My thoughts on game prices.

Recommended Videos

DEAD34345

New member
Aug 18, 2010
1,929
0
0
I think £40 a game (standard price for new games in the UK, sometimes it's a little more) is far too much, because I simply cannot afford it. Gaming is the main thing I spend money on aside from essentials, and yet I actually cannot remember the last time I bought a game new... it might have been Red Dead Redemption, but I'm pretty sure I was given that as a gift.

In fact, I don't think I've bought any games at all* in the last 6 months simply because I want to be able to buy Skyrim and maybe Mass Effect 3 new, two of the very few games I would be willing to pay that price for.

I can't help but feel that, at least for me and the people I know, companies would make far more profit if the price of a new game was a little lower. There is a reason so many of us have to buy games used, weeks or months after they come out, and punishing us with further fees (online passes and the like) is just bullshit.

[sub]*Technically I bought the Humble Indie Bundle for a fiver, but that hardly counts.[/sub]
 

Rack

New member
Jan 18, 2008
1,379
0
0
Economies of scale innit?

The thing is there's no way I'd pay $60 for Gears 3, that just isn't happening. But if I had to I'd happily pay $120 for Human Revolution. Meanwhile lots of other people would be in the opposite situation. Publishers are trying to sort out something for this pricing differentiation with DLC and pre-order bonuses and the like. I think one day they'll get there.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Kingme18 said:
Surprisingly, it was my grandpa that made me have this revelation. Before now, I thought games cost too much($60, as I live in the U.S.) But while my grandpa watched me play Gears of War 3, he asked me a question: "How in the world do the people that make this game get all of those people to move on their own?" To this I replied: "They can do some pretty sweet stuff to games nowadays!" Then he said, "It's a wonder that they don't make you pay more, with all the technology they use to make this!"

This got me thinking. Are we spoiled? Do we expect more out of games at a lower cost? What do you think? Is the price tag on games too high, or is it just right?
By that logic, the Lord of the Rings Trilogy should cost like 200 bucks per movie.

Larger market covers costs by distribution of profits.

Are we spoiled? Perhaps. There are hobbies which have scaled worse, but there are ones which have not. Entertainment is a dodgy thing, but games today are problematic.

Our grandparents not getting it, though, is a bad example. Game companies making Triple A titles tend to be making record profits right now, so obviously 60 bucks is a doable price point.
 

Von Strimmer

New member
Apr 17, 2011
375
0
0
Cyberjester said:
Think of your grandpa like this, he's still getting his head around phones that can browse the web and play music.. Technology doesn't cost much. Especially when creating the disc and packaging is on a factory line. The main cost there is labor to make the game, and even then I can guarantee that most of the employees of Activision would not be paid a percentage of the profit from the CoD franchise.

And a lot of it is profit, $100 a game, at ten million copies is a lot of money. I'm also in Aus, so I can state quite definitely that I am paying too much for games. Go to steam.com.au, then just to steam.com. Half the price just for changing where I live? Capitalism at its best. Most games also don't take me that long to get through, so in a lot of cases I'm paying the same amount as a cinema outing. (Cinema ticket is usually 23/25, more if I go to see a movie I like which mainstream cinemas don't, Pans Labyrinth is a good example. 60USD would still be a rip off? But people will still pay it so we still get charged a fortune.
Normally at a time like this I would fire up and blame Australian retailers for being greedy fucks. Unfortunately I think it comes down to publishers AND developers AND retailers being greedy fucks.

We earn quite a bit more than our North American bretheren (not sure on Europe [specifically UK] and what they earn) so I suppose it means they can squeeze us for more money. Or something like that I dont know it just feels natural blaming Australian retailers!

Edit* read a post above me by someone in the UK. So basically that cost vs income thing is pretty much BS. Maybe its a population thing? or is it a typical case of the simplest explanation being the correct one. fucking retailers.
 

Stall

New member
Apr 16, 2011
950
0
0
Yup. Game prices are fine. I think there needs to be some fluidity in the prices: basically, developers and publishers need to realize that there isn't any shame in selling a game for 30-40 dollars if it is lacking a bit of polish/length/etc. Most AAA games that ARE worth this much are somewhat rare though.
 

Vinculi

New member
Jan 15, 2009
173
0
0
Von Strimmer said:
Cyberjester said:
Think of your grandpa like this, he's still getting his head around phones that can browse the web and play music.. Technology doesn't cost much. Especially when creating the disc and packaging is on a factory line. The main cost there is labor to make the game, and even then I can guarantee that most of the employees of Activision would not be paid a percentage of the profit from the CoD franchise.

And a lot of it is profit, $100 a game, at ten million copies is a lot of money. I'm also in Aus, so I can state quite definitely that I am paying too much for games. Go to steam.com.au, then just to steam.com. Half the price just for changing where I live? Capitalism at its best. Most games also don't take me that long to get through, so in a lot of cases I'm paying the same amount as a cinema outing. (Cinema ticket is usually 23/25, more if I go to see a movie I like which mainstream cinemas don't, Pans Labyrinth is a good example. 60USD would still be a rip off? But people will still pay it so we still get charged a fortune.
Normally at a time like this I would fire up and blame Australian retailers for being greedy fucks. Unfortunately I think it comes down to publishers AND developers AND retailers being greedy fucks.

