"Games are a luxury item." So?

[Kerboom]

Move to Australia, then you'll have something to ***** about. We have to pay twice as much while fighting off 6 foot tall spiders on our way to the store.

Your minimum wage is also MUCH higher than EVERYWHERE ELSE.

Ireland: ?8.65/hour (11.07 AUD)
England: (Different rates corresponding to age groups. Over 21 is the one I'm using) £6.08/hour (9.77 AUD)
Australia: 15.51 AUD.


I could go on listing examples, and sure, the cost of living in Australia is a slight bit higher than over here (not much though, our minimum wage isn't sufficient to give people a standard of living any higher than those on social welfare) but you earn more money than everyone else. Why should you have to pay the same?

You honestly believe the extra forty dollars (Very occasionally more.) that Australians have to fork out to buy the game actually mostly goes towards the costs incurred by shipping, marketing and stocking the game over here? Really??

Listen, mate.. this is your lucky day! I've got this deed to this little building down in Sydney, waterside property you understand, one of a kind architecture, nothing else like it in the entire world, you might have even heard of it, the Sydney Opera House.

I'd just like to say something here. First of all, I never said ANYTHING about shipping, marketing or stocking, I'll come back to that later.

Next, ok... I don't know why you felt like putting that whole paragraph in that has nothing to do at all with anything I just said, but whatever floats your boat.

Finally: you're missing my point.

Entirely.

Either that or you're just rambling on about something totally unrelated to what I was saying, but regardless, let me explain what I was trying to get across in a different way.

Australians get paid approximately 4 dollars an hour more than other countries for people on minimum wage. Keeping that in mind, why shouldn't games be charged at higher prices there than everywhere else?

Now, let's examine a kotaku article about this subject from 2010. This article: http://www.kotaku.com.au/2010/11/why-do-videogames-cost-so-much/

Speaking to Mark Langford earlier this month, he revealed that the margins on video games at retail are low, and selling a new game at $79.95 is essentially equivalent to selling at cost price.

Ok. Now. Let's lay out the information we have.

1) Australian's have a higher minimum wage than the majority of other countries.
2) Australian cost of living is higher than other countries (this is everyday essentials: food, shelter, etc.)
3) Selling a new game at ~80 AUD is almost the same as cost price.

Think of it this way. How are they going to pay their staff their wages if they make no money? Retailers can't afford to sell cheaper than they do, because otherwise they'll have to let people go.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Trust me, as a US citizen, I know that XD

It's just a sad truth; we're not the shining city on a hill anymore. The post-Reagan conservative movement put an end to that -- Richard Nixon was more liberal than most modern democrats.

Aye, and it's that we couldn't be that proverbial city on a hill, it's just that we act like we are when we're not.
The source of the problem is multifaceted:
Incompetent leadership stemming from an incompetent, impractical culture combined with political apathy from an overworked, paranoid, and quite frankly stupid population.

I have no idea how far the rabbit hole goes, but there seems to be an endless supply of hare-brains popping out and running for office. Over HALF of the governors I've seen in my lifetime end up in jail for shit they did during their term in office (Illinois Politicians ladies and gentlemen!)

By the way, thank you for actually knowing about supply and demand curves. Most people on these forums seem to think the supply side is the only side that has any say in anything to do with economics, especially when it comes to the price of goods, which is just completely wrong.

I see a lot of nonsensical arguments amounting to "Since games are luxuries, they can overcharge all they want. Deal with it." which doesn't make ANY sense if they're arguing from the point of a business looking to make the most money.

Each market has a complicated series of variables, but they ultimately end up leading to the Marginal Cost (barring Monopolies/Oligopolies, but those can fail too if people get fed up with them and do without). Charge too much, and you move away from the marginal cost.
(conversely, charge TOO LITTLE* and you don't turn a profit.)

"Overcharge" in the economical sense is a bad thing, and not just for the consumer.

It's why I facepalm whenever one of those publishers tries to justify more covert price hikes or other money-making schemes when they should be looking for ways to dial-back on the costs for the most superficial stuff.

