£50 for a game !!!

[CARTIER90]

Yes 50 english pounds or at the present exchange rate $88.80 , thats how much us brits pay for 360 games. Slightly unreasonable dont you think ?
Regardless whether PS3 games take longer or not to develop, I'm finding that pricepoint a little hard to swallow. Premium PS2 games are around £40.
You could tell me to stop bitchin and appreciate that higher dev costs have to be recouped somewhere ...still - I believe that such software costs will actually shrink UK software sales as a whole due to consumers being more selective with their purchases. In a way perhaps this will be a good thing - devs will HAVE to up the quality if they want to maintain current sales levels.

Thoughts ?

[xbdestroya]

Well, this will probably turn into a general 'game pricing' thread, but my thoughts on the matter are that video game prices have been more or less static over the last ten years. If on the wings of inflation alone, the costs should be higher at this point. The fact that games cost more to develop each gen just makes the need all that much more apparent.

I used to pay like $60 for good SNES games back in the day, so really the last couple of years have in fact been cheaper than the time of the Nintendo Hegemony.

[CARTIER90]

True, but the industry as a whole has grown exponentially since those days....thus developers are getting more money (from putting out more titles) and so should pass this saving on to the consumer - while at the same time pigs start flying south for the winter :)

[Sephiroth_VII]

Remember that 60$ isn't what it used to be. It's about 2/3 of what it was back then, right? That means that a good SNES game actually retailed for more than a game on the 360 does now. So what are we complaining about?

[cliffbo]

i'd pay £50 for a game that lasted 40+ hours with true replay value, but anything less i'd be pretty annoyed. RPGs are value for money

[Sephiroth_VII]

:stupid:
Yeah. Games like Madden shouldn't retail for the same price as a Final Fantasy. Not to offend any Madden fans, but while it takes under a year to ready a new Madden game, it takes 3-4 years to make a good RPG.

Post #1.100

[yoshaw]

True, but the industry as a whole has grown exponentially since those days....thus developers are getting more money (from putting out more titles) and so should pass this saving on to the consumer - while at the same time pigs start flying south for the winter :)

LOL, that's a nice way to put it. But kind of selfish eh. You're just mentioning what suits your part of the debate. On the opposite spectrum you'd see that developers(more like publishers) are also spending as much as they are earning. User demand has also grown 'exponentially'. Check around the forums and you'd see how much users are excited over BIA3 and not excited over *insert any X360 title here*. Whereas I found them 360 games acceptable, majority didn't. Most Developers(and Publishers) have to keep that in mind before shipping a game and in doing so spend millions and millions unlike in the past where $10K-$100K was enough for a single game. Both sides of the equations have seen proportional growth on a large scale mate.

[CARTIER90]

yup , im just a cheap bastard thats all :)...........I know devs have bills to pay as do the rest of us. Talking about the 360 - anyone know why Saints Row the GTA-like game is only the size of Vice city ? - cant be good news for a GTA4 port...

[satriales]

Do what I do now and either wait 6 months for the game to be cheaper or wait 2 months and buy it off eBay. Games have always been £50 here in the UK which wouldn't be so bad if they weren't cheaper everywhere else in the world, but I can't really justify spending that much on a single game.

[Sephiroth_VII]

:lol: Next-gen.... Yeah, right!! If they can't fit a Vice City, in HD, on a DVD-9, what will they do with the next-gen GTA's?!?!

[Junox50]

Yes 50 english pounds or at the present exchange rate $88.80 , thats how much us brits pay for 360 games. Slightly unreasonable dont you think ?
Regardless whether PS3 games take longer or not to develop, I'm finding that pricepoint a little hard to swallow. Premium PS2 games are around £40.
You could tell me to stop bitchin and appreciate that higher dev costs have to be recouped somewhere ...still - I believe that such software costs will actually shrink UK software sales as a whole due to consumers being more selective with their purchases. In a way perhaps this will be a good thing - devs will HAVE to up the quality if they want to maintain current sales levels.

