Jump to navigation

Table of contents

Page Previous 1 2 Next

Advertisement

The Price Gamble Article

Article by Rob Fahey

21 November, 2009

Page 1 of 2. Page 2 ->

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.

1.7 million people in the UK bought Modern Warfare 2 last week, a figure almost lost in the controversy which has surrounded this game for months. Amidst voices raised by the controversial airport level, it's almost possible to forget that a few months ago, it wasn't the content of Modern Warfare 2 that concerned us all - it was the price.

In the end, the higher price-point which fermented so much debate over the summer meant nothing to consumers. While specialist retailers fumed, some supermarkets discounted the game down to £26 and online behemoth Amazon dropped its price tag to £32 a few days before launch. Even considering the buying power of such retail giants, it's likely that some outlets were treating the game as a loss leader.

As such, Activision's £10 price hike was mostly absorbed by retailers, not passed on to consumers - a fact which will give publishers pause for thought in the coming weeks. There has always been a fear that if MW2 was not damaged by the higher price-point, other publishers would seek to drive their own prices up - in defiance of the obvious decline in most consumers' value perception of all media, games included.

Well, Activision pulled it off and delivered the industry's biggest-ever launch - but we're still not much the wiser as to whether consumers would have accepted the move, since most consumers never got to see it in action. Some readings of Activision's figures for the game suggest that the average selling price of MW2 was actually lower than that for Grand Theft Auto IV, which carried a perfectly normal SRP.

For Activision, of course, this is perfectly fine. It's not all that bothered about how much consumers paid for the game - as long as retailers paid the inflated trade price, then the publisher laughs all the way to the bank, regardless of how much those retailers then chose to debase their own margins in order to remain competitive.

One wonders whether this had been Activision's plan all along. From the moment that the price hike was announced, commentators sucked in their breath and marveled at what an immense risk the publisher seemed to be taking with a goose that had previously been guaranteed to lay golden eggs. Yet it may well be that Activision knew perfectly well that retailers would never sell Modern Warfare 2 at full price. Anticipating the price war that broke out between supermarkets and online retailers - with specialist stores unwillingly caught in the crossfire - it knew that it could gouge its "partners" with a higher trade price, confident in the knowledge that consumers would not feel the sting.

If that is the case, then one side of the industry can only take its hats off to Activision's clever manoeuvring, even while the retailers who have just helped to inflate the company's quarterly figures lick their wounds and glower. They'll get their own back, of course - MW2 will turn profits for companies like GAME, GameStop and GameStation for months and even years to come as copies cycle through the second-hand market - but right now, Activision is the victor, having sneakily managed to hammer retail margins for one of the biggest releases of the year into the ground.

However, everyone knows that this isn't a situation which will be repeated too often. Supermarkets will only treat a small minority of extremely high-profile, seasonal releases as loss leaders, and specialist retailers simply can't take this kind of margin squeeze indefinitely. The next publisher to try and shove its SRP up may well find that retailers are not prepared to soak up the difference this time - leaving it in the exposed position of passing the price hike on to consumers for the first time, and almost certainly doing so with a far less attractive and anticipated product than MW2.

Advertisement

Are you excited about Modern Warfare 2 on PC/PlayStation 3/Xbox 360?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games

Thanks!

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Comments: 1-50 of 70 in total | next 50 »

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
Emmit_Assassin
21/11/09 @ 10:22
#1
+24
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Of course, it goes without saying that publishers could not survive if they sold games developed and marketed using their existing business model for a handful of coins rather than a handful of notes. However, this is the challenge to which they must rise - that others are finding cheaper, more effective ways of delivering experiences to a wide range of consumers (including many upstream gamers), and that they must adapt and innovate upon their development processes and business models in order to survive."

And the first way they will try and 'innovate' is to find innovative ways in which to rip us off with bloody 'micro transactions' and paying extra for online content.
BabyJesus
21/11/09 @ 10:28
#2
+5
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Aslong as no other publisher decides to followsuit and make that RRP the norm I'm happy.
RobotRocker
21/11/09 @ 10:35
#3
+10
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Consumers who spend hours playing something like Farmville for free will increasingly question the basic concept of spending the same amount on a videogame that they would spend on a night out, especially as web game experiences become more and more complex and involving. The same goes for mobile-phone games, which generally retail for between £3 and £5 - as those experiences improve and evolve, DS or PSP software selling at between £20 and £30 is going to look increasingly ridiculous.