We earn quite a bit more than our North American bretheren (not sure on Europe [specifically UK] and what they earn) so I suppose it means they can squeeze us for more money. Or something like that I dont know it just feels natural blaming Australian retailers!

Edit* read a post above me by someone in the UK. So basically that cost vs income thing is pretty much BS. Maybe its a population thing? or is it a typical case of the simplest explanation being the correct one. fucking retailers.
Its not the retailers, you can trust me on that, I used to work for EB and if you sold nothing but brand new games for the day your profit margin for the store is around 6-7%, and then the area manager rings up all pissed off, but that's another issue.

The problem for australian pricing is the publishers, I think, since they charge retailer chains so much to put the game on the shelf, in my experience, selling a AAA release for anything more than $10 off the retail price set by the publisher (i.e, $100-$120) actually loses the store money (not the chain, the store, since the individual store is expected to cover its own running costs).

phew, that ended up being longer than I intended, but I hope you find it informative.
 

krazykidd

New member
Mar 22, 2008
6,099
0
0
No it's not too expensive , 60$ is a very reasonable price. Think about all the hours and all the people it took to make a game ANY game . Developpers pooring their souls into video games . The amount of work it takes to make any game now a days .

That being said , we were probably overcharged back in the nes era , BUT because the market was so small , they needed to be that price to make a profit . A lot less people were working on the games and the games took about 3 months to make instead of 2 years.
 

Von Strimmer

New member
Apr 17, 2011
375
0
0
Vinculi said:
Von Strimmer said:
Cyberjester said:
Think of your grandpa like this, he's still getting his head around phones that can browse the web and play music.. Technology doesn't cost much. Especially when creating the disc and packaging is on a factory line. The main cost there is labor to make the game, and even then I can guarantee that most of the employees of Activision would not be paid a percentage of the profit from the CoD franchise.

And a lot of it is profit, $100 a game, at ten million copies is a lot of money. I'm also in Aus, so I can state quite definitely that I am paying too much for games. Go to steam.com.au, then just to steam.com. Half the price just for changing where I live? Capitalism at its best. Most games also don't take me that long to get through, so in a lot of cases I'm paying the same amount as a cinema outing. (Cinema ticket is usually 23/25, more if I go to see a movie I like which mainstream cinemas don't, Pans Labyrinth is a good example. 60USD would still be a rip off? But people will still pay it so we still get charged a fortune.
Normally at a time like this I would fire up and blame Australian retailers for being greedy fucks. Unfortunately I think it comes down to publishers AND developers AND retailers being greedy fucks.

We earn quite a bit more than our North American bretheren (not sure on Europe [specifically UK] and what they earn) so I suppose it means they can squeeze us for more money. Or something like that I dont know it just feels natural blaming Australian retailers!

Edit* read a post above me by someone in the UK. So basically that cost vs income thing is pretty much BS. Maybe its a population thing? or is it a typical case of the simplest explanation being the correct one. fucking retailers.
Its not the retailers, you can trust me on that, I used to work for EB and if you sold nothing but brand new games for the day your profit margin for the store is around 6-7%, and then the area manager rings up all pissed off, but that's another issue.

The problem for australian pricing is the publishers, I think, since they charge retailer chains so much to put the game on the shelf, in my experience, selling a AAA release for anything more than $10 off the retail price set by the publisher (i.e, $100-$120) actually loses the store money (not the chain, the store, since the individual store is expected to cover its own running costs).

phew, that ended up being longer than I intended, but I hope you find it informative.
So I cant blame retailers? (very informative I thank you) well then I suppose we just have to take it cause there is really nothing we can do about it...
 

Vinculi

New member
Jan 15, 2009
173
0
0
Von Strimmer said:
So I cant blame retailers? (very informative I thank you) well then I suppose we just have to take it cause there is really nothing we can do about it...
My pleasure.
 

DementedSheep

New member
Jan 8, 2010
2,654
0
0
Vinculi said:
Von Strimmer said:
Cyberjester said:
Think of your grandpa like this, he's still getting his head around phones that can browse the web and play music.. Technology doesn't cost much. Especially when creating the disc and packaging is on a factory line. The main cost there is labor to make the game, and even then I can guarantee that most of the employees of Activision would not be paid a percentage of the profit from the CoD franchise.

