Our Properties: Gamasutra GameCareerGuide IndieGames Indie Royale GDC IGF Game Developer Magazine GAO
My Message close
Latest News
spacer View All spacer
 
February 10, 2012
 
What drives the developers of Unity?
 
Analyst questions validity of unusual January NPD results [13]
 
Skyrim wins big at 15th Annual Interactive Achievement Awards
spacer
Latest Features
spacer View All spacer
 
February 10, 2012
 
arrow Virtual Goods - An Excerpt from Social Game Design: Monetization Methods and Mechanics
 
arrow Principles of an Indie Game Bottom Feeder [21]
 
arrow Postmortem: CyberConnect 2's Solatorobo: Red the Hunter [1]
spacer
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
February 10, 2012
 
Irrational Games
Systems Designer
 
CCP - North America
Lead Character Artist
 
CCP - North America
Sr VFX Artist
 
CCP - North America
Sr. Tech Artist
 
CCP - North America
Animation Director
 
Toys for Bob / Activision
Senior Programmer
spacer
Blogs

  $60 is Still Too Much
by Benjamin Quintero on 12/31/09 03:51:00 pm   Expert Blogs
15 comments Share on Twitter Share on Facebook RSS
 
 
  Posted 12/31/09 03:51:00 pm
 

I am being priced out as a gamer.  In 5-10 years, I may very well not have the funds to justify console gaming anymore.  It saddens me that a scene that has grown out of peoples garages is now an experience reserved for the most elite, the most core of gaming patrons who are willing to funnel all of their entertainment dollars down this single channel. 

Gaming has turned into another monthly bill, with expenses reaching in excess of $1,000 a year for some individuals who may purchase an average of 1-2 games a month.  Each year that passes, games are becoming less relevant to me.  It is not because games are less interesting, only that they are being priced beyond my sense of reasonable value. 

The last generation was a real sweet spot for me.  With blockbuster games prices around $40 and fair quality games at around $25.  It just made financial sense to pay $40 for 10-15 hours of high impact experience.  Even the top selling games would eventually find their place on the classics/platinum list for an irresistible $20 price tag.

Now, it seems that every game from Grand Theft Auto to My Little Pony is resting solid on a $60 price tag that doesn't budge for 9 months.  I own maybe 2 gifted games that cost $60+ because I refuse to pay the price.  I hope that someday people will realize that their choice to pay extraordinary prices is giving publishers the thumbs-up to continue to raise prices each generation.  Only by boycotting overpriced games will you make a statement that is heard. 

I was amused by all of the raging consumers who screamed about the $60 price tag of brief games like Halo ODST and Modern Warfare 2, and yet those very same people were fighting to be first in line on the day of sale.  There is a reason why publishers don't take these outcries seriously; it's the millions of dollars that they cash in on each of your idle threats.

I recently returned my gifted Modern Warfare 2 and purchased Batman Arkham Asylum for $40; an excellent price and a great experience.  Batman did leave me wishing that it had a simple co-op mechanic; perhaps even a spectator mode that allowed me to talk my friends through parts I had beaten, but if it meant a $60 price tag then I am glad that co-op was dropped. 

I'm hopeful to see a trend of quality games released at the $40 sweet spot and not have to wait a year for price drops that may never come.  I know that my refusal to purchase overpriced $60 games is a drop in the ocean and it won't change an industry of zealot fans with fat pockets.  This only means that my future as a gamer becomes more uncertain with each passing year, each console generation, and each $10 increment to the base price of an ever-shortening gameplay experience.

 [Reprinted from a December 31st, 2009 Blog on my website.]

 
 
Comments

Andres Castro
profile image
While I wouldn't mind paying less, I don't think 55$ (buy online!) games are a terrible deal. I usually look at my entertainment in a price per hour method using average movie ticket price as a base. So if a 90 minute movie is an average deal at 7.18$ (using 2008 average ticket price from a quick google search) then as long as you get roughly 11.5 hours (not unreasonable) out of a game you purchase then it is not such a bad deal. Of course this is just a crazy system that I made up to justify purchases to myself so YMMV.

