$60 games - A look at value.

[vxicepickxv]

Only 22 more hours and Fallout 3 hits profit mode. Thats <0.00$/hours

 

[farq1414]

well you don't live australia seeing as we have to pay almost double what you do.

 

[ArtemusClydeFrog]

well you don't live australia seeing as we have to pay almost double what you do.

I agree, I live in Scandinavia and a new game cost $100 here. $60 for a game on it's release date would seem like a perfectly fair price to me, but I think that's mainly because I'm used to prices being much higher.
That being said I usually never pay full price for a game, mainly because there are so many games I'd like to play and games tend to drop to a much lower price rather quickly compared to other media.

I've just bought New Vegas for $30 and when it comes to entertainment I honestly can't think of a way to get more value for my money.

 

[Scorekeeper]

Books vary drastically. $8 for an 800-page book is a pretty good deal.

 

[DaMullet]

Are we really dragging numbers into this again? Game companies don't charge what it costs to make a game, they charge what they think will get them the maximum profit. Otherwise, I could make the case that I got ripped off paying $10 for Terraria when it clearly did not cost one-sixth what Starcraft 2 did.

Can you break that down for me to prove your point?

Because I would think that the army of testers, voice actors, cinematics team, advertisers, and the extra people and larger team needed to make a game like Starcraft 2 would like to get paid too.

 

[Amphoteric]

So a game can ONLY be good if it is longer than 5 hours?

 

[MightyMole]

Wait, didn't you just kind of answer your own question?

People really don't want to pay the same price for a game that will last them 5 hours as a game that will last them 100 hours. Just like you don't want want to pay the same price for a 12 in. as a 44 in. tv. Less quality calls for lower prices. It'd be absurd for everything to have a flat price.

Of course I'm not really complaining, I just thought I'd say something. If I feel a game doesn't warrant my $60 purchase, I just wait until the price drops to a price I feel is fair for the game.

 

[SlyderEST]

And with video games there's a chance you'll come across something really good (15 euros/300+ hours, for instance).

 

[DaMullet]

Wait, didn't you just kind of answer your own question?

People really don't want to pay the same price for a game that will last them 5 hours as a game that will last them 100 hours. Just like you don't want want to pay the same price for a 12 in. as a 44 in. tv. Less quality calls for lower prices. It'd be absurd for everything to have a flat price.

Of course I'm not really complaining, I just thought I'd say something. If I feel a game doesn't warrant my $60 purchase, I just wait until the price drops to a price I feel is fair for the game.

I think I did.

And I have a hypothetical conclusion that sums up the $60 hate.

And I'll use cars as an easy example

Let's take two cars;
Mercedes-Benz SLK 55 AMG, $59,900
Nissan Versa 1.6, $10,740

If someone sold you a Nissan Versa for $59,900, you'd be really pissed off because you could have gotten a better car for the same price.

So when you buy a $60 game and only have as much fun with it as other $10 games in your library you feel jipped.

Regardless of the cost, its not a competitive price point. I think games are getting away with this because people have to buy it first to find out the value and you can't return it for 100% of your money back.

But now we're left with the problem as to how to fix this.

I say, especially to publishers, lower the price on crappy games and raise the price on good games to balance it out. Have reviewers play the game before it hits the shelves to help determind its worth.

If Kane and Lynch 2, brand new, was $30-$35 tops, it would take that edge off a bit.

But when you know that games are going to be good, they're going to be worth gold.
Here are some examples of games that I think would easily sell at a $70-$80 price point.

Skyrim
Mass Effect 3
Diablo 3

That way, your bottom line doesn't/shouldn't move and you end up with more happy, satisfied customers and happier customers buy more.

With that extra cash from that, publishers can then fund more AAA projects that are polished and immersive that are worth the higher price point resulting in more money.

This way, publishers have the ability to test out new concepts with that stream of cash, and if they strike gold (Like Portal) keep making money.

On the consumer side we see games like the 3 above that are pricy but worth it, but have new and unique titles for $20-$30 brand new. Giving us a rich and diverse artform to enjoy at any level we choose just like buying just about anything else. If people were not willing to break the bank for higher value items, then things like high end cars, diamonds, or $5,000 burgers wouldn't exist!
http://www.lasvegasvegas.com/content/5000-fleurburger-vs-499-n-out-burger

I'm just thinking out loud though. I know I'm probably missing something so please correct me!

