What do people think?
Go into Eb and you'll notice a great deal of Xbox 360 games are to be priced at $109.95.
Thankfully, it's less of an increase than the US got, though we still pay a great deal more overall than them.
Next-gen pricing: a necessary evil or a sham? Will you accept it or boycott such games? Good for the industry or driving people away?
Express you're thoughts here.
I found this a little odd:
The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion
PC: $89.95 ($99.95 for Collector's edition)
Xbox 360: $109.95 (?? for Collector's edition)
The interesting thing to note about this is that both version of the game are identical - so where does the extra $20 come from? In fact, the PC version also includes a copy of the Construction Set, meaning you actually get more with the PC version.
I think it also depends on the retailer. EB are notoriously bad with their prices as they almost have a monopoly right now. They charge that much because people will pay that much, not because it's justified by the development. If the developers saw any of the extra $10-20 per unit I'm sure they'd be very happy. :P
Scott.
I seem to remember when both the PS2 and the original Xbox came out, games were often (over)priced at around $10 to $20 more then the average for at least the first few months. It seems to be a common business tactic ? make more money while people are willing to pay extra for the latest product. As initial sales drop, lower the price to a reasonable level.
Surely 360 games won?t stay overpriced for long?
Anyway, I?m planing on avoiding the next gen consoles for as long as I can hold out.
quote:Surely 360 games won?t stay overpriced for long?
dont count on it. EA for one have stated that all their biggest next-gen titles will cost more, saying: "We believe premium titles demand a premium price" or some bullshit like that. Funny thing is that so far their 'premium' next gen titles often have less content (and even in some cases less gameplay quality) than their current gen alternatives, causing many an website to question the validity of their reasoning.
I'm writing about this issue in The Age and SMH for the 360 launch. When approached for comment to justify the pricing, nearly all Australian distributors ran for cover.
We all know the costs of development are rising exponentially and something's gotta give, but only one distributor was honest enough to say its simply because the installed base will be initially low so they have to hike prices to help cover costs.
The problem is, so many of the launch titles are ports from other platforms, with a $20 or $30 mark up for 360. I don't think consumers will tolerate it.
A multi-tiered pricing strategy that better reflects the actual quality of games is desperately needed. I don't think most people mind paying a premium for must-have blockbusters.
Jason
ooooooou money money money money....
<.< dudes that?s all it's about. The developer might have a passion and interest in games. But the publishers, distributors, manufactures and transporters don't give a crap about play value of the dvd cased game. They don't see "one fantabuious rocken-cool game" [<--- had to XD]
They see 300,000 copies. They see 2 million dollars profit. Therefore if an extra $20 on top of that mill make them 2.4 million instead, and they know that people initially will accept the price hike. Then rest assured they WILL do it for as long as they can get away with it. However if people don't buy their games and they only make say 1.5 million with the $120 titles then business wise the price will decline back to standard.
Games like many products work on the [quality = Price tolerance] idea. The higher the game quality is [and for the common man that equals graphics and visual thrills. Not game play, anyone noticing the popularity of Black?] the more people are willing to accept a higher price. This is why people pay ridiculous amounts of money for rare cars. The price is never justified except in the heads of those who buy it.
It's squarely on the consumer and how they will react. And personally with Australia?s "We don't like it but were not gonna do anything about it" attitude. I think the prices will stay around the $110 - $130 area.
quote:Originally posted by flyingdoormat
The problem is, so many of the launch titles are ports from other platforms, with a $20 or $30 mark up for 360. I don't think consumers will tolerate it.
I agree, it just doesn't make sense for any consumer to buy a nextgen port that has a substantial price markup when the game itself is only marginally better visually. In some cases, the game is worse than their current-gen couterpart. EA is the main culprit here with their nextgen ports like Fifa, NBA, and Madden having much less game options and features.
The odd thing is that EA then widened that price/quality discrepancy between current and next gen ports by dropping prices for their current-gen titles. What they really should have done, if they were thinking about the consumer, is drop the prices for the next-gen ports.
I agree with TheBigJ, prices for games can't keep going up and up. People will just be buying less and less titles per year. I know the benefits of digital distribution has [url="http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=11975"]been written about a bit[/url] [url="http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060301/buscaglia_01.shtml"]more recently[/url], but here's hoping it eventually becomes common place and drives the prices down.
$89.95 - $119.95, $40 bux is bugger all. You'd blow that on one trip to the bottlo on the corner for a weekend of beer and sport.
