icon to pop-up a window with pricing information.
 |
 |
|
New Releases at $59.99? Why?
By bsesb2003 05-30-2011 11:22 AM
|
814 views |
|
I have been thinking about the prices of games. There has been a trend of sales where an online or B&M has offered some sort of rebate, coupon for buying pre-release or even a sale only a few weeks after release.
So, the question is - Should game companies be releasing games at $59.99? Especially at this point in time of the consoles' lifecycles? I'm not against developers and producers making profits, especially since there had been plenty of developers who have been wound down. Also, with exceptions here and there, the pricing of gaming has remained relatively stable. But, shouldn't some sort of economies of scale have kicked in? By now, developers know the systems, already have game engines at or close to their peak for this generation, and many are on the second or third versions of a game. So why the $59.99 release? Why not just start it out at $39.99 or $49.99? |
 Comments (Total Comments: 22) |
|
|
TLFerrill
- 05-30-2011, 12:07 PM
|
The age of the console has little to do with the price of games. The games have been getting better and better, which means they require more skilled developers to work more hours to create them. The B&M stores offering rebates are sacrificing part of thier cut to gain customers over the competetion.
I'm still going to wait for my games to get cheaper, but the developers still need the cash (maybe more than before) to start developing the next project. |
|
bsesb2003
- 05-30-2011, 12:19 PM
|
|
@TL Ferrill - I agree about developers needing the cash. But it has to be cheaper now to develop than when they started from scratch. Also, would it be better for them to sell more games now at a lower price than at a bargain price later? Money in hand now is better than money in hand later.
|
|
nas6034
- 05-30-2011, 12:44 PM
|
|
I think without numbers it'd be hard to tell if it could be cheaper. What if there is a certain percentage the manufacturer requires for each VG release, a certain percent cut that the reseller wants to meet then in the end the developer is the one that has to take what is possibly left over which could be miniscule. We'd need someone with financial insight in the VG industry to truly understand why 59.99 is the initial price point now-a-days. The sales that happen weeks later are probably when the stores have met their profitability threshold on the item so they can go ahead and make it cheaper and still be able to maintain a profit albeit marginal. ......
|
|
Pck21
- 05-30-2011, 12:55 PM
|
It's because that's price the market will bear. For every price increase, the less people will buy at that price. For every price reduction, the more people will buy at that price (especially us CAGs lol). However, developers found a happy medium with the current price point of $59.99. People are willing to pay that price for a game they want, and the developers get that much more money. If/when the price decreases, more people buy the game, but the devs are probably breaking even at that point in the game's life cycle. It's all very strange.
|
|
phantasyx
- 05-30-2011, 12:58 PM
|
N64 games were 79.99.
psx games were 49.99 and its been several years since then. Inflation. |
|
1NintendoFan
- 05-30-2011, 01:19 PM
|
|
As long as games continue to drop in price and I can eventually pick up all the games I want for under $20, I'm happy
 I don't need to have games the minute they are released, so I'm more than happy to wait for a price drop. It does seem a little high to be releasing games at this price, but even new games are seeing pretty nice drops right away. A lot of stores are releasing games with really great promos, like L.A. Noire at Kmart with $20 gaming coupon and a free game under $20. Games are also seeing decent drops in price, Portal 2, for example is still new and is already down to $39.99. |
|
bsesb2003
- 05-30-2011, 01:24 PM
|
|
Portal 2 is a relatively new release and is at $39.99. So my thought process is that its better to get the $39.99 now, than the $19.99 much later.
|
|
The Mana Knight
- 05-30-2011, 02:14 PM
|
Development costs of many games are still high. Only a small percentage of that $60 actually goes to the developers themselves. Some goes to retailers, publisher, developer, manufacturing costs, etc. Some of the publisher money is used to make up for development paid on the game, along with marketing. Many games have to sell at least 500k at that amount to break even.
|
|
Dzamboni
- 05-30-2011, 03:48 PM
|
|
Game prices have always been around the same price. You just have to adjust for inflation. In the Atari 2600 era games were around 30-40 bucks which is around 90 bucks today. those games also probably cost a fraction of the cost to produce.
|
|
OtakuFerret
- 05-30-2011, 05:15 PM
|
I'm happy with the current pricing scheme, because there will ALWAYS be people who will buy new releases on day 1 and developers need that revenue to keep making AAA releases. But CAGs know that if we monitor the deals and wait a couple weeks, we can grab those same releases within a month and save ten, twenty, sometimes thirty bucks (Mortal Kombat, anyone?) Also, some developers do release games new for less than $60, like Super Street Fighter IV, BlazBlue Continuum Shift or Maijin and the Sacred Kingdom. Even games like Enslaved and Castlevania drop super fast. And look at Bioshock 2! You could pick it up for $10 less than a year from release.
tl;dr -- New games might be $60 but they drop FAST and there are ALWAYS deals to be had even on release, whether discounts, gift cards, swag or DLC. |
|
CAG Trader
- 05-30-2011, 05:30 PM
|
|
I disagree that they're getting better. Instead they spend too much time rehashing sequels and throwing away money on unnecessary graphics.