Farmville, Mafia Wars and the likes are a massive scam however. They allow players to play for free but to make micro transactions to get boosts and extra turns that are primarily useless in the long run. Even Free to play games like Pangya and Maple Story at least give players something tangible and unique with each transaction. Its just a ploy to get kids hooked and pay more for playing a game that's going to be more expensive than a DS title in the long run.

But hey, since the industry likes the current "fuck the customer" model. I don't see that changing any time soon either.

Edit: Before you start screaming how your farm is better than all your FaceBook friends. I suggest reading this

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/10/31/sca...

Edited 1 times, most recently on 21/11/09 @ 10:42
4thVariety
21/11/09 @ 10:37
#4
+8
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It's not about being justified, it's about getting away with it and making more money. No matter how much the people might moan about it, there is no help from the media side as the media only serve their advertisement revenue interests.

Basic fact is that the industry pays the media's bills, it is not the users, hence the power of the users is dwindling really really fast.
trevd72
21/11/09 @ 10:42
#5
+2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
if you paid more that £40.....unlucky. everyone I know who have it had every intention to pick it up when the price dropped, and boy did it drop. I mean £26 is a steal.
El-Dev
21/11/09 @ 10:47
#6
+3
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Wasn't Fifa the first game that started the price wars between the supermarkets this year? If so that was released after Activision announced the price would be higher than normal, and Activision surely couldn't have predicted that would happen between the supermarkets. Maybe they just got lucky.
lucky_jim
21/11/09 @ 10:56
#7
+4
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It's been obvious for a while that supermarkets are prepared to use gaming in this way. Sainsbury's did their discounted Wii consoles at the height of the rush for the console (only to see GAME send their staff to buy the stock and re-sell it at their own price, but that's another story), and I'm quite sure last year's FIFA was the subject of similar (though less extreme) discounting as MW2: it was £25-30 pretty much everywhere.

So Activision have done well out of this, but as the article says, there aren't many companies in a position to follow suit. It didn't take a huge amount of business acumen either, because the signs have been there for a long time, but it did take some balls. When the hike was announced, Activision's line was "we're gonna charge £55 cos we know people will pay it", so someone obviously took a decision to pretend Activision were expecting gamers to pay that much when in reality they knew retailers would take the hit. But that said, Bobby Kotick seems to see winding us gamers up as a sport, and it's a safer one than publicly winding up retailers.

Edit: Apostrophe abuse.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 21/11/09 @ 10:56
secombe
21/11/09 @ 10:56
#8
+6
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Having recently bought a 360 after being an exclusively Wii gamer for a few years, the prices of games (even online or in supermarkets) do concern me. I've thought long and hard about the 360 games I want to play, Forza 3 was a dead cert for me so I paid the price, but 99% of my 360 purchases will be second-hand or much later in the product cycle when it's cheaper on Play etc.

£30-35 is my self-imposed limit, which in reality means I'm going to end up playing games a few months after everyone else...which considering I don't play online, is not an issue at all.

The irony of all that is, the most time I've spent on any game this year was on an iPhone game...that cost me 59p, and yes for me that does bring into sharp perspective the cost of DS games.
spenner
21/11/09 @ 10:58
#9
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It definately would be intersting to see the number of people that paid anywhere near the full rrp. Like mentioned everyone I know paid £26 quid on launch so I guess the only people paying the full amount are the gaming uneducated / ill informed / xmas shoppers.

bad09
21/11/09 @ 10:59
#10
+5
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I spoke to a retailer yesterday who confirmed the price they were paying themselves at £41 for MW2. I was disgusted at first when I heard of retailers were buying up these supermarket loss leaders but at that sort of trade price can we really blame them. Christ selling it for £45 and they still only make a couple of quid!

I do hope it is only Acti and no one else follows their greedy disgusting path but we all know they will (some did when it was announced), it's only gonna get worse now. Thankfully I'm stopping the console gaming but PC is still affected.

Personally unless I trade in (which is becoming less and less now I'm not really console gaming) I think launch games are gonna be a thing of the past for me now. In 2009 the industry finally taught me one important thing about gaming I never really thought of before - I CAN WAIT.....
bad09
21/11/09 @ 11:01
#11
-1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"if you paid more that £40.....unlucky. everyone I know who have it had every intention to pick it up when the price dropped, and boy did it drop. I mean £26 is a steal."