Sander van Rossen
profile image
It's even worse here in western Europe, we're paying 60 euro for games (85 dollar in current exchange rates), games stay expensive here longer too.

Luis Guimaraes
profile image
It's even worse here in Brazil:
http://www.tradepar.com.br/detalhes/pre-venda-game-bayonetta-ps3-21573440-74.htm
l

USD 1,00 = R$ 1,74 (today), so R$ 249 = USD 143... wait, $143 pre-order, 2 weeks delay and not even subtitles in portuguese? Hmm, I'd invest in a powerful DRM...

Benjamin Quintero
profile image
@Andres - that is some crazy math =) and I do see your point. I do however, have an issue with saying that one movie hour is equal to one game hour, or anything of that measure. Many games really only have about 20 minutes of gameplay that is stretched by repetition and re-configuration. For example; you've beat up on grunts and super-soldiers, now fight both at the same time!!! It's totally different! =)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining about the staples of gameplay. That iterative gameplay is what drives the little OCD hamster in my head, but it's not the same kind of experience you get by watching a movie that is unique from start to finish. Vantage Point is the equivalent of a movie made like a game... and we all know how well that turned out *rolling eyes*.

Tim Johnston
profile image
The term Your Mileage May Vary is the X factor here. A buddy of mine (consoler) literally burns through 4-5 titles a month, including stuff like GTA, Fallout and other open world type games that take tons of time to play. I'm STILL playing both of them 6 months later (on the PC). I've played games like HL2 with amazing production values and immersiveness lasting 20-30 hours, and I've invested hundreds of hours in games like GTA and Oblivion. Both I enjoyed immensely. I dont feel ripped off for the 20-30 hours of gaming in HL2. Why? Relativity in game experience. You don't go into playing HL2 with the same expectations.

Since everyone's idea of value is subjective, how do you evaluate it?

With budgets approaching 100 million dollars for the upper eschelon of AAA titles, it seems to me developers need to focus on REPLAYABILITY instead of production value. Does this mean simply providing a menu of roles (with the usual associated skill trees, etc) to play through the same content? Not necessarily. But, the idea that a game can provide markedly different experiences depending on your choices seems like a slam dunk. I think this comes down to putting more thinking and development into content, building complex outcomes to choices that have nuance and chance built in, and maximizing the game play world so there is no wasted exploration. Im sure there's lots more to discuss here but I think its clear no one could argue with the idea that for $50, you can play a game 5 different ways and all of the experiences are divergent, unique and novel.

At the same time, developers don't want to create a game that can be played for an infinite number of hours because of the obvious reason....Noone would buy another game from them!

Its a fine line. But I think it comes down to the intelligence of the games content, the logic and AI behind it rather than how beautiful it looks.

Anyone?

Steven Ulakovich
profile image
Games during the 8 and 16 bit generation where on average $70, that would be near $100 today after inflation. The $10 jump from the last generation mean very little to me when most of the $60 games worth the price of admission have more playability and replay value then most games released 15-20 years ago.

Reza Ghavami
profile image
I remember getting Breath of Fire for SNES for almost $90 here in the US. That was 15 years ago, and several console generations ago. $60 is not so bad in my opinion.

Sean Maples
profile image
Why is renting on consoles being overlooked?

"Gaming has turned into another monthly bill, with expenses reaching in excess of $1,000 a year for some individuals who may purchase an average of 1-2 games a month."

This month I have played through Modern Warfare 2 and Batman AA; it cost me a total of $17.43. Instead of paying $100+ I just rent with Gamefly.

Now if only I could rent games for my PC.

Daniel Martinez
profile image
If games are $60 then they have been able to stave off to the gargantuan inflation over the past two decades. Part of this can be attributed to increased efficiencies, but largely to the rise of new formats such as disc and DLC which costs much less to physically produce. I just fear that games will all eventually become DLC and no longer be a tangible, tradeable commodity. I still buy music CD's and movie DVD's. Why wouldn't I buy games in a solid format? Woah, talk about going off on a tangent there... but yes $60 is higher than what you might be used to, but definitely not overpriced.

