Price Pressures

By Rob Fahey Published 16 October, 2009

Retailers and publishers murmur about price rises on the horizon. This is suicidal talk if consumer trends hold true.

Published as part of our sister-site GamesIndustry.biz' widely-read weekly newsletter, the GamesIndustry.biz Editorial is a weekly dissection of one of the issues weighing on the minds of the people at the top of the games business. It appears on Eurogamer after it goes out to GI.biz newsletter subscribers.

Pricing is a perennial conversation piece within the games industry. That's hardly surprising, given the variation we've seen over the decades - from cassette games for home computers selling for two or three pounds in the early eighties through to the latter days of the Nintendo 64, when cartridge price tags could hit 50 or 60 quid, right through to the modern day when consumers happily spend well over a hundred pounds on a box full of plastic instruments for Rock Band.

Despite historical fluctuations in the price of interactive entertainment, price has never been quite such a hot topic as it is today. Everyone in the industry has a viewpoint, but few of those viewpoints are particularly aligned. Prices are set to rise, say some. Prices are in freefall, say others. Others again argue that traditional pricing is becoming obsolete and will soon give way to more novel ways of generating income.

The most recent ripples in this particular pond have been caused by the launch of EA's hotly anticipated annual update to FIFA, the critically acclaimed FIFA 10. On the weekend of its launch, some major UK supermarket chains had dropped its price below £25 - using their mass-purchasing muscle and willingness to push loss-leading headline products to sell the game for less than some other stores were paying for it wholesale.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, this generated resentment from specialist retailers, especially smaller chains and independent stores who feel there's something innately unfair about supermarket giants treating as a loss-leader a product which, to the smaller stores, is their lifeblood. There are even anecdotal tales of independent retailers actually buying supermarket stock to sell in their own stores.

This whole story is something of a hoary old chestnut, of course. Specialist retailers complaining about the effects of supermarkets muscling in on the games business has been a feature of the trade press for as long as I can remember, and indeed for as long as many people rather a lot older than I am can remember.

However, there's a particular urgency to these complaints, and an unusual tone to some of the comments coming from many specialist retailers. There are various common refrains doing the rounds, such as claims the supermarkets will drive competitors out of business and hike prices (not true - the supermarkets don't really care about competing with specialist retailers, only with one another) or that price drops create consumer confusion (unless consumers are easily confused by having more money left in their wallets than they'd expected, I suspect that this is as untrue as it is condescending). Buried amongst this nonsense, however, is another common theme - how can such price-slashing make sense, when game prices are actually on their way up?

That particular claim is based, presumably, on the elevated price point of the forthcoming Modern Warfare 2, the high SRPs of games with bundled peripherals (an increasingly common sight on store shelves, ever since publishers realised that a piece of shoddy plastic made in mainland China for pennies can add 10 pounds or more to the price-tag of a game package) and some pretty aggressive statements from various publishers about widespread price rises at some point in the ill-defined future.

The justification, as ever, is that development costs are rising, so the price of games needs to rise in order to pay for those rising costs. This is a piece of business logic which would only be praiseworthy had it been scribbled in crayon by a not particularly bright five-year-old, and illustrated with a nice picture of a smiling sun and some trees. Coming from the mouths of supposedly economically-aware businessmen, it's enough to raise question marks about the education and common sense of some of the people at the top of our industry.

As the costs of development rise - fuelled by technological advances which mean that games require more detailed and extensive assets and more complex code - a healthy, growing market should mean that sales are also rising in parallel. We're not only talking about growth in boxed-game sales as the market expands, at that - after-market sales of DLC and add-ons, in-game advertising, merchandising and even the possibilities of highly profitable special editions for high-profile games all add up to extra revenue, which means that you can develop more expensively, sell at the same price, and still watch your profits grow.

But what if more expensive development isn't resulting in higher sales? Bluntly, in that case, you're doing it wrong. Either you need to rein in your development costs - and god knows there are plenty of cheaper platforms to develop for right now, ranging from the iPhone and the DS up to the Wii and digital distribution on PC - or you need to start looking hard at your product and business strategy. If you find yourself pushing prices up, you're making a schoolboy error. If development costs are rising and your customer base is stagnant or declining, up-front price rises, however tempting, will simply hasten the decline of the customer base and give you a nice shove on the path to insolvency.

Moreover, you can stop pointing to Modern Warfare 2 as your justification. Not only is the game not yet on shelves - so we don't yet know the impact of Activision's price hike - it's also a special case. It's probably high-profile enough that the supermarkets will hammer prices on it, as they did with FIFA. Moreover, it's probably the year's most anticipated top-flight multiplayer game, with a pre-built audience of millions who will pick it up in the first week to play online - and crucially, won't trade it in, thus choking off the second-hand market to some degree. Your game almost certainly doesn't have that. You can't compare your business model and audience profile to Modern Warfare 2's.

Besides, all of this talk about price hikes flies totally in the face of what we're actually seeing happen among consumers - where the perceived value of media in general, including games, is steadily dropping off rather than rising. Piracy doesn't help, obviously, and a whole generation of consumers now feels that paying significant money for a media product is ridiculous - which you can huff and puff about all you like, but it's not going to change how they think, and your business model needs to adapt to your consumers rather than vice versa. Blacksmiths probably huffed and puffed when car drivers decided that keeping horses wasn't really practical any more, and it didn't do them a damned bit of good.

It's not just piracy that's changing perceptions. Along with other types of media, more games and interactive experiences are going "free", be it ad-supported or "freemium" - from free-to-play MMOs to Facebook games - while other gaming experiences are hammering perceived value by being launched at miniscule price points. 30 quid for a PSP game or three quid for an iPhone game? Say what you like about relative quality, but most consumers, in the long term, are unlikely to decide that the PSP experience is worth a full order of magnitude more money than the iPhone one.

There are upward pressures on price, too, be it from publishers, retailers or even from platform holders whose digital distribution offerings bypass discounting and second-hand sales prices and charge pretty much full price for their products. In this, however, they don't seem so much to be shoring up prices, as simply to be totally out of step with where the industry - and more importantly, the industry's consumer audience - is going.

The tantalising prospect of higher prices on the horizon simply doesn't seem realistic. The industry must follow its consumers, not vice versa, and hiking prices will do little other than whittling down your audience to a receding hardcore while the rest seek their fun elsewhere. Instead, it's time to start thinking differently - exploring high volume, low-cost strategies, experimenting with cheaper development, and perhaps even thinking of revenues in terms of ARPU (Average Revenue Per User, commonly used by subscription services like cable TV or mobile phone networks) rather than up-front SRP figures. The pricing debate isn't going to go away, but it's about time it got realistic.

For more views on the industry and to keep up to date with news relevant to the games business, read GamesIndustry.biz. You can sign up to the newsletter and receive the GamesIndustry.biz Editorial directly each Thursday afternoon.

Picture of Rob.

About Rob Fahey

Rob Fahey is a former editor of GamesIndustry.biz who spent several years living in Japan and probably still has a mint condition Dreamcast Samba de Amigo set.

Read more articles from Rob by visiting the Rob Fahey archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (86) Latest comment 2 years ago

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

  • Gaol #1 2 years ago

    You wonder if the fact that it's inevitable the supermarkets will loss lead on CoD6 actually encouraged Activision to increase the RRP.