Thoughts ?

I don't like the increase in price either. That's way too much for me, so I'll just have to wait till the prices go down, I guess.

[cliffbo]

yup , im just a cheap bastard thats all :)...........I know devs have bills to pay as do the rest of us. Talking about the 360 - anyone know why Saints Row the GTA-like game is only the size of Vice city ? - cant be good news for a GTA4 port...

stick it to 'em cartier90! ye take that! lol 'do we need blu-ray?' ha!!

[cliffbo]

I don't like the increase in price either. That's way too much for me, so I'll just have to wait till the prices go down, I guess.

ye i agree... look how long you waited to get ICO. lol

[LiquidEagle]

On one hand, $50 or $60 is a lot of damn money for a game. It's significantly higher than a DVD, which is put on the same media format and the developers (filmmakers) spent plenty of money on that film too! It's pretty ridiculous that each game we want to buy is such an investment, and if they aren't already, publishers will be shooting themselves in the feet if prices keep going up.

Then on the other hand, look at the amount of hours we're able to get out of a game for the price. A movie these days can cost anywhere from like $8 to $12 during the night-time, depending on where you're at (I can't speak for the UK), for ~2 hours of enjoyment. Games are $50 to $60 for a bare minimum of like 15 to 20 hours, and with online games that makes unlimited replay value a possibility, not to mention other games can pull in 70 hours of solid entertainment. Ratchet & Clank 2 was $40 when it came out, and I put a solid 50 hours on that game! That's less than a dollar-an-hour for entertainment, and it was very entertaining. That's a good deal!

So I dunno, relative to other media it's certainly more bang for your buck, but that's not saying much :-X

[Junox50]

ye i agree... look how long you waited to get ICO. lol

Yeah, I mean I'm already considering to buy Kingdom Hearts 1 all the sudden, and Metal Gear Solid 3 just might be a possiblity too.

[cliffbo]

Yeah, I mean I'm already considering to buy Kingdom Hearts 1 all the sudden, and Metal Gear Solid 3 just might be a possiblity too.

oh yes get kingdom hearts 1 for definate! one of the best RPGs on the market.

[EvilTaru]

:stupid:
Yeah. Games like Madden shouldn't retail for the same price as a Final Fantasy. Not to offend any Madden fans, but while it takes under a year to ready a new Madden game, it takes 3-4 years to make a good RPG.

Post #1.100

I have bought every single Madden since the beginning of this generation, except last year's edition, I think I'm finally fed up with it, the genre isn't moving forward at all, the whole multiplatform approach just isn't helping the situation.

[EvilTaru]

I don't like the increase in price either. That's way too much for me, so I'll just have to wait till the prices go down, I guess.

There is really no reason for EA to increase the price of their games if they're NOT adding all that much to them. As for some of the more shoddy next-gen ports like Gun and King Kong, that's just highway robbery, they've got some nerve charging more just because it's "supposedly" on a "next-gen" platform, they're out of their mind if they'd think I would play along, and I buy about 4-5 games every single month. On principle alone I would skip the multiplatform crap.

[Junox50]

There is really no reason for EA to increase the price of their games if they're NOT adding all that much to them. As for some of the more shoddy next-gen ports like Gun and King Kong, that's just highway robbery, they've got some nerve charging more just because it's "supposedly" on a "next-gen" platform, they're out of their mind if they'd think I would play along, and I buy about 4-5 games every single month. On principle alone I would skip the multiplatform crap.

I'm talking about all next gen games in general costing more than the current gen.

[Raitei]

Liquid eagle, you also have to remember most movies make their money back through Cinema.

[CARTIER90]

MGS4 , GT Vision and GTA4 ....for them the devs can come and rob me !, I dont care just lemme at em !!!!! :)

[Smokey]

c,mon fellas ive been paying $100 au for ps2 games forever so thats life. just buy the games you relly want not every game you can get hold of.

