this 600.000, 300.000 live in brazil.

What, piracy on the 360?. I thought it was all those pesky PC gamers!

I'm flashing back to the "Hitler Gets Banned from Xbox Live" satire on YouTube :)

And the other 300.000 in Mexico

"this 600.000, 300.000 live in brazil."

Really ? Where did you get this data ? I live in Brazil and I'm sure this is not true.

Wait a moment... Wasn't something like this in the news about a year ago, too? I can't be sure, but I think MS was banning modded consoles from LIVE.

They can talk about banning people off of MS Live but when it comes down to it. MS has not fixed the Red Ring of death and you wonder why people get their units modded. Until they get their systems in order well I can play the 360 unit all day and night MS ain't hitting on nothing...................

@Darryl

So, you imagine most people mod their system to avoid the RROD? Changing a heat sink wouldn't be detected by the system. I don't know what a mod chip that allows the playing of pirated software has to do with stopping the system from overheating...

Although I don't advocate pirating games, I fully understand the reason why people do it. Microsoft was behind needing to raise the industry standard of $40 for a new game up to $60, bypassing $50 outright. A standard that has been in place since the 80s! If a game cost as much as a new, good paperback, say $15, more people would buy them and less people would find a need to pirate them. I predict an eventual backlash of the masses, when people get fed up paying so much, and are satisfied playing indie freeware, or indie games that are priced at the entertainment sweet spot of $10-$20. Please don't respond to this with the trite arguments of "it cost more to make a game, inflation, etc" We need to learn from the music industry what happens when you turn a blind eye to pirating, either adjust or go out of business.

I agree with J kelly, that's why lately I play more PSN and Xbox Live arcade games.

Just to correct j kelly, $50 was the standard for games since at least the 16-bit generation. There may have been $40 releases but they were most certainly exceptions. $60 was the standard cost of N64 games, so it's not unheard of. I don't think you can blame the rise to $60 games strictly on Microsoft since I remember reading quotes of Kotick stating that there will be a rise to $60 before 360 was even announced. ( http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=5127 )

There was a great discussion here about it back in 2005 about the price increase...
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20050406/hong_01.shtml

Microsoft is just a shit company through and through. What else would anyone expect? All of their signature products are garbage: windows (pick any), 360, Zune, Customer support, etc. Tried and true garbage all the way down the line. They are like the GM of technology ;)

Why do we keep supporting them with our hard-earned dollars at all is the question you have to ask?

And yes... JK is right on the money ;)

I live in Brazil to, and yes lots of people mod their consoles. All games cost 3 times more than in the US and UK. Yes I do mean US$ 150 for a new title.

http://www.submarino.com.br/produto/12/21573538/pre-venda:+game+modern+warfare+2
+-+x360

There's already a backlash against $60 games, it's called the DS. I don't think it's a coincidence that a platform whose new releases are typically $35 (CDN) happens to be the best selling by a wide margin every month.

yeah and if games only cost a dollar even more people would buy them! this excuse is ridiculous. Developers cant possibly make up development costs selling games for 15$, even if sales tripled (which they wouldn't) yeah new games are a little expensive (too expensive for me, but apparently not too expensive since many people are willing to pay it), but the price drops quickly and people are gonna pirate anyway regardless of price because pirated merchandise is FREE.

My backslash is not playing games at all, only my own prototypes. Many people don't have time for 60-hour games, and pay US$ 700 on a console and US$ 150 on a game for not even playing it, or getting bored quickly because games nowadays are so dumb? Nah, thanks.

I used to play demos when they weren't 600MB to download...

that reminds me. i would love to have shorter games for cheaper. i dont know how developers got it in their heads that people want hundreds of hours of gameplay. shorter, cheaper is the way to go.

That's what I'm talking about... Just price the game accordingly and nobody will complain that the game was short.

I agree with Bryson. Console games cost at least as much to make as five or ten years ago, and the price of $60 reflects that: adjusted for inflation it's no more than was paid for PS2 or Xbox titles in the last generation. MS and Sony have been able to avoid a price war with software pirates so have been able to maintain prices, to the benefit of all including anyone that loves games.

What has changed is there are now many more ways to get your gaming fix: different platforms which are cheaper, sometimes much cheaper, even free and advertising supported, or paid for by microtransactions a few pennies at a time. You don't get the same AAA production quality as say GTA IV but you're not paying for it. If you don't want to pay $60 for a game that's taken 2-3 years and $millions to make that's fine, as there are so many ways to play excellent games for a lot less today.

"Why do we keep supporting them with our hard-earned dollars at all is the question you have to ask?" Actually, the Vista debacle apparently upped the number of Mac users. The really funny part about that to me is, I am a new "Mac user" and the first time I booted up the Mac Mini I realized that Mac Users are actually UNIX users who have been renamed.