Purchasing a PC capable of running oblivion to match the 360 experience would set someone back $1500 - $2000 if they are a smart shopper. Probably $3000 for the average punter. Its bulky, you need a desk - a whole bunch of other crap comes with.
Xbox 360 == way less, smaller, plug in and go. If I didnt own a PC I had no inkling to do anything with a PC, thats where the real decision lies, a few thousand versus several hundred. As that person I know which choice I would choose.
As me - I'm going the PC route for Oblivion because its cheaper for me, and Im lucky enough to have that option.
The untapped potential - the people out there who dont own a pc or a console - these are the people that Micro$haft, Sony aim at most, with just enough extra to keep existing fanbases happy, who are easily chuffed with a backward compatibility announcement and another release of their favourite titles.
If you are able to think like a corporate monster I think youll understand and accept these things a bit more, if you look at it like an individual, youll think you deserve better and your being hard done by. If your a developer and a hardcore gamer your probably goign to be the worst of the bunch and pissing and moaning * infinity, the words " I remember when... " and " Back in my day.. " spring to mind.
Sneaking up the price every few years, personally I can handle. Now a 50%-100% increase that might stiffen the spine a bit, but a lowsy 10%-20% for games that I *have* to play, thats nothing to bark at - sign me up.
In the words of Caroo ( absolutely 100% spot on dude )
" The price is never justified, except in the heads of those who buy it "
To me it seems like the price increase is more about console politics than an increase in development costs.
When ?console X? is launched with titles that can be bought on other systems, the consumers need a reason to buy that game for ?console X?
One way to do this is to raise the price by $10-20 over it?s competitors so that when it comes time for Joe average to pick between say ?the pc version and 360 version of Call of Duty 2, Joe will come to logical conclusion that because the 360 version is more expensive it must have ..
Better graphics .
Better game play.
More gun/weapon?s/equipment.
Per pixel hair follicle render using sub surface scattering & HDR Lighting .
Fluffy Wuffy towel physics.
Average Joe's already paying $100 for a game so $10 isn?t to much extra to part with for the added bonuses.
oh i forgot gamedaily has a great QA with the creators of savage 2
[url]http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=11975[/url]
quote:We sold over 20% of our copies of Savage 1 online. The funny thing is, we made MORE money from those online sales than we did all the retail store sales.
and just to run a quick comparison of the pricing gap in the market today
Star Wars: Empire at War PC
EB America: $67.00 AUD
EB Australia: $99.95 AUD($90 if you pre order)
citysoftware Melbourne Australia: $76.00 AUD($69.09 without GST)
www.dvdboxoffice.com: $78.01 AUD(includes shipping from Canada)
where does all the money go [V]
quote:Originally posted by HazarD
Sneaking up the price every few years, personally I can handle. Now a 50%-100% increase that might stiffen the spine a bit, but a lowsy 10%-20% for games that I *have* to play, thats nothing to bark at - sign me up.
This is part of what I see as the problem. You, me, and many of the people on this forum *have* to play these games, so we buy them. Most average gamers I know (and every single non-gamer or casual-gamer I know) doesn't *have* to buy any game, they *want* to buy some games and they *might* buy some games, if they were reasonably priced.
My main point in the above rant was that by increasing the price of the product, you're decreasing the potential audience of the product, quite regardless of how good the product is. If these effects are balanced, profit remains unaffected. You're reducing your audience from people who *would* or *might* buy a game to the hardcore bunch who simply *must* buy the game. But like you said, if you think like a corporate monster, that doesn't matter. Profit remains unchanged.
My concern is not one of "I don't want to pay that much, back in my day, etc...". My concern is for the future state of the industry. Sneaking the price up a little at a time doesn't worry the existing audience very much. The untapped potential, however, doesn't see it this way. They think "Damn, I wasn't prepared to pay for that game when it was $90. Now they want me to pay $120?".
If we continue to sneak the price up and up, the audience stops growing. If this happens, what do we end up with? No room for the little guy, the small time or independant developer - the smaller audience of gamers, all willing to spend $120 or more on individual titles, will be expecting the absolute best quality gaming for their money. With the higher budgets required for these titles, publishers will be less willing to take risks, which could ultimately stiffle creativity.
Personally, I'd be willing to spend plenty of money for the games I play - I usually always get my money's worth. It's not because of my own pockets that I'm concerned about this. I'm concerned about this because I want to see more and more people discovering and enjoying games the way I do. For this to happen, the industry needs to grow.
$40 bux is bugger all.