Christ people REALLY don't get it do they. £26 is £15 below cost on MW2 for most retailers, how many games can they sell at that loss?
KDR_11k
21/11/09 @ 11:10
#12
+4
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Sounds like another disruption rolling through to me. Between the Wii and the web it looks like the core game industry is in for a lot of hurt.

Basic fact is that the industry pays the media's bills, it is not the users, hence the power of the users is dwindling really really fast.

And who pays the industry's bills?
Edited 1 times, most recently on 21/11/09 @ 11:12
agparrot
21/11/09 @ 11:15
#13
+4
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@bad09

Christ people REALLY don't get it do they. £26 is £15 below cost on MW2 for most retailers, how many games can they sell at that loss?

Well not many, obviously, but I don't think the consumer really cares, when the price is this low. Of one thing I'm sure - if the RRP of MW2 had been £55, I wouldn't have bought it, but being able to pick it up for £32 in a nearby Asda made it a no brainer for me. If I'd had a nearer Sainsbury's, I'd have been all over it at £26.
superjag86
21/11/09 @ 11:15
#14
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Good article. It seems the price hike was an attack on retailers then as neither consumers nor the publisher was hurt by the increase. Retailers may make money on the whole trade in marketplace but I wonder how long this will last.
Bagpuss
21/11/09 @ 11:15
#15
+3
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
This sort of price strategy will only work on those handful, and i do mean handful, of titles that have their own momentum, where they have shifted into public conciousness....

If any mid level publisher, with an average title, which constitutes 99% of yearly releases, tries this level of pricing, they will be committing commercial suicide.

Besides, what would have been the sales figures if MW2 had been £55 everywhere, no exceptions, whilst still huge, not 1.7million.
spudsbuckley
21/11/09 @ 11:17
#16
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Odd, i bought the game for €45 rather than the usual €55-60 that you'd usually pay here in Ireland :/
Metalfish
21/11/09 @ 11:29
#17
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
26 quid from Sainsburys for me. If they're happy to sell it at that price, I'm happy to buy it from them. As consumers, we don't have to worry too much about this ourselves (unless they bring out "fair trade" games or something).
FooAtari
21/11/09 @ 11:30
#18
+4
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Next year I am giving myself a monthly budget on entertainment of £50. I need to try and get what I spend on entertainment under control and also buy less games/movies/music that I am not getting full use of and effectively wasting my money on. (buy so many games that I probably play for less than 5 hours)

I didn't buy MW2, and had not intentions of. However any game at £55 would mean I wont be buying it. Instead I'll wait for the price to drop, or forget about it and never buy it all.
Mr_Fiddler
21/11/09 @ 11:34
#19
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Surely "spending the same amount on a videogame that they would spend on a night out" implies the opposite of what was intended, i.e. that the game is the better value for money (assuming that you play it for more than one evening) ?

Personally I can't see that they raised the price for any other reason than greed. They pretty much were guaranteed to get very high sales and high profits were surely never in any doubt even at the standard RRP. I don't see many other games getting away with this, people will just wait a few months until the price inevitably drops.
local_celebrity
21/11/09 @ 11:51
#20
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Great article and perceptive as ever. But how can the trade price of MW2 possibly be £41? If that's true, Sainsburys effectively handed over £15 to each customer. I find that hard to believe.
Machetazo
21/11/09 @ 11:52
#21
-1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@agparrot: interesting point you make about neither the consumers, nor the publisher having lost out due to Acti's decision.
Another consideration would be, I think, that it's also utterly devastated the trade-in value of MW2. Once you have a copy, you may as well hold on to it, and chances are that you'll get a copy, because a lot of other people did (the visibility's right there, any time you sign in and see the friend's list), if for no other reason.