I disagree with the price argument. Does anyone remember paying $70 for SNES games? I do, and that was back in 94. I could justify the price when I had no money and now that I'm an adult, $59 for a game that gives me much more gameplay is fine. Considering inflation thats probably equal to $100 today. I like cheaper prices so often I wait for game prices to drop. You can justify it any way you want, but no one is entitled to steal anything.

Geoffrey Mackey nailed it. I don't find $60 to be outrageous at all, especially when the cost of development is skyrocketing like it is.

"If a game cost as much as a new, good paperback, say $15, more people would buy them and less people would find a need to pirate them."

I've been saying this for the longest --- price say HD game at prices like $30-35 and more people would buy. Not only that, but the said developer/publisher will not only be moving more units, but they'll so turn a profit and recoup faster. Sadly though given the fact this industry is really driven by greed it will never happen.


"I predict an eventual backlash of the masses, when people get fed up paying so much, and are satisfied playing indie freeware, or indie games that are priced at the entertainment sweet spot of $10-$20."

The backlash have already happend and we're now seeing it in games underperforming at retail. Why do you think the NPD have been reporting shrinkage instead of growth for the past 10 months? Its not the economy but the prices.

Nathaniel Carver, what do you mean $60 isn't outrageous? $60 isn't peanuts. When I was in high school, I was working at a fast food restaurant after school every day and on weekends, and I only ended up making $150 a week. Granted a kid wouldn't be buying two games a week, but any way you spin it, that's more than 1/3 of your paycheck. Think about that, and no matter what age you are, you have other things to spend your money on (cell phone bill, paying or saving for a car, etc). High prices weren't justified back then and they aren't now.

Games are a luxury, they always have been and always will. If you don't like the prices, don't buy, it is pretty simple. I actually tend to wait for sales etc before I buy my games because I don't like the prices either. However I do buy new releases also for must have games for me but I also look at deals. Heck I pre-ordered COD: MW2 from Amazon and got the $20 off next purchase and then pre-ordered Assassin's Creed 2 with a coupon code and the $20 off next purchase for $30 which also gives me a $10 off next order. There are ways to be a smart buyer for new games or just wait until the price drops or buy used if you don't like the prices.

I am glad Microsoft are banning the pirates, I don't care about the "I'm allowed to backup my games" argument. I bet you <1% of people that have modded their consoles use backups in this way. With the install to hard drive option the excuse of preserving their discs is out the window. Just head over to somewhere like xbox scene and read what all the little whiny kids are saying about Microsoft and how they are now going to defect to Sony, it makes me laugh, good riddance to bad rubbish.

"Geoffrey Mackey nailed it. I don't find $60 to be outrageous at all, especially when the cost of development is skyrocketing like it is."

There is a reason why the Neo failed and why piracy was rampant on the platform and it didn't happen because of the $600 price-tag but came about mainly due to the high cost of software. Ask any other neo owner and they would tell you the very same thing.

As for $60 not being outrageous, the truth is $60 is outrageous because the price is essentially scaring away consumers both core and casual. Sure the cost of development might high but there is a reason why 3 out 10 titles actually recoup:

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=19780

Anyhow the videogame industry can learn alot from the early pitfalls of dvd when the format was practically struggling, that is until studios/retailers lowered the prices to consumer friendly levels...sales not only exploded, it allowed films that failed at the box office to recoup by way of dvd sales and also allowed the studio to turn healthy profits.

In the end the $60 level is turning off consumers and pushing them to either piracy or the secondhand. market.

Danny Pampel, there is a reason why most car or motorcycle manufactures don't price their products on the level of a ferrari, or ducati and that reason stem from the fact the manufacturers are aiming for the mass-market rather than a limited market.

As for games, they aren't a luxury because the the ultimate goal is to sell to the mass-market and as a result prices need to reflect that.

I don't think the price of the games has that much effect on piracy.
PC games are cheaper and get pirated even more...
People pirate because it is not that hard to do...
Pirating PS3 is hard and as a result piracy is almost non-existent on the PS3 and the games cost the same price as on the Xbox360...
What will happen is simple, next gen the console maker will be under even more pressure from the game development studios to come up with better anti piracy feature in their hardware.
In this way the situation is a lot different from the music or the movie industry. You have control of the platofrm where the product is used and that platform can be securised and that is what will happen...

Well, the high price of new games is exactly why GameStop's entire business revolves around selling used games.

As to the banning of modded consoles, I have no idea why MS doesn't do this more often. But the timing of this, just before the launch of a highly anticipated title, is priceless. If that were me, I'd send an op code that completely bricks a modded console. Banning it from Live is just too lenient if you ask me.

You can't play everything anyway. If you find 60 bucks that expensive, at least it will make your consideration on buying the game more meaningful. I always find that if you pirate anything, it will lower your value of opinion on the game a lot as you can just throw it away if you don't like it.

