Epic: $1 apps are "killing us"

By Fred Dutton Published 19 April, 2011

Games industry is "scary" right now.

Gears of War publisher Epic has singled out the rise of the $1 smartphone app as one of the biggest threats it's currently facing.

President Mike Capps told IndustryGamers that it was getting increasingly difficult to convince customers to shell out $60 for a game.

"If there's anything that's killing us it's dollar apps. How do you sell someone a $60 game that's really worth it... They're used to 99 cents."

Epic isn't the first outfit to have a pop at the App Store business model. Earlier this year, Nintendo's US boss Reggie Fils-Aime accused cheap smartphone titles of unrealistically raising gamers' expectations of what software should cost.

Elsewhere in the interview, Capps insisted that the games industry had never been in a more turbulent state than it is now, with so many platforms and new technologies vying for consumers' attention.

"We have not been this uncertain about what's coming next in the games industry since Epic's been around for 20 years," he claimed.

"We're at such an inflection point. Will there be physical distribution in 10 years or even five? Will anyone care about the next console generation? What's going on in PC? Can you make money on PC if it's not a connected game? What's going on in mobile?

"It used to be, 'Well, of course PlayStation 3 will be successful because PS2 was amazingly successful.' But can you say for sure that you know everyone's going to jump to the next generation? I sure hope so – I'm going to try to make some great tech that will make everyone want to. But it's scary."

Next up for Epic following the release of Bulletstorm earlier this year is Gears of War 3, which is due on Xbox 360 in September.

Picture of Fred.

About Fred Dutton

Fred Dutton is Eurogamer's US news editor, based in Washington DC.

Read more articles from Fred by visiting the Fred Dutton archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (82) Latest comment 10 months ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • enfilade #1 10 months ago

    But what quality of software are consumers used to expecting for $1? I really hope that the progress we're finally starting to see in video games' narrative structures, presentation, gameplay and graphic detail isn't going to be undermined by a glut of physics-based thumb-twiddling pap.

    There are some excellent games available on these devices, and some fun times to be had, but I like my console games, dammit. Don't take them away from me :(

  • Machetazo #2 10 months ago

    "it was getting increasingly difficult to convince customers to shell out $60 for a game. "

    The leader of the PC arms race is here now, complaining at the rise of a market that has been driven, and continues to be fed by demand left uncatered to. Not only do I think that the enthusiast/pocket money games market is a good thing, but I think that's true on several levels. Maybe part of Epic's resentment of app-gaming's ascension, is that you don't need to purchase one of their dev kits to set about making the games.

    I think it's likely, that app-gaming succeeds in reaching out to the broadest base, because there are no real barriers to entry, and no real bonds or restrictions once you do get started - that machine you might use to check schedule, interact online, chat, or whatever it may be, can also provide you a few handy rounds of connect-3, when you're between tasks. Then, who's to say what might catch the beholder's eye besides, once exposed to an app store...
    Edited by 1 at 19/04/11 @ 23:35

  • deadduckz #3 10 months ago

    "it was getting increasingly difficult to convince customers to shell out $60 for a game. "

    If you need to convince people your charging too much and you game is just spin

  • dean0null #4 10 months ago

    Hold on loosely, but don't let go...

  • paulf #5 10 months ago

    well of course it's difficult when you release the same generic game every couple of years. However I also think its a bit of an excuse. No reason why 1$ apps can't coexist with the 60$ blockbusters, either that or change your business model so you also release your games at a lower price point

  • rudderless #6 10 months ago

    It's not just Epic that is having this problem, though. Iwata and Fils-Aime both mentioned it, and I think you'll hear this from a lot more publishers. It's a genuine concern for a lot of major publishers and it's an understandable worry. As enfilade points out, we're at the stage where developers are making progress when it comes to narrative and immersion through graphic and sound design, and it would be disappointing if the market evolved to a stage where titles outside major AAA franchises simply can't survive any more. Not saying that it will, but if the iOS/Android model is a genuine worry to some of the world's biggest game-makers, you can't help but think that anyone not developing for those platforms must be concerned, too.

  • dsmx #7 10 months ago

    What's killing you is dev teams numbering in the hundreds, you don't need teams that big to make good games.

  • Mr_Brown #8 10 months ago

    Nope, online passes, DRM and over priced DLC strategies. That is only a few things that are "killing us".

  • trjp #9 10 months ago

    You'd be AMAZED what people expect from a $1 game. Read the comments on the iStore or Android Store for most games where people complain that $1 games "got boring after a couple of weeks" or "only had 10 levels" or whatever...

    They resent paying even that small sum too - a lot of developers would rather rake in advertising revenues (while they last) then deal with people bitching when they paid a whole $1 for something...

    Thing is tho - people complain about FREE games as-well, so the pricepoint is possibly not the real issue there. I think some people just like complaining - they like having a go from behind the safety of their keyboard AND they think their opinion counts for something...

    Meanwhile, most games on mobiles are not comparable to the big consoles - nor should they be (and attempts by people like Epic to bring them closer together are futile IMO).

    Nintendo has a MUCH bigger issue with the DS tho, £20+ for most DS games now looks like daylight robbery (it always was) - in fact, with the spread of smartphones, if I were Nintendo I'd be worried that my entire business was under threat because when you own a decent smartphone, why buy a DS at all (and the 3DS is a 10 min gimmick IMO - which smartphones will soon copy anyway!!)