  • RobotRocker #2 2 years ago

    Also, stop demanding high prices on videogames you morons. Do not tell Capcom that you want to pay full whack for Super SF4 (Like this idiot said yesterday http://ww w.iplaywinner.com/news/2009/10/... ). You are not some special snowflake that they lavish attention on. You are just another easily led rube to them. You are the reason Activision knows they can get away with MW2 for £55 because you preform textual fellatio on Infinity Ward every day. So knock that shit off and tell companies that you aren't paying full whack for their games until they start respecting their customers and quit pricing everyone out of the hobby.

    /Gonna keep telling people to read up about the Fairplay Campaign because my god some people need it beat into their head at this stage.

  • bad09 #3 2 years ago

    Quite frankly they can up the prices as much as they want. 2009 became the year I said no to rushing out and buying the latest game, I can wait for a cheaper price. 2009 was the year this gamer of over twenty years said "up yours" at the high price and began to rent pretty much anything and anything I do actually buy to own is £25 or under. Still thanks to Steam I can get to that price quicker than console at retail so Mr 2nd hand is getting less. Honestly console gamers, it's cheaper on PC..

    The sheer amount of product over retail , platform and online is staggering, no longer can I stomach the high price of gaming. Neither can many others. You'd think the HUGE 2nd hand market and all those pirates would tip them off...

    Seriously people rent, use GOG, Steam, Metaboli etc. Don't rush out for the next hit. Your wallets will thank you. Bollocks to 'em.
    Edited by 1 at 17/10/09 @ 01:25

  • dsmx #4 2 years ago

    At present my policy is £20-30 is the maximum I'll pay for any game regardless of how much I want it.

    I fail to see any reason game prices should be going up, technology is supposed to make doing the same thing cheaper over time not more expensive.

  • Gammerz #5 2 years ago

    It all boils down to supply and demand. If people will buy expensive games then retailers will sell them at this price. Consumers always have the choice (with games) not to buy now and wait for the inevitable price drop when the demand cannot support the high prices. A quality product will also support higher prices for longer. The longer consumers support higher prices the longer they will remain high.
    Edited by 1 at 17/10/09 @ 01:53

  • Dekyriel #6 2 years ago

    This article is right and comes at the right time. I had already decided that I wouldn't honor my MW2 preorder after that shameless price hike.

    Instead? I'll be playing Torchlight. Preorder is up on Steam for 14.32€. This is my definition of value and business & economics overlords need to accept it at some point.

  • wyldkard #7 2 years ago

    I'm happy for places like BigW here in Australia for selling games cheaper than the other greedy retailers sell them for. The majority of games are sold under $100 (56 pounds) dollars and are discounted even further when certain catalogue promotions come around. Places like EB, GAME and even K-Mart are selling new release games for premium prices of $120 (68pounds) each. This second hand market makes me laugh over here... EB and GAME who trade in second hand games give you nothing for a trade in price on the game you are selling but I have constantly seen the "second hand" game on the shelf for $5 less than the brand new title... a real saving. I've had enough of high prices and the thought of some of these bastards claiming that software prices need to rise is frankly sickening. No wonder why that the gaming industry is seen to be bigger than the movie inustry with the prices that they get away with charging.

  • BabyJesus #8 2 years ago

    Fucking told everyone that Activison were trying to set a new standard for so called 'AAA' titles.

    Good article though.

    And Robot Rocker said what I was thinking but far more eloquently. Heh.
    Edited by 1 at 17/10/09 @ 05:19

  • timberwolf #9 2 years ago

    if publishers like EA start charging a subscription fee to play their games.... or i'm charged £5 per mission or level. i will simply never again play computer games. i have lots of cheaper interests.

  • freakzilla #10 2 years ago

    I agree totally with every single point. The one thing that makes it absolutely clear that the price hikes are just greedy businessmen wanting more money is MW2, "oh the £ is weak we need to raise the price to break even", (not an actual quote from Cotick) but of course we all know that there is no way MW2 will not make a massive profit.

    And MW2 isn't even one of those high tech, costly-to-develop games.

  • xentar #11 2 years ago

    the good thing about buying a console some time into its lifecycle is that there ara already many games available in the "platinum" range. With My PS3 i got some games thrown in for free but bought GT5 Prologue in Platinum and heavily discounted NHL09 this fall for less than 10 pounds too. And then there is ebay.

    It looks like the big guys with big calculators have it all wrong. The development costs are high and they try to make the money in big chunks instead of dilluting it with millions of copies sold for lower prices. Sure, there are manufacturing costs and such but look at the DVDs at newstands... dont know how it is in UK but here in Czech republic those cost like 1,5 pound and sell like hot cakes...

  • Geordiemp #12 2 years ago

    At last, some sensible comments on supermarkets, they compete with each other, they dont give a damn about Game and other small stuff.

    Dont buy games unless < £ 30, sometimes for less desirable < £ 20 is worth the wait. Exception to this rule in 2009 was Uncharted II at £ 39 from ASDA. Halo ODST to drop < £ 20 then will buy it.

    What else other than UCII has been worth the full price this year, only Batman I think.

    Maybe COD MWII will get a surprise and wont sell as well, although the sparcity of Xbox good exclusives means people will snap it up on Xbox which will lead the sales...

  • Bremenacht #13 2 years ago

    Greed may well be the reason behind a £55 price tag, but if consumers are still gasping to pay that in order to play the game on day 1, then they obviously got the price right. An 80%+ metaranking will ensure that both Activision & players are happy.

    It's a shame that none of the extra money will go back to the devs, whose costs they claim are rising. It'll be 'Trebles all round' for board members and shareholders instead.

  • Caimbeul #14 2 years ago

    Greed! I bet that in almost all cases where cost is an issue, their cash and resources are not being used in an efficient manner. I am talking operational costs too, not just development.

    At the end of the day, I gave up walking in to store a long time ago simply because of (oarticularly GAME's) ludicrous prices. Piracy cannot be blamed as much as it is, yes it is an issue but not as big an issue as they make out. Like EG said, they need to adapt to the consumer not vica versa. Steam is also another example of rising greed. Whilst i like the service, i can often buy physical media on-line cheaper that the steam version which is silly...if you think of all the additional costs involved in that...well, i need not say any more. if digital distribution like steam was priced better it would have better uptake.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #15 2 years ago

    /Gonna keep telling people to read up about the Fairplay Campaign because my god some people need it beat into their head at this stage.

    It's certainly nice that Rob's lined up alongside what we were saying seven years ago, after bitterly attacking it at the time...

  • Bagpuss #16 2 years ago

    I have to say as an industry, it does seem to be full of whingers and whiners like no other.

    The games companies seem to think that they are some sort of 'special case', demanding everything from higher prices to tax breaks to the banning of the 2nd hand market...

    It seems to be mostly down to the relative immaturity of the industry, filled as it is, with young, straight out of university types who have yet to grasp the concept that in buisness, unless THEY THEMSELVES control costs, and not ask the consumer to subsidise them, they will fail.

    Its simple, if they push prices up too far, the industry will implode, and they will only have themselves to blame, as they serve up another Big Mac in their new job, and ask themselves where it all went wrong...

