http://www.fairplay-campaign.co.uk/front.htm
Read the WHOLE site, there's some valid reasoning in there plus support from developers and publishers alike.
No one's going to lose their job, in fact, it could turn around the industry - piracy will lessen, publishers will take greater risks on originality if this movement can gain momentum.
Make sure you read the WHOLE site to see where it's coming from.
Did you read the whole site? It's worth it.
The movement actually originated at the Edge Magazine forum and has gained quite a following. Word has it that Edge magazine may do an article on it. I think it's got potential to make people sit up and take notice. A lot of parents dont really realise how much they are paying for the games.
Game development IS expensive work but a lot of the initial cost is money coughed up on behalf of the development studio or with a bit of investment. The actual production of the disks themselves is minimal.
Im not saying it will work, but if it does, it could have some good effects. But one thing we probably all agree on is that games ARE expensive and for those who dont keep up with the reviews and previews (ie mainstream consumers) paying $100+ is a risky proposition. I paid $139-95 for Metal Gear Solid 2 and I pick up most games second hand unless I really, really want it. On Wednesday I picked up THPS3 for $51 NZ ($40 AUD) and if more games were in this price range, they'd see more sales. Just look at what happened when the Xbox price hit $399!
$100 is definately too much to pay for a game, especially those games that have a small replay value. A case in point would be when I hired Metal Gear Solid 2 from the local video store to play on a Playstation 2 for 3 days, which I finished in 2. I would have felt a bit cheated if I had $100 for that (the artwork and everything was top notch, but it wasn't $100+ worth of entertainment).
Game pricing issues have been debated for a long time - people were arguing Commodore 64 games were expensive when they were $30, so it's unlikely things are going to change too soon. The references to the movie and music industry in regards to expensive productions / inexpensive product is a bit unfair though, I think. Games simply don't sell as much units as music CDs or movie tickets. Games are lucky to sell 500,000 copies, whereas CDs and movie tickets usually sell in their millions.. But yeh, I'm sure lower prices would encourage people to buy more games. I sure hope they don't get much higher than $100 any time soon though!
I must say that personally, i very rarely buy games because of the price tag. Over the last 3-4 years, i've bought 2 (full price) xbox games (in the last 9 or so months) and maybe 2-3 (full price) PC games. However, i've also bought about 15+ Cut price/budget PC games. Usually games that are about a year or so old that stores are trying get rid of, i've bought from anywhere between $7 to about $40. And i'll even say, 1 or 2 of those games i've hardly, or haven't played at all, but they looked good at the time, so i bought them. So i do agree that lowering the price of games to around $50 or so would increase impulse buying, and buying in general. If xbox games were $50 i'd probably buy one every couple months, instead of maybe thinking about maybe possibly buying one every 4-5 months.
I think PC prices have a better chance of being able to drop than console prices, because of the large licensing fees that the console makers have to charge to make money. You could still get console prices to drop, but more likely dropping to $60-70 instead of $40-50. I had a friend who was making GBA games...and then stopped after nintendo changed their licensing prices. The publishers gave his team $30,000 front to make the games, but after the licensing changes, his team would have only been making $1 from the sale of every unit, and he would have to pay back the publishers front, so they would have to sell 30,000 units before they saw any money coming in. I don't know what the publishers cut, and what nintendos cuts were exactly, but obviously if prices drop, it has to happen at the publishers end mainly, and for console games also at their end.
Wether it would reduce piracy is interesting. I can only really speak from my personal opinions and actions, but i have very rarely (if at all) downloaded a game *instead* of buying it. I'll download a game, cos it interests me, but if i hadn't been able to download it, i still wouldn't have bought it. I just wouldn't have played it at all. It'd be interesting to see what percentage of people are in my boat, and what percentage are in the "downloaded it instead of buying it" boat. Piracy may be big, but it's possible it's not actually as big a threat to sales as it seems. Of course the larger problem with piracy is not the downloading off the net, but in places where pirated copies are actually sold as legit copies. At that point, people are still forking over money for pirated copies, which, if prices were lowered might be money spent on original copies instead....
Well, i think i should stop typing :P
CYer, Blitz
I too fully agree. The most recent games I've bought have been War3 Collectors Edition (~$150, but being collector's edition you can expect that, I spose), Freedom Force (~$60 on release) and Battlezone 2 (~$30). I've also bought the odd Dreamcast game, because they're now cheap as chips.
I can safely say that the cost of games is preventing me from buying a Gamecube/XBox/PS2, due to the fact that for 2 or 3 games, I could buy another console. This just ain't right to me. So I'd be all for the Fairplay idea.
Seeing everyone's in agreement, what does everyone think about the possibility of this being a well sized boycott in Australia? Imagine if everywhere got in on it. No games sold for a week. Powerful stuff...
Chris Bowden
http://brain.gamekey.com/
Just a few crumbs of thought...
I paid $120 for Street Fighter 2 on SNES ten years ago. Heck, I paid $60 for Pole Position on Atari 2600 back when it was released. There are XB/PS2/GC games that cost $120. There are GBA games that cost $60.