Lol, come on Troy, almost 1/2 the price again?! Thats a big deal man, what if your rent went up by that percentage, or your salary down by it? lol. [:P]
Just ask yourselves this, how much of that extra cash goes to the developer?
If the increase went into making the games better or paying developers what they are really worth then I could almost see some justification but its more likey just buying some marketing guy a newly pimped golf buggy.
Not that I blame a guy for wanting one of these:
[url]http://community.webshots.com/photo/127358929/1127375786053789465OiWwZO…]
Anyway I digress, while I'm happy to pay the already bloated $90 wad for some gaming goodness I certainly aren't rushing out for 360 games until they get a bit cheaper than that.
Also doesn't help stop the piracy issue, increase the cost, that'll bring them back into the fold?!
Maybe publishers are anticipating the XBox 360 being modded too and trying to recoop some cash from those doing the right thing before they start losing sales?
If my rent went up by $40 overnight I'd find a new place to live! Hence thats the reason we left Teneriffe - rent went up by $50 wtf!
But like everything - theres ALWAYS an alternative.
I agree with Malus although I've got to admit that buggy sure looks cool and i could really use one of those [:P]
Like always just expressing how the price hike effects me, and it doesnt - bring on the games.
I do however agree with you TheBigJ - it cant keep on sneaking up, or could it?
Like shoes, there are $10 dollar pairs and pairs that cost 250k+.
Bizzare comparison you say - well theres a purpose: 90% of the population - you might as well say *everyone* needs shoes todo the things that they do (i know there are those who dont, but for the hell of it) so the consumer market is there to support the massive price range.
Not everyone needs games, and unlike shoes - there probably arent a great deal of gamers out there that are willing to pay 100k+ for a game. Therefor the market is not there to warrant such a huge price range - BUT a $10 - $20 markup - SURE the market is there. watch them eat those new titles up!
There are a other forms of entertainment out there that the general populace find equally or even more stimulating and rewarding.
DVD's -anywhere from $1 - $40 for a single.
whole boxed sets provding 10 - 12 hours of watching will set you back aroun $60 - $150.
Collectors editions with extra goodies for classics or entire seasons of x-files etc will end up costing you hundreds. Movie buffs pay these prices.
Why is it that these movies - *if* good quality linger on still fetching a top price tag. 10+ years after they have been made?
Games dont have that kind of life cycle - Guildwars won awards for its effort, yet in the local EB at a recent sale it was $39.95. Now for a 9/10 90% rating game only a year after its release, AND its an MMO without monthly FEES! to pretty much drop in price by more than 50%. You just cant get much better than that!
Now a hypothetical:
A future development studio puts in motion a dev cycle for the most epic game to date.
Dev cycle 7.5 - 12 years.
The company finishes it - the quality and gameplay are fantastic.
The price on this game is $500 - $600. Given the dev cycle is 500% - 600% longer than *most* and the quality is absolutely outstanding.
Would you buy it?
Would you buy it if a press release was announced that only 35% of the funds are going back to the developer to make more?
Would you now buy it if a press release was announced that 95% of the funds are going back to the developer to make more?
Does the general populace even care how much goes to the developer?
Whens the last time you grabbed something in your household, looked at the made in china sticker on it and thought or even cared about how much money those people make or under what conditions to provide us with thier quality product?
Despite my rambling post - the ultimate point is, Prices go up - until people stop buying, then prices go down to extract the most from the product. How to put something in action to change the cycle ?
Some good points HazarD. I'm still not content, however.
The DVDs and boxed sets that fetch large prices generally do so because they've achieved some sort of cult status - they've gained a small, devoted following of fans ready to pay whatever price is asked. In this scenario, everyone is happy. The cult fans get their beloved product, and the company makes enough money from this small group to justify the production. This is, I believe, not an appropriate analogy of the next-gen price hike. Consider the following.
There's a lot of gamers out there who love old games. Let's say there was some old game that had faded into obscurity and the publishers had long since abandoned it. Perhaps a publisher could invest some more money into it - port it to a next-gen platform or make a low-budget next-gen sequel. This game, when released, could fairly be overpriced since it was aimed at a cult audience.
But this is not how the industry works. When games like Sam & Max 2 get cancelled, you can be pretty sure that publishers aren't interested in cult or niche markets. The price of a next-gen game isn't like a pair of expensive shoes or that Robotech DVD collection thats gnawing on your soul with it's $400 price tag. These things are once-in-a-while purchases. With a few exceptions, the next-gen prices seem to apply to the whole range of titles. The games that get the price increase don't necessarily stand out, they don't necessarily have any cult status, they aren't necessarily anything special. This is what I've been ranting about:
They want us to pay more for games that aren't necessarily much better than the games of the previous generation.
