to end of the gen simply becuase of the mega price point they started with at launch. Now I won't be able to afford the games even when they have come down in price a bit. This sucks.
I'm gonna end up like those poor trailer trash people who don't buy a video game system until it is a decade old and all the games can only be found at old dirty pawn shops.
I'm gonna end up like those poor trailer trash people who don't buy a video game system until it is a decade old and all the games can only be found at old dirty pawn shops.
TheJollyCorner
Member
f_elz said:Seems Massive Attack was wrong? Engadget says that PS3 is a no show at the Taipai Game Show. Uh Oh. I hope the games are not $70.
a lot of media sources were saying PS3 would be at Taipai. MassiveAttack has been pimping this unknown 'Feb. Playstation Conference/Event/Whatever'- so he shouldn't take any heat for this one.
Yep, time is running short for Massive, but he was never pimping the Taipei show as THE show.TheJollyCorner said:a lot of media sources were saying PS3 would be at Taipai. MassiveAttack has been pimping this unknown 'Feb. Playstation Conference/Event/Whatever'- so he shouldn't take any heat for this one.
Fishie flop oog
Banned
Agent Icebeezy said:
Nightrain IS a Nintendo fan
100Bullets
Member
This PS3 stuff is just out of hand. Higher priced games, a high priced system, and Lord knows what else. The PS3 is turning into a life time commitment.
Amir0x said:
But how is that going to work at $399 when stand-alone players cost, what, $800-1000? Especially since they say that the Cell + RSX combo will be better at the decoding than what the standalone players will offer.
Kutaragi saying that people will have to get another job is most likely an indicator that it is going to be, at the worst cast, double the PS2 launch price. So $499 doesn't look impossible...
I hope not, though.
Spike said:
The fact that Cell and RSX do the work is actually a good thing for price, not the other way around. That's precisely how some would argue they'd be able to get it in at $399.99.
Nevertheless, at this point it's silly to eliminate the possibility of a $449.99 or $499.99 PS3. Indications are all over the place, and I'm not very happy with the way OPMs comments are leaning.
MassiveAttack
Banned
kaching said:
Frankly, the implied inquisition and banishment to a closet-sized room containing nothing but backissues of GamePro and the editorial staff of ***** has me shaking with unmitigating dread. Whatever shall I do?
Perhaps I'll rely on trusted friends who know what they're talking about and damn the consequences. Perhaps, just perhaps, things might change and tear a terrible hole in the fabric of the universe, rendering me as wrong as MS's launch strategy and walking the plank with Yoshi Maruyama and a crate of unsold 360s tied to each foot. Who knows?
Until then, I'll stand by what I've said... and yea, damn the consequences.
Sic transit gloria gentlemen.
Spike said:
Well, standalone players generally cost more than PC hardware that's capable of doing the same thing. I don't claim to be an expert on electronics, but aren't the Blu-Ray drives shipping for PC's going to be cheaper than the standalone players? On a standalone player, whoever is manufacturing it has to ensure that all the necessary "other" hardware (component output, HDMI, etc) are included as well. For the PC, you've (probably) already got a graphics card that can handle the output of video that comes from DVD or Blu-Ray, so they aren't concerned with "other" hardware that isn't the Blu-Ray drive. For PlayStation 3, it seems like they're just sticking a Blu-Ray drive in the console, and emulating what works on the PC rather than treating it as a "standalone" Blu-Ray player.
MassiveAttack said:
seriously, MassiveAttack... you state everything with 'finality', as if the event was actually happening (even if you allowed leeway on the announcement of it). Your "friends" are either bullshitting you, or well...you know. The backseat modding by some in this thread has got to stop... but personally, I think you should take a break if nothing goes down.
dynamitejim
Member
Why would games cost $70 on PS3 and not on Xbox 360 though?
Massive, I didn't say anything about whether you should care about GAF backlash, just that it's obviously going to happen if this event/major announcement doesn't occur as you've been hinting for weeks.