  • BOFH_UK #17 2 years ago

    I actually stopped buying games about a year ago. Instead I've got a top-tier Lovefilm subscription which costs me £19 a month in exchange for 3 discs at a time, unlimited rentals split (in my case) into two movies and one game at a time. That £19 has let me watch dozens of films on blu-ray that I'd have skipped otherwise because I'm not going to re-purchase a title I've already got on DVD, try games I'd have otherwise gone straight past and catch up on TV series that I'd missed when they were broadcast. Plus of course I've got to watch the latest releases and play a load of games I'd have otherwise been tempted to buy. The only game I've bought in the last year was Batman and then only because I know it's a title I'm going to come back to over and over for the challenge rooms.

    When you see a RRP of £55.... that's three months of rentals and probably covers at least twenty movies and games. Granted multiplayer does require purchase but there's been very little I've wanted to keep on playing on-line past the first few weeks and by the time you do decide to buy the cost has probably come down anyway.

  • Shikasama #18 2 years ago

    Consoles are now seeing what PC hardware/software retailers realised a long time ago. They simply can't get away with this shit. These days consumers are too business/tech savvy to pay over the odds or be happy with a product that doesn't give value for money. The article made a great point about MWF2. It isn't setting a standard in pricing for anything. If MWF2 smashed every record in existence at 55, then Ratchet and Clank was released at 55,I would suggest that R&C wouldn't be as successful.

    It's ironic that MMOs are the ones being most progressive in this area. As much as I struggle to see the benefitand legitmacy of 'freemium' games (after years of WoW I struggle to get past subscription = quality product), the MMO companies are at least experimenting with their models.

    I really liked the recent EG Championship Manager offer. I was never going to buy the game off the shelf but BGS offered me the oppoprtunity of minimising my risk by letting me pay what I want. Now, the game wasn't for me in the end, but at £2.50 I was willing to try. More things like that please.

  • coojam #19 2 years ago

    From a development perspective, one of the major issues is that retail take the biggest cut of every game sale and platform holders throttle the console market. The development studios that create the games and the publishers that market them often make a surprisingly small amount of money.

    Comparing complaints against piracy to blacksmiths moaning about cars is simply poor journalism though. It would be like a blacksmith complaining that somebody had stolen their horseshoe design which they invested money and time in developing, then cloned it an infiinite number of times and gave them away from free. The development of automotive technology is not a comparative one to game design as someone hasn't created a new technological product to replace videogames (yet).

  • Incarta #20 2 years ago

    Good article. It's crazy to think you'll sell the same number of games by putting your prices up.

  • dsmx #21 2 years ago

    I still think companies should be thinking about dropping prices to insanely low levels, as an example yesterday Saints row 2 was £3.50 off of steam. At that price how could you not buy it? Now extend that to every game and a lot more games would be purchased.

  • GreyBeard #22 2 years ago

    The gaming press needs to accept its responsibilities too. On one hand you have articles like this, and on the other you have things like the face-offs where titles are criticized for not being maximally shiny compared to the current "state of the art".

    What message is that sending?

    If you are not better technologically than the competition you get rated down. If you develop for one of the less technically adept platforms (Wii, DS, PSP) you get less attention, respect, and often get roundly ignored because a-nother game with a last gen graphics engine just isnt considered newsworthy.

    The press drives the graphical and technological arms race then bitches about the way that darwinian struggle for audiovisual supremacy has a cost to the end user!

    It all costs money, and the way games are means that there's only a short time to recoup those millions before its financial viability is consumed by things like the rentals/used-games market, fashion, technological and market changes, and obsolescent hardware.

  • AngelAngelus #23 2 years ago

    I am curious how Sony/Nintendo and Microsoft's next consoles will be priced in the supermarkets compaired to places like Game and Gamestation. I think if they are "crashing" prices on the games to levels what comsumers see as a good price point at around £25-£30 then how will they play the console pricing overal as this would be the next big step for the market share if they manage to get game prices lowered overal even for a small amount of time?

    Also there are people are always willing to pay over the odds to get their hands on the latest big thing be it the Wii/360 Elite or PS3 Slim especially when it comes to the holiday season for their family members or partners etc especially when it becomes short on supply around Christmas. I would suggest this may be part of the reason for the £55 price or other price increases around now...

  • FortysixterUK #24 2 years ago

    A slightly long winded article that could have been more vehement in its condemning of high prices, I sense some tightrope walking within the writers prose.
    Frankly, EG and every other gaming website should be pushing forward, and totally championing, the dramatic price DROP
    of games.
    Why is it for example, that some games available for digital download are the same price as their physical shelf ridden counterparts ?
    The price drop we need must stem from the console making companies. Dev kits prices MUST drop massively. The money MicroSoft, Sony and Nintendo take from the game writers must drop. The publishers prices must drop. And a retailer, be it an independent or a chain, should make a clear £5.00 profit per sale. Simple as that.

    No game should retail for more than £19.99 upon release, no matter the format.

    At this price it is obvious to even the most arrogant critic ( who may or may not respond to this post) that sales would raise hugely, and piracy would drop hugely.

    I am hoping for TRUE revolution in the games industry that see's it crash like the worse stock market crash ever, with all the publishers going down, with all the software houses closing ,the slate wiped clean and a new , stronger and more sensibly priced gaming industry emerge from the ashes a few years later. Maybe that will take the arrogance away from the industry and make it , as whole , realise who it's market is....you and me. Not the shareholders.

  • bad09 #25 2 years ago

    "It all costs money, and the way games are means that there's only a short time to recoup those millions before its financial viability is consumed by things like the rentals/used-games market, fashion, technological and market changes, and obsolescent hardware. "

    I always find the short life argument funny I bought Far Cry 2 yesterday a fairly old game now. Now I picked that up on Steam for ease so a bit more than 2nd hand but still within my £25 limit and Mr 2nd hand didn't get the cash. If I have the means to buy games at a cheap price (even old games) I will.

    This "short window" excuse is a myth created by the industry to justify high pricing. WHY does it loose sales to 2nd hand so quickly? Because people won't buy at the asking price.

    Games DO have a LONG shelf life it's just the way the current model works you have to go to 2nd hand for that long life (and a reasonable price). This is changing though digital is giving them the means to prolong a games life. Hell things like superpacks/bundles and discounts can actually revitalize a game.

    Speaking of which, all 3 red factions just £26 today on Steam...

  • Spuzzell #26 2 years ago

    Excellent article. The GameIndustry and Digital Foundry article series are both top class, long may they continue.

  • wayneh #27 2 years ago

    Game , cnuts that they are, decided on release day to change the price of Uncharted 2 from £39.99 to £42.99. Also Gamestation who are owned by Game done the same. So where has the High Street competition gone? Online retailers get most of my business now as I can have a game delivered to my door on release day at a half decent price.

  • Gaol #28 2 years ago

    Christ, this thread is full of folk moralizing about not paying more than £30. It's a free market and a free country, if folk want to spend £40 on a new game like Uncharted and have the cash then that's their call, they don't owe it to you to wait 6 months.

  • KDR_11k #29 2 years ago

    I think the more important part of the message is not that the prices suck but that they are a sign of the impending death of the game industry. The companies pay less and less attention to the customer, treating him as a resource to be exploited, an enemy to be defeated (with DRM and its ilk), a competitor to be squished (second hand market) and a sucker to be fooled (massive hype before release). Yet they are blind. The game industry doesn't look at the customer, it doesn't understand him. This lack of understanding results in companies only knowing what something will sell if it has sold before and that's why they only invest in "safe" games that are exactly like all the games before it because that's the only way they know the customer actually wants something like they're making. They are blind and that blindness is going to kill them. They cannot see WHY a customer buys a game, without understanding that they cannot escape their death spiral as they cannot go into uncharted terrain.