The appropriate analogy here is not an increase in your rent, or an increase in the cost of some DVDs, but if all rent increased and the cost of all DVDs increased. Then, you'd have no choice. You'd have to pay $40 more for your rent and you'd have to buy average DVDs at cult prices. Where's the alternative?
Good point TheBigJ, and I see where your coming from.
Luckily at this stage anyway, you do not *have* to pay $120 for a new 360 game if you dont want to. There are other choices / avenues available - all rent and all dvd's havent increased in price, yet [:)]
Lets take a look at some xbox 360 game prices from the places I purchase games.
Dead or Alive 4 - $89.95
Perfect Dark Zero - $89.95
Kameo Elements of Power - $89.95
NBA2K6 - $89.95
NHL2K6 - $89.95
Project Gotham Racing 3 - $89.95
These are hardly prices to bark at - they sound pretty standard to me, but some have been out for not even a month now.
Lets take a look at the some of the prices for game that havent or just been released.
Prey ( pre-order ) - $92.95
Elder Scrolls: Oblivion ( pre order )- $89.95
Fight Night Round 3 - $109.21
Football Manager 2006 - $112.07
Moto GP 2006 - $109.38
The general consensus is - after just a month or so of release the games drop back down to the level I'm used to paying. And some games just arent effected by the price hike at all and for those that are above the $99.95 - bah its $10 odd bucks, if i have to have it, and cant possibly wait for 1 month, I'll have it for 10 extra bucks.
If your wondering where I get these prices and purchase my games stuff from its small shop called Burn. Located right there in the Valley in Brisbane.
However this doesnt solve the problem your outlining TheBigJ - it does however provide a solution in the short term while we mull over an action plan to defeat the *insert cheesy intro music* Next Gen Price Hike!
At the end of the day, it depends on the consumer reaction. If EB is the only store that keeps to the upper price range and the majority of consumers begin shopping elsewhere, they'll notice and drop their prices post-haste. I admit I haven't looked at what prices the smaller shops are putting up, but at EB and Harvey Norman, it's mostly > $100. It's entirely possible that this will just blow over within the first few months as the RRP gets kicked back to $99.95.
Either way, I feel my original point is an important one: Development costs will continue to climb into the following generations. Games on the Xbox720 and Xbox1080 will, presumably, have greater development budgets than that of the Xbox360. If unit prices go up, audience goes down (or at the very least, growth stagnates). If this happens, game titles become less diverse, even more hit driven then at present, etc. If we want to prevent this from happening in the future, we need to think ahead and start cultivating our audience now. In my opinion, the first thing we need to do to achieve this is to start lowering unit prices.
quote:Originally posted by TheBigJ
or that Robotech DVD collection thats gnawing on your soul with it's $400 price tag.
Dude.. you got so jibbed. You can pick up all 86 episodes on 14 dvds remastered for 140-160 dollars at JB hi-fi
The only thing robotic gnawing on my soul is this little thing: http://www.robotech.com/store/viewproduct.php?id=111
Damm driving lessions XD eating my monies!!
I think Hazard has hit the nail on the head. Demand sets the price. Retailers will soon find out if demand matches the price. Although I think in the case of the X360, publishers are already finding there isnt enough software demand. Activision recently annouced a dual pack bundle you can buy. Which is pretty bizarre this close to launch.
http://palgn.com.au/article.php?title=Activision+reveals+bundle+pack+fo…
I think this is a good indicator to what Harard was referring to. If demand isnt there, you dont need to worry about prices staying at 109 buks :) Also, prev gen had things like platinum titles and so forth, I expect we will see similar things happening to cater for people who simply dont want to buy on the leading edge of releases.
It is the publisers that raised the price though, not EB, and i think the reason you can find many games until $110 is simply becuase $90 is still a lot more than the new US$60 price point, which i find interesting - it means we have a nice buffer zone in which to drop prices while else where in the world they go up. But as we've seen with EB there's no garentee this will happen.
Also Hazard, be careful about Burn, i've heared mostly bad things about them. Stories like trying to sell an imported PSP for about $500 and claimg it was not going to be released in austrlia. And the fact that they dont take returns or refunds should say something too. Of course that's all second hand information, i havnt bought from there myself, but the consensus so far seems to be on the negative.
