Games are too expensive
- Thread starter Gindil
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I haven't bought a new game for ages. Not since Street Fighter 4. And I learnt my lesson for paying premium prices for pretty shite games. I'd rather buy it pre-owned because it works out cheaper than buying new or renting from MOST places.
NO, no, no NO.Gindil said:
Sale of games for ownership is NOT the only way that money can be made in gaming:
Subscriptions
Look at World of Warcraft. You buy the game but you PAY to get an online service.
Remember back in Novemeber 2009 Activision were bitching about Dedicated Servers being too expensive for Modern Warfare 2? Well how about they sell the game and then charge per for "tickets" or even "season passes" to access dedicated servers.
The upcoming PC game APB has a rather unique setup where you buy the game and get the first. what uh, 50 hours free? Then you pay for subsequent hours and or if you are a REALLY heavy user you pay for free passes for a given number of months.
Also, publishers have to realise that they can make up whatever numbers they like, the market will pay what it can bear. That's how capitalism works.
Sure they COULD sell each game at £90, no law is stopping them and I swear hand on heart I knew a manager of Gamestation that thought games should sell at that price... each game the same price as a console. His justification: no game should EVER make a loss, he ACTUALLY THOUGHT that every single game should break even. I said that the reason most games don't break even is those games are crap and deserve to fail.
But lets say that was done, then way fewer will be sold though that may not be a problem if the unit cost counteracts that. The problem comes as this will only increase the affect or re-selling of games.
One of the reasons the pre-owned market for games is so huge is that people cannot afford games new and when they do get them it uses up so much of their income they need to sell the game they bought to bankroll the next purchase.
Which is I think another reason why the Gamestation Manager was being selfish as greater cost of games means a much higher trade in rate, which is where they make most of their money.
One think I don't think he considers is £90 per game may even completely destroy the retail business and it goes almost 100% rental based. £90 is a just too large an investment for one person to make in one game, it only ever becomes cost effective by doing the rounds amongst dozens of different users.
I personally have huge faith in Steam's network and the pricing and special offers.
I would like to hear how much money Vince Zampella and Jason West was promised as bonus money for MW2, im sure it's on the net somewhere (it's not the amount they are suing for)
When the industry tells me that number and still continues to argue that games make 'little' money and people believe that: your guilible lapdogs for the industry.
Hell, for the amount they were promised you could make a descent or even a really good (read: expensive) game all by itself.
Games can easily knock off 5-10 euro per title and still make huge amounts of money, key is: they have to make a good game first, but corporate wants more profit/royalties. So we are flooded with repetitive boring crap for more money that plays it 'safe' and keeps the stockholders happy. Look at WoW: ever since it's evident succes we are flooded with mediocre MMO's, because investors think there is a lot of money to be made and marketshare to gain. Since all those crappy clone-like games dont sell as well as they think: prices might go up to make up for loss of income.(i know they usually get cheaper after release, but this happens usually after the results from the testgroups are in and investors get scared before the launch of a game) But once those prices are UP, they will never go down. And even games that are a 'sure thing' (like MW2) will be from now on marketed in that same new upped pricerange or at even higher prices to inflate the profitmargin.
It's standard capitalism really.
And yes, games cost (too) much money, but it is a luxury after all.
When the industry tells me that number and still continues to argue that games make 'little' money and people believe that: your guilible lapdogs for the industry.
Hell, for the amount they were promised you could make a descent or even a really good (read: expensive) game all by itself.
Games can easily knock off 5-10 euro per title and still make huge amounts of money, key is: they have to make a good game first, but corporate wants more profit/royalties. So we are flooded with repetitive boring crap for more money that plays it 'safe' and keeps the stockholders happy. Look at WoW: ever since it's evident succes we are flooded with mediocre MMO's, because investors think there is a lot of money to be made and marketshare to gain. Since all those crappy clone-like games dont sell as well as they think: prices might go up to make up for loss of income.(i know they usually get cheaper after release, but this happens usually after the results from the testgroups are in and investors get scared before the launch of a game) But once those prices are UP, they will never go down. And even games that are a 'sure thing' (like MW2) will be from now on marketed in that same new upped pricerange or at even higher prices to inflate the profitmargin.