  • Rens11 #10 10 months ago

    Why is everyone scared of cheapy apps? They can co exist together its not like a 99p is gonna compare to a full release hmm should I get angry birds Rio or gears of war 3!?

  • Red-Moose #11 10 months ago

    Used to be an argument for piracy that games were overpriced and people would buy a lot more if the prices were a lot less - I guess this proves the point. I'm called FACT immediately.

  • The_Bloody_Kettle #12 10 months ago

    Personally, I think the rise of the $1 app is a good thing. Particularly if it's making the big guys think. It means the AAA guys have to sit and think about their games more. If people are unwilling to cash in for something which is viewed by them as unworthy of their money then they will have to make it worthy.

    Not that I'm saying they need to add more content (necessarily), just that they need to work harder on making it seem worthy. Rather than making the same game over and over and asking for more money each time... -cough- -cough- Call of Duty -cough-

  • Machetazo #13 10 months ago

    Worry? It's a cry to the future, a dragging up by the scruff away from the past. Go to the audience, don't expect them to come to you.
    Nintendo asked for this! Here's the great ocean they wanted to reach out to, except that when a way in did present itself, they're being found ill-equipped to respond.
    We continually hear the danger of risk. Maybe, it turns out, that there's danger in not taking risk, as well. Again a hole in the market's clearly presented itself, and people are lining up to make the games to address that demand.

    Think of Valve. Did they foresee Steam, was it on the cards from the get-go, or did it appear to answer a need, a gap in the market, and from their expand in to broader use, appreciation and acceptance...

  • mukki #14 10 months ago

    2 different markets one possibly selling their wares too cheap while the other charging too much...

    But I would assume that most gamers have different expectations of what an iPhone app vs say gears of war has to offer'

    And yes overpriced DLCs and online passes are NOT helping console games.
    Even though as much as I think online passes suck I can understand game devs wanting to get some money off the 2nd hand market, but I do digress...

  • _LarZen_ #15 10 months ago

    It's just silly reading what Epic are saying in this article. I can't ofc talk for everyone but me game on iPad2,Pc and Consoles know the diffrence between a $1 game and a $60 game...come on give us SOME credit Epic...we aint braindead.

    The type of games on a android/iDevice is a segment Nintendo has had for many years....the only one that should fear anything is Nintendo with their handheld devices.

  • bikmate #16 10 months ago

    What a stupid thing to say.

  • Bluetooth #17 10 months ago

    Adapt or die

  • DarthMartious #18 10 months ago

    Two industry insiders who "just don't get it" in one day? Well I'm blessed!

    Mike [Capps], if people are gravitating to the $0.99c price point it's because that's what they want to pay for mobile - and sometimes throw-away - apps. Didn't like the game? Well it cost 99c so who cares! And hence it approaches a natural price.

    Apply this to your next game. I'm not suggesting that you can do it for 99c, but try it at $14.99 and lets see what happens - here's my bet:

    1) You sell (many) more "new" games.
    2) The used market practically disappears due to the low cost of the initial product and the potential used saving.
    3) Video game piracy is reduced because it just ain't worth pirating.

    In short: let capitalism run properly and set the natural price. You have created the used market by pricing your games out of the reach of many gamers which is why both the used market and piracy exist. If you want customers to buy new product understand - as Game, Cex, Amazon and just about everybody else has realised - that nobody wants to pay $60 for a game when 6 months later it's in the bargain bin for $20.
    Edited by 1 at 20/04/11 @ 00:11

  • Dave_McCoy #19 10 months ago

    For 59p I expect something mildly diverting for 5 min sessions if that. For £40 I expect a polished game with a bit more depth. I'm not expecting a narrative akin to Mass Effect 2 for 59p. I will never compare the smartphone game market to the home console/PC market as they just aren't the same.

    Is it only me that thinks Angry Birds is frightfully boring. It's almost random for God's sake.
    Edited by 1 at 20/04/11 @ 00:12

  • dingo75 #20 10 months ago

    Yours truely Cliffy B said that PC gaming is dead so please leave us PC gamers alone and look elsewhere for your $60 markets. Otherwise come out with a new UT with kickass graphics running circles around the next-gen consoles.

  • DrStrangelove #21 10 months ago

    President Mike Capps told IndustryGamers that it was getting increasingly difficult to convince customers to shell out $60 for a game.

    That's why so few people bought Blops I guess.

    Really, there are an awful lot of facebook/app gamers who wouldn't buy a game for 30-40 quid. But they're not actually interested in playing a good game, they just want a distraction from class or work that's as low-brow as possible. That's like saying there's hardly a market anymore for quality products because people want only cheap stuff. Truth is, quality products are increasingly sought after because more and more people are tired of bothering with worthless shite.

  • Rorsch #22 10 months ago

    Afraid of some competition hein? Quality products have nothing to fear.

  • geox30 #23 10 months ago

    It's called progress and this time I think that it works for us customers.The only thing that needs to be realised here is that this amount of money is too much for any game,no matter how good and that you can't continue to rip off well paying customers when there is an alternative-to any degree.Of course none can compare 1$ games with blockbusters and I prefer the second,but cheap games can keep you occupied and amused as well.I also remember these gentlemen from Epic being negative towards PC game development and went for the big bucks with the consoles.o tempora o mores...