    This is best seen on the Wii as it's a microcosmos that the industry treats as unprecedented so you can see new genres appearing on the industry's radar. Nintendo makes Wii Sports which has smaller games so the industry goes out to make minigame compilations (because they can only see that minigames sold, not why or what else the customer might want like, oh, say, more fleshed out versions of those sports they've got a demo of in Wii Sports). Nintendo makes Wii Fit which does fitness so suddenly the industry starts pumping out fitness games (a case where they actually understand why someone would want to buy one but they came so late to the party that Nintendo already harvested most of the money there was). I don't know who made the first rail shooter on the Wii but now we see tons of those too. Meanwhile many traditional genres are almost completely absent because the industry is blind and cannot see whether they would sell, needing someone else to map that terrain out first (and reap all the money).

    This disconnect is destroying them and the prices are just one sign of their desperation as they try to increase revenues with the customers they already have instead of making new ones. Others are all that stuff like trying to prevent used sales or big talk about defeating piracy or all that DLC, all of that is about increasing the revenue without the need to change the product to actually appeal to more people.

  • TRUTH #30 2 years ago

    Cost of AAA titles cost a lot due to the people needed to get best out of the console: art designers, research, programmers, composers, various development teams etc etc...the list goes on & on. Just look at the final credits of a typical AAA games and realize how many people are needed for the game you have just played - which have to be funded!...It takes averagely 2yrs(+) for game from an idea to full development to hit the shop shelf...then add the advertising cost need. The game then usually only has one form of income and that's the sales - they don't get any income the 2nd hand market or trade iins. If the game does not sell this could actually break the company that produced it!...If ypu want cheap shovelware games like the Wii; cheap and dumb and simple - this will happen if we continue to ignore games like Ico, Shadow Of The Beast, The Orange Box (aka HL 2), Dead Space, Veiwtful Joe, Beyond Good & Evil, Theif:Deadly Shadows, Deus EX...etc etc.

    Most new AAA games at highest cost £30.99 to £39, anyone who pays more simply does not look around to shop. There own fault!
    Edited by 1 at 17/10/09 @ 14:33

  • DevilsNeverCry #31 2 years ago

    Good report EG!

    Definitely true what a lot of people are saying.

    It certainly comes down to greed, but as most have said, buying games at bargain prices is the best way to go.

    Plus, we got xmas coming up, so expect a lot of titles to hit low prices anyway.

    But as a general rule, prices need to come down. Activision are testing the water with MW2, even though you'll still get it online for 40 if you want it on day one. I don't expect it will become standard.

  • Tyronne #32 2 years ago

    I have to be honest and say that the cavalier and condescending manner some publishers are talking about and treating their customers is really starting to get to me lately.

    Here we are in a global slump, with people losing their jobs left, right and center and it appears that its okay to start raising prices until some are left with the decision of shall they eat for a week or purchase modern warfare 2.

    I have been a gamer now since 1981 and have seen it all with the various excuses for high game prices (cartridges which cost a fortune to make - piracy resulting in games not being made (never heard of ONE game not being made due to piracy/same as the them saying piracy jeopardizing future movie making - never heard of a single movie not being made due to piracy either))

    And now its the high production costs, which as much as I can understand, if it sells well you will get your money back but if not you will lose but is this not the same for ANY business with a product regardless what it is?

    Gamers are not as stupid as they think we are and sooner or later the tide will turn.

  • Nephirion #33 2 years ago

    Lets not forget the N64 cartidge was actually made up of a PCB and I should imagine cost much more to manufacture than burning a DVD.

    £34.99 is the magic number for me if I can't buy it new for that price I wait or go preowned, publishers are all about greed I doubt the extra money they charge is invested in improved game design or ever reaches the developer.

  • ben---neb #34 2 years ago

    I'm not buying the new Modern Warefare, too expensive. Take that Activision.

  • Shikasama #35 2 years ago

    I truly don't understand the 2nd hand market vilification. Walk with me.

    If a game comes out for 45 (insert currency of choice) and I don't want to buy that game for 45, I don't buy that game and the developer gets no money.

    If 6 months later I see the game for 25 (Currency of choice) and I think 'What the hell, thats a decent prize for Puppy Island Adventures 4', I buy the game for 25 and the developer gets no money.

    If the industry was so concerned about not recouping costs from second hand sales, then they should simply drop prices. It really is that simple. As a student, the RRP on MWF2 could feed me for a month. A good month. Could probably even get a steak for Wednesday.

    That was lsightly off topic, but I do have a relevant point to make. At the start of the recession this is the industry that proudly declared that it was recession proof and wouldn't be affected by what was happening in the world. They have had their fingers very badly burned in that respect and I can't help but wonder if all of this talk of price hiking is more of an act of defiance than any sound, logical business thought.

    Raise your prices. See who buys your games.

  • Xinch #36 2 years ago

    still laughing on second last paragraph, page one

  • Xinch #37 2 years ago

    Rob, you've been at this ten years, by God it shows. Brilliant.

  • dsmx #38 2 years ago

    It never ceases to amaze me the number of people defending the price of games when all the evidence says that people want cheaper games.

    The second hand market and piracy of games is a result of people not wanting to pay full price for games, you can bitch about games being good value for the hours of entertainment they provide however the market says that people want cheaper games.

    The more you fight the market the worse the problem will get and unless game prices start dropping fast you are going to get the situation that has happened in the music industry where a lot of people don't pay for music, ever. That was a result of the record companies not listening to what the customer wanted and the game industry will end up the same way.

  • xentar #39 2 years ago

    whats missing in the article is monaning about secondhand market too... And there is missing info on how much cheaper PC and many Wii versions usually are compared to X360/PS3

    So once again - if they want to rise prices, they are free to do that. gamers then are free to go to preowned or simply wait till the publishers decide its time to cut the prices again to move their stock.

    And then there are publishers/developers, who deserve even the full price. Thats for games which have long playtime, good multiplayer and community features or games with free DLC or toolsets to make own content like LBP or Witcher

  • Stepharneo #40 2 years ago

    This was like an episode of Dragons Den...and Rob I assume, is out.

  • YourMessageHere #41 2 years ago

    What's true of games is true of most media at the moment: there is simply too much crap. Be it games, TV, film, anime, music or whatever, the prevailing business model seems to think that they need to make more money to fund the level of production, when in fact the level of production is the problem. They are vomiting out too much low-quality product and spreading their money too widely, instead of focusing in on making fewer things of higher quality that more people actively want to buy and feel is worth their money. If there were fewer games on the market overall, but of a generally higher standard, surely the savings made by not spewing out blatant rubbish would cover these costs? Put another way, is churning out also-ran shovelware really so competitive when you set it against spending that money to polish something else to a much better standard and make a real gem of a game? This philosophy is short-focused idiocy.

  • TRUTH #42 2 years ago

    Ninitendo was previously the worse to charge for there games ; I remember Turok being priced at £70 for N64.

  • TheRealBadabing #43 2 years ago

    Great article but you are preaching to the choir.

