Ben-DutkaIt remains a hot topic everywhere: the next generation of consoles.
And while hardware price is always a major issue, we also can't forget about the all-important cost of software.
Many think $60 is too much for games this generation (which I don't agree with at all), but the overall cost of development is ever on the rise.
Historically, games on the PlayStation side have gone up $10 with each new generation. During the PS1 era, new games were $40; for the PS2, they were $50, and now for the PS3, they're $60. So is it safe to assume that PS4 games will be $70? Is that properly taking into account inflation and the rising cost of game creation, from the drawing board to the production line? And how much are gamers ultimately willing to spend on a routine basis?
The other question involves shifting formats; from physical to digital. A lot of people think digital copies of games should be cheaper than their physical counterparts, as it costs the publisher less (theoretically). However, we haven't really seen that yet; might we see it in the new generation? Maybe that will accelerate the death of game discs. If a new title launches simultaneously on store shelves and on the PSN, for instance, what if the digital copy is $10 cheaper? Then what? Will that drastically increase sales of one version over the other?
I'm a little tired of all the complainers, who clearly weren't around when SNES cartridges cost $50-$70 nearly 20 years ago. We should all be thanking our lucky stars that games today don't cost $100 apiece; by all rights, maybe they should. But things need to remain accessible and affordable; after all, the industry has experienced several down years, here. So maybe a big price hike in the software department next generation isn't a good idea. Maybe it should just stay at $60…if that's even feasible.
if games hit $70+ for a new game i will be buying used games a whole lot more or waiting for price drops. i am not wiling to pay that much for a new game.
I agree I would buy all my games used. The other choice would definitely be to invest in gamefly.
for me gamefly takes way to long and with the mail service slowing down it will be worse. its a waste of money to use gamefly for me. takes over a week to get a game from them
Then it will just be used games for me there on out lol.
I have to agree with Frylock25… It is difficult to contemplate paying $70 dollars or more for a game.
The reason why I say this is that for the perceived value of various items, such as a game, you eventually reach a threshold that people will simply not go beyond.
The suites will push the limit and see how far they can take the price, but reality is that there WILL be a limit to the price rises and what people are prepared to pay.
Put simply, if economics play against the man in the street, if wages don't rise enough and keep up with inflation… you are going to see a lot more I.P. piracy than you see today. People will just get their entertainment illegally if need be because prices will be ridiculous for the average family.
In addition, you will have a huge 2nd hand market, whereby people will force deflation on games by waiting for games to come onto the second hand market and pay half price or less for those titles – and rather pay the top up for online access…
In the extreme cases I am reading on the net today, games that have been made to run on hacked PS3's and 360's can now be played online via an alternative network using software that bypasses PSN and xBox Live. I feel these activities will increase as prices escalate…
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
To tell the truth as long as things dont get KRAZY like when Neo-Geo was selling there Games. ($100 – $200) awww hell naw !
I don't know that I'd be buying most my games new, but I wouldn't be buying games at full price anymore.
Maybe games should start to get released with a one time use per account. But also priced at a much more affordable price. $34.99
Their are just to many games releasing to purchase them all at $60 or $70 a piece.
Most games don't offer enough, to be worth $100 even $70… I think most developers and publishers know this, or at least that from a longevity stand point that's just not an acceptable price.
I dont think we will see a price increase. I can see the price increase for the PS brand as it went from CD to DVD to Blu-ray. Now though Blu-Ray isn't going anywhere soon. So there's no reason to up the price from that stand point.
I do agree however that the amount of time, money and technology put into a game, maybe they should be selling at $100. Problem is even at $60 most developers and publishers see a good return. If not then we would have seen the price hike of games a long time ago.
After reading most of the comments so far… It seems my point is legitimate in that developers and publishers know they simply couldn't sell as many games at any higher of a price. Consumers simply won't pay that type of money. I don't blame them, heck I'm one of those many!