  • Geowolf #24 10 months ago

    Maybe so, but $60 price tags ain't doing you any favours either.

  • paketep #25 10 months ago

    "How do you sell someone a $60 game that's really worth it... "

    Easy, Mike. You make a game that IS worth $60. Problem is, you've forgotten how to do it since UT2004. Too much dough from Microsoft, too many inflated scores for your crouching simulators, and you think yourselves gods. No wonder you panic when other devs come and release better games for a tenth of the price.

  • chaywa #26 10 months ago

    Market diversification is the best thing that will happen to gaming, especially with the F2P business model.

    And even then publishers will be greedy bastards.

  • Caimbeul #27 10 months ago

    I also think the problem is that people are more vocal about complaining these days (look at any games forum - EG is a great example) without consideration for how reasonable or unreasonable their argument is. For $1 i would expect no more than a couple of hours, anything else is a bonus.

    Maybe the problem is (and i may get burned by people for this but...) there are too many games out there.I cant afford to buy all the games that i want to play and even if i could, i don't have the time to play them. I have to select my games very carefully. This may be the case of many hardcore gamers out there who have grown up with the industry and now have families.

    Just a thought...

  • jumpdeveraux #28 10 months ago

    Whether it's a $1 app, $15 indie game or $60 blockbuster - these all compete (with other non video game products and services) for the limited time and attention of a consumer and the consumers personal budget of "dollars".

    Epic should simply be confident that there is $60 worth of value in their $60 game and enough of a consumer base to ensure they stand a high enough probability to make a profit.

    I never compare whether I should buy 60 $1 apps or 1 $60 game... My yardstick for iPhone apps is how expensive is it versus a cup of coffee. I like my coffee.

  • spudsbuckley #29 10 months ago

    Has the entire industry completely lost any kind of perspective?

    Phone games are 99% utter shit and the people who play them aren't gamers and have little or no interest/impact on the real games industry.

    A $1 phone-game is in no way comparable to a full price real game. They shouldn't even be talked about in the same context.

  • chaywa #30 10 months ago

    @spudsbuckley
    10 million downloads in 10 days for Angry Birds Rio versus less than 1 million sales total for Enslaved: Odyssey to the West.

    Game quality doesn't matter when the price is right. It's not comparable in price or quality but in economic values of leisure it means a lot, an awful lot and this is why big name developers are worried.

    Personally I'm all for new business models, but not everyone will be pleased with them.

  • ChronoMizaki #31 10 months ago

    What bothers me most about $1 apps is not the fact that it's cheap, but rather that these are the same type of games that you can play for free on the internet, especially something like Newgrounds (and to be fair, most games on Newgrounds are probably better quality than 1$ apps you can find on the iPod store. And for free).

    For that, I'd call those people idiots who buy cheap app games that I can find a equivalent on the internet for free. And it makes me sad that Angry Birds is still extremely popular despite many versions that does similar concepts as Angry Birds for free.

  • Collymilad #32 10 months ago

    Really?

    I wouldn't have thought that epics target audience were the kind of people who would buy $1 apps instead of full price retail games.

    I'll tell you how you convince "gamers" that $60 games are worth more than $1 games. You show them both. Anyone with any sense will see the reasons for the price difference.

  • spudsbuckley #33 10 months ago

    10 million downloads in 10 days for Angry Birds Rio versus less than 1 million sales total for Enslaved: Odyssey to the West.

    You could have picked a vaguely well know/more anticipated game besides Enslaved (not knocking it, i've heard it's good) to compare to pretty much the most popular phone-game series ever.

  • TitusCrow #34 10 months ago

    This is a ridiculous article; have these clowns (not the cool evil sort!) never heard of economies of scale? Maximum marginal utility price point, demand curves, or Price Elasticity of Demand – I refuse to believe that companies of this size do not understand relatively basic economic theory.

    Of course ever good, or service has a different shaped demand curve (variable factors here, – but they can also mostly be predicted to a reasonable degree) so It’s not as simple as this diagram link I include, but this is how business is run these days (and has been for many years) If they want to sell a lot, they reduce the price, if they want more marginal profit per unit they raise it. Somewhere in the middle the market mechanism finds equilibrium* (* ceteris paribus) As these companies are going for maximum profit they want to keep the price as high as possible, before the price point drops of demand that the higher price point does not impact on their projected maximum profits ( Again - ceteris paribus applies)

    My personal opinion here is they would have a far more attractive demand curve, leading to more overall profit if the price point was much lower. Sure you don’t make the margin per unit, but the attach rate is phenomenal (if it’s a great game) and they you have a far vaster install base for super high margin content (map packs etc...) also the Zeitgeist effect can come into play here, where everybody on your friends list gets this crazy value game so loads more people get it and its becomes viral this way, eventually this type of success can lead to a game to go “over ground” where it finally gets big enough to penetrate very casual or non gamers consciousness too and that leads to even more sales.

