|
Post by wil327 on Apr 6, 2006 10:20:03 GMT -5
Simply put, I can't figure out any reason for the games to cost more.
Granted the technology is new, and the cost may rise a few cents to make a disc, but that hardly justifies the high price tags. I simply do not feel the need to spend 70 or 80 dollars on a Special Edition or Collector's Edition of a game, no matter how good it may be.
Not only are "Edition" games pricey, but so-called next-gen games are going up in price. That's just not fair to gamers. I remember when NES was the standard, and games ranged between 35 and 50 dollars, now for a console, you average about 50 dollars for a new title, and roughly 30-35 for a used one.
Now, I know many companies will cite, marketing cost, packaging cost, and production costs, but, there is a limit on how much BS we are willing to listen to before we turn away. I just don't see how manufacturing an Xbox 360 game and manufacturing an original Xbox game are so different that the costs justify a 60 dollar price tag.
Moreover, when we find ourselves paying 300 -500 dollars for a new system, it is very hard to then spend an additional 60 dollars per game.
Now this argument also applies to portable gaming as well. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out what I am referring to.
I can find no reason why I should have to pay more than 30 dollars for a portable game at all. For the longest time, Game Boy and Game Boy Advance games ranged from 20 to 30 dollars, and life was good. Then the DS and PSP were launched, and prices went up. Now, I'll be the first to admit that the DS prices maybe raised the bar to 35 dollars, which is not terrible. The PSP on the other hand has games that sell for 50 dollars, which is completely ridiculous. Especially considering that most of the games for it are simply scaled down ports of PS2 games.
This my friends is a complete travesty of justice. PSP games at absolute most should retail for no more than 35 dollars. Especially when you consider that a vast amount of the PSPs that are sold, ship with dead pixels, and require replacing.
That being said, the pricing argument for both consoles and portable systems, is truly a question that requires some serious pondering. As a gamer who grew up with Atari VCS, and has kept up to date with the latest in gaming, I will continue to game, and buy games, but I have to pose this question. Are we, the gaming community, really satisfied with the new games so much that we are willing to pay more and more for our precious games? Or Are we ready to stand as a community and tell the gaming companies that we refuse to pay more, for games on systems that offer less than their previous versions?
Think on this and see where you stand on this debate.
|
|
|
Post by Malroth on Apr 6, 2006 16:36:41 GMT -5
I completely agree that wholesale prices for portables shouldn't be higher than $30, but thats big business for you. As for paying extra for special edition bundles, I can understand if it's packed with physical goods like artbooks, watches, and such. For example, I bought the cheaper GC version of RE4 instead of the PS2 version, even though it had extra scenes and modes. On the other hand, I also bought the more expensive special edition Growlanser bundle because of the extras it came with.
|
|
|
Post by megamoronx on Apr 8, 2006 10:02:45 GMT -5
Ahhh, I remember when big name SNES games used to run for 70 bucks a pop. I guess it explains why I used to rent so much back in the day. I appreciate the cheaper price of games nowadays but even I'm getting to the point where I don't even like paying 50 bucks for a new game. Most games aren't even worth that. Maybe I'm just jaded.
Actually, I'm looking at my PS2 and Gamecube collection right now and the vast majority of the games are simply compilation titles that were budget priced at 30 dollars of less: Street Fighter Anniversary Collection, Sonic Mega Collection, King of the Fighters 02/03, Midway Arcade Treasures 2, Capcom Classics Collection etc...
Also, why the hell does it take Nintendo so long to mark their games down to 20 dollars? Pikmin 2 has been out for like FOREVER and is still 50 bucks and Super Mario Advance, a game that game out what, 5 years ago is just now 20.
|
|
|
Post by Discoalucard on Apr 8, 2006 10:18:08 GMT -5
The used game market is "robbing" new game sales. New game sales are great for the publishers, because they make a ton of money and the store gets almost nothing. Used game sales are bad for the publishers, because they get zilch and the store reaps the profits. This is how retail stays in business, according to them.
Since the publishers can't say "Stop selling used games", they need some excuse to jack up the price. The "we're creating more detailed textures and models for our high res games" argument is being used to justify the extra $10. Except they've been doing this stuff for years on PC games and not charging extra money. I think it's also to sorta help cover the licensing fees Microsoft charges. Regardless, it's annoying. I refuse to purchase any 360 title new unless I really want it. Good news is, you can purchase Asian versions of most of the games, they're 100% in English, not region coded, and only $40.
As for portables - it makes sense why they're claiming they're more expensive to an extent. 3D games require a lot more manpower to make than 2D games (especially the stuff on the PSP) so it makes sense that they're more expensive. Except, as mentioned, when a majority of them are ports. That's just lazy and retarded.