And a lot of it is profit, $100 a game, at ten million copies is a lot of money. I'm also in Aus, so I can state quite definitely that I am paying too much for games. Go to steam.com.au, then just to steam.com. Half the price just for changing where I live? Capitalism at its best. Most games also don't take me that long to get through, so in a lot of cases I'm paying the same amount as a cinema outing. (Cinema ticket is usually 23/25, more if I go to see a movie I like which mainstream cinemas don't, Pans Labyrinth is a good example. 60USD would still be a rip off? But people will still pay it so we still get charged a fortune.
Normally at a time like this I would fire up and blame Australian retailers for being greedy fucks. Unfortunately I think it comes down to publishers AND developers AND retailers being greedy fucks.

We earn quite a bit more than our North American bretheren (not sure on Europe [specifically UK] and what they earn) so I suppose it means they can squeeze us for more money. Or something like that I dont know it just feels natural blaming Australian retailers!

Edit* read a post above me by someone in the UK. So basically that cost vs income thing is pretty much BS. Maybe its a population thing? or is it a typical case of the simplest explanation being the correct one. fucking retailers.
Its not the retailers, you can trust me on that, I used to work for EB and if you sold nothing but brand new games for the day your profit margin for the store is around 6-7%, and then the area manager rings up all pissed off, but that's another issue.

The problem for australian pricing is the publishers, I think, since they charge retailer chains so much to put the game on the shelf, in my experience, selling a AAA release for anything more than $10 off the retail price set by the publisher (i.e, $100-$120) actually loses the store money (not the chain, the store, since the individual store is expected to cover its own running costs).

phew, that ended up being longer than I intended, but I hope you find it informative.
Really? I figured part of it was publishers but assumed the stores were pumping up the price too. Huh, I guess I I'll hate EB less tho their fake sales still piss me off.
 

Psycho78

New member
Jan 12, 2011
81
0
0
$60 is too much for a potentially great game that they cripple with bugs, stupid gameplay decisions, and/or DRM.

For $10 or less I'll take a chance. For $60 it needs to be a GTA, Oblivion, or Fallout title.
 

Epona

Elite Member
Jun 24, 2011
4,221
0
41
Country
United States
Fat4all said:
I paid $80 for A Link to the Past when it first came out.

I'd say standard pricing has it's ups and downs.
I paid $50, I shopped at Wal Mart. Maybe you should have too.

I have seen countless times that people paid $70-$80 for SNES and N64 games. I never paid more than $50.

OP, that your grandfather thinks video game avatars moving around is amazing should tell you that he's out of touch with technology. Didn't sprites move around on the Atari 2600? If he's out of touch with technology, it should not have inspired deep thought from you or a thread about it.
 

UrieHusky

New member
Sep 16, 2011
260
0
0
Kingme18 said:
($60, as I live in the U.S.)
In New Zealand, we pay 120 dollars for a new release game, which won't drop in price far longer than it takes in America,. That coupled with our low internet speeds makes multiplayer gaming without severe ping a rare treat. Games as it is are already far too expensive these days, so no, I don't think I'm spoilt in the slightest
 

SpartanBlackman

New member
Apr 1, 2011
117
0
0
If you do nothing but buy the latest Call of Duty and FIFA game, then gaming is affordable. But if you are a gaming enthusiast... it's so expensive, I can see why there is so much piracy.
 

dickywebster

New member
Jul 11, 2011
497
0
0
Well if you consider that here in britain the minium wage is £6 and a new game tends to cost at least £40, any increase in price would just limit the number of people that would be willing to spend that much money one one game that may last them say 10 - 20 hours.
While its not the most expensive place to buy games, i still cant afford to buy games new, even for £30 would be too much to do even probably 4 or 5 times a year atm.
So if games never came down to £20 or less (though some never do), then what would people with limited incomes who like to play games do as their hobby do?
 

Cowabungaa

New member
Feb 10, 2008
10,806
0
0
Then don't buy them for that price. I almost never buy my new games for such prices, always look for (reliable) webshops that offer way better prices. If enough people do that, the other prices will go down as well.
 

Fat4all

New member
Aug 6, 2011
28
0
0
Crono1973 said:
Fat4all said:
I paid $80 for A Link to the Past when it first came out.

I'd say standard pricing has it's ups and downs.
I paid $50, I shopped at Wal Mart. Maybe you should have too.

I have seen countless times that people paid $70-$80 for SNES and N64 games. I never paid more than $50.
The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past cost $79.99 retail when if first came out. Either your Walmart was selling stolen copies, or you bought it when it became a "Players Choice" gold label roughly 2 years after the game came out.
 

Epona

Elite Member
Jun 24, 2011
4,221
0
41
Country
United States
Fat4all said:
Crono1973 said:
Fat4all said:
I paid $80 for A Link to the Past when it first came out.

I'd say standard pricing has it's ups and downs.
I paid $50, I shopped at Wal Mart. Maybe you should have too.

I have seen countless times that people paid $70-$80 for SNES and N64 games. I never paid more than $50.
The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past cost $79.99 retail when if first came out. Either your Walmart was selling stolen copies, or you bought it when it became a "Players Choice" gold label roughly 2 years after the game came out.
Prove it was $79.99 MSRP.

Did you really just accuse Wal Mart of selling stolen copies, that's pathetic.