I think, especially over the last ten years, games haven't risen in price that much. Having that $100 mental price point that publishers are reticent to go over (much...) helps, too.
I just think it's a part of human nature to say that things are too expensive. I remember people complaining that $30 was too much to pay for Commodore 64 games.
What is clear, to be sure, is that the general public do think that games are too expensive. Actually while I'm on the subject - remember how huge the budget ($5 - $10) games market become on the C64? It singlehandedly put Codemasters on the map and look at them today. Maybe that's needed. I mean, Midas and 3DO are doing 'budget' games and they're doing quite well out of it.
I think the crux of the matter isn't that ALL games are too expensive, but the MEDIOCRE ones are. Why is, say, a AAA title like Super Mario Sunshine the same price as drek like Simpson's Road Rage? If you walk into a car yard, a BMW is more expensive than a Lancer. Prices may not have to be CHEAPER, per se, but they should be RELATIVE.
The final point I wanted to raise is that, especially in the PC market, the first week of sales is critical in the eyes of publishers. I feel bad for the games (and especially its developers, who are typically only one bad selling game away from going under) that are released that week.
Anyway, you can be safely assured that I won't be buying any games that week. Or the week before, or the week after. Who the hell has money to spend on games? :)
But one point to remember is that usually all games cost about the same amount to make and advertise, so there's usually no cost discreptency there like there is between a BMW and a Lancer.
On the other hand I'd expect crappy / mediocre games to go down in price faster than the better games, as they wouldn't be selling as well and the plunge would be faster and more dramatic than the better games.
The one thing that I hate now though is that the expansion packs now a days always contain the original game inside, and cost slightly more than the original. This peeved me off when I first bought MechCommander, because the "Gold" edition came out, but it had the original inside of it and offered a "$19.95 (US) rebate" to the owners of the original. Pretty pathetic IMO, I remember when I got Ghost Bear's Legacy - the expansion pack to MW2, and it cost me $19.99 (US) compared to the original MW2 at $39.95 (US).
Anyways, I generally support their arguments on that site, and if possible I would call all indipendent developers to try and release their own games by themselves, and sell them for a cheaper price, say $20 AU for a game. I'm sure a few thousand people would play for that? And if lots of these indie games sell well for such a small price it may bring it to the attention of the "big boys", and maybe then some change will take place.
That's why hiring rocks
It was really irritating with the N64 when you hired games and they were saved on the cartridge. The chances of you getting the same cartridge back again before someone deletes your game is low.
But now the GameCube (1337o McN337o), all games are saved on your memory card.
Before i buy most games (Except for: Zelda, Starfox Adventure and other games that i'm going to get regardless) I try to hire them first. Then if you like it and you buy it, you don't have to repeat all the work you just did.
The universe is big so don't complain
j0o R phf0o13e n00b3|~i|=i<
|-|3 i5 /\u<|-| 1337||35s h4/in9 4n|> i|= j0o <4n'7 r34d i7 7|-|3n jo0 i5 3><7r3/\31y n0o8 h4/!n9
/\|_||-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4[8D][8D][8D][8D]
lol
Bloody hell its a giant harmonica!
quote:Originally posted by Meatex_Salami
j0o R phf0o13e n00b3|~i|=i<
|-|3 i5 /\u<|-| 1337||35s h4/in9 4n|> i|= j0o <4n'7 r34d i7 7|-|3n jo0 i5 3><7r3/\31y n0o8 h4/!n9
/\|_||-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4|-|4[8D][8D][8D][8D]
lolBloody hell its a giant harmonica!
It's not that hard to read guys
Just for the n00bs sake, here's the translation (Which i worked out my self):
He is much leetness having and if you cna't read it then you is extremely n00b having
Muhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
(Still not much better in English, readable at best)
100% chance of PAIN, in the GLAVEN
3@# 7#@7 l@$7 ?0$7 1Z ?|2377? 3@$? 70 |23@|), 1 |)1|)||'7 |23@ll? 7|2? 7#@7 #@|2|). :) |_|7 73#|| @9@1|| 1 |23@ll? 7|2? @7 @ll |||) 1|= _|00 7#0|_|9#7 7#@7 l@$7 ?0$7 |)|20??3|) 73# 1||73l193||(3 l3/3l 0|= @|_|$7|2@l1@... //3ll 70|_|9#. |_|$7|2@l1@||Z /073|) |=0|2 0#|| 0//@|2|) $0 73#? |)3$3|2/3 70 ?3 ?|2@1||//@$#3|) 1||70 @ $7 //#3|23 73#? 7#1|||< 0393 |_|$# 1Z $m@|27
Bloody hell its a giant harmonica!
quote:Originally posted by Obsolete_386
That's really good Meatex. Not only did you give a really stupid opinion, but you wrote it in such a way that no one will be able to understand it and reply. f00100% chance of PAIN, in the GLAVEN
How do you know its stupid cause you can't read it [8D]
And all it was anyway was random crap that i thought of so i could confuse and frighten inferior people and... well everyone else [:p]
Bloody hell its a giant harmonica!
quote:Originally posted by Obsolete_386
Back to the actual topic now, Video games need to cost a lot otherwise the 50+ people who made it (Most games anyway) get megXX0r pissed off and don't get shit. They need shit100% chance of PAIN, in the GLAVEN
If you read the site, you'd know that most of the development costs are paid up front. Wages, Hardware, Software are all fixed costs - and often taken on by the studios and/or investors. By your rationale, movies on DVD would be the most expensive because of all the people involved in producing a movie (check a blockbuster title for the credits) and I don't know many artists/programmers getting paid like Brad Pitt/Julia Roberts/Harrison Ford etc..