Is this a realistically repeatable/smart way for publishers to combat pre-owned, though. I don't think so, because I doubt that retail would continually take the loss.
lucky_jim
21/11/09 @ 11:58
#22
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I scrolled to the bottom of the comments to see a banner ad for MW2 at shopto, proudly proclaiming "£42.99- save 21%". Heh.
Lee_Morris
21/11/09 @ 12:28
#23
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I fear that we're only going to get more 'epic' games on console and these games will continue to get blander and more americanised to hit the widest possible demograhic. sigh
whoslotte
21/11/09 @ 12:36
#24
+4
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The only reason I bought MW2 was because asda priced it low. At full price there was no way I was going to buy it.
Vertical Stand
21/11/09 @ 12:42
#25
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Good article, but could have done with comparing it with other examples, such as Square Enix pricing in Japan. I agree with bad09 its about greed, about using a brand to sell it at a highest possible price they can get away with. Its not an exact science, not even if we on the outside were able to know the exact costs and margins. However its more of a feeling about the game from the way its presented to the bits of information we have about the price retail has to pay for games, people can tell its not about growth on the part of Activision. about money for investment in staff, studios and new games but about material greed.

And that is the point where I turn away, not boycott or anything silly like that, I just turn away because I'm not interested, same with yearly updates, when Konami went the way of Fifa with their own football games I simply walked away.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 21/11/09 @ 12:43
JohnnyWashnGo
21/11/09 @ 12:47
#26
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
If the price had not been reduced from RRP then I would never have bought it.

As it was, the £26 deal at Sainburys meant I could try it, find out I didn't like it and trade it in for a profit.

I never buy games at full price, its just not economically sound at this point in time.

For example, I really wanted to play Infamous but didn't want to pay full price. This week it hit £14.99 at hmv.co.uk so I bought it. If it had never hit that price, I would never have played it but seeing as it did, I will give it a shot.
notmyrealname
21/11/09 @ 12:52
#27
-7
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I like how the people here forget inflation. Games nowadays real economic price is roughly equal to games during ps2/ps1 era. It's just that those games have had their cycles run, so they are cheaper now.

People need to think more before opening the mouth.

Concerning MW2: If the customer pays the price, why not? BTW I live in the netherlands and it's just standard price here, in fact it's cheaper among the newest releases (44e versus 55e). Am I nutty or is england being shafted here?

*edit* I always buy second hand, so this doesnt worry me in the slightest.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 21/11/09 @ 12:54
Vertical Stand
21/11/09 @ 13:04
#28
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@notmyrealname well it should worry you cause those second hand sales give publishers an reason for high prices, because retail takes all the money from second hand (and thats without considering the harm of piracy) so they need to charge high prices for new games, its a vicious cycle.

I said it above its not an exact science and that includes inflation, far too many factors for us to pin down, sure games costs a lot more but you had Nintendo high fees, cartridge production, a generally smaller market place back then etc. But you do get a sense of when it goes beyond a developer or a publisher wanting to do well and maybe even grow, to one that is just exploiting its brand and all those who are interested in it, or interested in selling it for huge profits.
Edited 2 times, most recently on 21/11/09 @ 13:08
GreyBeard
21/11/09 @ 14:26
#29
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I wonder what percentage of buyers have paid less than the usual RRP (£39.99) for MW2 so far? From talking to people I know with the game it seems like nearly all of them got it at a heavy discount.

I dunno, but it seems to me that for a lot of people MW2 was ultimately cheaper than average. Now I know that's just an anecdote, but to be realistic I can't see too many people paying over the average for it after its been on the market for a few weeks.

People expect prices to fall over time on games, not go up, and certainly not for a game like this where its core audience wants to be online gaining perks and combat experience as soon as possible.

Just looking at the way it was reported, MW2 apparently shifted as many as 1.2 million units on day #1, but by the end of the week it had "only" (lol) risen to 1.7mil. That's a heavy, heavy drop-off.

If the prices generally return to ATVI's desired RRP I can see that decreasing sales trend getting worse as competing titles start looking like better, cheaper, deals.

MW sold very well for a long time, but will it be the same for MW2?
UKLL
21/11/09 @ 14:30
#30
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
MW2 isn't just a game it's a phenomenon, you only have to look at all the hype, coverage and sales it generated to see that it's unique. If the industry tries similar price hykes with the majority of other games then people will either buy less games, wait for the price to drop (and game prices do drop quickly) or they will buy them secondhand.

I bought it at somewhere selling it full price but I had a ton of store credit I had to use up so I only forked out £16 in cash.

I'll probably only buy a couple of games before the next COD is released.
Edited 2 times, most recently on 21/11/09 @ 14:32
beemoh
21/11/09 @ 14:33
#31
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@Machetazo >Is this a realistically repeatable/smart way for publishers to combat pre-owned, though. I don't think so, because I doubt that retail would continually take the loss.