Thats assuming they're pirating it because of the price. Most aren't. If you can get something for free, you wouldn't pay anything for it.

I sincerely believe that piracy would still exist even if games cost around $19.99. I suppose it would be reduced to a degree, but by how much would depend on how easy it is to pirate software.

I too am in a position where I can't buy every single game I like, but I live with it. I wait until the price is reduced and buy it then. Just today I bought a game I really wanted last Fall, for $20. That makes it the 11th game I've bought this year for $20. This does not include the excellent prices for software found over Steam...where I have spent $5-20 for high quality games. I have become a bargain gamer and I don't think I'll ever turn back. I do spend a bit on gaming though, I've bought a $90 Collector's Edition of Forza and plan to get Modern Warfare 2 soon. I'm not allergic to $60 games, just very picky. Games like Assassin's Creed 2 and Uncharted 2 I plan to rent on a weekend where I'm free.

While I cannot afford many $60 games, I am not blind to the fact that $60 prices are a reality based on numerous array of obvious factors. It is clear that development costs and market sizes add up to $60 being a reasonable starting price for game software. Sure, some games should start out a bit lower (I would like that too), but I can't blame any publisher wanting to start out at that price. Early adopters typically pay premium prices for products they want. This is true in many industries, from cellphones to PCs, to even vehicles. Some people want the 2010 model of the car now and not next year.

Secondly, when compared to other forms of entertainment, videogame prices offer great value. A game like MW2 can potentially offer hundreds of hours of entertainment. Compare that value to a movie rental, a DVD purchase, or the hiring of clowns for your next birthday party (had to switch this example to a more family friendly one)...a $60 game stacks up very well.

And lastly, the latter half of this decade has provided us with a wide range of game prices, moreso than at any other time. I could not buy $5-10 games on my SNES or Genesis, as I can now over XBLA and PSN. Games which, by the way, would still be targets for piracy despite their cheap prices. I don't have to buy $60 games when there are many cheaper that will provide a lot of fun.

With all of this in consideration, I find the complaint about "high prices of game software" to be somewhat misguided. For some games $60 is absolutely fair for what you are getting. Again, I can't afford to buy every $60 game and I don't. Yet, I am building an incredible backlog of games by buying software at retailers at reduced prices. By the way for the record, I've bought only 2 used titles of the 11 I've bought for under $20.

Andre Thomas said: "As for games, they aren't a luxury because the the ultimate goal is to sell to the mass-market and as a result prices need to reflect that."

I think Wii Fit is a suitable contradiction to that statement. It is a title that sold for $90 and has sold over 20 million copies worldwide and it has been out for only a year and a half.

$120+ music games have outsold many, many $50-60 games. Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts was a 1st party MS game available for only $40 at release, and has yet to crack a million.

Value isn't only about price. Value factors in things like retail price but also factors in many other aspects. Too tired to pull out textbooks right now to get into detail. :)

I do agree that more pricepoints should be looked at for games, including a host of lower pricepoints. But at the same time the scopes of such games have to be reduced and we consumers should be prepared for that. Frankly speaking, my position on the pricing of Halo: ODST is that it is overpriced by $30. The day it hits that price is when I'll buy it. Simple as that. So I'm not entirely disagreeing with a call for cheaper titles, but I do think it has to be taken on a case by case basis, with the great majority of games being suitably priced at the moment.

In regards to MS reacting to piracy in any other fashion, I think they've responded appropriately. With more and more games being tied online, this move can render many games useless.

On a side note my comments tend to get on the large side, if anyone thinks these should be relegated to the personal blog section and are unfit for the comments section, do let me know. :)

@Andre: I'm sure everyone would love games to be cheaper, but the sad fact is: they cost a lot of money to produce. Also, in real terms, the cost of games has dropped.

Using a simple UK inflation calculator, a game which cost £40 in 1999 would now cost £52. Similarly, a $60 game from 1999 would now cost $77.

However, looking at the price charts, games are still marked at £40 and $60. I.e. the cost of buying games has actually dropped (or the spending power of gamers has increased, depending on your viewpoint).

Dunno about anybody else, but I've not seen the piracy rate drop any as a result of these lower prices...

Also, new games *are* a luxury: they're not essential to life and there's tens of thousands of alternatives: on the Xbox alone, there's a wealth of demos, free titles on XBLA and games starting from 80MSP on the Indie Games section. Not to mention the secondhand market, "platinum" releases and dozens of special deals available online and in shops. There's also millions of free/cheap titles available on the PC.

The reason people pirate games is because of the perception that the cost of piracy is lower than the cost of purchasing - put simply, people are willing to count the cost of their time as zero, while ignoring the long-term consequences of their actions (i.e. a risk that developers will be unable to fund their next title). The only way to address this is to add value which cannot be pirated. Wii Fit came with the balance board, while Microsoft is using online multiplayer as the carrot.

