There are plenty of costs you can cite to justify the 30%, but servers and bandwidth are not lol.
We have seen this before. It wouldn’t- it just means someone else would have a larger margin. Prices are not changing.It is both. If the obnoxious store tax did not exist we would be paying less for games and apps. This is an interesting suit because the non digital versions of older games do get discounted and they only have a slim retail markup. Whatever, this is all Apple and Valve's fault.
Actually more expensive in most cases.Yet, the games on EPIC are the same price as everywhere else.
They rent the servers off Microsoft so there is no cost to that? And bandwidth usage that they use is free to? It all adds to costs.
remember when Sony used cheap security back in the day and the PSN got hacked and millions of bank details got hacked. You dont think security to stop that happening again costs money also?
this is the problem with people complaining they dont realise the costs behind the store fronts, am i saying its 30%? Coarse not but things start to add up once you look at it
They rent the servers off Microsoft so there is no cost to that? And bandwidth usage that they use is free to? It all adds to costs.
remember when Sony used cheap security back in the day and the PSN got hacked and millions of bank details got hacked. You dont think security to stop that happening again costs money also?
this is the problem with people complaining they dont realise the costs behind the store fronts, am i saying its 30%? Coarse not but things start to add up once you look at it
There would be some cost, but in a literal sense you have to figure that a 100GB download costs them what, half a penny? But, it's also true that there are paid workers keeping these stores online along with the costs of the utilities/hardware required to keep it all running smoothly.
So let me paint a picture, you only own a PS5 and you bought the digital edition. This is the case for a lot of people. Some people can only afford one gaming platform, some people could only afford or get a hold of the digital edition, next gen digital edition may be the only option. How does Sony not have the monopoly?
I know, I was backing you up .Your replying to the wrong person. I ain’t the one saying it costs virtually nothing to sell digital games
Nintendo is even worse with this. They both deserve to be sued tbh.nintendo right now with the switch tax
Relax guys I’m a switch owner so.
It is completely possible to sell digital software on a platform AND sell software at retailers too. You cannot buy PlayStation software on Xbox or PC. You shouldn't have to completely avoid a platform if you want to buy digital software from multiple locations. It is a monopoly if you only have a sole source for digital software.You don’t have to buy a PS5 in the first place. Buy an Xbox Series X or S or a PC
You have options, so I would argue it’s not a monopoly.
The main issue there was Apple removing apps that you could pay for outside of their store.Apple vs Epic went nowhere and somehow someone thinks they have a case on this matter, lol.
There's nothing stopping you.Nintendo is even worse with this. They both deserve to be sued tbh.
The local monopoly argument is stupid.The marginal cost of selling a game is effectively 0 since all the storefront does is assign a new license. Servers are bought once and bandwidth is purchased on long term contracts. Digital storefront costs are roughly fixed while the amount of products they can sell is infinite. 30% is only "standard" because each major digital storefront operates a local monopoly.
Physical retailers take roughly the same cut but they have significantly higher costs. Physical retailers also lack a mechanism to get customers to pay for the upkeep of the store in the way that console makers lock online play behind a paywall.
It is completely possible to sell digital software on a platform AND sell software at retailers too. You cannot buy PlayStation software on Xbox or PC. You shouldn't have to completely avoid a platform if you want to buy digital software from multiple locations. It is a monopoly if you only have a sole source for digital software.
That's ridiculous!You don’t have to buy a PS5 in the first place. Buy an Xbox Series X or S or a PC
You have options, so I would argue it’s not a monopoly.
You say that like suing is free?There's nothing stopping you.
It is completely possible to sell digital software on a platform AND sell software at retailers too. You cannot buy PlayStation software on Xbox or PC. You shouldn't have to completely avoid a platform if you want to buy digital software from multiple locations. It is a monopoly if you only have a sole source for digital software.
That's the thing, 30% is pretty standard. But also, what has reducing that % gotten us? The Epic game store takes a lot less than Steam, yet game prices are largely unaffected. When it comes down to it, that savings won't be passed down to the consumer. I think this suit is trying to insinuate that if it wasn't 30% that games would be cheaper... but clearly it doesn't.They should...its an exploitative fee in every single case. Didn't Xbox reduce theirs to 12%? Far more reasonable. That should be the standard.
You say that like suing is free?
That's ridiculous!
Maybe they like Sony's 1st party games, maybe that's the type of games they like. So shame on them for choosing the PlayStation if they don't want to be ripped off? And I also said they might only be able to afford a digital edition, how they going to afford a PC? Console and PC gaming are two very different price of entries.