[Sephiroth_VII]

Well, 100 AU translates to 70 USD, so I see what you mean. But, at the same time, if converted to GBP, it's only 41.66 £, while we Danes have to pay 55.6 £ for a new game on the 360.

[EvilTaru]

I'm talking about all next gen games in general costing more than the current gen.

Considering only xbox360 game prices are known, I would rather not make that assumption.

Also, if they're going to raise the prices, which Sony has not indicated they would do such a thing, there should be games that are worth more than current-gen games, publishers like EA and Activision are only going to be snubbed by me if the only reason for charging more is because basically the same product now has the name of a next-gen console on the box.

[Smokey]

Well, 100 AU translates to 70 USD, so I see what you mean. But, at the same time, if converted to GBP, it's only 41.66 £, while we Danes have to pay 55.6 £ for a new game on the 360.
its funny how we all pay something different hey seph. itll be the same for the ps3 as well garuantee U.S will get it cheapest.

[Sephiroth_VII]

Of course they will. Thank Denmarks 75% taxes for that...

[woundingchaney]

As far as replayabilty shouldnt we include a good online scenario. Say for instance I play FF? for 40 hours yet I have 200+ hours online in Tekken. Online ability dramatically reflects replay value. Its quite possible that I get more play time out of a good fighter or shooter than I would a rpg.


Irregardless $60 is high on a consumer standpoint, whereas I believe the price is justified that alone doesnt leesen the burden on the consumer. Devs are going to have to find a way to streamline the cost scenario before we are looking at 70 - 90 dollars in coming gens.

[cliffbo]

As far as replayabilty shouldnt we include a good online scenario. Say for instance I play FF? for 40 hours yet I have 200+ hours online in Tekken. Online ability dramatically reflects replay value. Its quite possible that I get more play time out of a good fighter or shooter than I would a rpg.


Irregardless $60 is high on a consumer standpoint, whereas I believe the price is justified that alone doesnt leesen the burden on the consumer. Devs are going to have to find a way to streamline the cost scenario before we are looking at 70 - 90 dollars in coming gens.

i agree to some extent but with most online games its more of the same, but with RPGs they tend to add to the mix on a regular basis and when you come to the end, its a completion of a very complex story line

[woundingchaney]

i agree to some extent but with most online games its more of the same, but with RPGs they tend to add to the mix on a regular basis and when you come to the end, its a completion of a very complex story line
But that is only if it is a qualtiy rpg, so infact if both titles are qualtiy and offer valued entertainment then its quite possible that one could recieve considerably more play time from a fighter or shooter with good online structure (this of course refers to RTSs and other online genres as well).

But that really is just beating around the bush here, I completely see your point :happy:

[julps31]

What worries me is that there probably gonna try to raise by $10 each gen. We'll be paying $100 in no time and thats just too much. I don't care if games cost $80 already in europe...thats europe. I don't know about you but if i had to pay that much for games i would have to cut down on my video game playing.

[indiekid4]

As far as replayabilty shouldnt we include a good online scenario. Say for instance I play FF? for 40 hours yet I have 200+ hours online in Tekken. Online ability dramatically reflects replay value. Its quite possible that I get more play time out of a good fighter or shooter than I would a rpg.


Irregardless $60 is high on a consumer standpoint, whereas I believe the price is justified that alone doesnt leesen the burden on the consumer. Devs are going to have to find a way to streamline the cost scenario before we are looking at 70 - 90 dollars in coming gens.

Well I spent over 200+ hours playing all my FF games. cause if you want to master everything in those games you pretty much need to spend that amount of time. Wow, I must of had no life when I played those games...lol

[Sephiroth_VII]

If not more. FF VII is almost eternal in my opinion. Without seeking help at GameFAQs.com, of course...