They need to stop pushing the market to pay more.
Eventually, people start taking notice of that shit, and they WILL stop buying if they don't feel they can trust the publisher. I cannot imagine how much damage ME3 did to Bioware's reputation and consumer confidence; Filing complaints to the FTC no less!

Justified or not, those people were PISSED!
(and now I must pay penance for bringing up THAT tired old topic)

ASIDE: About Sales/Discounts
(For those of who are wondering: Game Sales are designed to generate interest in a title or series, and get word of mouth going again to create sales after the discount. For video games, this works by having supply temporarily move their market price closer to their fixed costs for that good. Since costs for any given supplier can vary, this can be a positive OR negative amount of net revenue made per unit.

Therefore:
"Selling more" does NOT automatically equate to "Generates more profit" for that sale period, and conversely, "Pricing less" does NOT automatically equate to "Taking a loss".)

 

[Phlakes]

Game are a luxury item SO there's no justification for not paying for them. That's a different discussion to what you seem to think people use that statement for (pricing).

This. The argument was only about people trying to justify piracy, and if you can't afford a game, even if the price is a little higher than it probably should be, you work for your next paycheck so you can afford it.

 

[lowhat]

What if you had no money but you looked at a picture of a Star Wars poster on a library computer hooked up to the internet? Because unless it was properly uploaded by Lucasfilm, it's the exact same crime as downloading a videogame. Copyright infringement is something very different from theft, in terms of both degree and kind, and that's another reason why I can't take the "it's a luxury item" argument seriously; sure, stealing a luxury item is bad. Getting it for free because there's a way to make infinite copies? It's not so clear cut. It reminds me of the replicator in Star Trek; if it existed in real life, its creators would get sued into oblivion for ending poverty.

Fuck, I knew this would happen. Note to self, don't use any analogies on the Escapist - ever. Even if they are not misleading, people will delve into the semantics to find any inconsistencies between the subject matter and the analogy. And given that it's an analogy there are always inconsistencies.

No. No. No. No. I will tell it as straight as possible: games are luxury items, in that they are not required or mandatory in any way. Therefore "I cannot afford it" is absolutely wrong as there is nothing that forces you to spend the money or get the game. Saying "I will pirate this game because I cannot afford it" is an inherently stupid claim to make.

I did not try to say that piracy is anything like stealing. Luxury items are just extras you can go without. That was the whole point. If you cannot afford something you can go without...then why not go without it? Getting illegal access of any sort is not justified because you don't need the luxury items in the first place. That's why they are called so.

The thing is, your argument still stands on a physical object model; let's turn it on its head. If you can get a luxury item for free, without taking it from anyone else, why could you morally be required not to? The replicator analogy stands; if it were invented today, its creators would be sued into oblivion for ending poverty, because that would mean the people running all of the manufacturing plants it replaced would be out of business. Granted, they wouldn't exactly be badly off since money would no longer be a bar to getting anything you wanted, but they wouldn't care because in the short term, they would make less money. That is exactly what's going on right now, except instead of physical items, it's software and information.

Sadly, this is exactly why molecular replicator technology will likely never exist, even if the technology level needed for it comes about in humanity's future. The sorts of capital interests which would be required for such an expensive undertaking(in the form of energy) would most likely recognize the end of their wealth and power in such a technology, and refuse to support it with their capital.

Much like JJP Morgan did when he realized that the research Tesla was doing on wireless electricity would effectively give everyone free energy and bypass the electric meters he was making a bankroll on, which led to him immediately withdrawing financial support for the project.

 

[SilentVirus]

If it counts for anything, I find condoms to be fairly overpriced.

 

[imperialwar]

Move to Australia, then you'll have something to ***** about. We have to pay twice as much while fighting off 6 foot tall spiders on our way to the store.

$60 would be pure luxury for us here in Australia. Games usually start at $110-120 then the first few second hand ones go for about $90 it isnt until about a year later we can get the game for $60 IF it goes platinum. Or if not platinum then second hand.