Nintendo is notoriously bad about lowering their first party game prices. But you know how you keep reading about how profitiable Nintendo is? That's probably one of the reasons - they keep selling at those high prices, because people will continue to shell out $50 for Mario Tennis or what have you. Contrast that to Microsoft, who used to gflood the market with their titles and then drop them to $20 within a few months (Jade Empire, Conker, Forza.) Nintendo's is a smarter business tactic but not all that consumer friendly.
|
|
|
Post by Gilder on Apr 8, 2006 10:22:47 GMT -5
The overpricing of video games are really starting to obnoxious. What's worse however is the overpricing of USED games. Having to pay $30-45 for a used copy with out being able to see the disc for scratches really bothers me.
I must commend a few games that have been cheap. Namco made the smartest move ever by releasing the original Katamari Damacy as a budget title. I never had so much fun for only $20.
On a side note, Killer 7 had to be the fastest marked down game ever. Two weeks after it was released, I saw it's price drop immediately to $19.99
|
|
|
Post by megamoronx on Apr 8, 2006 11:08:22 GMT -5
Yeah, the whole used game market is huge now. The sad thing is, the more huge it gets, the more you get screwed on it. About 2 months ago, I sold Ulitimate Spider-Man for the PS2 which came out in September I think for a whopping 6 dollars. A lot of times, used games are sold for only 5 dollars less than what they are new!
Another thing that bugs me is how stores clear out their 8 and 16-bit stuff in order to make room for hundreds upon hundreds of crappy used PS2 games that no one wants and probably don't work. Can't blame them I guess, at the end of the day, the name of the game IS profit.
|
|
|
Post by wil327 on Apr 8, 2006 18:04:40 GMT -5
I would be remiss if I didn't add the following information to this discussion.
I worked at a small video game chain, The Game Zone, on and off for the last few years. As such, I should add, that when smaller chains/mom & pop stores order inventory that doesn't move, they are often forced to drop prices to about 1 or 2 dollars above cost in some cases. Not that this is a bad thing mind you, in terms of the consumer, but it can directly effect how well the store does.
In cases like this, I can certainly understand how they justify the sale of used games. Though, I have to agree that certain used games shouldn't cost 5 dollars less than their factory new counterparts, I still agree with some retail stores that used games are a necessity to stay in business. As a consumer, I have to admit that I am glad for it.
However, I still feel that the publishing companies, are more or less "crying wolf", in terms of actually being hurt by used game sales. That is probably one of the weaker excuses for raising video game prices that I have heard. Especially, when you consider that: a) Sales charts are readily available both online and in magazines, clear indicators that people are buying new games, b) most of these companies have their annual reports available for public viewing either online or by request, a good amount of them show profits in the millions or billions, in some cases, every year. Also, consider that the reason most companies, in general, fail is because they overextend themselves, make promises that they fail to deliver upon (consider the case of Ion Storm), or just plain abuse their employees to the point where they seek employment elsewhere.
When you look at this issue from a rational standpoint, you can see that the real reason the prices have been raised is because the companies know that WE will just plain pay for the games. They are greedy, and know that we are more likely to spend big bucks on games than the average consumer. Plus, they know that if they include freebies, they are more likely to entice us into collector's editions, or pre-orders for expensive new games.
Sadly, it is a vicious circle and we have to pay for it, but that doesn't mean that we, as a community, can't change the way things are. If we unite and stop buying for 1 day, we have the ability to send a message to the companies, that we will not stand for higher prices on our games.
If you are truly concerned about this issue, I urge you to do some research, and get the facts for yourself. If you are serious about taking a stand for our common passion, let us know.
|
|
|
Post by Discoalucard on Apr 8, 2006 19:46:29 GMT -5
If we unite and stop buying for 1 day, we have the ability to send a message to the companies, that we will not stand for higher prices on our games. The problem is, when the suits look at a game's performance and see it not doing so well, they don't look at it being too expensive, they attribute to other factors, like competition, game quality, lack of interest, etc. Not buying a new game just shows you don't want the game, not that you think it's too expensive. This is especially dangerous when you get into niche games. I love how Nintendo is swearing that all first-party titles will never be over $50. That's great, but it doesn't really mean anything other than as competition against Microsoft and Sony. If Nintendo REALLY wants to break into the mainstream, out of the traditional target demographic, they'll need to hit the $20 mark. For non-gamers, even $50 is way too expensive, unless they know they'll get a LOT playtime out of it.
|
|
|
Post by Protodude on Apr 8, 2006 21:33:39 GMT -5
Ha, there's no way you can get people to stop buying for one day, it's not like there's a specific schedule for when people can and can't get games. But anyway, I can understand PSP games being about, say, $40 at the most, but I REALLY don't like 360 games being $60, since $50 already seems like a lot to me. I think once technology catches up, new games will go back to $40-50.
Speaking of used games, remember when stores like Babbage's only had like, one fucking rack of used games? Ah, those were the days....
|
|
|
Post by Shinigami on Apr 8, 2006 22:08:44 GMT -5
Just how do we let the companies know that we won't pay outrageous prices then?
I agree that selling used games for 5 dollars less (and in some cases 2 dollars less) than the new games is bullshit. So how is it that they get away with it? Are you telling me that there really are that many morons who will pay 45 dollars for a used game?