[cliffbo]

What worries me is that there probably gonna try to raise by $10 each gen. We'll be paying $100 in no time and thats just too much. I don't care if games cost $80 already in europe...thats europe. I don't know about you but if i had to pay that much for games i would have to cut down on my video game playing.

how many games though do we buy as video game consumers and then leave them to gather dust on the shelf. i've done it myself and lots of my friends have too. so perhaps, although the innitial price will be higher, in the long run with a more selective audience (hopes for nextgen are prety high) it will hit your wallet less than you think. i would sooner have 3 AAA titles than 6 half hearted personality tie-ins that offer nothing more than a few unpublished music tracks. yes i'm talkin' ta you 50 cent!!!

[Smokey]

thats right cliff (be more selective) ive got some great games gathering dust i bought GTA SA and i thought it sucked but i played the crap out of vice city.

[cliffbo]

thats right cliff (be more selective) ive got some great games gathering dust i bought GTA SA and i thought it sucked but i played the crap out of vice city.

i'm buying MGS and picking through it with a fine tooth comb. same with RaC. if i can download extra levels and content, it'll be a loooong time before i invest in any other game. unless its a FF game of course.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

It's funny I remember the xbox spokesman, J. Allard saying in one presentation a couple years ago, 'If we're going to expand the industry prices are going to have to come down, not up.' Oh snap, 400+ dollar consoles and 60 dollar games.
Funny how that happened.

[CreativeWriter]

Buying used games is where it's at. If you can wait the couple months for the game to show up on Gamefly or used at the local EB it can save you so much money. Soon the games are priced like DVDs.

Some AAA titles I just can't wait for (DQ VIII for example), but I waited for MGS: Subsistence and for God of War at $19.99. Getting a Baldur's Gate II for 15 bucks is really satisfying--a game you love for the cost of a dinner. DQ VIII has totally been worth the $49.99, since it has hundreds of hours of content (and I knew it would before buying it... that's the key). I agree that RPGs seem more worthy of the price hike than EA Sports Game #20...

Then again, I'm not playing online on the PS2 or Gamecube, so maybe those sports games will have more replay value next gen. Still, I think we can all agree EA deserves a good ol' wag of the finger for being sketchy/lazy about their next iterations of franchises. Madden 06 plays just like Madden 04 and the graphics aren't even much better.

[LiquidEagle]

Aren't used games part of what publishers/devs are attributing to the rising cost of games?

I can't blame somebody for wanting to buy a used game, since it's cheaper & on-hand like that, but there's been a lot of talk about used games hurting the industry real bad. That & game rentals. It's like a movie being available for rent the same day it comes out in theaters. That would kill its intake like a mofo, and that's what the game industry has to put up with. Retailers pay jack squat for you to give them your old games, then they sell them back for pure profit to themselves -- no money from a used game goes to the publisher of the game.

I'm not sure where I'm going with this, but I think it's related to the rising cost of games...

[CreativeWriter]

Aren't used games part of what publishers/devs are attributing to the rising cost of games?

I can't blame somebody for wanting to buy a used game, since it's cheaper & on-hand like that, but there's been a lot of talk about used games hurting the industry real bad. That & game rentals. It's like a movie being available for rent the same day it comes out in theaters. That would kill its intake like a mofo, and that's what the game industry has to put up with. Retailers pay jack squat for you to give them your old games, then they sell them back for pure profit to themselves -- no money from a used game goes to the publisher of the game.

I'm not sure where I'm going with this, but I think it's related to the rising cost of games...

Future online distribution should allow the game publishers to offer competing price drops once the overhead of production is removed... Maybe we'll see publishers offering prices comparable to used games 6 months or so after release...

[LiquidEagle]

Online distribution certainly has some perks, but I dunno if I'll ever be able to let go of my desire to own the game in a tangible way and have the packaging & stuff, y'know? We'll see.

Either way, price increases aren't going to bode well over this upcoming generation -- how much are limited edition games gonna cost!?