Now things like buying accessories and clothing for your Avatar on 360 Marketplace... that's a whole other can of worms.

Benjamin Quintero
profile image
It's difficult to relate games from SNES to the current generation. The advent of the CD and DVD have drastically reduced the cost of game printing. Each cartridge for an SNES meant that you were basically purchasing a small piece of the console each time. With cheaper CD printing, it meant that games came down in price. You can't make a direct correlation to the cost of a SNES game to now unless we go back to cartridges. At which point yes, games will likely cost $150 each and ship in the form of small USB drives or solid-state harddrives.

My point is that nothing has changed in the form of content printing from last gen to this one and yet there has been a $10 increase in the physical goods. Xbox360 still uses the same DVD's that were on the PS2 and original Xbox. There may be other reasons for the hike in price, but inflation is a far stretch considering the cost to mass print these ancient disks is reaching the pennies.

Luis Guimaraes
profile image
CDs and DVDs replaced of cartridges, but digital distribuition didn't replace retail...

Kim Pallister
profile image
>My point is that nothing has changed in the form of content printing from last gen to this one and yet there has been a $10 increase in the physical goods. Xbox360 still uses the same DVD's that were on the PS2 and original Xbox. There may be other reasons for the hike in price, but inflation is a far stretch considering the cost to mass print these ancient disks is reaching the pennies

Its not the cost of printing, it's the cost of the consoles (higher royalties to MS/Sony) and the cost of producing the content itself and taking it to market.

Kim Pallister
profile image
@John: Agreed, they should, but they won't likely do so any time soon. I think it's a fear from publishers and platform owners of ticking off their retail channel. Same reason that if you buy something direct from a manufacturer, it's usually listed at MSRP and not discounting retailers margin. Companies don't want to be seen as competing with the same people that help them sell product

Barry Brooks
profile image
They said the added cost was for online support and higher quality textures. The added time in making high resolution games with a bigger staff adds to the cost. For some reason people on consoles are forced (in most cases) to pay for online play already ($55 a year for LIVE). On top of that they are charged for map packs (free most of the time on PC). The online play is sketchy at best since its defendant on some server who knows where that when it goes down you must suffer without playing.

Back to the higher texture resolution part. Who cares. I heard somewhere that less than 40% of Americans have a digital ready television for the conversion last year. Not all of those televisions are even going to show 720p let alone 1080p. That portion of the gaming market I am sure is higher than mainstream America. For Halo3 I read that it doesn't actually support 1080p but the game draws at 760p and scales accordingly...So they aren't even drawing in the high resolutions they are charging us for.

MW2 was a great game but for it to make 300million dollars that quickly and I am still forced to suffer with their bugs. It makes me not want to play another game on a console...

You get what you pay for. Except that you never get whats advertised.

Daniel Martinez
profile image
Even if digital distribution replaced retail you are ignoring the 500lb gorillas in the room by the name of Greed and Profit. The human mind in general, hates deflation because it sees it as the reversal of progress. Forget your currency having more purchasing power, the name of the game is money and all that matters when it comes to Greed and Profit is how MUCH you have not how much it's WORTH.

Take any other commodity such as Pharmaceuticals, Oil or Housing. All other things held constant, the demand may fluctuate or even drop, but the prices will continue to exhibit a generally-increasing trend because of those two same gorillas. The same goes for wages and salary. And that's a whole other can of worms right there.


none
 
Comment:
 




 
UBM Techweb
Game Network
Game Developers Conference | GDC Europe | GDC Online | GDC China | Gamasutra | Game Developer Magazine | Game Advertising Online
Game Career Guide | Independent Games Festival | Indie Royale | IndieGames

Other UBM TechWeb Networks
Business Technology | Business Technology Events | Telecommunications & Communications Providers

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Contact Us | Copyright © UBM TechWeb, All Rights Reserved.