It's standard capitalism really.
And yes, games cost (too) much money, but it is a luxury after all.
Everyone in the states doesn't really pay all that much for games. Your standard game price is $50 right? Obviously Australia gets kicked in the balls for pricing, but Canada(where I live) isn't too cheap. It isn't nearly as expensive as Australia, but it's still pricey. Most games are going for $69.99. Throw in the sales tax of 13%(that's ontario's tax rate) and you are up to almost $80 dollars for a game.
I have learned never to buy used games from EB or gamestop(yes I know it's the same company) because a current release used game can range from $54.99 to $64.99. What's the point of saving 5 bucks, when you know if you buy brand new you are guaranteed no problems. Some new release games go for $59.99, but even after the taxes, you are at $68 for a game. That is just ludicrous.
I have learned never to buy used games from EB or gamestop(yes I know it's the same company) because a current release used game can range from $54.99 to $64.99. What's the point of saving 5 bucks, when you know if you buy brand new you are guaranteed no problems. Some new release games go for $59.99, but even after the taxes, you are at $68 for a game. That is just ludicrous.
I was actually just straight mocking him. Because he has the foolish idea that things don't require money. Games DO require money. That was my point, and i was making fun of his small minded comment.iLikeHippos said:
Your comment is imbecilic. You seem to feel people should spend millions of dollars and not expect a single thing in return. This isn't food water or shelter. They are not making games as a favor to you or to be nice to you. Its a business.Kair said:
First post, so please bear with me.
I've been lurking on this site for the last few months, reading the articles and getting a feel for the forums, and this topic seems to come up quite often. I'm old enough to remember the average used game costing between five and fifteen dollars, which also makes me old enough to remember something about the way games were priced back then; the price almost always dropped low enough that a new copy was competitive with a used one. Up until Gamestop bought out EB games, and gained a virtual monopoly over the used market, used games were cheap enough to make buying new right when they came out a bad idea unless you had the money and couldn't wait. However, I bought almost as many new games at the time as I did used, because publishers actually tried to compete with used prices.
Now, I don't mean that the prices for brand new games were significantly different -- actually, they've been pretty constant for at least twelve or thirteen years -- but even as recently as 2003 or so, games would be re-released in a heavily discounted form about a year after the initial release, assuming they did well enough to warrant it. I remember buying AAA PC games for $10 brand new, and PS1 and PS2 games for $15-20. Today, thanks to Gamestop's monopoly, and corporate greed on the whole, we no longer get these kinds of discounts. This is the real reason games are too expensive these days; there is no real competition from used games, and as a result, no reason to significantly cut the price over time.
TL;DR
Games are expensive now because without true competition from used games, the publishers no longer have any reason to cut prices.
I've been lurking on this site for the last few months, reading the articles and getting a feel for the forums, and this topic seems to come up quite often. I'm old enough to remember the average used game costing between five and fifteen dollars, which also makes me old enough to remember something about the way games were priced back then; the price almost always dropped low enough that a new copy was competitive with a used one. Up until Gamestop bought out EB games, and gained a virtual monopoly over the used market, used games were cheap enough to make buying new right when they came out a bad idea unless you had the money and couldn't wait. However, I bought almost as many new games at the time as I did used, because publishers actually tried to compete with used prices.
Now, I don't mean that the prices for brand new games were significantly different -- actually, they've been pretty constant for at least twelve or thirteen years -- but even as recently as 2003 or so, games would be re-released in a heavily discounted form about a year after the initial release, assuming they did well enough to warrant it. I remember buying AAA PC games for $10 brand new, and PS1 and PS2 games for $15-20. Today, thanks to Gamestop's monopoly, and corporate greed on the whole, we no longer get these kinds of discounts. This is the real reason games are too expensive these days; there is no real competition from used games, and as a result, no reason to significantly cut the price over time.