Hopefully Sony continues to set an example and they price their games at $45 or $50 at the most :-/

[Junox50]

It's funny I remember the xbox spokesman, J. Allard saying in one presentation a couple years ago, 'If we're going to expand the industry prices are going to have to come down, not up.' Oh snap, 400+ dollar consoles and 60 dollar games.
Funny how that happened.

Really? It's blasphemy I tell you, blasphemy!

[satriales]

It's funny I remember the xbox spokesman, J. Allard saying in one presentation a couple years ago, 'If we're going to expand the industry prices are going to have to come down, not up.' Oh snap, 400+ dollar consoles and 60 dollar games.
Funny how that happened.
If only they were that cheap over here I might actually buy one.

[Junox50]

Considering only xbox360 game prices are known, I would rather not make that assumption.



Why not? It seems likely to happen with all this talk about game development being expensive.

[lips]

Yes 50 english pounds or at the present exchange rate $88.80 , thats how much us brits pay for 360 games. Slightly unreasonable dont you think ?
Regardless whether PS3 games take longer or not to develop, I'm finding that pricepoint a little hard to swallow. Premium PS2 games are around £40.
You could tell me to stop bitchin and appreciate that higher dev costs have to be recouped somewhere ...still - I believe that such software costs will actually shrink UK software sales as a whole due to consumers being more selective with their purchases. In a way perhaps this will be a good thing - devs will HAVE to up the quality if they want to maintain current sales levels.

Thoughts ?

Thank god. I'm sick of poser gamer jokers. Now only serious gamers will exist, and all the comedians who believe they can truely compete with less than full fair will be carted in with the xbox 360 worshippers.

[EvilTaru]

Why not? It seems likely to happen with all this talk about game development being expensive.

Actually people like EA are talking about it, and it's obviously a way of trying to justify a price increase. But if you look at Sony's history, they're the ones who decided to give people the greatest hits titles at $20, their first party titles are often priced $10 below, and Phil has stated that with the PS3, developers are actually able to get their engine up and running quicker, and while development costs will obviously increase, it's not like it's going to grow THAT much, as higher quality assets will be come more important, creating them is getting easier with better tools.

http://games.greggman.com/edit/editheadlines/2005-08-17.htm

[LiquidEagle]

The main raise in development costs is the higher pay for staff and things like that. The game development itself will be cheaper than PS2, if that makes sense.

[Z]

just to note: not all X2 games are for $60. and all MS games are priced at $50. this is EA and other big publishers taking the chance of the beginning of a new console cycle to test things out.

if they can, they'll try it with PS3 and Rev games as well. vote with your pockets people. you draw the line!

[EvilTaru]

just to note: not all X2 games are for $60. and all MS games are priced at $50. this is EA and other big publishers taking the chance of the beginning of a new console cycle to test things out.

if they can, they'll try it with PS3 and Rev games as well. vote with your pockets people. you draw the line!

I'm going smurfin' boycott crap like Gun, Tony Hawk, Need for Speed and King Kong. The PS3 version of Madden better be actually next-gen or else!!! >_<

[Z]

that's the way EvilTaru! show'em who's boss!

[CARTIER90]

ha , yeah, WTF are they about ^^^ if its not AAA its not worth my time....

[sif]

Cartier, the conversion to dollars is not really valid as UK prices include tax, whereas US ones do not. Also, it is the retailer's fault for trying to rip off early adopters, who they know will spend big. Look back to the PS2 launch, where all games were £45 and slowly went down to £30 as the user base became more casual.

On www.play.com all 360 games are £39.99 or less, packaged and delivered, so it is obviously the retailers that are at fault, not the publishers.

Minus tax we pay: 40/1.175 = £34
which according to xe.com is $61

[CARTIER90]

However the final cost is tallied - its still a rip.....just like our petrol, 99 p a litre or £ 4.50 a gallon, thats $7.50 equiv. Of course its our insane fuel taxes that we pay that cause that.
I suppose per hour, as many of you have stated, games are very good VFM.