    In short this article is a bunch of crap and any sound economist could tell you the price being kept high has nothing to do with anything, except consumer training in most cases. Consumers have already been trained in the vile art of DLC and premium content packs with a very low marginal utility compared to the original product – this is another example of the same thing. There’s more but I’m off to play portal 2

  • miiiguel #35 10 months ago

    Not that I'm saying they need to add more content (necessarily), just that they need to work harder on making it seem worthy. Rather than making the same game over and over and asking for more money each time... -cough- -cough- Call of Duty -cough

    You have to be kidding me, it's not the CoDs or the Gears of this world that are going to suffer.
    Edited by 1 at 20/04/11 @ 02:10

  • Jamiesan #36 10 months ago

    I'd just like to say that this long into the previous two optical media console generations, games were £25-£30 on day one, so I'm not surprised they have trouble shifting them at $60USD

  • Walkerj #37 10 months ago

    Um, gamers have been paying 60 dollars for like 15 years. Maybe if Epic's games didn't suck they would sell better.

  • Raiko101 #38 10 months ago

    Gamers who own 360s and PS3s will still buy full priced games. The cheaper games market will obviously continue to grow as it can reach and appeal a wider audience, but the two markets offer widely different games and so neither market is going to be able to kill the other off.

  • KDR_11k #39 10 months ago

    But are Epic's games worth 60$? I know I never buy a game at the 70€ price that they ask for, I always look for cheaper alternatives. The 40€ for a Wii or DS game? Sure, that's fine (especially for the first party games) but 70€ for an HD console game that's likely much shorter than a Wii or DS game? WTF?

    I imported Bulletstorm from the UK to avoid the crazy HD pricing. If I understand the trickery that UK retailers use right that means Epic made much less money on that copy.

    1$ games are mostly killing the small games. Games that are low on content and only trying a novel game idea (or even a proven old one) but still appearing at retail on a console (e.g. Wire Way or Puzzle Bobble). They don't separate themselves enough from the 1$ market to justify their ten times higher price.

    I tend to look more at the XBLIG market for 1$ games as the app store's games usually suffer from the lack of buttons on the iPod. It's just much harder to screw up the basics when the interface is physical like that.

    Probably the healthiest place for small games is Steam, they can easily charge XBLA-level prices there without people complaining that they're costing more than a dollar because that pricing expectation just isn't there.

    I think that if anything is killing Epic it's Epic itself and its ridiculously expensive games both on the dev and retail side. People complain about the short length of Bulletstorm and that game was a whopping 70€. How long are people going to bear that especially in the face of games like CoD that offer three game modes with enough meat that each could be sold separately and every type of gamer can pick one or two to latch onto? CoD is just a much better value. Epic won't be able to maintain a similar multiplayer presence until they realize that their prized Unreal Engine 3 is garbage for online play and outperformed by the competition.

  • Paul_cz #40 10 months ago

    And meanwhile, Notch is making millions by himself for himself..

  • PlugMonkey #41 10 months ago

    The industry is awash in a sea of crap software, and the "app" is partly to blame, alongside Nintendo, piracy, and developers locking off content behind one use codes.

    The industry has been awash in a sea of crap software since long before the existence of apps. It was awash with crap software when Nintendo was the market leader in 'harcore' gaming. It was awash with crap software when piracy required you to be able to manufacture your own cartridges.

    It was even awash with crap software before 'Project $10'. I know that sounds amazing in these dangerous times, when having to pay for content instead of getting it free threatens to shatter the very foundations of our passtime, but trust me. It's true. I was there, man.

    There was a lot of crap software. And if you adjust for inflation, it cost about £70 a go.

  • UncleLou #42 10 months ago

    Whether it's a $1 app, $15 indie game or $60 blockbuster - these all compete (with other non video game products and services) for the limited time and attention of a consumer

    That's exactly the point. I've got Crysis 2 sitting unfinished on my PC, but spent the 30 minutes gaming time I have atm playing Dungeon Raiders on my iPhone.

    Phone games are 99% utter shit

    No difference to console and PC games, then.

    and the people who play them aren't gamers and have little or no interest/impact on the real games industry.

    Ok, I am not a gamer then, regardless of the fact that I've been playing games since around 1980. Neither are all the forumites on EG. Interesting theory.

  • jonsaan #43 10 months ago

    There's an awful lot of middle ground between a dollar and sixty dollars. People will pay what they feel a product is worth. Besides, apps may be 1 dollar but the devices required to play them on are expensive.

  • Kerome #44 10 months ago

    That's about the size of it.

    The basic imperative is this: the price of AAA games MUST come down for them to survive. People are getting interesting experiences for £1-3, and they're looking at £50 games and are now saying "dam thats a lot of cash".

    But consider: movies are still popular at £10, a night out costs £20+ even at the low end, and a train trip to visit the relatives is similar. It's a question of perceived relative value for money, and consumers are wising up to the fact that more is not necessarily better. Most gamers don't finish games, why would they want a 50 hr blockbuster which feels samey beyond hr 3, which takes months to complete and which their busy lives leave no room for anyway? The average gamer is 28 yes old, and all the kids are out of a job and playing Android games to pass the time.

    Bigger, better graphics and a real cinematic feel are not going away, but the challenge for the industry is to find a way to build a 6-10 hr triple-A experience which sells for £15.

    It's a production problem, but that should bring games back into the realm of "hmm, cinema trip or new game?" Rather than, I buy only 4 games a year and they'd better be absolutely awesome because I'll be spending months with the things. That is also the underlying pressure behind rental, by the way. This year, Limbo made it onto my all-time faces list alongside ME2 and Sword & Sworcery.