I think it might make matters worse in the long run- they've exacerbated the problem that got specialist retail so reliant on second-hand games (low margins) and as soon as supermarkets start to either sell the game at closer to full price (Tesco and Asda online seem to be doing this already) or ditch it altogether in favour of the next thing, suddenly GAME et al have an excuse to be even more stingy with trade-in prices.

That being said, MW2 got games into a number of new retailers who have announced that they're going to expand their offerings- which, assuming they're smart with it and get in a decent range of titles, rather than just taking the shortest possible route and buying in waggley shovelware crap that nobody else is managing to move either, might allow some enterprising single- or double-A developer to abuse an economy of scale and pull their own wholesale prices down as a way of getting one over on AAA developers.

One major thing that affects pretty much all of games from 'businessy' things like pricing and sales to broader topics like cultural acceptance and the range of titles on offer basically comes down to a lack of retail options- something that seriously needs fxing before it's too late.
hilts
21/11/09 @ 15:00
#32
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I believe it is back up to around £45 in most places now - no doubt it will still sell plenty in the run up to Xmas - so doesn't that show that their model has worked , given that most other releases will be around £40
Jonny5Alive7
21/11/09 @ 15:07
#33
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I think the article is reading too much into Activisions price rise. Everyone knew it was going to be massive seller regardless of the price going up a tenner, so they were just being greedy. I really don't think they were bothered if the consumers got hit with the rise or not.

Theres no way other games will be able to get away with a rise like MW2. The game would already have to be an established popular brand for sales still to be as good. Plus games prices always tend to drop in the 2nd half of a console's lifespan, so I don't think they will be increasing much any time soon.
dsmx
21/11/09 @ 15:08
#34
+2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
For me I paid £30 for COD4 the week it came out on the PC. When MW2 was coming out they said there would be price hike so at that point I sat on the bench about should I get it, then 2 weeks before launch news started leaking out about features in the PC version that have been removed from COD4. I started thinking why am I paying more for a game that has less features in it than the previous version? Then when it launched but you could get copies for £26. By then though I was pissed off at IW trying to suggest that p2p is an improvement of dedicated servers, then saying the maps weren't balanced for lean and saying mouse control and text chat is a feature for the PC version. That was the best thing they could come up with for features on the PC version, something that has been in every PC multiplayer shooter since, well since multiplayer shooters went online.

Currently I'm happily playing l4d2 and bf2 which I bought with the money that was going to go towards MW2.

Overall I struggling to see why you would buy MW2 on the PC, I just can't see why.

Edited 1 times, most recently on 21/11/09 @ 15:09
Lukey__b
21/11/09 @ 15:13
#35
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Got it for £22.50 when I traded in MW1. As it was my brothers MW1, I think thats not a bad deal.

I've played it for 10 hours total online so far..... thats £2.25 an hour. Less that a pint. Even if it was £32 from Amazon thats 'steal' a good deal..... plus im gonna play it alot more that 10 hours in the future.

I would have never paid anymore than £35 for it, regardless of activisions price hike or what not. £35 is my ceiling for games... unless its a one off special (like a FF game, or Fallout... or some other IP I love) and COD has never lived up to the hype for me. That doesnt mean I don't really enjoy it and dont think its a 9/10 game (whatever these scores mean).... but its not as special as the press, hype, fans make out. Although I think MW2 is an improvement over the last.
k4rl
21/11/09 @ 15:40
#36
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
what price hike, I got mine for £24.99 from morrisons. Actually cheaper than World at War
davisorle
21/11/09 @ 15:40
#37
-10
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I didnt read the article. I got irritated just from the titles question of the price being worth or not. Lets just say that if each title's pricetag has to fit with the product's quality they owe us all some serious fucking money for every other titles of activision and any other publisher that passed us so far. I wont get to answer if MW2 is worth its price since they already stated themselves that they didnt sppend the budget that Activision was willing to do so for the game. Thats another factor for them. For me its all the same. I dont think its convinient even for Activision to be pricing by product quality, at all actually. Cause if you check the stats I havent seen any record breaking title or company till now do it twice so if you ask me, they are bound to have lower than the regular price for the next game of theirs since it wont be as good or whatever it might mean.