 

[Saulkar]

[sub]I hate you Brink, you suck so much.[/sub]

I really liked Brink! Fuck, I have not played it in a while, hell I have the sudden urge to play it right now if I had the time!

CAPTCHA: strike three.

What were the other two things you said? -_-

 

[imperialwar]

Move to Australia, then you'll have something to ***** about. We have to pay twice as much while fighting off 6 foot tall spiders on our way to the store.

Your minimum wage is also MUCH higher than EVERYWHERE ELSE.

Ireland: ?8.65/hour (11.07 AUD)
England: (Different rates corresponding to age groups. Over 21 is the one I'm using) £6.08/hour (9.77 AUD)
Australia: 15.51 AUD.


I could go on listing examples, and sure, the cost of living in Australia is a slight bit higher than over here (not much though, our minimum wage isn't sufficient to give people a standard of living any higher than those on social welfare) but you earn more money than everyone else. Why should you have to pay the same?

You honestly believe the extra forty dollars (Very occasionally more.) that Australians have to fork out to buy the game actually mostly goes towards the costs incurred by shipping, marketing and stocking the game over here? Really??

Listen, mate.. this is your lucky day! I've got this deed to this little building down in Sydney, waterside property you understand, one of a kind architecture, nothing else like it in the entire world, you might have even heard of it, the Sydney Opera House.

I'd just like to say something here. First of all, I never said ANYTHING about shipping, marketing or stocking, I'll come back to that later.

Next, ok... I don't know why you felt like putting that whole paragraph in that has nothing to do at all with anything I just said, but whatever floats your boat.

Finally: you're missing my point.

Entirely.

Either that or you're just rambling on about something totally unrelated to what I was saying, but regardless, let me explain what I was trying to get across in a different way.

Australians get paid approximately 4 dollars an hour more than other countries for people on minimum wage. Keeping that in mind, why shouldn't games be charged at higher prices there than everywhere else?

Now, let's examine a kotaku article about this subject from 2010. This article: http://www.kotaku.com.au/2010/11/why-do-videogames-cost-so-much/

Speaking to Mark Langford earlier this month, he revealed that the margins on video games at retail are low, and selling a new game at $79.95 is essentially equivalent to selling at cost price.

Ok. Now. Let's lay out the information we have.

1) Australian's have a higher minimum wage than the majority of other countries.
2) Australian cost of living is higher than other countries (this is everyday essentials: food, shelter, etc.)
3) Selling a new game at ~80 AUD is almost the same as cost price.

Think of it this way. How are they going to pay their staff their wages if they make no money? Retailers can't afford to sell cheaper than they do, because otherwise they'll have to let people go.

So i ask why do digital downloads cost me full price still ? as in the same for the physical copy ? no sales staff, no shipping etc. So the retailers dont cry foul ? bollocks ! If I am business savvy enough to get it cheaper by going directly to the manufacturer then YAY me. I definitely shouldnt have to pay the same just to make a company who rips us off happy.

All this is considered AFTER the fact the company actually decides to ship it's game here to begin with. Then our censorship board steps in stopping a fair share as well, or editing the game to the point is unrecognizable.

Now I don't remember if this just an Urban Legend or the truth, but I remember WoW wasn't intended for release outside of America and it wasn't until people decided to import it for themselves that Blizzard changed its mind. Imagine where the world would be now if it had decided to stick to its guns ? We'd probably be living on the moon.

 

[Samantha Burt]

Where the heck did you get the idea that 8-30 hours of entertainment where you are in control isn't worth $60?

I've never regretted a video-game purchase.

I typically go by the "cinema test" as I call it. Saying the average movie is about two hours long, it works out about £4.30 an hour (if you bring your own snacks). If I get better out of a game, I say it was a good price.

8 hours for a £20 game, no problem. 8 hours for a £40 game, is stretching it a bit.