    That's not all of the answer of course. Issues like the rise of Freemium are continuing to distort the pricing space, and as always it will continue to be a moving target. But I'm pretty sure it's part of the answer.
    Edited by 1 at 20/04/11 @ 08:11

  • Sodding_Gamer #45 10 months ago

    In all honesty more people nowadays are willing to pay £40 quid for a game than they were back in like 1998 or whenever it was when the PS1 came out. They were pretty much the same price on release. Maybe £35 at a stretch. People pirated so many games for PS1 because back then it was like "Woahh thats a bit much ain't it!" (I'm talking about mass market as I know that they were retro Nintendo games for like £60 quid at one point). A lot of people did it but now with xbox and ps3 people are prepared to pay the same price for a much better game. I mean hell most of my ps1 games I had were bug ridden and rubbish.

  • Fab4 #46 10 months ago

    Nah mate, charging 60 bucks for sequels is what is killing you.

  • LFace #47 10 months ago

    spudsbuckley : Phone games are 99% utter shit and the people who play them aren't gamers and have little or no interest/impact on the real games industry.

    Quite an overgeneralisation there chap. Im a 33 year old gamer whos been gaming since a young un starting off with a ZX81 and Atari 800XL and so forth onwards through the various computers and consoles. I have an iPhone and buy the odd game on there, and although I agree there is a lot of shite on it, there is also some true gems. Take Battleheart as an example. It is a basic RPG that offers the basics of rudimentary Raid mechanics. Its currently the game I have put the most time into in all games on my phone.

    Should I be considered a non-gamer in your eyes for playing that game? How about some of the others I have : Virtual Pool (The grand daddy of good Pool games, all others do not compare). Wolfenstein and Doom 2 RPGs (tailored for touch screen phones and work perfectly and again Im enjoying them thoroughly), Jet Set Willy and Manic Miner spectrum emulated games (classic old school platform games). What about them, am I still a non gamer ?

    I also have a PC and Xbox 360, currently my PC is the one I play games on the most, and probably always will be. Im a FPS nut at heart and I simply cannot stand using a joypad for that style game so I'll always go for mouse and keyboard.

    So with the generalisation that 99% of games are tripe and people who play games on an iphone (as an example) arent true gamers, I sir have to protest that I am not a merry man! (Trek quote there for those inclined)

  • BOFH_UK #48 10 months ago

    I'd suggest that a big part of the problem for mainstream games right now is that it's all far too similar.

    I've been a gamer for... yikes, almost thirty years now but I've recently moved back to PC from consoles despite having all three current gen consoles under the TV. Why? Because I can't justify paying console prices for games that offer very little new in terms of gaming experience from stuff I was playing five years or more ago. PC and iOS gaming is giving me really good quality experiences at a much cheaper price point (let's hear it for steam sales) and the occasional gem comes along that grabs me for a good long while. If you want to keep the interest of people who've been gamers for a long time you need to offer something new, not just pretty graphics. Put it this way, only game I've bought on release date for a year (on any platform that isn't iOS anyway) is Portal 2 and that I preordered on the strength of the first one and being fairly certain it would be unlike anything I'd played before.

    Related note, those that seriously think (and aren't just trolling) that mobile gaming only offers crap flash game ports.... do yourself a favour and have a good long look at what's available. You might be amazed at the quality levels on offer these days. Quick example to get you going: Real Racing 2. Licensed cars, nice mixture of tracks, superb controls, AI that actually fights back and tries to bash you about when you overtake, online multiplayer, great graphics, career mode, upgradable cars, rumoured development cost in the millions... All for around a fiver.

  • albertofustinoni #49 10 months ago

    Fact is, Epic hasn't made a game worth $60 since UT2004: Gears of War, much like Halo before, was a dumbing down of the FPS genre for consoles; while it did usher us in the wonderful age of chest eye walls combat and buff-n-gruff character designs, I am not sure those can be qualified as positives. Unreal 3 was a further disappointment: much slower gameplay than 2k3 and 2k4 to cater to console gamers and a shoddy PC effort (seriously, WTF happened to menus? And just a slider or two for graphics options?). I haven't played Bulletstorm yet so I can't comment on that one, but I am not hopeful.

  • turingsway #50 10 months ago

    The problem is not taking advantage of digital distribution to lower prices. Why are games being released as downloads at the same price as the physical version? In fact most games on Xbox's games on demand service cost more than buying them from online stores. I don't see any reason why games shouldn't be launched at £39.99 in stores and £24.99 as downloads with the price dropping to £14.99 and £9.99 after set periods of time. This would go a long way towards tackling the preowned market which is damaging the console market at the moment.

    I don't think full priced games should be priced to compete with the app titles but they should be able to use the similar methods of distribution to keep the costs down.

  • TheEarlOfZinger #51 10 months ago

    I can't get the games I like to play for $1, but I see his point.

  • Inmediasress #52 10 months ago

    Anyway whose fault is it in the first place that 60$ games don't sell?
    The industry/publishers fault the industry gets bigger every year not the quality of games just their production cost and the cost of shity marketing just so that people who still believe that crap buy their games.
    They dig their own grave and complain about it. Realistically they should make downgrades you don't need to churn out 10 games a year 5 is enough but make them good and it will sell and in accordance with that if you make nice games you don't need double the cost of the game marketing campaign to make it sell to the people.