Games like WoW, or maybe I should say Skyrim, dc universe or even MW3 to get consoles involved, offer tons of gameplay, but on an even plane (all games being sold at the same price) most games don't offer that. The amount of games that are released each year is very large and most games are in demand. But once you up the price that demand and even drive to get the next best game goes away.
We'll see quad layer blu-ray discs hopefully soon.
I agree that most games do not offer enough to be worth $100 or even $70 and the developers do see a good return on the $60 price tag. For me as it stands right now, it would be hard for me to justify paying more than $60 plus tax for games. And then on top of that to pay extra for DLC that may have been included on the disc, but I need to download the key to unlock it.
I remember hearing about Phantasy Star IV costing $100 new in stores. That's pretty brutal. I think the cost of games may go up depending on the types of games. Indie stuff will be cheaper, of course. The thing about SNES and Genesis games is that cost was determined largely by what kind of game it was. If it was an adventure game like Super Metroid, it would be more expensive than Phalanx which was a simple (awesome) shooter. And FF6 was more expensive because it needed more memory than that. Now the new bowling games go for $50 just like Skyward Sword. Discs are really cheap, I guess.
Even considering that, I'm certainly not willing to pay $70 for any game, no matter what it is. I can't afford that. I might pay $40 for a super rare or several hundred hour game (like Legend of Mana or Ogre Battle 64) but that's when I'm splurging. A few months after release, games are way cheaper in stores than on PSN because stores need to get rid of their stock, and PSN doesn't. Is Dissidia Final Fantasy still $25? Exactly.
Either way I can't pony up $70 for much of anything, so if that happens they've lost me.
If they are that much I will not buy new games.
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 1/13/2012 10:16:32 PM
Hmm World, I feel similarly!
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
All my game buys would be either during special deals, or Buy2-Get1 Free(once they're down to around $30 each), and/or get them used.
Oh snap……I do that now
Geez, 60 bucks is enough for a brand new game, sometimes too expensive depending on the kind of game.
I remember in the PS2 era they were new games for 40 bucks, for example the Need for Speed games.
Depending on the game for sure. What's silly is that there is a common price for all new releases – it makes no sense from any perspective. It's like if every chocolate bare were priced the same. Ridiculous!
Here in canada, some of the new games cost 70$. I remember buying Naruto Ultimate Ninja Storm 2 and Bad company 2 for 70$ new at EB games.
I wouldn't want to pay more than $60. If games were to go up in price I would still buy them, but I would reduce the amount of release date purchases.
I think a $50 price tag would encourage more sales when a game first releases.
Yeah sorta like music CDs when they first come out they should be on sale the first week then full price the week after. That's a great idea.
I say $60 would be the minimum most likely but I wouldn't count a higher price point out at all.
Those of you that complain videogames are expensive should not be…well videogaming. I'm starting to get tired of always seeing comments like: "oh yeah sony needs all the support they can get, ps3 is the most underrated console this gen, blah blah blah…" but ask them about buying a 1st party game new and they say, "nah I'm going to wait for a price drop, or for it to come free on my happy meal". Seriously guys?
i support sony in plenty of ways and have spent plenty of money on 1st party sony games this gen. raising the price of games more will just reduce the amount of new games i will buy plain and simple. in fact not wanting the price to go up really has nothing to do with supporting sony or not.
You make it sound like being a gamer is some sort of charity work. It's not.
Are you buying every 1st party game full price just because it's 1st party? Seriously, guy?
dude that wasn't my point. My point was that sony cannot up their quality without rising the price of software. So far only their 1st party games are the ones that are worthy of their $60 price tag, agree?. It'd be as if you didn't expect to get a raise for doing your job better. And to answer your question, no I don't buy every first party game, I only have a handful of them. Like I said, sony isn't getting the love they deserve. Not saying they aren't getting any love at all.
$100 games? Scary thought. The price is one thing, but gamers have had to deal the fact that games are getting shorter as well. Short games spammed with day1 DLC seems to have generated a lot of complaints from gamers this gen. Basicaly, that's an artificial way for publishers to raise the price of their games. I never have liked that attempt to "slow roast" consumers for some reason. Gamers have to pay more for less content these days…that just does not feel right. That's probably what is generating the complaints.