TL;DR
Games are expensive now because without true competition from used games, the publishers no longer have any reason to cut prices.
It's not really 'technically' more, it just is more since $50 is only £34 and £50 is $72 so Americans shouldn't be complaining about game prices. But then in the UK if you buy a game for £50 that's VAT included whereas in the US you have to pay VAT on top of the $50 which would probably bring the price closer to $60. Though I could be wrong.dogstile said:
But anyway, I don't really buy console games so I never have to pay too much unless I want to get the collectors/limited edition. For example Fallout 3 GOTY on Amazon.co.uk is £22.91, £22.39 and £9.21 for PS3, Xbox 360 and PC respectively.
To paraphrase an article a week or so ago on DRM, "It's your fault games are so expensive".
What I mean is, most (not every gamer so I don't mean anyone on here)gamers want cutting edge graphics so their avatar looks real-that costs more in terms of development. They want multiple online multiplayer modes that are supported 24/7 for an infinate amount of time-that costs the companies to keep up servers and do maintanance, not to mention to develop patches for peopole exploiting bugs. They want A list hollywood talent doing voicework-that costs a lot especially for the SAG union members.
All of the things people want (notice none of this ever makes a game better) bring up production costs and to recoup it, the prices of games go up. So everytime you see a game that is inordinately expensive then complain that the grapohics aren't shiny enough, that their isn't enough maps or that they should've gotten Patrick Stewart to do the voice of the Wizard King, remember all those reasons are why you are paying more and more every generation of games while the actual game part get's smaller and smaller.
What I mean is, most (not every gamer so I don't mean anyone on here)gamers want cutting edge graphics so their avatar looks real-that costs more in terms of development. They want multiple online multiplayer modes that are supported 24/7 for an infinate amount of time-that costs the companies to keep up servers and do maintanance, not to mention to develop patches for peopole exploiting bugs. They want A list hollywood talent doing voicework-that costs a lot especially for the SAG union members.
All of the things people want (notice none of this ever makes a game better) bring up production costs and to recoup it, the prices of games go up. So everytime you see a game that is inordinately expensive then complain that the grapohics aren't shiny enough, that their isn't enough maps or that they should've gotten Patrick Stewart to do the voice of the Wizard King, remember all those reasons are why you are paying more and more every generation of games while the actual game part get's smaller and smaller.
I see this argument fairly often, but I've never seen it backed up with statistics. Yes, games cost more money than ever to make, but gaming is also much more mainstream than it used to be, with sales figures that are higher than they were in the past. Shouldn't this at least partially offset the higher cost of games?RowdyRodimus said:
1. I would say that saying most games don't have 10 hours of play time is wrong. Most do, and the ones that don't on the first playthrough should be played through more than once. If you are buying games that only last 4 hours, and don't intend to re-play them, you should consider renting them instead of buying them.666Chaos said:
2. I live in Canada, where prices have gone as high a $70 per release, (this generation), when our dollar was below the American dollar by a fair bit. I agree that it isn't fair for other countries, but like you said, they can just import the game for less money. As far as collector's editions go, they aren't necessary purchases, and only those with the money to get them, should.
3. Do better research as to which games you are buying. Read up on the game, and the developer to see the developer's track record when it comes to games they make. If the developer only makes Shovelware, then chances are the next game they make will also be Shovelware.
4. I don't think that this was aimed at me, as I said absolutely nothing about PC games, but I'll field it anyway. You are right, you shouldn't be comparing a crappy independent game to a AAA release. That is where the research should come in. Find out about the company history and research the game you are planning to purchase.
Really if the games a masterpeice i could justify spending more. But i guess thats because gaming is a passion of me and my significent other (Guilty gear grude matches!She's a tier whore lol) I can understand what your saying thouhg games are just fun and a stress releiver for you nothing more so ya i'd do the same in your situation.Pararaptor said:
I feel your pain. Games down here in Costa Rica cost at least 80 dollars, and finding a store where they sell used games is practically impossible. They should seriously adjust prices according to the region they're being released in.Pararaptor said:
