If console gaming is cheaper, why are all the games so much more expensive?

[-|-]

I sit in front of a computer all day, and I play games to relax. Therefore I want to play games on my TV from the couch with a controller and this experience is easier on a console. Yes, I know this can be done with a PC and I could build a gaming PC, but that's effort and for me, convenience trumps cost every time.

 

[dimensional]

well it seems people are making assumptions that consoles games are expensive and pc games are cheap. I would say that generally console games are more expensive and that is because that is what they make money on so they want a nice cut.

That being said if you are willing to wait long enough you can play both pc games and console games for pretty cheap you just have to look around. If you only buy digitally for consoles (i.e you are insane,rich or a hermit or some mixture of the three) then you are being ripped off as digital download pc games are one hell of a lot cheaper than the ridiculously priced online store console games.

I however rarely download games as if it is anything reasonably sized (4gb) it takes me 36 hours or so to download the bloody thing during which time the internet is locked up and almost unusable. It has to be a bloody good deal for me to put up with that even if it took 15 hours I could have driven to the shops bought, played, finished and returned a lot of games in that time.

 

[SextusMaximus]

Just not the case in Britain, or at least where I live - console and PC games are equally as much as each other. Great fun either way!

 

[emeraldrafael]

...
PC - Skyrim - $108
PS3 and 360 - Skyrim - $128

...

What skyrim are you playing thats 100+? I saw it in gamestop for the ps3 for about 60 bucks.

Anyway, I always assumed it was just because it costs more to maintain a computer. I once did a calculation based on how much my PS3 cost vs my friends built gaming computer and he spent almost 100 dollars more, and he had to keep spending to keep it up to date.

 

[Stainlesssteele4]

Because your average Xbox 360 runs you maybe 300 dollars, while a good gaming PC can and will run you over 1000, not including any hardware updates you may need to get.

Even if you are saving 15-20 bucks per game, you still need to buy a LOT of games to make up the difference. Plus, there is a huge used market for console games. I've found even relatively new games for 30-40 dollars on sale.

I have a 370 dollar gaming computer that I built myself, and I can run any game I throw at it on maximum settings. Gaming PCs do not cost 1000 dollars, this is a misconception that gamers need to get over.

 

[veloper]

Let's calculate the difference per month and then try to figure out how many games that is.

On the console side a PS3. Good, reliable hardware unlike the 360, so a fair chance it will still work now, if you bought one at launch in november 2006 for $600.
Not counting crap like a TV, which you would already own anyway, that's a modest $10/month and still dropping.

In that time a PC gamer would have upgraded his rig atleast once (possibly through several increments, but let's assume one complete overhaul, which is simple and not unreasonable), if he started with new rig in november 2006 already.
Again, I'm not going to count small stuff, like good monitor you'd need for all your boring office needs anyway, just the case with every component upgraded to run the latest games for 2 years and a bit. $700 is reasonable, twice ofcourse.
So that comes to about $23 per month.

Difference PC-PS3 = -$13 per month. Piracy would really skew the picture. Renting and trading is also hard to quantify, so let's start with the easiest scenario: our early adopter with his brand new PS3 at launch, occasionally buys new games. Let's have PC guy do the same to keep things fair. Price difference $60-$50 = $10. a break even at a 1.3 game a month.
If the PC gamer is patient enough to wait a month or 2 after launch, the price difference is more like 20 to 30 and he can still play games with all the new pretty bells and whistles. The break even point will be at about 1 game every 2 months.

So if you really like to play games, the PC can turn out cheaper. You also get your pretty, high resolution visuals at 60 fps with that.

If you're not that much into games, the PS3 is cheaper.

Consider there's nothing worse you can do to Sony than to buy PS3 and not buy any new games for it. You bought it for 600 at launch and the costs to make them were estimated at over $800 back then. Sony needed to cash in on the licence fees of over 20 games sold, to make a profit on that box.
Since M$ and Sony are still playing this game, I assume the scheme works for the most time. So I reckon the PC gamer really likes games to take the initial hurdle and then gets his fix cheaper in the long run, while the average console games also really likes games, but ends up paying the same or more.

 

[Mr. Omega]

Console gaming SHOULD be cheaper. That's why I bought the Wii at launch but waited a while (see: big price drops) to get the PS3 and why I will never get a 360 (I refuse to pay a subscription for XBL).

I do admit, with this console generation, Sony and MS seem to be missing the entire point of console gaming:
Low cost (*in voice* US$599!)
low maintenance (The Red Ring of Death)
and an experience you can't get on a PC (One of the few points I agree with PC Gamers on: FPS games are better on PCs.)

And Nintendo made a system with bad 3rd party support, so the quality games were few and far between, thereby really limiting options for those unwilling to shell out for a brand new console.

Plus: rental services like Gamefly are fucking amazing money savers if you rush through games and only play through once.

 

[J Tyran]

Just this year I have saved about £150 buying PC titles instead of the XBox versions, I could buy a PS3 for that much. Not only are PC titles usually cheaper if you pre order them from Steam you save an extra few quid on top.

 

[TotalerKrieger]

Let's calculate the difference per month and then try to figure out how many games that is.

On the console side a PS3. Good, reliable hardware unlike the 360, so a fair chance it will still work now, if you bought one at launch in november 2006 for $600.
Not counting crap like a TV, which you would already own anyway, that's a modest $10/month and still dropping.

In that time a PC gamer would have upgraded his rig atleast once (possibly through several increments, but let's assume one complete overhaul, which is simple and not unreasonable), if he started with new rig in november 2006 already.
Again, I'm not going to count small stuff, like good monitor you'd need for all your boring office needs anyway, just the case with every component upgraded to run the latest games for 2 years and a bit. $700 is reasonable, twice ofcourse.
So that comes to about $23 per month.

Difference PC-PS3 = -$13 per month. Piracy would really skew the picture. Renting and trading is also hard to quantify, so let's start with the easiest scenario: our early adopter with his brand new PS3 at launch, occasionally buys new games. Let's have PC guy do the same to keep things fair. Price difference $60-$50 = $10. a break even at a 1.3 game a month.
If the PC gamer is patient enough to wait a month or 2 after launch, the price difference is more like 20 to 30 and he can still play games with all the new pretty bells and whistles. The break even point will be at about 1 game every 2 months.

So if you really like to play games, the PC can turn out cheaper. You also get your pretty, high resolution visuals at 60 fps with that.

If you're not that much into games, the PS3 is cheaper.

Consider there's nothing worse you can do to Sony than to buy PS3 and not buy any new games for it. You bought it for 600 at launch and the costs to make them were estimated at over $800 back then. Sony needed to cash in on the licence fees of over 20 games sold, to make a profit on that box.
Since M$ and Sony are still playing this game, I assume the scheme works for the most time. So I reckon the PC gamer really likes games to take the initial hurdle and then gets his fix cheaper in the long run, while the average console games also really likes games, but ends up paying the same or more.

Awesome post, very clear concise argument.

 

[Jfswift]

I think consoles themselves are less expensive than a pc but games always seem cheaper on pc really.

 

[Silas13013]

snip

Then you didn't have a strong enough PSU to actually run it. You can indeed just throw in a $70 graphics card and have a PC that will run most games. My friend threw a 5770 into a 5 year old rig about 2 years ago and it runs just fine.

The thing to remember is we aren't comparing the cutting edge of PC to the cutting edge of consoles. We are comparing 5 year old PC components to current consoles. An HD 5770 will more than surpass the graphics capabilities of a PS3, and even a 4870 will run any game at console settings at 1080p.

So yes, if you want to be on the bleeding edge of PC gaming you will be paying hundreds a year to stay on top. But if you want to play games, you can usually get away with a graphics card upgrade every few years. Heck, look at the requirements for Assassins Creed Revelations, it still calls for a core2duo or Anthlon 6400+, those are 5 year old processors and can be had for extremely cheap. There is almost no chance of the next console generation even coming close to the power of the cutting edge of current PC's so if you happen to make a top of the line rig now, you should be set for 1 or 2 console generations.

How was I supposed to know my PSU wasn't strong enough? I didn't even buy the computer yet when the salesperson who was at the shop was the one who recommended I install a new graphics card, offered to install it for me. For like an extra £80. It's still one of the decisions I regret making.

I know anecdotal evidence is a very piss poor attempt to prove my argument, but even when my brother installed a new sound card into his computer, he could not run it unless he took the side off and placed a detatched standing fan next to it to keep it cool until he got a new one (fan or sound card, I'm not sure). It makes it pretty hard to feel that installing a new part is going to be as simple as plugging it in every time. You might as well go all the way when it comes to installing a new part (I mean not to latest level, but rather a case of the rest of your computer "falling behind" on specs)

Ahh then that would be the fault of the seller not knowing what he is doing.

Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "going all the way" when upgrading. (You aren't making love to your computer are you? ) I think you mean a whole new system, correct me if I'm wrong. However, there are a number of ways that is incorrect, and I will list some of them if you wish.

 

[lacktheknack]

Most people can't build a gaming computer though.

I don't understand this. Building a computer involves:

1. Asking the guy at your computer part store if the various pieces you're looking at will mesh (he will know). If they don't, he will offer you alternatives

2. Putting your new (or re-used) tower on the counter

3. Open the box with the motherboard, open the manual and follow the pretty pictures

4. Open the CPU box, open the manual and follow the pretty pictures

5. Open everything else except the PSU and install them in any order, following the pretty pictures

6. Install the PSU following the slightly harder pretty pictures

7. Close the side of the tower, plug in the monitor

8. Plug in, turn on

9. Insert Windows 7 disk, install

10. YAY

Your other points about having to wait and buy on sale? That's not hard, and is actually generally good financial sense in day-to-day life. Just get one game you really, really like and buy the good deals as they come, and you'll have a major backlog by the time you're done with the first game. And you'll have bought 15 PC games (or more) for the price of 5 console games.

If you think the average gamer or consumer period can or wants to do this you are waaaaaaay off.

Everyone can do this if they have functioning digits. End of story.

And if they value their precious convenience over $400-$500 savings, then whatever.

 

[Twilight_guy]

In the united states sales in store usually have a 10$ difference. It's more over time, but in smaller chunks. Rather then a large PC purchase to start with, they have a smaller console purchase and then a series of larger price game purchases. In addition, this price discrepancy wasn't always true, not too long ago, games cost the same thing for both. Also, there are other reasons to buy a console.

 

[Laughing Man]

If console gaming is cheaper, why are all the games so much more expensive?

I am lost, the answer to this question and please look at the question again, was given about 3 posts in. Console games are more expensive because the game developers have to

a). Purchase an SDK from the creator of the console, these development systems are not cheap.
b). Pay the console owners a license fee for the right to create a game on it

PC SDKs are freely available and their is no fee to be paid for developing on the format so hence less cost.

So why the hell has the topic been routed on to some discussion on the long term costs of building and owning a PC vs owning a console? The costs of buying and owning a console or PC have nothing whatsoever to do with the cost of the games for the systems so why the debate?

 

[Jesus Phish]

-mega snip-

A bare bones gaming PC is still better than a console. A new console generations hardware will already be obsolete compared to PC after about two years of its life, if even at that. Once again I'll state, I spent the same money as a PS3 would have cost me on release on a PC that has lasted me to this day and the only reason I've upgraded to a new one is because I've recently been employed and decided to treat myself to new hardware.

What you need to understand is that a low end pc now is better than a console in hardware. A mid-range pc now, will probably match a future console. If you listen to the zealots who do believe you need bleeding edge hardware, then of course you're going to think it would cost $400+ to upgrade yearly but you absolutely 100% do not need to do this. You can get many many years out of the hardware and you can play many many more games than consoles.

 

[Zakarrum]

Why does no one ever include the price of xbox live or the cost of a decent tv in their price analysis of console gaming...

 

[newwiseman]

Here in the states all new console games roll out at $60 USD and Most 'Big Name' pc games are $50. Considering how most games are $10-$20 off in 2-4weeks my guess is they're just trying to get as much money out of us as possible. Considering how much money the $1 games make I have to image there is probably a better lower initial price point.

For the Console vs, PC argument I'll say consoles are holding gaming back and getting a descent gaming rig doesn't cost nearly as much as it used to, but a top of the line still cost a pretty penny... and those new AMD 7970's look nice, 7990 will be awe inspiring.