 

[boyvirgo666]

Where the heck did you get the idea that 8-30 hours of entertainment where you are in control isn't worth $60?

I've never regretted a video-game purchase.

Really? i envy you. i want a refund for sword of the stars 2 so bad

 

[Vuljatar]

This comes up a lot in discussions about both piracy and the price of games: the argument goes that games are a luxury item, so there's absolutely no reason to complain about the price. The problem is that, first of all, games are a luxury item, but they're a luxury item of the sort that DVDs and books are, and they're priced high enough that they're more in competition with expensive wines and designer clothes, but more importantly, it is still possible to overpay for a luxury item, something that has been the source of many a joke about the nouveaux riches over the years.

You know why this is? Luxury items have price ranges the same as anything else. Just like $5 would be ridiculous for a loaf of white bread and $20 would be ridiculous for a gallon of milk, $10,000 would be ridiculous even for a high end home theater receiver, and $60 is ridiculous for a videogame. Anything can be overpriced, even luxury items -- especially luxury items -- so let's quit pretending videogames can't be overpriced just because they're not an absolute necessity for daily life.

Welcome to the free market, buddy.

Something is officially, objectively overpriced when it is expensive enough that it fails to sell well.

If it's turning a profit, then it's not overpriced. Sure, it might turn even more of a profit if it was cheaper, but none of the publishers want to take that risk. There are only two ways that game prices will ever seriously go down. Either one major publisher cuts their prices, forcing the others to do the same in order to compete, or a major boycott of unheardof proportions forces them to.

 

[Nouw]

Move to Australia, then you'll have something to ***** about. We have to pay twice as much while fighting off 6 foot tall spiders on our way to the store.

I see your complaint of the AUD and raise you the NZD! We have it even worse! Plus we have to fight...erm...dinosaurs! Yeah, dinosaurs! [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/Sphenodon_punctatus_in_Waikanae,_New_Zealand.jpg/250px-Sphenodon_punctatus_in_Waikanae,_New_Zealand.jpg]

 

[Nouw]

Move to Australia, then you'll have something to ***** about. We have to pay twice as much while fighting off 6 foot tall spiders on our way to the store.

I see your complaint of the AUD and raise you the NZD! We have it even worse! Plus we have to fight...erm...dinosaurs! Yeah, dinosaurs! [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/Sphenodon_punctatus_in_Waikanae,_New_Zealand.jpg/250px-Sphenodon_punctatus_in_Waikanae,_New_Zealand.jpg]

You guys have the Weta.

Oh, I fucking relent. Those things are terrifying.

As terrifying as they are, I'd love to see one in real life. They're almost extinct so they're quite a rarity.

 

[Woodsey]

Game are a luxury item SO there's no justification for not paying for them. That's a different discussion to what you seem to think people use that statement for (pricing).

This. The argument was only about people trying to justify piracy, and if you can't afford a game, even if the price is a little higher than it probably should be, you work for your next paycheck so you can afford it.

Or you learn how to use the internet to find stuff other than porn (took me years), and get yourself some deals.

No one with a little patience should be paying the full RRP on games these days, because there's no need to.

 

[GoaThief]

No one with a little patience should be paying the full RRP on games these days, because there's no need to.

Yeah, there is if I don't wish to give my money to supermarkets and their ilk. They often sell games at a loss with the expectation you'll make it up for them elsewhere in store, small independent shops are really struggling as they can't make money on new game sales at all. It's surprising how many think independents are being greedy and should reduce their prices!

 

[Woodsey]

No one with a little patience should be paying the full RRP on games these days, because there's no need to.

Yeah, there is if I don't wish to give my money to supermarkets and their ilk. They often sell games at a loss with the expectation you'll make it up for them elsewhere in store, small independent shops are really struggling as they can't make money on new game sales at all. It's surprising how many think independents are being greedy and should reduce their prices!

It's just business. If they can't afford to be competitive then why are they competing? It's nice of you to support them, but then don't moan about pricing.

(And I was talking about using the likes of Amazon anyway.)