The problem is that the retailler and publishers cuts are too huge. But that in turn is due to royalties paid to Sony/MS/Nintendo. If the way licensing fees were changed, then we could see some effects in pricing.
If games were cheaper, then they'd sell more and the potential user base would expand also. Games are still out of the mass market impulse buy range to be truly massmarket. Case in point: I picked up Tony Hawk Pro Skater 3 for $51 the other day. Would never given it a thought at it's original $129-95 price.
Upfront costs are paid (as well as royalties later, depending on the contract), but publishers/investors are only going to invest a certain amount of money if they expect to get more back. So paying the developers is still an issue because if the returns are less, investors/publishers are going to be willing to put less payment up front, which means developers would have to burden more of the cost themselves, and/or go out of business because they can't afford to run for 18 months on what the publishers are giving them.
So, publishers still need to be assured that they will still be making at least the same amount of money at a cheaper price.
Also, licensing fee's theory works fine for console games, but new release PC games are in the same price range, so wheres the "license fee" going then :)
The lack of a licensing fee does allow for a budget category in PC games, unlike consoles where every game is in the $90-100+ range until it sells a million copies or something. There is a lot of crappy little titles that would be worth $40-50 because they are fun for a short while, or they are fun multiplayer (party games) but are pretty much sucky for single player. But $100 for these titles is ludicrous when there are so many "Better" titles on the shelves.
I think if the console licensers move to a percentage based scheme, or at least created a new budget license (and limited the maximum RRP for instance) it would be highly beneficial.
CYer, Blitz
quote:Originally posted by Blitz
Just a reminder to everybody, to buy splinter cell on the 29th or 30th of novemeber so you don't have to wait until the 9th of december (if you are gonna do the fair play thing) :)
CYer, Blitz
(If you didn't guess...very excited about splinter cell)
Me too, the lowest score I've seen is from Gamespot with an 8.6. According to them, it's not a MGS2 beater but it's very very good. I can't help but feel that other sites have gone overboard on their praise and have glossed over what are apparently some of the games faults. Still, opinions and all that.
Uhmm if your curious as to why GBA games cost so much ask Nintendo, last time we checked it costs 40-50 AUS, for each cartridge, for the publisher to push out a fully license game.
Not quite, it costs a publisher 40-50 AUS for each cartridge for the license from nintendo to be used an official licensed GBA game >.>
However it costs a PC game about 2-10 AUS, to get a box out. However the cost of making the game can range upto the $1M+
So it's not just manufactoring costs, but also marketing. After all it has to appeal to an audience. The game could be crap however with the correct marketing teams will become a seller.
I will stop ranting now >.>
I played poker with a Tarot deck the other night. I got a full house and four people died.
--Steven Wright.
quote:Originally posted by JonathanKerr
If you read the site, you'd know that most of the development costs are paid up front. Wages, Hardware, Software are all fixed costs - and often taken on by the studios and/or investors.
There are many games development companies that get paid royalties. This might not be the case on PC as much as on consoles, but you're talking to a console freak
(At one point or another i've owned the following)
Commodore 64
Sega Master System
Sega Mega Drive
Nintendo Entertainment System (NES)
Super Nintendo Entertainment System (SNES)
N64
Gamecube
(Nintendo loyalist now)
100% chance of PAIN, in the GLAVEN
Actually, almost all development companies would be paid in royalties. However, they do also get an upfront payment to spend on developing the game. This upfront cost though is taken out of future royalties. Eg. If a studio gets $50,000 up front, they won't receive any royalties until that $50,000 has been "paid back" to the publisher by royalties off sold software. Of course if the game doesn't sell 25,000 copies or whatever the royalty fee is, the studio keeps the $50,000 and the publisher most likely posts a loss.
If the studio runs over the budget of it's upfront payment then it is screwed if the game bombs.
CYer, Blitz
I've posted it on the main page about the Avault article that explains how game prices got so high.. read it at http://www.avault.com/articles/getarticle.asp?name=stickershock ..
HMMMM, I agree, with the whole video games industry being run by idiots quote, I agree games cost too much, in Australia its $100 for console games, $80-$100 for PC games, this is ridiculous. I can understand some games costing that much because of the amount of work put in, but for the average game its a joke. Its not so bad with PCs because the prices drop quickly and there is usually extra content to get off the net, Consoles its bad, I wouldnt pay $90 for tonyhawk or silent scope etc.
This site has an interesting Idea, I'm interested in seeing how it turns out.
Lead paint: delicious but deadly!