Stop victim blaming. You are what's wrong with why it's like this.
That's ridiculous!
Maybe they like Sony's 1st party games, maybe that's the type of games they like. So shame on them for choosing the PlayStation if they don't want to be ripped off? And I also said they might only be able to afford a digital edition, how they going to afford a PC? Console and PC gaming are two very different price of entries.
Stop victim blaming. You are what's wrong with why it's like this.
There would be some cost, but in a literal sense you have to figure that a 100GB download costs them what, half a penny? But, it's also true that there are paid workers keeping these stores online along with the costs of the utilities/hardware required to keep it all running smoothly.
The actions of Sony is costing millions of people who can't afford it
I can assure you, as a customer of Microsoft's with a segment of our environment in Azure that is probably a fraction of the size of PSN in the US, Azure is not cheap. Even if Sony went with the absolute best cost-saving design for their cloud environment they'd still be looking at hefty operating expenses.
I couldn't even begin to tell you how much without seeing more info about PSN's overall design and how they leverage Azure, but just going by my org and seeing how much we are billed monthly, and considering how tiny we are compared to PSN in terms of how many customers we serve and data we move, it must be a major expense for Sony.
I can assure you, as a customer of Microsoft's with a segment of our environment in Azure that is probably a fraction of the size of PSN in the US, Azure is not cheap. Even if Sony went with the absolute best cost-saving design for their cloud environment they'd still be looking at hefty operating expenses.
I couldn't even begin to tell you how much without seeing more info about PSN's overall design and how they leverage Azure, but just going by my org and seeing how much we are billed monthly, and considering how tiny we are compared to PSN in terms of how many customers we serve and data we move, it must be a major expense for Sony.
Yes, a specific scenario that applies to a vast amount of people in the world. A majority of people as a console gamer usually only choose one console and a lot of people buy what they can afford, purchasing a digital edition PS5 is locking you into a monopoly price whether you like it or not. Sony could increase the price by another 50% tomorrow, and you are still ok to say well you have a choice? It's the principal that Sony don't need to be charging way above RRP (in this case an additional 30% commission) compared to physical games. Here in Australia, the average newly released third party digital game is between $109.95 & $124.95 AUD, but you can buy the physical version in many different stores for $79 - $89, sometimes $69. You don't see a problem with this?If you have to apply all these filters to get to a specific scenario in order to apply the words "monopoly" and "victim" then your entire narrative is a bit contrived.
You can buy the non-digital version though, so that's all moot.Yes, a specific scenario that applies to a vast amount of people in the world. A majority of people as a console gamer usually only choose one console and a lot of people buy what they can afford, purchasing a digital edition PS5 is locking you into a monopoly price whether you like it or not. Sony could increase the price by another 50% tomorrow, and you are still ok to say well you have a choice? It's the principal that Sony don't need to be charging way above RRP (in this case an additional 30% commission) compared to physical games. Here in Australia, the average newly released third party digital game is between $109.95 & $124.95 AUD, but you can buy the physical version in many different stores for $79 - $89, sometimes $69. You don't see a problem with this?
Sony have some of the most anti-consumer practices when it comes to sales/purchases compared to most companies but judging from your avatar you are probably blind to it.
Yeah. Generally speaking I don’t buy games at full price anymore. Sales or Gamepass Ultimate and PS+ Premium releases is how I handle it. It’ll truly suck to wait for the PS+ release of Ragnarök but I try to remind myself that it’ll probably be patched for half a year anyway like everything else.It probably won’t go anywhere, but fuck em. They promote themselves as being for the players but bleed them dry for cash at every opportunity.
Yes, a specific scenario that applies to a vast amount of people in the world. A majority of people as a console gamer usually only choose one console and a lot of people buy what they can afford, purchasing a digital edition PS5 is locking you into a monopoly price whether you like it or not. Sony could increase the price by another 50% tomorrow, and you are still ok to say well you have a choice? It's the principal that Sony don't need to be charging way above RRP (in this case an additional 30% commission) compared to physical games. Here in Australia, the average newly released third party digital game is between $109.95 & $124.95 AUD, but you can buy the physical version in many different stores for $79 - $89, sometimes $69. You don't see a problem with this?
Sony have some of the most anti-consumer practices when it comes to sales/purchases compared to most companies but judging from your avatar you are probably blind to it.