    The big publishers are run by big business men. You know, the sort that push the envelope in developing synergy in an adverse consumer space. Cunts, basically. They are not in the slightest bit interested in long term industry (or even their own company) health, all that matters is providing a good return for their shareholders while they are in charge.

    Oh, and to all those people that think they are somehow making a stand by saying " I only buy one or two full price games a year"...don't you realise Bobby Kotick has that exact phrase painted in 6 ft letters all over his Fortress of Evil?

  • spiny #44 2 years ago

    The trend seems to be for preorders to be cheap, then when retailers see the orders coming in for a big title, they raise the price before release. I got batman AA for £22 (PS3), Uncharted 2 for £32, & cod 6 for £25 (PC) all on preorders but they're a lot more than that now. I've taken to using http://www.gamestracker. com & it's great for keeping to a budget. They'll email you when the cheapest price listed goes below a threshold that you set for each game.

  • smelly #45 2 years ago

    I agree with the article.. Apart from one thing.. i think you'll find that the platform holders pretty much set the price of games.

  • Alterego-X #46 2 years ago

    I don't pay money for games, I pirate them.

    Even if I would want to, I wouldn't have money for such things, but even if I would have, I'm barely interested enough in most new games to download them for free.
    Edited by 1 at 17/10/09 @ 19:10

  • niteninja #47 2 years ago

    Are publishers really that short sighted?
    Are going to make more profits selling millions of games at 25-30 quid?
    Or hundreds of thousands at 40-50 quid.
    Cheaper prices means more sales the industry is stuck in the stone ages.

  • curtlikesmeat #48 2 years ago

    Most people seem to have their own price - I won't pay over £30 now. I'd stretch to £35 for something special like a Zelda game but that's about it. I waited about 8 months to play Fable 2 for 18 quid.

    As for MW2 I can't see what the fuss is about really, sure it'll be extremely polished but it's hardly Half Life in terms of innovation. I played the first, enjoyed it and I don't really feel inclined to play the second. I guess I can kind of see why people value the multiplayer though if they're happy to play it a lot, I paid £25 for Fifa 10 and will play it constantly till the next Fifa, so I suppose that's worth it.

  • secombe #49 2 years ago

    I got a free (refurbed) iPhone 3G on my standard O2 contract 2 months ago, and although the Apple haters will completely ignore this...I will never look at game prices in the same way again. Say what you will about quality, but there are tens (probably hundreds) of very very good games out there now, and they are easy to find, and crucially - nearly all have free instantly available demos.

    Ignore the so called big-hitters and there is gameplay-a-plenty at 59p a pop, lists are worthless, but it would tale a souless person to not find 15-20 games (or a £15 vouchers worth) that offer many, many hours of play. GeoDefense (and its sequel, Swarm) have alone given me 30hrs+ and I've barely scratched the surface, not bad for £1.16 for the two of them.

    Unbelievably, piracy is still an issue at 59p a go, so at least we know price isn't the only factor in that respect. I suspect games could be a penny and still many would make the effort to find it for free.
    Edited by 1 at 17/10/09 @ 21:28

  • Avaloner #50 2 years ago

    I rarely buy a game at release and when I do its for the PC. Why pay 50€ for a game when I can get two and have spare change? True, I am not playing the latest games, but who cares? After 6-8 months most games still have plenty of life left in them.

  • RobotRocker #51 2 years ago

    It's certainly nice that Rob's lined up alongside what we were saying seven years ago, after bitterly attacking it at the time...


    Please do tell. Google is bringing up squat for me. I did find an old hilariously smug and wrong Spong post however.

    http://ne ws.spong.com/article/3829/Bewar...

  • TheRealBadabing #52 2 years ago

    "Most people seem to have their own price - I won't pay over £30 now. I'd stretch to £35 for something special like a Zelda game but that's about it."
    FFS don't you get it? That little stretch for a special game is exactly what Bobby Kotick is expecting to happen for MW2. If we pay a premium for one game, every other publisher will feel their product is "cheapened" if theirs is not the same price.

    Percieved value is everything in this industry which is why every generation we hear sob stories of increasing costs and reduced margins. It's all bullshit.

  • Moz #53 2 years ago

    surely at this point in the cycle all the devs have their core tech sorted so new games are cheaper to make then those made at the start of the generation as you don't need spend a truck load of money developing the core engine.

    EDIT:

    As for the mordern warfare issue - it is a game that has more perceived value, I know several people that only play CoD they're happy to pay more for it because it's the only game they're going to play for the next 6 to 12 months!

    No matter how good it is, a game that's going to be played for 10 to 20 hours total just isn't worth as much to people as one that they're going to be playing for over 10 hours a week for months on end.

    Personally I think the payment models being explored by MMOs and games like Battle field heros are the way forward for online games.
    The fixed disc cost only makes sence for a game of a fixed play time.
    Edited by 1 at 17/10/09 @ 23:05

  • hiddenranbir #54 2 years ago

    Supermarkets are killing small businesses. Nothing new.

    My town has lost its local butcher, local bakeries are now the franchise ones that are essentially now lunch bars.

  • clockworkzombie #55 2 years ago

    @wyldkard

    I think you may be a a little harsh when it comes to EB Australia, I am a very happy customer.

    EB will price match if the opposing retailer has stock.

    I traded in my Wii yesterday to buy a PS3 and the console was worth $165.00 AU as a trade in the six games I traded in pushed the total to $415.00 and I did not trade in any extra wiimotes. When I checked my docket after I got home 4 of those games traded in for $45-$48 each so about half new price.

    When I purchased another 360 earlier this year it came with a copy of Halo Wars I was not interested in this and asked if they would swap it for Streetfighter they refused but I traded it in on the spot and received a $78.00 AU trade in value towards streetfighter.

    I do have an edge card and this costs $10.00 per year, reduces the cost of any purchased second hand product by 10% and also increases the value of your trade ins by 10%

    I purchased the 250GB console @ $600.00 AU and this is bundled with CoD MW goty edition and Uncharted 2.

    I would have purchased both of these games anyway CoD specifically to play online with friends & Uncharted 2 looks like a bunch of fun and is one of the reasons I decided to buy now the added value from the games makes it feel like a free upgrade to a 250GB drive instead of the standard 120GB drive.

    Within the first week at EB you can return a game you have purchased with no questions asked and get a full store credit so if you can finish a game quickly or you are unhappy then you can change your mind and get something else.

    Perhaps you need to look at the way you use your local EB and make their policies work for you.

  • ziggymon_g #56 2 years ago

    On release day for FIFA 10, I walked into my local ASDA to see 2 GAME employees each purchase all the remaining copies of FIFA 10, making sure that no-one would be able to purchase the game in that town at the discounted price.

    I love how the specialist retailers complain about the supermarkets hurting the industry and killing off the small stores when they themselves have been the biggest issue for the small inde stores over the years. Pulling off various back handed tactics with suppliers and publishers to keep punishing the smaller stores.

  • IP #57 2 years ago

    Amazing. Everyone moaning about high prices and the one person to dare mentioning that things like the two geoDefense games (total price: £1.18) from the App Store could be a way forward and something the rest of the industry could learn from gets their post downrated.

    Still, if prices did fall to sensible levels, that'd be one less thing for everyone to bitch and whine about.