Here's a quick question for my fellow PSXE members. Do you guys think most games are worth $60?
Off topic:
I finaly got through the suicide mission in Mass Effect 2 with all my team members alive. No easy task since Miranda and Legion were not loyal to me. If they aren't loyal they tend to die. I left them behind to defend the door and they somehow survived. Intense battle. Epic game.
no most games are not worth the $60. id say its probably about 50% of the games are actually worth that much.
I think games now days are absolutely worth $60. I'd love to pay $50 again as we all were with the PS2. But the game aside, and the Blu-Ray disc alone, is an amazing type of media. Now combine that with the content that goes on the Blu-Ray and it's worth $60 wether the game actually is or not.
The thing consumers have to realize and I'll admit there's a fine line with a game being $60, is that this generation the cost of developing has gone way up! Not to mention the salaries of the developers and all the team members has also gone up. So all things considered we are lucky games are not $100.
@Big: The cost has gone up for sure, but *so has the income potential*! Don't forget that! The market for games has grown at an exceptional rate over the last two decades. It's not that long ago when a few hundred thousand copies sold were considered a great success.
Last edited by Beamboom on 1/14/2012 2:54:16 AM
NO. Not ALL games are worth $60. Most are not either. But then again, $60 with can mean different things to different people.
My question to PSXers. What games do you feel ARE/ARE NOT worth what you paid for them?
I agree most games are not worth the full price – I hardly buy any games at that price.
I don't want to mention any titles cause that'd include some exclusives too and then all hell would probably break loose around here. But there's definitely titles I regretted buying, and even more titles I'm really happy I didn't pay full price for.
Last edited by Beamboom on 1/14/2012 8:12:58 AM
Resident Evil 5 comes to mind. I paid $60 for it on day 1 and just did not care for it at all. It wasn't worth $60. The campign was boring…it did not even feel like a RE game.
The first Assasin's Creed game bored me to freaking tears. I only paid $30 for it and still felt ripped off, I am going to have to say KZ3 as well. I hated the sp campign. It only lasts about 5-6hrs and that was another game that bored me to death…at least on the sp side. There was a lot os sprinting down narrow paths until the next set of glowing eyes. It kind of had an "on rails" feel to it. Yuck.
Here is my list of games that offer a lot content. Worth every penny I spent on them.
Fallout 3 GOTY
Mass Effect 2
Crysis 2
Castlevannia:LOS
Skyrim
MGS HD Collection
FF13
The Lost Odyssey
Last edited by Excelsior1 on 1/14/2012 9:19:22 AM
Even if digital copies of games were 10 dollars cheaper, that still wouldn't be enough. I can pre order on amazon and usually get a 10-20 dollar credit. For me to buy digital, it would need to be half the price of retail.
You again. Ben, please pull the plug on this cyborg. I know you stated to let these bots be deleted but.. Casual sex is NOT Casual gaming. No continues.
So yeah a big copy and paste to you:
Yeah.. What happens when that Casual Mingle becomes a Casual TINGLE/Itchy/Burning sensation between your pants?
Enjoy life.. But please people, do it responsibly.
Last edited by FatherSun on 1/14/2012 7:43:59 AM
Games will have more price freedom than they do now. Vita game prices will range from $50 to $10 I think, so im sure the next gen will start playing around with prices too. This year specially we saw that the stigma of free to play games as cheap and low budget games finally started to fade so asking for more money up front is complete ridiculous. I think games in average will go down actually, at least the up front price.
For a while console publishers have been wanting to do what MMO's have been doing for years; subscriptions. But that business model is not the right one for everyone and thats is why many are finding a comfortable space in free to play. Conventional games are more likely to adopt that model than subscription. Games may come down to 40 or even 30 dollars but will be supported much longer and heavier than they are now. DLC will not be DLC but episodes or chapters that will carry the game beyong 10 hours of gameplay. This will also help publishers retain some of the revenue lost to game trading and retail. It may not sound pretty but that is the only way I see the game industry remaining relevant in the next decades.