@Andre - you misunderstand the term 'luxury'. Something is a 'luxury' as opposed to a 'necessity'; and despite how you or others may personally feel, games are not a necessity. They are indesputably luxury items, just like cars, mobile phones, or trips to the hairdresser.

Thinking that most people pirate your games because it is free is wrong btw...

Most of the pirated games that I see have been BOUGHT by pirated goods dealer, the download piracy is just the iceberg tip.

So, saying that people are pirating because it is free, is wrong.

Helder - do you have numbers to back you up? Because your claim that "download piracy is just the iceberg tip" does seem to go against my intuition. And please don't tell me that "everyone you know" who pirates games buys them, like you do so often on threads like these. Everyone you know is not everyone there is.

Well by the same token games are supposed to be a mass medium, a pop art form and a social leisure tool that unifies people. There is a perception that if it's ok in America why would people do it differently? Problem is $60 US might be ok for upper middle class Americans to buy sporadically and lower brackets to save for but the rest of the world doesn't have the same income and games typically cost a lot more (only publishers know why - MW2 is $120 Australian, and our exchange rate is 91 cents to the American dollar). If games cost $150 US in emerging markets where their average income is soooo much lower can you honestly blame people for pirating?

Helder has pointed out again and again that he comes from a country with a lower income threshold and the product costs more, a stupid amount more - how does that make any sense? You can knock him but he is a very valid, emerging demographic. As a developer hypothetically I'd much rather make money by selling a lower cost product to more people - it's art and it needs to be shared and if it's worth its price people will pay for it, but you have to remember who is your audience? The core demographic for violent videogames is young teenage males, they harness their buying power through their parents so how do you control where that finite amount of funds goes? You offer either a compelling adventure, you pimp the advertising and you offer a rounded package and as Steam has demonstrated quite consistently you offer lower prices to drive up sales that correspondingly increases the user pool and revenue model.

People pirate games because they cost too much. Lower prices, increase sales, increase consumer base, increase profit. Piracy is never ever going away but it drops drastically when you can convince the mystery 'average consumer' that they are getting value for money. You can spend a decade and 600 million to make a game and charge 700 million per copy, but if that one oil tycoon doesnt buy your pony sim for his niece you're screwed. Or you could charge $7 per copy and sell 700 million units world wide to every computer around. Globally.

@JJ

At least for Brazil, Hélder is right. People who download pirated games are 1 out of 50 core PC gamers. Nobody downloads for consoles. Everyone goes to a pirate seller and gets it. People just don't trust sources or don't read english or don't have connection to do a week of p2p and find there's something wrong with the installer, when they can go back to the shop and trade any copy with problems for a fixed one. People just pay for that comfort. Even FREE online games are commonly sold by pirates.

Nathan -
"If games cost $150 US in emerging markets where their average income is soooo much lower can you honestly blame people for pirating?"
Yes, you can. You can live perfectly fine without video games. If games are expensive, don't buy them. You do not deserve them any more than you deserve a car or a television set.

"it's art and it needs to be shared"
What do the two have to do with each other? If I, for example, create a sculpture or paint a picture, am I obliged to share it with others? What right do people have to seize art without permission?

"if it's worth its price people will pay for it"
And if it is not worth its price you have the right to use it without paying? Does that mean that developers of a bad game don't deserve pay for it? Besides, if people think a game is not worth its price, why do they pirate it? So they can play games they don't like?

"The core demographic for violent videogames is young teenage males"
Are you certain? I'm not so sure that claim is true. Please, if you have access to statistics, tell me.

"People pirate games because they cost too much."
That I can tell you almost for certain is not true. People pirate games because, by their nature, humans take what they can get for free. If people pirate games because they cost too much, how do you explain the staggering piracy rates for $0.99 iPhone games? Here's an example from just a few weeks ago:
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=25809
There is no way a game like that isn't worth the $2-$3 it's sold for. People pirate it because they can, not because they want to buy it but can't afford it.

@ those who postpone buying a game until it's price drops to half its release date price : what happens when you want to play the game online, and the audience playing a 2 year old game has dwindled down to 4 people playing? COD3 and COD4 come to mind...and both *were* great to play when new, and matches were full. Both games suck when team death match consists of you, and one other guy who drops out after playing 2 minutes.

@JJ Lehmann

First, picture often say more than words... Do you want to buy a game or a (ilegally imported) console for christmas for your children in São Paulo?

The place is that one (among several others...) http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_yaCA-bXFl0w/ScqT3PKjL2I/AAAAAAAAAPI/qO7-8kvBhYQ/s400/2
5+de+mar%C3%A7o.jpg

The location in that picture is a street famous for the majority of its goods being illegal in some way (counterfeit stuff or smuggled stuff, no drugs there... only toys, games, some software and clothing).