If companies don't want stores to sell used games they need to do something that maybe just hasn't occured to them: make games with long lasting appeal and replay value. Now I don't mean games that will keep you busy for a few months, I mean games that you will want to keep for years on end. Games that you'll want to take the grave with you. Games that you never get tired of playing, or wish for a sequel. If companies made games like that, nobody would be selling their games. However, that's not what companies want because they DO want you to buy the sequel. They DO want you to get tired of it and move on the something else. They DO want to leave you slightly unsatisfied so you'll want the upgrade and sell the release date preoder copy you paid a total of $59 for ( *cough* MGS3 *cough*). In short, through their actions, companies have caused the rise of the used game business themselves.
Unfortunately for us, instead of making timeless gems, companies are going to resort to other underhanded methods to kill the used game business. I heard PS3 games were being made so that they only work on the first machine they are placed in. Is there any truth to this or is it an unfounded rumor?
Right now I find myself unwilling to buy any new console for the following reason:
Component Cable = $25 (If I want the picture to look like its supposed to) Memory Card = $20 (If I want to be able to save the game) Second Controller = $25 (If I want to play with anyone) A game to actually play on the new console = $50 (If I want my new console to be anything other than an overpriced paperweight) Tax = Approximately $12 (Undesired requirement)
This is well over a hundred dollars, and the price of the console hasn't even been added yet. Are gamers paying too much? You're goddamn right they are. Is there anything we can do about it? I highly doubt it. Numerous times my parents have compared video gaming to an addiction to crack. Maybe they're right. Maybe gamers are too addicted they'll pay $50 a week or suffer from withdrawal.
|
|
|
Post by wil327 on Apr 9, 2006 1:48:02 GMT -5
To day "Maybe there's nothing we can do about it" is the type of attitude I hear from people who didn't vote in the last election, and now complain that they hate the way the current administration is doing things.
I have news for you. If WE ALL spend a little time doing some research, and talking about this, then we ARE doing something. I'm not talking about changing things tomorrow, next week, or next month. I'm talking about in the future, through planning and communicating with people, and getting media coverage and so forth.
I am no simpleton, and I KNOW just about every gamer I know is an intelligent person. You all know it starts with one person and then spreads from there. To find evidence of this, just look back at history, be it US History, French History, or English History, they all say the same thing, change starts with an idea.
Maybe a day of not buying is not the right way, maybe a letter writing campaign or massive amounts of phone calls are in order, I can't say for sure.
What I do know is that if we sit around and just complain about the prices, but take absolutely no action, then the game companies will just continue to do whatever they want. I don't know about you, but I, for one, will not just sit back and let this continue.
I have been a gamer since 1982 and have always considered myself lucky to have such a medium at my disposal. I wish to pass this on to my children some day, and I want us all to be able to enjoy this passtime for as long as we possibly can, BUT I want us to be able to afford this.
|
|
|
Post by megatronbison on Apr 13, 2006 8:43:33 GMT -5
It always makes me sigh a little when I hear people in the US complain about high game prices- new DS and GBA games here cost £30- that works out as $52 :\ Pity the 360 owners more so over here though: £50 for almost every new game which works out about $87! Most decent new GC and PS2 games are £40 brand new too- again that works out about $70.02 which for me is pretty much not an option- I just have to wait for games to be reduced to less than half price after a few years or hope for a bargain on Ebay for the better part- and if your wanting games that are snapped up quickly like Phoenix Wright or Castlevania titles you pretty much either have to stump up or forget about it. Things were much worse back in the 'golden age' when you were having to fork out £60 ($105!!) for a new NES and SNES game. For a kid like I was back then that meant pretty much a game for your birthday and Christmas and that my friends- truly sucked!
|
|
|
Post by wil327 on Apr 13, 2006 10:28:24 GMT -5
I can understand megatronbison's point about the cost of games on foreign soil. I have friends in the UK that also suffer from the same problem.
This only seems to add to the already established problem here in the US. However, I will say that if games cost more in the US, then that price will reflect in foreign markets as well.
Granted, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot we can do about the prices, I believe that there is hope that we can change things for the better.
|
|
|
Post by Neo Rasa on Apr 13, 2006 11:00:57 GMT -5
The prices haven't quite reached outrageous yet. Mortal Kombat 3 and Killer Instinct on the SNES both retailed for $79.99 on launch, (KI was successfully SOLD for $99.99 at more expensive places like The Whiz, Sam Goody, etc.).
That said, Kurt you mean to say that ANY Asian 360 game isn't region coded? Anything good that hasn't made it here yet/won't make it here?
|
|
|
Post by megatronbison on Apr 13, 2006 11:08:09 GMT -5
I personally hope that the revolution will make a big change- in both the way we play games and from a price point of view: Shelling out £300+ for a less than stellar next gen system doesn't tickle my fancy to be honest- given that the vast majority of the games are bog standard updates with slight graphical overhauls. However Nintendo could play it smart and not only offer a cheap alternative system but one that also could be cheaper to develop for maybe also meaning cheaper games? I would love to see it giving a rebirth to 2d games and such. I know this theory has been said elsewhere but ultimately, we can hope...
|
|