On average a game developer makes about 85k a year and lets say 100 people work on a game, thats is 8.5 mil in a single year. The better games take 3 years to make, so lets give this one 2 years, so that is 17 million only on staff. The average game sells about one million and considering games tend to drop in price fairly quickly we will give our one million an average price of $45. The game makes 45 mil in revenue, minus the 17, we got 28!! minus retail, other fix cost, advertising and more variable costs.. 28 mil quickly becomes 5 million in a period of 6 month or more. that is not so impressive as corporate profits go.
You will also see our favorite game studios making smaller teams to work on smaller side projects for ios and android, kinda like insomniac click. If I was SCEA I would be piss off that some people believe Rovio is valued at one billion dollars… Dont be surprised if you see a Sucker Punch label on a one dollar game on android. If our favorite studios become recognizable brands in these markets, then the idea that a 50 year old lady who has never played a console game may become more interested on a "professional game" made by a "professional studio" on a dedicated platform does not seem so far fetched.
i swear i never intent to write this much when i start…oh headache
You Americans have had it pretty good for a while now 😉
Here in Australia ($1AU = $1US) new games retail at $100-110.
So how do we cope? We are probably mostly doing one of the following:
1. Being more selective and only buy a few new games a year.
2. Buy more 2nd hand.
3. Trade in our old games.
4. Buy games from overseas mostly Asia or the UK.
5. Wait a few month and buy them when they are reduced.
So next generation may see you doing one or all of those things (you may be doing them already anyway!).
Where there is a will there is usually a way mindyou!
Still don't want digital only games mindyou.
You should try out Ozgameshop my Wallaby friend, they're from Europe so they take about 2 weeks (well to NZ anyways) but they are are a hell of a lot more cheaper than purchasing from retail stores.. especially EB Games, lol
I do 3, 4 and 5 today, especially 5, else I'd not be able to buy as many games as I do.
i only buy my games from ozgameshop now, JB hifi and EB games are blatantly ripping us off, ozgameshop sells new games for $60 or so, depending on the title, so it is in line with our fellow U.S gamers
Exactly Gordo. If we were actually paying 60, that'd be wonderful…
Well, many developers are charging $70 for their games in the disguise of DLCs.
Take my favorite game this gen – LBP2. I bought it for $60, and then MM released a Move pack for $10. Now, while purchasing both these things, I knew that if I only wait, I'll get both (and more) for half the price, brand new!
The problem is, we Day-1 Purchasers are fools beyond redemption! Sure I could've waited for LBP2 GoTY edition for a year, but it was too compulsive!
This is one of the reasons why I'll arrive at the next generation of consoles at least three years after it hits – I'll have a huge backlog of new-gen, half-priced, extra-featured games to play.
I ALWAYS say that too. I will wait on a new console. But then it winds up in my living room day-1 somehow. WTF!
there are a lot of good comments so far – one of the big reasons i enjoy visiting this site
Ben I'm going to mildly disagree with your blanket statement about whining – yes, there are whiners out there, but with the profits being made off of certain games, and the lack of content in other games, I think we as gamers SHOULD voice our opinions if (when comparing games) $60 gets a varied content/time investment from game to game. That is, should $60 be the standard? Should game price vary?
One of the ways companies make more money on games is through download content – in some cases, through "unlock keys" because it's already on the disc – so it seems we already are paying more than $60 for some games, but it's spread out over time
which brings me to "episodic content" – saw it in the above comments and elsewhere – especially effective (I would think) for downloadable titles – make the first part (and make it bigger than a demo!) 10/15/20 dollars, then if I like it I can buy more of the game – spreads out my purchase, and also gives me the opportunity to see if I'm receiving value for my money
If game prices DO go up, I too will be financially forced to wait for most of the games I play to go on sale, have a retail price reduction, or buy used. If a good portion of gamers go this route, will that hurt the game industry?