I can't confirm this because I've never worked at a game store before, but I've been told in the past by friends who were EB clerks that the USD-to-AUD price anomaly is actually set by the publishers and distributors, not the retailers here. According to the information I was given, EB simply couldn't afford to sell a game at more than $15 or $20 below it's RRP. If this is the case, then the buffer zone isn't any larger then that of the rest of the world - and the publishers take advantage of our market's relative isolation to make more money off Australian sales (on a per unit level) then elsewhere. This would make the $120 RRP on some next-gen games particularly difficult to swallow.
Does anyone here have game sales experience that can shed some light on this?
I consider videogame next gen price hikes justified under the current model. The cost of development has increased massively, the audience hasn't. Especially in a transition year with low install bases where product risks are great, its unsurprising publishers are jacking up the price.
Also, for those making comparisons to the movie industry, remember to not stop short at just box office and DVD sales. The movie industry has a much wider range of revenue streams including box office, pay-per-view, VHS/DVD sales, subscription TV, free to air TV, and merchandising. Under this model, even a crappy film is going to have a half decent chance to make some coin (in fact, Uwe Bolle has made an art of it).
So are higher prices "good" for the industry? Thats hard to say.
From my travels, consumers seem trained into the current gen pricing structure, and with little understanding of the cost structure of development Joe Average isn't going to take kindly to his copy of Project Gotham 3 for Xbox 360 costing more than PGR2 for Xbox. That being said, he doesn't have much choice if he wants the latest PGR unless he is prepared to wait for discounts over time.
So, some consumers aren't likely to be happy in the short term, and higher prices are only offsetting increased risks for publishers rather than lessening the volatility of the market. Not industry crash material, but its probably not going to be stimulating growth either.
For the games industry to work in the longer term, the model needs to change. All the way along the chain - from financing, through development, to distribution and marketing. A number of companies are already making some great progress in these areas, and we are seeing some interesting examples of this shift already (Bioware/Pandemic merger, Steam, XBLA).
Exciting times lie ahead for those developers with vision.
But you are stuck with high prices in the short term :)
I don't know if I'll boycott Xbox360, but I certainly can't see myself spending more than $100 for a game. I've done that only once or twice in the last decade.
I [url="http://sumea.com.au/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3510"]briefly mentioned[/url] my opinion on this in a recent thread. Two days after doing so, I visited an EB store and noticed only one Xbox360 game priced at $99.95 and the rest were either $109.95 or $119.95. Around one-third of the titles were $119.95.
This is ridiculous.
The way I see it, rising development costs cannot possibly justify a price hike. Does a ticket to a blockbuster movie cost more than a ticket to a lower-budget film? No. Do TV stations put more ads in higher-budget shows? No. The reason that these higher-budget productions are made is because, presumably, they draw a wider audience and thus, are more profitable (I don't want to get into a thing here about creative integrity). If next-gen prices must increase to meet rising development costs, it can only mean that the audience size is not growing proportionately. If this is the case, I must ask the question:
Why are next-gen development costs increasing at all?
If we want to increase our audience, we need to lower prices. Dramatically. Non-gamers and casual-gamers are used to paying $10 - $15 for a box-office ticket, $20 - $40 for a DVD, $20 - $40 for a music CD. These people aren't used to forking out $120 for a single title. Doesn't matter how many ads you put on TV, nor how many good reviews a game gets, nor how many friends play the game - they ain't gonna do it. The Lord of the Rings movie trilogy cost over $700 million to produce. $10 gets you a ticket for each film, and $70 gets you all three films on DVD. Profit? Billions. Why? Huge audience.
Oh, and I don't agree that it's easier to justify with games because you get 50+ hours of content. Non-gamers and casual-gamers don't think in these terms. Especially when there's really little relationship between budget and length anyway. I finished Halo 2 in a few casual evenings. I've spent hundreds of hours playing Civilization.
I think the problem here is that while lowering prices would be great for the industry, it wouldn't be immediately beneficial to the publisher/console manufacturer that attempted it - they would have to wait for the snail's pace migration of DVD shoppers to the Games shelves before it paid off. Most likely, they would have to lose money to help the whole industry grow, while their compeditors feed on the new growth. Doesn't sound like good business sense to me. The fact that all existing gamers, myself included, continue to pay $100 for mediocre titles doesn't help either. Microsoft knows it can do this and not lose much of an audience.
Wow, this is getting very ranty. I had more, but I'm gonna finish it here.