Also, Abragames (our version of ESA) said that in 2004 94% of our console market was with smuggled consoles and pirated games. (while ironically, 80% of the PC market consisted of smuggled computers AND games, and some piracy too... thus already proving that PC has more piracy than console is a myth).

In 2008 we had here several "CD SMASH" events (the government drops tons of illegal CDs on the ground and wrecks them with tractors or other cool heavy vehicles while allowing the population to watch), some reported destroying 1 million CDs (and our trasure department destroyed 1,6 metric tons of pirated stuff, not only games mind you, in one event too) and yet, this is a small fraction of what exist of piracy (altough there are intensive cop presence in places with pirated goods, they are highly organized and always has watchers to warn of cop aproximation, so if you go to a street known for having pirated games and don't see any, is because a cop is nearby somewhere, even if he is not dressed as cop... the dealers know it).

The streets with popular piracy sum each day (normal day, not holyday or weekend) about 1 million people crossing them, of course not all 1 million people buy a pirated game, but still even if a small percentage of these people buy games each day, it is still a huge amount of people.

Also remember what I said about the console market being knownly having 95% of it illegal? This mean 95% of the consoles have modchips.

Steam listed to me around 1600 south america counter-strike game servers, the majority is from Brazil, if each server supports usually 20 players that is around 34000 legal players. I have a teacher that worked at EA, and claimed that they calculated (with some imprecision) that counter-strike (valve games and actvision games are sold by EA in Brazil... when they are sold at all... sometimes they aren't, so you have to smuggle illegally, that is hard to do, or buy a pirated copy, that is easy to do, explaining part of piracy) had a piracy rate of around 98%, this mean that we have around 1.5 million illegal CS players, IF WE CONSIDER ONLY ONLINE PLAY, because here Lan play is wildly popular (we have more players than we have households with console and PCs, a huge amount of people play in lan houses, friend houses or arcades, that usually have modded consoles and some MAME machines instead of proper arcade machines, that too are not sold here usually... the last KOF release here was 98...)

Seriously, I already done much research on the topic of piracy talking with people and piracy dealers, they claim that they sell around 50 games in a day (dunno if it is true) and since I believe (there are no known way to track this data, for obvious reasons... but I calculate from what I visited in person) there are only in São Paulo 400 dealers, we have around 200.000 illegal games sold each day in a single city.


And final note: Brazil has only 3,4% of its population with broadband, this is a obvious reason why downloads are not that popular here.


So in short: No, we don't know the actual amount of pirated games being SOLD (instead of downloaded), but I can assure you: It is a HUGE amount, that is MUCH bigger than the downloaded games.

And that is for 1 country, that is much smaller chan China (that have reports of a similar piracy culture, only with much more population).

Seriously, EA boss (John Riccitello... whatever his name :P) claimed in a public speech that The Sims 3 had 200.000 downlods and that was a record breaking number (breaking previous spore record of EA piracy).

Do you REALLY think that only 200.000 people have pirated The Sims 3?

Do you REALLY think that only 7 million (official number of sales) people and few console pirated game people have played Metal Gear Solid 2 in a console that sold 138 million units while Metal Gear Solid 4 really has 4 million players (because there are no known method for piracy on PS3) with a console that sold 27 million units?

On Metal Gear, basic math: 14% of PS3 user base played MGS4, and only 5% of PS2 user base played MGS2?

Extra note: When you are not a soccer mom (or suspect to be a cop) and go to any game store and ask the PS2 price, you will probably hear: 160 USD. But you can get the 180 USD version that is modded and have 2 controllers (1 of them being counterfeited or smuggled, of course, but the guy willl not state that, everyone already know that...)

That's what I'm trying to talk about Hélder. I live in Brasília and it's not different.

I'm talking about people that buy a PS3 Slim for 600 USD (http://lista.mercadolivre.com.br/ps3-slim), maybe more 50 or 100 USD to modchip it, then get their PS3 games for 25 USD each. Or then, one XBOX 360 for 500 USD (http://lista.mercadolivre.com.br/xbox-360), more whatever the modchip costs, and buy games for 10 USD/Disc. Or mount their computers from China, and buy games per 10 USD/Disc (4,7 GB). And again, no, only 5% download their games, people are actually paying for it, to the pirate dealers.

Note: I'm taking today's exchange rate of R$ 1,74 = US$ 1,00.

Any current gen game takes at least two 4,7GB DVD discs to hold it, so that's US$ 20. And really, people go home with 10 or more titles at once.

I'm not defending piracy, I just want a way around, for the goods of my life developing too. Hit your heads against the wall in hate for the end consumer that chooses US$20 against the US$150 for the original game won't get the US$150 in your pockets, nor the US$20 that 50, 70, 100 million of gamers spend every week in those copies.