To some extent its all in good fun, but there's something to be said for maybe having held your tongue if you really aren't privy to solid details. You seem to like to flaunt your insider connections but you've been wrong before and there's only so much tolerance for being led around blindly in anticipation of something that doesn't happen.
If you want to take the stance that you just don't care about GAF's reaction, well, that's a shame, because some of us were willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and by expressing apathy towards even our reactions, you're basically saying you've been doing this simply to take the piss all along.
To some extent its all in good fun, but there's something to be said for maybe having held your tongue if you really aren't privy to solid details. You seem to like to flaunt your insider connections but you've been wrong before and there's only so much tolerance for being led around blindly in anticipation of something that doesn't happen.
If you want to take the stance that you just don't care about GAF's reaction, well, that's a shame, because some of us were willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and by expressing apathy towards even our reactions, you're basically saying you've been doing this simply to take the piss all along.
FortNinety
Member
xexex said:
These figures are constantly being brought up, and the thing is, those were exception and not the rule (for example, VR was so expensice due to a the SVP chip). As for SNES, yes it did get pricey, but near the end of the system's life cycle. So $70 right out of the gate is all the more distressing. But as one mentioned, inflation is something to consider, like it or not.
MassiveAttack
Banned
kaching said:
That's not it at all. I greatly respect the knowledge and insight of many of GAF's members and greatly enjoy reading what you have to post. I'm simply saying that things can always change at the last minute and if that is the case, I will gladly take the heat, walk the plank, etc. I remain confident in my prediction and will bear the consequences should it not come true. Thanks kaching.
Kabuki Quantum Lover
Member
MassiveAttack said:
Luckily for you, and everyone else, PS3 info will pour in very soon. Whether or not it's in February is up to Sony, but it will come.
$349 price-point, please...
sonycowboy
Member
Why is the $70 / game discussion still going on, when it's clear that that particular piece of data was a reader question, not a comment from OPM?
SolidSnakex
Member
sonycowboy said:
No one really knows who its from. In last months "From Me to You" it was just a section where Tom talked about stuff, without any quesitons from anyone.
TheJollyCorner
Member
Scotch said:
exactly. One of the US business publications (can't remember the exact one) last year predicted this very scenario. Either it comes out expensive like Sony says and there will be no reason for bitching, since the warning of it's high price has been out there since the beginning OR it's all a clever strategy to fill people's minds with the idea that it will be expensive, and in the end a $400 system ends up looking like it's a "much cheaper than expected! GREAT deal!"
My Arms Your Hearse
Banned
PSP 500 DOLLARS GUARANTEED!!!!!!
Larry Bird
Member
Mrbob said:
GAF is totally falling for this, too.Scotch said:
It reminds me of the ol' "tard pack". Everyone thought MS was insane for releasing it and that anyone who bought it was retarded. Meanwhile, everyone was feeling like they made the "smart purchase" and got the "better deal" because they purchased the Premium pack. Had they released the Premium pack alone I think there would have been considerably more bitching about the price, and more people hesitant to buy one.I actually hope Microsoft GAINS marketshare this generation. Nintendo too. Competition is good. If Sony was the only kid on the block, I could see them charging underpowered hardware (for the times) at $500. But the fact that they have to stay competitive keeps them from pulling some move that screws the consumers. That's why I wasn't too fond of that "We don't see Microsoft as competitors. We may work with them down the line," comment.
There is no way that even third party developers would charge $70 for a regular edition of their games. Imagine EA charging $60 for Madden on 360 and $70 for Madden on PS3. The PS3 version would be required to look substantially better and have many more features than the Xbox 360 version at that price. Would EA really make the extra effort to do that?
There is no way that even third party developers would charge $70 for a regular edition of their games. Imagine EA charging $60 for Madden on 360 and $70 for Madden on PS3. The PS3 version would be required to look substantially better and have many more features than the Xbox 360 version at that price. Would EA really make the extra effort to do that?