  • Quixz #58 2 years ago

    That was a very good read. £30 is perfect :)

  • wobbly_Bob #59 2 years ago

    Its a simple truth that if you sell cheaper you make more monney, but greed blinds them to this truth. I think if games want to be the mass market product they desire to be then the price point needs to be a lot lower than it is now or they will forever remain niche with a small hardcore audience,

    Intresting to note is that seems microsoft tried to hike the standard acade title to 1200 but now they are mostly 800 again so it seems people were pushed to far and would not bite.

  • Shikasama #60 2 years ago

    EverAfter - Woah, a lot of stuff that is wrong there. Are you a mental?

  • dirk_aircool #61 2 years ago

    @Robotrocker. you nailed that one . well said and damn right . I know the +/- thing is to filter crap u dont wanna read but I did it anyway .
    Edited by 1 at 18/10/09 @ 11:21

  • thesombrerokid #62 2 years ago

    Couldn't've put it better myself, the prices aren't rising or shrinking, as the market grows prices of games aimed at one demographic rise and prices of games aimed at another demographic drop, this is what happens in a healthy market, you can get toilet brushes for £1 and for £50.

    People have been saying that single price point, single distrobution model is really unhealthy for our industry and makes it impossile to take risks or explore ideas, now the industry is free to take risks and make super high budget games, the only thing is that now theres a low development cost route to market, you don't see as much of those AAA risk takers, ala looking glass, anymore which is a real shame.

  • Cid #63 2 years ago

    @TRUTH: Turok was never £70, was it? :/ The most expensive N64 game I remember is Donkey Kong, which I believe was £60 with the (necessary) memory expansion. Other than that it was always between 40-50 quid.

    I wouldn't want to spend more than £40 on a game these days, and even that's taking the piss. For a console game I'd say 30 notes is reasonable enough, and 20-25 for handheld releases.

  • DarkFenix2k9 #64 2 years ago

    Prices rise, I pirate more. Simple. There's no way in hell I'm forking out for MW2, don't get me wrong, MW was a great game that I thoroughly enjoyed, but that doesn't mean I'll accept extortion on its sequel.

    Anything above £30 I consider out of the question. Hell, I'm reluctant to get anything priced above £25 courtesy of online retailers like Play and Amazon. They're going to end up going above what their products are perceived to be worth, and I hope they suffer for it.

  • RobotRocker #65 2 years ago

    @ Cid

    Turok was £70 and a lot of magazines made a huge deal about it at the time as N64 launch games were £60-70 each. Though since the N64 launch was a spectacular failure and the price was dumped down to £100 within 6 months. The games went down to around £40-55 by Christmas with Nintendo eventually releasing a bunch of "budget" games like Bomberman Hero, Snowboard Kids and Tetrisphere between £30-40. The prices did shoot up again near the end as Perfect Dark and Conkers Bad Fur day were sold between £55-70 in places (Though Conker had a very low print run as Nintendo pulled as publisher a month before launch and Rare had to get THQ in as a last minute publisher/distributor)

    This was during the THE Games run as distributor in Europe so price fixing was rampant throughout and may have contributed to the high prices at the time.

  • gammonbanter #66 2 years ago

    Will the supermarkets do cheap deals on MW2? I wonder how cheap they'd go!

  • GreyBeard #67 2 years ago

    Hasn't it occurred to people that if it was practical to offer full AAA gaming experiences at low prices and still make a healthy profit some enterprising company would have done it by now?

    You really ought to ask yourself why this hasn't happened. The "games industry" isn't some shadowy cartel, becoming part of it doesn't involve going into some backroom and standing on one-leg and swearing loyalty to Mammon or some other satanic deity. Its a business like everything else.

    The reason why it doesn't happen is because its too big a risk. There are a lot of very significant upfront costs involved in producing a product that can still fail miserably at market. Its all very well saying yeah, if we sold it at half the price then we'd shift more than double the units, but are you so firm in your belief that you are willing to bet your shirt on it, not to mention the livelihoods of all the people you employ?

    If you think its so easy, please, go out and prove it. Re-mortgage your house, max your credit cards, get a business plan together and take it to your bank or a VC company. Set up your own small outfit doing iPhone games or whatever platform you can financially handle and make yourself and your staff rich!

    If you can handle the 7 figure sums needed to make a high-end PS3/360 title better still, you've got far more competitors ton undercut and as such are going to stand out more as a value proposition.

    But obviously if your product fails for whatever reason, are you going to be in trouble. If you barely break even are you going to try the same approach again for your next project? If you only make a small margin how does that impact your ambitions nad how the banks and money men are going to treat you the next time you ask for a loan to expand...

    There's a lot of talk about "iPhone" millionaires, but the reality is that in comparison to the number of people failing or scraping by they are a tiny minority. Its still a lottery. And this is for titles with a fraction of the upfront costs of a Halo or an Uncharted.

  • Underdoseuk #68 2 years ago

    After being stung a fair few times by buying full retail games only for them to be short/shit I only ever rent games which is directly due to games pricing being to high. The kicker is I will be getting mw2. I love the multiplayer in modern warefare and as much as I hate to admit it I am part off the reason why activision hiked the price :(

  • Lemming81 #69 2 years ago

    The truth is we aren't short of good games for large periods of time. If they hike the price up on something as over-hyped as CoD, or expect me to spend a shitload on plastic peripherals because 'everyone else is' they are sorely mistaken.

    I've just bought Brutal Legend, Uncharted 2 and pre-ordered the GoW collection which are priced moderatly and have no plastic guitars in sight. Tell me how I'm missing out greedy industry-types, please...

  • JensonJet #70 2 years ago

    I'm not sure why there's such anger or worry about a select few games going up in price. The difference in cost between the top and bottom range in everything else we purchase in life is far greater. The car you drive and the one you want to drive, I expect, are very different in price. The same for where you live, or perhaps even the TV you use or clothes you wear.

    I think the price structure of the gaming industry needs an overhaul. A game that features a single-player, adversarial multiplayer and a co-op experience based on a relatively new or brand new game engine is worth far more than a game that's purely single player based on an old game engine. A game without co-op always appears overpriced to me, compared to games that have the potential to last for months on end.

    If a game brings a lot of pleasure for a year or more that's surely worth paying more for than a game that's only played once or twice. Throughout my gaming experience I've always looked for games that can entertain me for many months or years at a time. I'd happily pay £70-80 for a game that has long lasting appeal. Any game that's purely a single-player only experience is outrageously expensive at £40.

    Games that have us purchase special equipment (plastic guitars, etc) are ultimately the most expensive of all. And for as long as people are willing to buy special limited-edition versions of games, the industry is right to assume there are gamers who are willing to depart with more than £40 for a game.

    Games are expensive if you're addicted and need to play many. If you lose interest in games quickly and need a constant supply of new ones then it's clearly an expensive habit. If you're more select about your purchases, or patient enough to make use of the second-hand market the cost of gaming is still relatively cheap.

  • RobotRocker #71 2 years ago

    If a game brings a lot of pleasure for a year or more that's surely worth paying more for than a game that's only played once or twice. Throughout my gaming experience I've always looked for games that can entertain me for many months or years at a time. I'd happily pay £70-80 for a game that has long lasting appeal. Any game that's purely a single-player only experience is outrageously expensive at £40.

    I'd happily pay £70-80 for a game that has long lasting appeal.

    I am honestly speechless. There is absolutely nothing I could say that would convey the sheer bewilderment that statement has caused me.