Really it doesn't matter what they choose to release them for, I'm only going to buy them when they near $30. All the better for me if that happens within weeks instead of months. I guess for people that buy a game a month and play it to death that's fine. Someone like me who collects and can end up with a stack of games a month (not always) would rather pay less for a wider range of titles. $60 just gives them room to mark it down. If they start at $50 then it'll take longer before a price drop/sale. |
|
mebegod
- 05-30-2011, 05:52 PM
|
|
@phantasyx you are thinking of PS2 games were $49.99 PSX games were $39.99
|
|
hostyl1
- 05-30-2011, 06:14 PM
|
Reasons:
1) People will pay 60 bucks. 2) People think less of a game that's released at a "budget" price. 3) You can "trick" people by offering discounts. But the downside of expecting software prices to vary is that they could just as well vary upwards. A game like Call of Duty or Assassins very well might be able to justify a $70 price tag (based on advertising costs alone  ). |
|
AvidWriter
- 05-30-2011, 06:31 PM
|
Because people still pay for it. If they tested games at $65.00 and they sold, guess what more companies would start launching games at that price. You want prices to go down? Stop buying games at $60 prices. It's that simple.
Also I never understood "AAA" releases. What does this really mean? Does just the fact a certain compnay is working on the game and it costs millions of dollars make it a "AAA" game. I think it's a pretty bad term to be honest. It should only be used after a game comes out and it has gotten reviewed and received a general overall good or bad from the community. Like Portal 2 for example would garner a "AAA" title. A game that has not been reviewed or played yet like another Halo game should not be called "AAA" although it will cause of the simple reason it has Halo in the title. |
|
dopa345
- 05-30-2011, 06:53 PM
|
If you take inflation to account, games actually have been getting cheaper over time.
|
|
mission42
- 05-30-2011, 07:11 PM
|
@phantasyx
I remember paying prices like that for SNES games too. I think I paid like $79.99 or something for Chrono Trigger on release and I paid $70 for Secret of Mana as well. |
|
cmb00
- 05-30-2011, 08:38 PM
|
|
between amazon and kmart i hardly ever pay full price unless its a gamestop only edition.
|
|
mike.m
- 05-31-2011, 12:59 AM
|
I don't think people realize how much development costs is going into some of the AAA games. Seriously, we're talking budgets rivaling movie budgets now. As far as retail pricing, I know a lot of companies are getting angry about the price drops on new releases soon after they come out at places like Amazon. Portal 2 has been on sale virtually since it released. If you paid or pay $60 for a new copy, you're not a responsible CAG.
|
antlp89
- 05-31-2011, 04:15 AM
|
Despite games having a more expensive MSRP this generation, I've actually paid less on average for each game in general. Prices tend to fall much faster this generation compared to last generation and recently most big budget games have a $10-20 gift card associated with the purchase.
My knee-jerk reaction the the price hike was dismay but in retrospect it looks like the hike actually decreased the price of games overall. For example, look at all the Ubisoft games (Assassin's Creed, Splinter Cell, etc). They drop by $20-30 within weeks/months after release. Big title games like Fallout, Mass Effect, GTA, RDR, Call of Duty, etc all fall under $30 less than a year after release. For the uninformed casual gamer the $60 price seems steep, but for the educated gamer there are plenty of games to play on the cheap because of the nature of price drops this generation. |
|
SeanNOLA
- 05-31-2011, 12:58 PM
|
Believe it or not, games used to be a lot more expensive. Sonic 3 was $70 when it first came out, and Phantasy Star 4 was over $100! Back before there was a universally agreed upon, standardized price, bigger name games or any game that took a lot of time/money to develop would end up costing more. The tradeoff was that licensed games or other b-level releases were usually only $30-$40, but if you wanted the best, you had to be willing to pay for it.
|
|
|
| Recent Blog Entries by bsesb2003 |
|