 

[the D0rk One]

Regarding music albums, they generally have much higher replay value - you can listen to an album many times, whereas you can't watch a film very often. Games also have higher replay value, but to a lesser extent than music.

Think you nailed it.
Replay yeah... sounds familiar... I think I met this somewhere... oh... no, it's just my nostalgic jadedness acting up

Guess considering replay value for your product is beneath you, eh devs?

 

[Veylon]

Are we really dragging numbers into this again? Game companies don't charge what it costs to make a game, they charge what they think will get them the maximum profit. Otherwise, I could make the case that I got ripped off paying $10 for Terraria when it clearly did not cost one-sixth what Starcraft 2 did.

Can you break that down for me to prove your point?

Because I would think that the army of testers, voice actors, cinematics team, advertisers, and the extra people and larger team needed to make a game like Starcraft 2 would like to get paid too.

All right. Let's say Redigit's paying himself and Blue $60,000 a year each. They've been working on this since January, so the salary costs are about six months' worth, so $60,000 altogether. Plus, they paid someone to make graphics and music for them. Let's be insane and say they spent $10,000. Advertising consisted of giving free beta copies to popular reviewers and beta testing was playing with friends who did it for free. Costs grand total: $70,000.

Now, they are selling the thing through Steam. Let's say Steam takes half the money. So, they're effectively making $5 off of each sale. The only solid number of sales I have is that it sold 50,000 copies on day one. That's $250,000 in gross profits and $180,000 in net, besides the fact that the vast majority of the expenses come in the form of giving themselves money. And this is solely on day one sales. Those greedy Indie developers! Terraria should've been a $1.50; they're raping our wallets!

Anyway, the point is that it's somewhat naive to assume the price of a game is due to the cost of making it. Companies have a whole variety of other costs and fees they have to recoup off a game, including the costs of paying people to make unprofitable or cancelled games and corporate overhead and payouts to shareholders. There's also the gaping issue that companies often have no idea how well their game will sell or how it will be received. Did Valve have any idea that Portal and Team Fortress would do what they did when they bundled them together in the Orange Box?

In any case, I'm essentially in agreement with you. Games shouldn't cost $60 (with rare exceptions) and I'm willing to back that up by not buying them. I'm also saying it's not solely the companies' greed that causes this but also the complacency of the buying public. There are plenty of people here who would buy that $60,000 Nissan and then rant and rave about how their money was stolen instead of just not buying the car.

 

[DaMullet]

*snip*

So true dude.

There are plenty of people here who would buy that $60,000 Nissan and then rant and rave about how their money was stolen instead of just not buying the car.

Stupidity still trumps logic doesn't it?

*smirk*

 

[KingSofa]

I've been a computer geek for Sales and Marketing executives for the last 15 years, and something I've seen over and over again is that "value is perception".

Do I think that spending $60 on Dragon Age 2 is reasonable? No, but only because I've read a million negative reviews and I know that someday I will be able to buy it for much less (on Steam).

But if you truly look at a bang for the buck; $60 for a dozen hours or so of fun seems like a deal. I clocked in 167 hours so far on Dragon Age 1 and I bought it for $9.99.

 

[auronvi]

The original Atari 2600 console cost $200

Games ran about $30-$50 each

FYI - That was actual USD - not adjusted for inflation

No one should complain about the cost of video games these days. There isn't a reason for it. They are probably the cheapest form of entertainment you can buy other than perhaps a stick and a rock.

I was interested in researching this and here is the price of games adjusted for inflation.

Atari2600: $30-$50 adjusted to $106.67-$177.78
NES: $40-$50 adjusted to $78.47-$98.08
SNES: $50-$60 adjusted to $79.02-$94.82
Playstation & N64: $50 adjusted to $72.59
Playstation 2: $50 adjusted to $62.67
PS3 Launch Year: $60 adjusted to $64.79
Now games currently cost: $60.00

Inflation numbers were gotten with this site:
http://www.westegg.com/inflation/

I used the launch year of the system as the point to calculate value. Even the fact that since the PS3 launched 6 years ago we have had enough inflation to warrant that the companies actually RAISE the price of games to $64.99. Not that they should or probably want to but I think people are just not looking at this the right way.

So games are historically the cheapest they have ever been since console gaming started. PC games tend to be 50 dollars so they are even a better deal but that is because of lower demand. I say stop complaining about the price or STOP BUYING GAMES THE DAY THEY COME OUT! I learned this recently for buying Portal 2... fucking 39.99 a week later at GameStop.