    Really? £80? Are you insane? Dont answer that actually, because clearly you are a raving batshit loony who has no concept of the value of disposable entertainment or work in a PR department for a publisher.

  • WMain00 #72 2 years ago

    When I was at the EIGF, the biggest thing that struck me was that all the major people pretty much supported the price rise, quoting that it wasn't that long ago when N64 games et al were being sold at £60 and more. The problem is that the industry knows full well what it's doing. Those that can afford it such as Activision, EA etc will do so because the outcry caused by it will be at minimal. Want proof of that? Wait till Modern Warfare 2 comes out and watch. People will storm to buy the game and those who are storming are not your demographic who go on forums ranting about Activision for raising the prices and/or being mean guys.

    The truth is you see, as the industry gets bigger and bigger and more accepted as a mainstream media, it will shrug off the nerd look that it had up to the late 90's and early 2000, and start to take on a new look as a multi-demographic organisation. This has already occurred with the Wii moving into more casual media. Activision meanwhile will move into family entertainment media, and EA...well EA is EA and will likely continue as it always has. Funnily enough I think EA will become more friendly to risk developments such as Mirror's Edge et al.

    Basically, sit back and get used to it, because the future of the industry is about every gamer demographic, and those that don't want to join in will be left behind quite happily.

  • actionfitz #73 2 years ago

    "that price drops create consumer confusion (unless consumers are easily confused by having more money left in their wallets than they'd expected, I suspect that this is as untrue as it is condescending)."
    "The justification, as ever, is that development costs are rising, so the price of games needs to rise in order to pay for those rising costs. This is a piece of business logic which would only be praiseworthy had it been scribbled in crayon by a not particularly bright five-year-old, and illustrated with a nice picture of a smiling sun and some trees."

    agree totally.
    It's good to see someone in the media calling them on this bullshit too.
    +1 Gamesindustry.biz

  • carrotcake #74 2 years ago

    If I really want a game I still have to get it first day it becomes available. Not being able to afford it much just means I buy fewer games now. Ninja Gaiden Σ2 was £45 for me. I know it will be half that soon, but what can I do, I was counting down the days to its release months in advance.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #75 2 years ago

    "Ninja Gaiden Σ2 was £45 for me. I know it will be half that soon, but what can I do"

    Shoot yourself for being a feeble, weak-willed waste of space?

  • JensonJet #76 2 years ago

    RobotRocker,

    What the hell is your problem? While I understand there'll always be cheap-skate gamers who want games for next to nothing or in the case of pirates, who want them for free, I happen to think some games are excellent value for money.

    You have to understand I'm not an obsessed games fanatic. I don't buy a game every week. I'm pretty fussy about what I buy. I make mistakes in my choice sometimes and the games that last no more than a week work out incredibly expensive. The ones that last months or even years work out very reasonable. I suppose that's a strange concept to you.

    I assume you never go out as cinema, pubbing, clubbing, concerts, restaurants, etc must seem extortionate to you. For me gaming is a far cheaper form of entertainment than any of these.

    Perhaps you blindly buy any old game that comes out. This may explain why gaming is expensive to you. Choose wisely and gaming is one of the cheapest forms of entertainment. I don't have to work in a publishers PR department to understand that.

  • Lukey__b #77 2 years ago

    I don't pay release date asking price.... apart from Fallout 3 when it came out. That was because 1. Massive fan of the previous games 2. Happened to be in the market for a new game 3. Having a bit of a gaming night that night.

    Now, I don't agree with the massive prices (COD £55!!), but I do not regret paying full price for Fallout 3. Its a great game... and I would guess that I have gotten 2 hours of great entertainment for every £1 I spent on it. Compared to other things thats good value regardless on the amount of profit the dev/pub or retaler is making.

    But I would never pay £55 for COD. Others will. That's how markets work and how prices will be defined. If people have the money and think that the item is worth the price, they will buy it. If you don't think its worth it, dont but it... but don't cry about other people who want to pay that price.... yes, they may be idiots.... but, again, thats how markets work. Its like crying over gravity or sommin.

    Having an issue with the industry trying to muscle out the 2nd hand market is a valid reason to start getting shouty.

  • RobotRocker #78 2 years ago

    I assume you never go out as cinema, pubbing, clubbing, concerts, restaurants, etc must seem extortionate to you. For me gaming is a far cheaper form of entertainment than any of these.

    I do partake in those activities. I'm just selective. I just booked Tickets to Electric Six and Jonathan Coulton/Paul And Storm which cost me £15 each. My student discount works wonders in the local cinema which allows me to bring in stuff from the Tesco across the road. I limit my drinking as I am a health freak and I like to prepare my own food which saves a lot of money, particularly when you share with friends. Gaming is a far more expensive form of entertainment than any of these since you can save money on the others if you are sensible.

    Also, outside of digital downloads, I have only bought two "Full Price" games this year. One was Street Fighter 4 which I obtained at £27 anyway as I got it in an Airport HMV and the other was The Beatles Rock Band which was £25 for me as I made use of some spare GAME vouchers. Everything else was obtained second hand or obscenely cheap. I spent more on Gym Fees than I have on gaming this year and those are £25 a month. I barely buy anything new unless I am obscenly excited about it or I feel the developer has packed it with enough love and attention to get my money and even then I am content to wait a few weeks for Tesco or Asda to knock £10/20 off it.

    See, Ive been in this hobby for near 20 years now when I got a C64. Ive seen some of the most outrageous price gouging occur (Yes, I did have an N64. No, it was not pleasant at all) and quite frankly I have had enough of it. I love this hobby but it has to evolve or die. Asda has Every Season of the Wire for under £20 at the minute. That has more than 20 hours of content per set of hands down the greatest TV show ever created and has more content than any Single player game this year except possibly Dragon Age, FIFA 10 or Forza Motorsport 3. This is what games compete with now. This isnt a niche, nerdy hobby anymore. This is mainstream entertainment that competes with other forms for a consumers money and its shocking that we still pay the same silly amounts of money for it that we did 15 years ago.

    Your concept of value is extremely flawed as well. While you may think you are getting more moneys worth out of Multi-player, its just repetition over and over. Multiplayer components are like DVD extras. They shouldn't justify charging more for the core single player experience. Not only that, some people wont even touch the online multiplayer (The death of Split-Screen is another annoying issue but thats too much of a de-rail). A feature some people wont even touch should not even justify any sort of price increase. Yet many companies do. Tacking on the entire Halo 3 Multiplayer mode to justify whacking ODST to full price is an exceedingly twatish thing to do. DLC maps or no DLC maps. Saying you will pay £80 for to run around the same maps, doing the same thing with different people requires a hell of a lot of cognitive dissonance.

    So yes, I am a cheapskate and I am bloody proud of it at the minute because the games industry can fuck the horse they fucked in on if they expect me to blow three weeks of shopping money on a game.

    /Speaking of Digital Downloads. I got more fun out of Trails HD, Splosion Man and Shadow Complex than most full games in the last 5 years. Go figure.

  • secombe #79 2 years ago

    Amazing. Everyone moaning about high prices and the one person to dare mentioning that things like the two geoDefense games (total price: £1.18) from the App Store could be a way forward and something the rest of the industry could learn from gets their post downrated.

    Expect anything less from the intelligent folk on EG? (the ones that mock analysts, but get everything wrong themselves...would love to dig up some old DS and Wii posts prior to there releases) If they don't like or understand it (or more worryingly, if they've not tried it), they mark it down or ignore it.