  • doragor #53 10 months ago

    @ The Driffter "Make games that people actually want to play instead of some stupid, generic chainsaw game."

    What other generic chainsaw games have I missed? Are you simply referring to 3rd person cover based shooters? If so, which of those is Gears Of War incredibly similar to?

  • Clipper #54 10 months ago

    As others have said if you are struggling to persuade people your games are worth £40 then they probably arent worth that.

    The 59p apps market (and indeed free apps market) contain hours and hours of good gaming. Been gaming for 30+ years and the app market reminds me of the old games, simple gameplay and instant reward.

    The £40 boxed market is overblown big narrative games which I also love sometimes , Mass Effect etc... But I am rarely willing to pay full price as it isn't economical to me.

    Take Portal 2 - I hear the single player is 6 hrs... well £40 for 6hrs is £6 odd an hr of entertainment.. I have probably had say 3 hrs out of Cut the Rope and that works our at 20p an hour... So that boxed game better be VERY entertaining to warrant the price per hr of entertainment being 3000% higher.

    That is how I judge it, hoew long will it entertain me and how much am I willing to fork out.. I rarely pay over 20 quid a game, some exceptions, ironically Portal 2 is probably one of them.

    So Games Industry try more price points and admit that anything less than AAA probably isnt worth £40 and price accordingly.. See Bulletstorm's current price for instance ;) Bet they are selling more copies at that pricepoint tho :)

  • teabagger #55 10 months ago

    @ The Driffter "Make games that people actually want to play instead of some stupid, generic chainsaw game."

    The games that people actually want to play are the ones they go out and buy, which tend to be those 'generic' games you are referring to. The past few years are littered with the corpses of excellent games that no one bought, simply because when it comes to the crunch people will always favour the familiar. It's the same reason that McDonalds is so successful despite it being really obviously shit.

  • kangarootoo #56 10 months ago

    @spudsbuckley

    The reason people are comparing the two is because sales of both MATTER, and determine the direction of the industry in the future. In the real world, whether someone is a "gamer" or not means nothing at all.

    Big budget games get made, not to fulfil some sort of service for the hardcore "real gamers" out there, but because they make money. If they stop making money because more people are buying cheaper titles on other platforms, less of them will get made.

  • WJF #57 10 months ago

    Aye, the guy who brought up economy of scale is bang on.

    Also worth noting that 'premium' games exist on the App Store, too, and still can sell extremely well. People - even the 'casual non-gamers' that everyone love to throw iOS gamers into - recognise a more serious game on the App Store when they see it.

    For examples, see the best-selling - Dead Space, Galaxy on Fire 2, Real Racing 2, Football Manager, Chaos Rings (all priced at £4.99 or higher) - all of which offer a 'hardcore' experience for the platform and all of which either topped out the sales or grossing charts in multiple countries.

    So the myth that mobile gamers are only willing to pay 59p for their games is just that - a myth. There's a price point for everything, it's just finding that sweet spot is what Epic should be doing, rather than complain about it.

  • jellyBelly #58 10 months ago

    It is without a doubt that the industry has been heavily disrupted by mobile devices and their stores/markets. Nintendo was the previous candle holder for disruption with ds/wii but they got undone by digital delivery, the essential - always in your pocket - nature of phones and their inability to sell software cheaply on their cheap platforms.

    Its bollocks for epic to say 'our games our bigger better more valuable' etc. In the end games serve a certain basic function: To entertain us in our free time. I personally have often hesitated on spending 35-40 quid on the latest rpg/fps epic as my work/friends/other hobbies currently do not permit me to hog the TV for 2-3 hours at a time except on rare occasions. I do make exceptions for games I really fancy (demon souls and mario galaxy spring to mind) but simply put id rather play 20 mins of lets golf on my laptop during my lunch break than sit down for a session in front of the TV. Simply put there is a far far bigger market out there for 1 - 10 pound games which are digitally delivered on demand whilst you're on your sofa/train whatever than the kind of games epic makes. I fail to see how epics market can increase other than expansion to emerging economies. Like somebody else mentioned thats why they focus on profit per unit sold rather than capturing a huge installed base.

  • UncleLou #59 10 months ago

    Big budget games get made, not to fulfil some sort of service for the hardcore "real gamers" out there, but because they make money. If they stop making money because more people are buying cheaper titles on other platforms, less of them will get made.

    Exactly. Devs and publishers go where the money is. As mostly a PC gamer who heard a gazillion times to "go with the times" my sympathy for self-proclaimed "real gamers" on consoles who are now afraid of things like the appstore is limited.
    Edited by 1 at 20/04/11 @ 11:26

  • Mister-Wario #60 10 months ago

    "President Mike Capps told IndustryGamers that it was getting increasingly difficult to convince customers to shell out $60 for a game".

    Well, why should we, exactly? Who established that price point? And moreover, why shouldn't we wait a little while and get it cheaper? Dead Space 2 has dropped to about £18 on play.com now.

    I'd like to buy more games but the fact remains that games are expensive and I can't afford £30-40 each time, no matter how good the game is. So my only option is to buy a few key titles at launch and wait for the majority to come down in price. Moreover, is every game automatically worth the standard £40 or whatever? Why should you make that assumption? Is a familiar shooter that we can whip through in 8 hours or so going to feel like a good buy after we've finished it? Yes, you may have spent a lot of money on it in development but what does it matter if the finished product is uninteresting?