Helder -
Thanks for the info. I don't know much about the Brazilian games market, but it seems like you are on top of things there. The reason I was so skeptical about your claims was most likely because of where I'm from. Here in Israel, people can easily afford to buy games they want - it is, for the most part, a modern country, especially in the area I come from - but actually buying a game (or music, movies, or any other software) is practically unheard of. And people here don't buy pirated stuff, like you report they do in Brazil. They just download whatever they want. It drives me nuts. People don't care at all about one another.
My point of view on piracy, then, is very different from yours. I still am completely averse to piracy, but at least I can see where you are coming from.

Late note: people don't speak English or Japanese, but still play many of these games barelly understanding what goes on in the story, or what does a spell is in FFX, or whatever acclaimed story GTA4 has, or what each choice means when you first meet Nemesis in Biohazard3. They only buy the graphics, setting and gameplay.

Oh yeah, Luis told another important stuff (and I mentioned it) few games are sold legally here anyway, so you have to choose between two illegal means, smuggling or pirating... Pirating is much easier (and less chance of getting caught), so here we go...

Also piracy dealers here localize games (yes, you read that right), accept returns, give warranty and phone support.

COMBAT!!!

PIRATED GAME DEALERS VS LEGAL GAME STORE!

Number of titles in stock: piracy: many, store: few. piracy +1!
Release speed: piracy, faster than store. piracy +1!
Change of getting arrested: Obviously, none at a store... store +1
Location: Usually dealers are in crowded and easy to access city downtown, dealers +1.
Localization: Usually dealers have localized games (while stores rely on publisher localization, that ignore portuguese langauge, even with it having more speakers than french, italian, japanese or german...), piracy +1.
Price: PC or console, 5 USD in dealer, PC 40 USD in store, or 160 USD console game in store. Piracy +1.
If the game suck you are screwed: Piracy accept return, stores don't. Piracy +1.
If the game don't run: Piracy gives you a phone that you can call and ask for help, also they already put patches, cracks and mods (that are needed in borked games like Ultima 9 that is awfull without subtitle fixing mod and balance mod) on disc. Piracy +1.
Developer chance of surviving: Piracy spreads much farther, but stores are direct sales... so... unkown.
DRM that borks you machine: None on pirated games. Piracy +1.
Virus risk: None on store games. Store +1.
Manual: Well, today games on store has crappy black and white manuals on PDF too... So it is a tie here.
Box and cover: Stores today use those cheap DVD boxes that are easily re-made by piracy dealers, that usually don't do it to make the game cheaper, so +0.5 to stores.

Piracy 8. Store 2.5.
Piracy wins.



Mind you I am not defending piracy, I am only showing what a costumer of your game think when deciding.

"Omfg!! so we need to spend more money on DRM!!" Ya, of course, keep on what have always worked...

EDIT (Hey, were did that "edit" button came from?):

Physical piracy is (God knows how many times) bigger than your favourite p2p sacrifice sheep. And physical piracy moves money. It's a concurrence. Illegal concurrence, but still concurrence, and it holds a big share of the market in some countries.

Concentrate your work (and blames) on the end consumer, also, ban the XLive users that also have PS3 or Wii, they buying game from concurrence too. I know you wish you had an excuse to do that too, don't lie to yourself.

Or else, show you're really that smart your public think you are and work around it.

@Alex K:
I know exactly where you're coming from, I've been working since I was 15 and a good portion of that has gone to video games over the years. But just look at Geoffrey Mackey's point, cost of SNES and N64 games were particularly high. Probably higher than todays $60 price if adjusted for inflation and whatnot. Having been one of those people who paid full price for games on both systems I just don't get the whole "todays games are too expensive" argument. I personally don't feel that games have gotten any more expensive at all over the long term. $74 for a Link to the Past vs. $60 for Modern Warfare 2...Does not seem much more expensive to me. Am I missing something?

@Andre Thomas:
What customers are getting scared off from game purchases? I don't know any gamers that stopped buying games because of the $60 price. Many including myself have had to cut back on their game budget but that would be the case even if games were $50 or $40.

Regarding prices: Why do PC games cost $10-$25 less than their console counterparts at launch if technology is to blame for the increase in price? Last I checked, PCs are more than capable of running things far beyond what consoles could even dream of. One would think that these more advanced games would cost more, IF indeed technology was the cause of the cost.

If Crysis cost more than Ratchet and Clank, that theory would hold true... but it doesn't.

Regarding cheaters: You sign a ToS when you sign into XBL, right? Read it. You agreed to it. Next time, you don't need to agree to it.


And Nate: You don't know any gamers that stopped buying games because of the $60 price? I know 600,000.