    It's the biggest single thing to happen to game pricing in 20 years, yet hardly anybody is talking about it.

  • Tonka #80 2 years ago

    A friend of mine bought Uncharted 2 on release day. I couldn't believe my ears when I heard how much he paid. I've stopped buying new games entirely. I can't justify putting down what amounts to a return ticket to Budapest, Milan or Prague on something that I know will be 3 times cheaper within two months.

    Tat is the biggest problem for me. I know the game will drop rapidly and massively in price. So why bother getting it on day one? Second hand/on-line bargains is where it's at for me. Yes, I'm a stingy fucker but that gives me the opportunity to do so much more with my time.

  • keyboardmonkey #81 2 years ago

    Game price has become quite an issue for me recently, I moved away from blighty and moved to a country where there is little if any competition between retailers. Games here normal retail at the MRRP so if i want to buy Batman currently the cheapest i can find it is 42 GBP, in the UK it's for sale at 35 GBP... and this is an example where the difference is not too bad. Anyone willing to pay 39 GBP for Halo ODST.

    I buy pretty much all of my games online and have them delivered here. Indie game shops have been complaining about the large retailers for year, now the large games retailers are complaining about the supermarkets. Well you guys are going to have to adapt. You're not going to be able to rip people off on the big releases anymore, and maybe just maybe you will need to have a wide selection of games with staff who are knowledgable about them. Almost like indie record shops ;-)

    It does feel like some parts of the industry believe they should be able to charge whatever they want. Can they not see what has already happened with the music industry? CD's that were priced at £15-20. Keep the prices reasonable and people will buy the games, try shafting people and you will sell less games but do a great favour to the second hand market you despise so much.
    As for development getting more and more expensive does that mean some games which are cheaper to make are retailed cheaper? because at the moment given the rrp's of games it would appear they all have the same development costs. It is just greed within the industry, how come it's possible to sell the same game at a greatly reduced price months later in some cases only weeks after its release?

    /Finally Orange box and Burnout Paradise have both been great examples of value for money products.

  • JensonJet #82 2 years ago

    RobotRocker

    My concept of value isn't flawed, it's simply that it's 'my concept of value', and it differs from yours. One person spends £2000 on a watch. Another spends £50,000 on a car. Are they wrong, do they have a flawed opinion of value? Of course not. If you have the finances and love the product enough, you'll purchase. If you don't care much for a product or are on limited funds then you miss out. That's life. Gaming is big business now. Games differ greatly in their quality, size and popularity. It's natural that the price structure would change to reflect the way the industry is changing. In future I wouldn't be surprised to see very popular game twice the price of a far less popular one. It makes sense.

    Taking FIFA and ProEvo as an example. As FIFA is the more popular and generally considered the more polished of the two football games it's no stretch of the imagination to assume one day FIFA could well cost more than ProEvo. It makes sense too. If ProEvo can't compete on a technical level and is dramatically losing sales to FIFA, then it equally makes sense for them to reduce the cost in order to compete. We're unlikely to see ProEvo drop in price, but I would expect FIFA will be more expensive eventually.

  • YourMessageHere #83 2 years ago

    One person spends £2000 on a watch. Another spends £50,000 on a car. Are they wrong, do they have a flawed opinion of value? Of course not. If you have the finances and love the product enough, you'll purchase. If you don't care much for a product or are on limited funds then you miss out. That's life.

    That sounds like a textbook description of a flawed concept of value to me. That's not any sort of concept of value, in fact, it's simply a willingness to pay the asking price set against the contents of one's bank account, which is not value at all. Because someone slaps an insanely high price tag on something does not imbue it with magical 'value', because price and value are completely seperate things. The £2,000 watch and the £50,000 car do exactly the same as equivalents that cost a 50th of the price - they have little to no greater actual value. Value comes from the relationship between the price and what the thing does, and how much that appeals to you. It is because people confuse the value and the price, and because people don't understand that this sort of confusion is simply incorrect, that companies can get away with selling £2,000 watches, £50,000 cars and £55 games. I can't say I feel that I am missing out because my watch cost £40 - it tells the time and does in just the way I want it to.

    I disagree with RobotRocker in his description of multiplayer as like DVD extras - some of it is like that, especially in those games where it is clearly tacked on because they feel obliged to provide multiplayer, but it is the whole point of many games. COD4 is unusual in that both the singleplayer and multiplayer are equally feted. But neither it not MW2 are good value for me, because basically both are two games at once, and I don't want the multiplayer half. Conversely there are plenty of people out there who only want the multiplayer and will never be interested in the singleplayer game. I might be willing to pay half price for the singleplayer.

    "Amazing. Everyone moaning about high prices and the one person to dare mentioning that things like the two geoDefense games (total price: £1.18) from the App Store could be a way forward and something the rest of the industry could learn from gets their post downrated."

    Expect anything less from the intelligent folk on EG? (the ones that mock analysts, but get everything wrong themselves...would love to dig up some old DS and Wii posts prior to there releases) If they don't like or understand it (or more worryingly, if they've not tried it), they mark it down or ignore it.

    It's the biggest single thing to happen to game pricing in 20 years, yet hardly anybody is talking about it.

    Games for iPhone have little or less to do with games for anything else (it's not easy to resist the temptation to draw some sort of distinction between iPhone games and "real games";), hence it's hardly appropriate. Anyway, these games are cheap, people are moaning about expensive games and want them to be cheap...so what exactly is it that everyone else isn't talking about?

  • RobotRocker #84 2 years ago

    @ YourMessageHere

    I used the DVD extras example because like DVD extras. People might not use multi-player or want a component like it. The film industry often makes two versions of a DVD release. A Cheap £5-10 version with very few extras and on a single disc for those who just want the film. Or a deluxe version with 2-3 discs, lots of extras, deluxe packaging and other additions for £15-20 for the collectors.

    Now this is an exceedingly bad idea for the games industry since they are most publishers are a bunch of greedy pricks who would run the concept into the ground and make it worse for consumers. But the choice of a version with/without multiplayer would be an interesting idea to debate at least.

    Edited by 1 at 19/10/09 @ 18:19

  • JensonJet #85 2 years ago

    YourMessageHere,

    Fortunately I don't worry about value. If I can afford something or am willing to wait until I can, I buy what I like. I see absolutely no point complaining about the cost of a product. I see even less point in trying to explain to people their purchases are wrong because they're not good value. Do you not think there are purchases you've made that wouldn't suit other people and they could easily argue you've wasted your money? Maybe your whole life is spent on a serious budget. I happen to enjoy not worrying about the cost of things. All that matters to me is what I can afford. Your attitude may well have you make some very sensible purchases and after a lifetime allow you to settle down to retirement with a few extra bob in the bank, but I like to live a little freely with my money. I buy whatever my taste and bank account dictate. It suits me fine. No doubt that's completely immoral to you.

  • BonzoBanana #86 2 years ago

    I don't blame the publishers for wanting to raise prices. I totally understand it and Activision doing so with a major must have title is understandable. Its the right title to do this. As consumers we either resist and refuse to buy at that price in which case the game fails and the price increase is not copied for other games or people still buy it in massive numbers and the new pricing gets accepted. Tight fisted people like myself will have our fingers crossed that other consumers will resist the new pricing and be sensible.