    Moreover I'm not sure why £1 apps are being linked to £40 games. Are these two demographics going to overlap? If so, will one negate the other's existence? I'm not convinced. If their presence is getting people to question your pricing structure, then great. In any case, small apps can offer good experiences too. I recently downloaded a PS Mini (Edge) and I love it. And that was an iApp at one point, apparently.

    The main complaint I'm getting from this article is that people aren't willing to give game makers as much money as they have in the past. I'm also getting the complaint that these smaller games means the average person's expectations of what a game constitutes on a platform has been radically altered. But are the App users all typical gamers? If not, why are you expecting them to react in the same way as those who immerse themselves in the "proper" gamers?

  • coolbritannia #61 10 months ago

    Halve the price of games, make them impossible to sell 2nd hand.

    Et voila, industry saved.

  • Daeltaja #62 10 months ago

    For me, it's more a case of the mid-priced market taking over. I buy an awful lot on Steam at the moment, as I can get 5-8 games for the same price as a full priced console game. Chances are that 2-3 will be just as good it not better than said console game.

    Thats obviously something that the boxed game market is sorely lacking, a mid-price release range. But no console publisher thinks their game is worthy of anything less than 60 bucks. I don't need to draw examples but if you compare Homefront to the recently reviewed Section 8: Prejudice. Both offer in nearly every way, the same thing. Seems the latter does it better, and with more content, yet is released as a 10 quid download title.

  • spekkeh #63 10 months ago

    Been gaming for 30+ years (..)
    Take Portal 2 - I hear the single player is 6 hrs... well £40 for 6hrs is £6 odd an hr of entertainment. (..)
    That is how I judge it, hoew long will it entertain me and how much am I willing to fork out..

    Alright, don't mean to flame, and maybe you're having a tough time with the economy, but you're 30+ years and are still constantly weighing the value of entertainment per hour, and then coming to the conclusion 6 quid for an hour is too much? You must never go to a restaurant, that's 30 quid per hour right there for some entertainment, and probably less awesome than a 10/10 game. Methinks you need more moneys or get less uptight.
    I'm nearing 30 (and been gaming since I had the motor skills to move a joystick), but juggling with spare time, a 6 hour game lasts me two weeks. For which I think 40 quid is fine if it's a great game (and I mean to play the coop too). If it lasts longer than 10 hours, I may never finish it, which I consider less value for money.

  • spekkeh #64 10 months ago

    Thats obviously something that the boxed game market is sorely lacking, a mid-price release range.

    Actually, it got a whole lot better since two years or so. I just switched to buying all my games via Amazon (games that are E60 at retail go for 38), and given the time it takes me to finish a game (see post above) I'm at the comfortable position where I can buy the game two months later, when they're going as low as E25. The real problem seems to be brick and mortar shops, but for better or for worse they seem to be dwindling anyway.

  • Clipper #65 10 months ago

    Alright, don't mean to flame, and maybe you're having a tough time with the economy, but you're 30+ years and are still constantly weighing the value of entertainment per hour, and then coming to the conclusion 6 quid for an hour is too much?

    Never said it was too much... Just said its the way I judge it.

    Later on I specifically say that at £6 plus an hr I will still buy Portal 2 at launch... It is of high enough quality to justify it to me.

    Like everyone else I lack time so if I bought every new release I fancy at 40 quid I'd end up with large pile unplayed that I could pick up cheaper later on.

    witness Bulletstorm and Dead Space 2.. I fancy both , have done since launch.. but to me they didnt have enough of a MUST play now to warrant 40 quid ... Now I have time in my schedule to play them and I can get round to playing them and they are under 20 quid each. Ive saved myself £40 ... i mean if you have the spare cash to waste on that then feel free ;)

    So there are many factors to my purchasing decision, but price per hour does make an impact. So there are AAA games I wont wait for and will pay £40... anything less than AAA dont expect £40 from me

    therefore boxed retail should reassess their pricing instead of all being lumpe din at £40. Downloadable games have already come to this conclusion with games going from 59p ish on iOS and XBLIG and PSN up through a fiver to a tenner and beyond.

    there are loads of pricepoints to consider selling at so why is boxed retail obsessed with £40 regardless of status.
    Edited by 1 at 20/04/11 @ 12:19

  • Bartacus #66 10 months ago

    £19.99 is a fair price point for games that's $40.00 Epic need to rethink if they cant acheive that.

    otherwise I would rather buy 20 £1.00 games & not get bored with the same old EPIC shit that bakrupts me just to make Clif happy.

  • Tyronne #67 10 months ago

    Does it has anything to do with this recession I keep hearing so much about...people only wanting to spend a few £`s rather than 40 quid..why would that be I wonder?

    It is getting to the stage where a good many people honestly cannot keep up with the high price of games and so something has got to give and the quick selling, way cheaper games should not come as any surprise.

    High price games are a luxury and not a necessity, people are shopping for more game for their money and who can blame them?

  • telboy007 #68 10 months ago

    Currently have put 20+ hours into Zenonia 2 on my Desire, that cost me about ohh... £3. Its a bit cheesey and generic but it plays well. These guys have had it too good for too long, they need to re-evaluate their pricing policy otherwise they will be going bust.