Someone else mentioned piracy – if gamers can't afford games/entertainment, they'll get them illegally? That, in my opinion, is whining…sounds as though we, as gamers, are "entitled" to games. To me gaming is a great diversion, but there are other means of entertainment that are less costly for me than to resort to illegal activity. Don't mean to offend, just stating my viewpoint
Thanks for all the good comments, and Ben thanks for the site – no matter what we see as to game prices, it's good to know there are forums/sites like this!
If I am expected to pay $70 or more for a game then in turn I expect for said game to BLOW MY MIND! I play all types of games. From small time killers to TIME swallowing sagas but my true preference is in Story and Production. I want to be entertained. In every possible way. I want to be visually entranced. Audibly immersed. Mentally stimulated and challenged. This level of gameplay is what I crave.
That experience is not common. Only some titles have offered this thoughout the years. Usually by elite game developers. And that level of pride and workmanship costs time and money and sometimes even blood, sweat and tears. Im willing to give those creators their just due. But please take me to that place I wish to be. Take me out of this world.
Honestly, I think we are going to see more tiered pricing than ever. Sony, MS and Ninty will agree to on a set price for marquee titles. Possibly $70-$75 but will also price games according to production value. Which its why I do not see Digital Distribution overtaking physical media any time soon. Definitely not in the next generation of consoles. They will exist side by side. Smaller games will never see life on a disc unless it is a compilation. The heavy hitters will be Disc and Digital. After that.. Its anyones guess.
Last edited by FatherSun on 1/14/2012 7:28:49 AM
$60 is a good price and I would be shocked if game prices elevated to $70. With today's economy all devs know that their bottom line would be a hurting unit. $60 is to much for some games. Obviously I would pay $70 for U3. However for other games they would have to be AAA 9.0 or above guaranteed for me to pay $70.
I think its worth mentioning that in the UK the recommended retail price of a new ps3 game is usually around 50-55 pounds but usually stores here sell them for 30-40 pounds on launch.
Even so, I got to admit games are getting expensive and I don't think I could pay another 10-15 on top for a new game.
Last year alone during the big game fiasco I bought ratchet and clank: a4o, rayman origins: collector's edition, uncharted 3 and battlefield 3 and all together cost me £150. Could of cost more but I got uncharted 3 in a sale.
Digital releases are meant to be cheaper but never are, I mean new releases are on psn for like 50-55 pounds. That's insane.
A rise in cost does not take into account at all that we are actually sporting a new delivery system of gaming now… We are paying full price then paying for more of the game afterwards, a lot of the content (some developers worse than others) consciously held back for DLC. A lot of games are offering less at initial purchase, more through DLC. Prices are not reflecting this at all.
Due to this the base should be going DOWN not up as the industry has moved to this distribution system (it has already happened). The only place that gets this right is the digital realm, with pure episodic content. I for one am just starting to wait for the game of year/complete editions to come out in a year because I am sick of paying so much for one game with base + DLC.
I think they will stick to $60 for physical media. There's always the online market to purchase many games and enough PS3's already have 3rd party HDD's to handle 30GB+ game downloads for storage… So long as PSN can handle the bandwidth.
If developers have both routes for sales, they can reduce their overall cost for distribution while remaining reasonably profitable. Increasing to $70 is simply going to hurt their sales too much. In Chicago, that would mean an additional 10% for taxes. Nearly $80.
I'm not saying some of these games aren't worth it. Clearly, many of them are. I just think they would harm their sales for even those who are willing to fork that kind of money out, but have a hard time paying what the cost is already. Sure, it's another $11 for someone such as myself, but I usually buy at least 10 games a year. That's over $100 yearly increase.
And YES, I balance my budget and get thrifty when I need to. For example, FF-XIII is now selling for $19.95. Perfect price point for a broke-ass joke! (Psst, that's me!) 🙂