@Nath:

So, your first one: Me.
And you cannot add to your list as people that you know, since you don't interacted with them, but in my home live more 4, and my classroom (that has in total 40 students) have more 37.
Then you have also all the people on that street on the photo that I posted (btw: That photo is 23 december of 2008)

Hmmm venomous topic. Amir had some good points, but some thoughts.
The book comparison is thin- one or a few authors can produce a book. A quality book at that. The publisher of course does its thing and adds to the cost of manufacture.

A triple A game takes far more talented proffessionals to produce. Okay, well movies take a lot of people right? And yet they only sell for 15 bucks? (USD)

A movie takes several people to make, some of them quite expensive to pay, even if you use b-list actors. Bringing us more in comparison with games right?

Problem is, ANYONE can sit and easily watch a movie and move on with their life. And people frequently do. The experience is the ultimate in casual, and requires the most meager of investment from the user.
In comparison with a triple A game, its like a bike ride around the block versus doing a bike tour of New York (or worse, a bike tour of the Grand Canyon). There will be a signifigant contingent of the population that will NEVER touch triple A games as we know them.

This leads to my most tortured point- Gamedevelopers of triple A games, whatever they want to believe, are NOT developing for the mass market. Look to this site, to presentations given at local arts colleges, and your own analysis, but you are going to find that the deeply immersive, story driven, high production value games... probably won't mean much to the 'average joe. And never will... at least no more than the very occassional buy. Some of these advocate of casual game are all but sounding the death knells of Triple A.

Look in this thread and you can see it... I can't find the name in a quick scan but another poster lamented the 40+ hour plus game experience.(*) They want a light paperback, we want Lord of the Rings.

The old guard is going to become a niche... luckily for some of us, that niche is going to be at least temporarily filled by indies. Indies right now (as again, I believe someone else said) excel at delivering midpoint experiences... something bridging the gap between bejeweled and COD. Obviously 'our niche' (I'm going to reasonably believe most of this group leans towards triple A) will not be 'killed off' as long as Halo's and final fantasys and COD's make so much cash... but I do worry that the transition will be extremely rough on us. I, for my personal part, want to make massive worlds for people to explore. These worlds will require an investment I will have to accept that most people will not make.

That's not to say that some people won't. The question becomes, as it is now, how can I, and that group, come to an agreement on a price that is fair?
Keep in mind the average person doesn't really think about companies as people... really how often do you? They don't know (or really care) that AwesomeGameStudios(**) is made up of quite a few people with kids who need braces. Their desired price to pay will ALWAYS be lower than what you think is fair, and quite often, lower than what you need to stay in business.
Some how the 'pirate argument that its the cost of games that causes them to pirate is thin. Might be true for a few, or a pathetic justification... but the fact is patience pays off in the game market. In the US market at least, 50-60 bucks is NOT hard to come by. Skip a few mocha's this week. As another noted- people pirate 2 dollar games. What's the justification for that? "It was too cheap to pay for?"

* That's not to say I like 'time wasters' in games. Games especially of the previous decade, employed a lot of redundant levels it seems to me, lots of ridiculous wastes of time that would artificially inflate the time it took to play. Contrast with Halo 2, which many people complained was too short- I noted it was short only because it rarely wasted my time... the next fight was always around the corner... If there was a switch, there was guards with it, but there were rarely redundant walking. (my perception.)

** Any apologies to any company named awesome game studios...

Sorry this was so damned long.

@Ken K like I said, that apply to download piracy, not to mainstream piracy.
I don't see for example extremely popular piracy of iPhone games, maybe because I don't see iPhone themselves (the only time that I ever touched a iPhone was working for a iPhone game company).

What I see is a transatlanticload of physical games being BOUGHT (not downloaded) because they are cheaper.

And here 70% of the population has 200 USD to live a entire month. Just to be a reference...

Like you said: Skip some mochas to have 60 USD... I bought a mocha on starbucks only once in my life, and my friends considered that a luxury trip (they envyed me as same as someone would envy one of you US people going to those expensive restaurants to eat lobster)

Yeah I won't even try to speak for that environment. I can only hope the situation gets better- really for all concerned. There is certainly some cases that where I wouldn't 'advocate piracy, I certainly can't go out of my way to condemn it.

I imagine somehow buying a physical copy of the product, even if it is an illegal copy, somehow legitimizes it in many peoples minds, or they simply don't think about it. When the alternative is an impossibility, what choice do you have? My problem is how many games can I afford... or rather what do I have to sacrifice or how long to wait to get what I want. The problem for the above... it just isn't feasable... and that's kinda nuts.

I'm left to wonder what possible economic reasons can justify the 'legitimate' market's prices. Any insight into that? Because obviously thats NOT working out for them.

What will be interesting to watch is, suppose everybody gets there act together, game publishers sell games at prices people can realistically afford. (People would probably have to MAKE more as well). That price would probably still be more than the piracy situation as described... will the culture accept it? Will piracy get mellowed to a fringe point?