  • Rack #69 10 months ago

    By and large the 59p apps don't have much for him to worry about. Okay I got World of Goo for 59p on the launch sale and it has more entertainment value than a dozen Brown Shooters but it's getting on a bit now so it's not so surprising how cheap it is. For new games he's much more to worry about the £5 apps. For that price you can get inventive, fantastically polished titles that from a gameplay perspective can easily compete with anything Epic put out.

    They've invested the world in making more and more realistic looking brown shooters even after they've realised no-one even notices what they look like anymore they shouldn't be surprised when a less bloated company can utterly destroy them from a value perspective.

  • BonzoBanana #70 10 months ago

    No one owes developers or publishers a living. They present their wares and we buy them if we want them. Personally I like ambitious cutting edge games on consoles but still resist paying full price and wait for reductions.

    I love the heavy discounting of games where they go from £40 to like £10 in a matter of months sometimes but this can't be good for the industry. They really need to keep their games at a higher price because their own heavy discounting reduces the perceived value of games.

    I bought pre-owned copies of Uncharted 2 and motorstorm pacific rift for £12 for both delivered recently. Thats only £6 a game and when I sell them on I'll probably get most of my money back. Awesome value.

  • Peter_LIAR_Molyneux #71 10 months ago

    How about aiming for customers who have proven that they are willing to pay $60 for a long, deep game instead of always trying to grab the casual consumer. This race to the lowest common denominator and the relentless pursuit of getting customers who have proven that they don't like traditional gaming is dumbing down (or "streamlining" in the publisher's words) major releases and in doing so is slowly putting off some long time hardcore gamers.

    I'm getting sick of this pandering to the masses shit from every big company from Bioware and others. Sure you might get a few new customers but you will lose some old ones and believe me, the old gamers would have bought a lot more of your games than these new fickle gamers will. Just look at the Wii for proof. Lots of casuals bought a Wii and then went on to buy 1, maybe 2 more games for the system over it's life where a hardcore gamer would have bought 15 or 20 games easy in that same time span. If they weren't driven off the system by Nintendo constantly catering to an audience that wasn't interested in it to begin with.

  • zedzee #72 10 months ago

    So why don't Epic try releasing a game, one level at a time. Gamers will buy the 'engine' at a cheap price - be it pure download or packaged.

    If they don't like the game - no harm done - they didn't shell out £45 for it. Move on.

    If they do like it, they can download more/rest of the levels from XBL/PSN/Epic's site etc. These would be cheaper than the 'engine' purchase above.

    And there you go. An expensive game brought down to the cheap level and still able to compete.

    In fact, this way, such games can show what casual gamers and £1 game developers are missing!

  • actionfitz #73 10 months ago

    To be completely blunt here, there are games right now being released for £40 and higher that aren't worth more than £20

    So rather than moaning about $1 apps
    How about releasing games at a realistic price point. Yes im well aware of how small a piece of the pie developers and some publishers get from each sale. But what is true for boxed copy's of a game is not true for Digitally distributed games.
    They launch at the same price as the boxed copy's just to keep the retailers sweet (while they happily rip everyone off with preowned sales).

    I dont care how lovingly crafted your £10 iphone game is, im not paying over £2 for anything from that store.
    All around the world people are still reeling from being royally fucked by the banks and their government cronies...
    sorry if your sales have suffered as people figure out how they are going to afford to live through this mess.

  • spekkeh #74 10 months ago

    @Peter_LIAR_Molyneux

    1. Whether due to the larger market of the Wii or because what you say is plainly incorrect, 7 of the 10 best selling games this generation (per single console) are Wii games. [link url=http://vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/Best_sell ing_games_%28seventh_generation%29
    ]http://vg sales.wikia.com/wiki/Best_selli...[/link]

    2. Streamlining has nothing to do with catering to the lowest common denominator, try following a class of game design before posting drivel about it.

  • FWB #75 10 months ago

    The first real gaming generation has grown up and got jobs, hence part of the reason for the prices going up.

    If you're moaning about competing with 59p games then all I can say is... bwawawawawa. Stop producing generic shite and actually some proper, different games at a price that people will buy. It's called capitalism, embrace it.

  • Dannyboy1100 #76 10 months ago

    "will anyone care about the next console generation?"

    Made me lol

  • Kaminari #77 10 months ago

    I've said it before and I'll say it again: casual is killing gaming. This is 1983 all over again.

  • TonyHarrison #78 10 months ago

    This coming from one of the supposed big supporters of the app store ethos, after they were desperate to get UE3 on to the damn iPhone...

  • BlinkeredAxis #79 10 months ago

    Phone apps, I play on the train, whilst dreaming wistfully of playing something decent on a big screen later that night. No need to worry yet, mr Epic.

    The argument about cost per hour of gaming can be solved easily - get addicted to WoW! When I was playing that I spent about 5p/hr to play, and didn't buy any other games. I'm glad that I gave up though :)

  • metalangel #80 10 months ago

    Hey Epic, remember stuff like Jill of the Jungle and Kiloblaster? Silly little cheap games you peddled in the face of the monolithic big publishers like Origin and Microprose?

  • neonxaos #81 10 months ago

    If someone is able to make a decent game that people enjoy, sell it for 1 dollar and still make money even though Apple also have licensing fees, well, whose business model is really broken then?

  • medicineboy #82 10 months ago

    Angry Birds>Black Ops