This whole thing is plain stupid if you ask me. Not to be offended to any of the ones with a clear, different or not opinion of their own but I am not willing to even read the article nor comments on this subject. The game is good. It's online would be good if it wasnt as if you play on PSN by P2P and even my PC version is lagging like crap when I havent had worst quality on connection on my online games ever since... I cant even remember actually which is pathetic. Other than that the game is good.

P.S. they can shove the price tags up their ass. I would much better kow it was for charity or a purpose and id pay even twice,
marronthered
21/11/09 @ 15:56
#38
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
i bought it on release day for £26 from sainsburys at 8.30am. there was a queue of about 50 people. i dandered over to game at 9am to see what the queue was like... it was practically empty. the game sales assitants were all dressed up in khaki ready for an onslaught that never came... sad? not really no.

some cheek of activision to charge that price in the middle of a recession! they are laughing all the way to the bank!
metalangel
21/11/09 @ 17:01
#39
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Wasn't interested in MW2 until the £26 drop. Was then interested but still have not been able to actually find it anywhere for that price. Interest fading fast, everyone on my friends list playing (and indeed finishing) so reckon I've missed the boat and just won't bother.
Quixz
21/11/09 @ 17:57
#40
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
This is a distributor's problem than a consumers one. They are the ones that can tell Acti:Bliz FUCK YOU we aint selling your shit at a loss.
jambo74
21/11/09 @ 18:10
#41
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Prike hike, never paid that hight price. There were places offering the game for £30
Spooke
21/11/09 @ 18:19
#42
-4
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I stopped paying for DS games a long time ago, 99% of them are simply not worth £20 with only the excellent GTA and Nintendo staples even coming close.
makeamazing
21/11/09 @ 18:53
#43
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I think £26 was probably too much for this over priced peice of junk :)

But on a serious note, do you think retail will take such a high loss on a game thats not likely unless its a big game. I also dont see publishers risking rising the price too much as it could easily put the risk of no sale over it.
Sunyavadin
21/11/09 @ 19:25
#44
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It's an interesting alternative to download-only availability in order to avoid the money the publishers mistakenly and greedily see themselves as "losing" through the second hand market. Charge extra to the retailers the first time round, and you recoup the tenner they'll make selling the game on second hand when the initial buyer returns it.

I for one prefer it to ideas like Sony's new PSP. But I can't help worrying what the long term effects will be...
makeamazing
21/11/09 @ 19:49
#45
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Charge extra to the retailers the first time round, and you recoup the tenner they'll make selling the game on second hand when the initial buyer returns it

Maybe, but games are traded in much more than just once, so they lose more than just a £10 longer term. Ive read somewhere on here that one game was tracked and traded in 8 times. Thats alot of cash.

Games need to add more locked in content, that means a player is less likely to trade in. We are seeing that already, with single use codes in games where you can download something. Doesnt stop a user trading in but certainly means theres less value to someone buying *well if they know it includes such an item.
beemoh
21/11/09 @ 20:09
#46
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The only real long-term solution to second hand is to undermine it by reducing new prices, squeezing margins on used stock- a focus on online play, which kept a lot of copies of CoD 4 out of the channel, only works for one specific market.

This does leave a few other issues, but I think those are vacuums that will soon fill themselves.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 21/11/09 @ 20:10
Grayvern
21/11/09 @ 20:58
#47
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Whether the supermarkets took the price hit or not depends on how much it cost them from the distributers. It's unlikely but distribution middlemen could have taken a hit.
TheGuvernor
21/11/09 @ 21:50
#48
+6
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Has it not occured to these greedy muppets that lowering their exorbitant prices for video games might REDUCE piracy & actually increase their profits.
makeamazing
21/11/09 @ 22:11
#49
-5
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Whos being greedy in all this though....

When you spend anything between 10 and 100 million to make a game, you probably want to make the money back.. Remember the consumer buys with their wallet, no one is forcing them to buy. So if they pay a certain amount then they are telling the game creators that is ok. If no one buys and they have to drop the price, then the same can be said again.

Lets not go down the route of dropping the prices will reduce piracy, many people pirate because they dont want to pay, it has nothing to do with cost.
biru
21/11/09 @ 22:38
#50
-2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"In the end, the higher price-point which fermented so much debate..."

I believe you mean 'fomented'. Wouldn't want to imagine what a fermented debate is like!

Comments: 1-50 of 70 in total | next 50 »

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Get Games.  Download Great PC Games!

X View gallery