I only have the glance at the situation as provided... but I think it'd be a long road to making that market 'viable'.
This is somehow similar to the musician problem, I've read commentary* suggesting that music artists should make all their money from live performances, since the media of a mp3 is simple and easy to transmit. So easy that the claim is made that they should not expect anything for it. (If it is not physical it somehow has no value.) But this causes a problem for some musicians who won't or can't do extensive live performances... and in video games it falls apart extremely quickly (how or where would you do live performances?)
Should we expect games to be like other arts- you find a benefactor to fund you?

* Many thanks for accepting at face value my references (or rather lack thereof).

I suppose a distinction should be made between piracy in developing countries vs. piracy in developed countries. I have seen piracy first hand many years ago in Pakistan and India. The great majority of titles are bought in disc version at their local game/movie store, rather than downloaded.

"How to turn these places into viable markets" would be a whole other discussion, but I'm sure people can see the obvious reason why few people there can (or are willing) to pay a fair price for videogames.

j kelly asked: "@ those who postpone buying a game until it's price drops to half its release date price : what happens when you want to play the game online, and the audience playing a 2 year old game has dwindled down to 4 people playing?"

It seems that the nature of many online players is to stick with the "flavour of the month" and then move on when a new game comes out. But I find that this isn't the case for high quality online titles. But you aren't entirely incorrect, it does happen and affect a few games. My strategy in picking new games factor in this point that you bring up, as well as what my friends will be playing...who, like most people, move on to the next new game when it comes out.

Here's what I mean about "high quality online titles"...Granted you may have a point with CoD3/4 (as they have received sequels), but I've purchased Ace Combat 6 for cheap years after release and still found dedicated players online. I also bought Chrome Hounds (a 2005 or 2006 title) and found a vibrant, dedicated community (which will shut down in January because SEGA is shutting down it's dedicated servers). Games with great online play seem to retain a certain amount of players. And these guys are not only skilled and dedicated but helpful and courteous.

I have also seen the reverse. I bought Prey for cheap in 2008 and there was pretty much no one online when I tried jumping on. I recently got Too Human and I would like to play Co-Op with someone else, but most people have already gone through the experience and have moved on. I'm sure the same applies to sports games but I do buy the newest version of sports games always.

I have noticed through my experience that games that have a high quality online component, or games that have sold in the millions, still have a decently active online community provided there isn't a sequel to that game out. On the other hand, XBLA and PSN titles may be high quality titles but they don't get the sort of numbers retail releases do, and so their online communities die out very, very fast.

I used to be a guy who bought 15 new titles a year a couple years ago, and now that is reduced to 4-5. Very recently I picked up new Forza 3 and NHL 10, and have been playing them online quite a bit (play with an online team of friends in NHL almost nightly). I've picked up older games like Devil May Cry 4, Mirror's Edge and Dead Space just recently as well. All games that lack multiplayer (that I know of). I hope that sheds some light on how I manage these purchases, and I think most people who can't afford every $60 game can do it as well. Maybe publishers will start seeing a trend and adjust their game development and pricing appropriately.

Back to the topic on hand...regardless of how piracy plays out in developing nations, Microsoft's response was the right thing to do. Entertainment on the whole is a target of theft in these nations. People use illegal Satellite Dishes to watch TV, buy copied music CDs, buy copied DVD movies...piracy is rampant and affect all sorts of mediums. I have a funny related story: When I went to Pakistan in '94 I brought along a mixtape I made. I lent it to my cousin once and he went around town one night blasting it in his car, and later returned the tape. Weeks later he takes us to a restaurant his friend owned. My family and I hear my mixtape being played in the restaurant. So his friend copied the tape and now anyone who visited the place heard my weird concoction of Ace of Base, Aerosmith and Counting Crows.

Piracy is just a fact of life there and I don't think MS should consider reducing their game prices on the whole just to appease these markets. A different strategy perhaps, that may include reduced prices for that region, or a plan to build it into a viable market by offering more affordable hardware...but prices are for the most part fairly suitable at this point. The people selling pirated software themselves have found the pricepoint people are willing to pay for games (in Pakistan it's around $4-5 CDN) and I'm sure they would charge more if they could, but the market has spoken. Obviously that price point is not feasible at all and it would be impossible for publishers to sell it at the price, even if just for that market to encourage legit sales.

I DO find a weird issue with the thought that these people can somehow end up with computers/consoles... and afford to pay the pie rats for the illegal copies. Coupled with the apperant business model that the pie rats have.
Couple factors affect that I spose, they can rely on the fact the publisher has already done the market blitz elsewhere, some of which should spill over. The pirates have no need to compensate the developer for the work or the publisher for that advertising.
Even so, maybe the pub's SHOULD try to match them, if nothing else to keep their foot in the door.