[Smokey]

we pay $1.20 a litre here for unleaded :(

[CARTIER90]

Thats only 49 p a litre - I wish :) !!

[Smokey]

half of ours is government tax or about .40.50cent a litre

[venomv]

Most of what we pay is tax and what the gas stations pay for it, I saw a chart once that shown the profit that gas station make off of selling gas, it is something like 3% of what we pay they make as profit, and then people complain to the cashiers and managers when the price goes up, like they can control it.

But what does this have to do with anything???

[CARTIER90]

yeah , it was just another example of different countries paying different amounts for different goods.....

[The Dude]

Games are priced at whatever people are willing to pay for them. If you think its unfair then to price a game at $80, than don't buy it. Look at how quickly EA lowers the price on their madden games, after a month or two the game usually drops a good $15. While RPG's on the other hand retian their value longer because fewer are sold.

Just basic microeconomics

[venomv]

Games are priced at whatever people are willing to pay for them. If you think its unfair then to price a game at $80, than don't buy it. Look at how quickly EA lowers the price on their madden games, after a month or two the game usually drops a good $15. While RPG's on the other hand retian their value longer because fewer are sold.

Just basic microeconomics

That's not quite right, if the price stays up for while that means it is still selling good, lowering the price is to attract more buyers because it has stopped selling as well as it could at a lower price.

[Junox50]

Actually people like EA are talking about it, and it's obviously a way of trying to justify a price increase. But if you look at Sony's history, they're the ones who decided to give people the greatest hits titles at $20, their first party titles are often priced $10 below, and Phil has stated that with the PS3, developers are actually able to get their engine up and running quicker, and while development costs will obviously increase, it's not like it's going to grow THAT much, as higher quality assets will be come more important, creating them is getting easier with better tools.

http://games.greggman.com/edit/editheadlines/2005-08-17.htm

So your saying you believe the games will be priced at $50?

[masteratt]

Sorry if mentioned already and correct me if I'm wrong but I believe BR games will cost above £50? Sorry to say but at least the internet has it for cheap so you should be able to get it for £50.
I wish every developer was as sensible as R*. They released their table tennis game for £30 or something knowing it wasn't a £50 worth of effort although it probably is better than most games that are selling for £50.

[EvilTaru]

So your saying you believe the games will be priced at $50?

I believe many will be priced at US$50, not sure about EA and Activision games though. Ultimately the price will be determined by the market, I think people are worrying over nothing, because it's not just costs that control what the price will be set, because the price will ultimately be appropriately set according to market conditions, whether it's the software or the hardware.

[satriales]

Cartier, the conversion to dollars is not really valid as UK prices include tax, whereas US ones do not. Also, it is the retailer's fault for trying to rip off early adopters, who they know will spend big. Look back to the PS2 launch, where all games were £45 and slowly went down to £30 as the user base became more casual.

On www.play.com all 360 games are £39.99 or less, packaged and delivered, so it is obviously the retailers that are at fault, not the publishers.

Minus tax we pay: 40/1.175 = £34
which according to xe.com is $61
The retail price of 360 games is £50 - £8.75 tax = £41.25 or $73.50USD

We're still getting ripped off even without tax.

Sorry if mentioned already and correct me if I'm wrong but I believe BR games will cost above £50?.
I don't think anyone will buy them if they raise the price anymore. The actual cost of a Blu-Ray discs is not that mich more than DVD was when it first came out so it shouldn't effect the retail price.

[venomv]

nevermind, delete

[sif]

[QUOTE=satriales]The retail price of 360 games is £50 - £8.75 tax = £41.25 or $73.50USD

QUOTE]

The thing is though, Play.com selling ALL their 360 titles at £40 shows that its the retailers, not devs/publishers that take the extra tenner, and they are just ripping off early adopters.

[venomv]

Not sure if that is good news or bad....

[sif]

IMO it means prices will come down when casuals get on the bandwagon, so a good thing.