Games are *cheaper* today than in 1989/NES days

electrictroy

electrictroy

Banned
Adjusting for inflation (the fact that people get paid more):

- a game that cost $50 in 1989 would cost $78 in today's currency.


So we're actually paying LESS for games today than we did when the NES was popular.

troy
 
It's hard to change consumer expectations, especially after so many years of $45-$50 games.

I do remember when my parents payed $70 for Secret of Mana (USED) back when it came out but out of print.

Given the higher cost of production now a days and decrease in the number of gamers, it's a wonder that there are still so many game companies. But then again, it also explains where there have been so many mergers and acquisitions as of the past few years.
 
[quote name='rabbitt']Same with consoles. I think there was a Neo Geo system that cost' $400 when it released.[/QUOTE]

And you know what else was amazing? When the system was about to die, and even after it died, the price never dropped!
 
[quote name='Saucy Jack']And you know what else was amazing? When the system was about to die, and even after it died, the price never dropped![/QUOTE]

The neo geo hasn't died. I do believe KOF games are still coming out on cartridge for the Neo Geo. Samurai Spirits V all the Metal Slug Games, etc.
 
[quote name='capitalist_mao']The neo geo hasn't died. I do believe KOF games are still coming out on cartridge for the Neo Geo.[/QUOTE]

The Neo-Geo "died" in July of '04 with the final game Samurai Showdown V Special. After that all of the games have been developed for the Atmoswave arcade hardware. Still VERY prices for the system and games.
 
This generation clearly has been the most cost-friendly of all. Not only are games coming out at $50 or even $40, meaning the top ones, but there are loads of bargain games coming out at $30 or $20 or even $10; we have tons of PC/GH/PH games at $20; and many new games seem to drop within a few months if not weeks. It's a great time for great prices on a lot of stuff. Kids still complain about prices, but if you've been around from the early days (Defender Atari VCS = $79.99, and go from there) you know price-wise things are great now.

The only thing that's worrisome is the launch of $60 Xbox 360 games. I hope the other next-gen machines don't follow suit. I don't pay $50, and there's no way in hell I'm paying $60.
 
Wow. I never realized that the Neo Geo system was still being supported until recently. I thought it died many, many years ago. Who still sold Neo Geo carts, anyway?
 
[quote name='rabbitt']Same with consoles. I think there was a Neo Geo system that cost' $400 when it released.[/QUOTE]


The games were like $200 too. I remember my jaw dropping at the Neo Geo section in those mail order ads they used to put in EGM.
 
[quote name='Apossum']The games were like $200 too. I remember my jaw dropping at the Neo Geo section in those mail order ads they used to put in EGM.[/QUOTE]

Back in 1994, I was a Babbages looking at stuff. This was the only store I ever saw that had a section for Neo Geo games, and by section, I mean a metal wire basket sitting next to the register. The only sub $100 game I saw in there was Fatal Fury, probably because it was one of the older Neo Geo Games. That cartridge was $75. THe last two Neo Geo games were sold at about $385, each.
 
[quote name='Saucy Jack']Wow. I never realized that the Neo Geo system was still being supported until recently. I thought it died many, many years ago. Who still sold Neo Geo carts, anyway?[/QUOTE]

SNK mainly (though they went bankrupt in 01 and others stepped in to produce KOF and other SNK franchises for a few years). They still cost a ton of money, but they supported both the AES and MVS until last year.

the neo is still pretty popular in europe and japan which is part of the reason it lasted so long.
 
[quote name='Ecofreak']Given the higher cost of production now a days and decrease in the number of gamers, it's a wonder that there are still so many game companies. But then again, it also explains where there have been so many mergers and acquisitions as of the past few years.[/QUOTE]

Decrease in the number of gamers?
 
[quote name='CaseyRyback']SNK mainly (though they went bankrupt in 01 and others stepped in to produce KOF and other SNK franchises for a few years). They still cost a ton of money, but they supported both the AES and MVS until last year.

the neo is still pretty popular in europe and japan which is part of the reason it lasted so long.[/QUOTE]

Oh, OK.

I probably would have bought a Neo Geo if it wasn't so expensive. I loved the Fatal Fury series, 3 Count Bout, and a bunch of other SNK games.
 
I paid (my mom paid) $69.99 for Street Fighter II when it came out for the SNES. That was some amazing value for how much i played it. I put more hours into that game than any game since then.
 
when my dad got me and my brother a snes with super mario world when we were around 4 yerars old we thought it cost thousands of dollars when in actuality it was about 150 dollars. Now we buy our consoles for 300+ but it is all worth it.
 
That does put it in perspective. Of course in those days, I didn't pay for my games. I would get 1 game a year (on my bday) and occasionally on xmas as well. Now I am actually paying for them, which is why I don't like the increase in games.
 
The Neo Geo was only $400? I thought it was around $800 or $900?

Maybe that was the Neo Geo Gold or some such? Anyway, only reason mommy wouldn't let me have one was because it was $800 or so around where I lived. The games averaged about $180 too.
 
[quote name='Ikohn4ever']cartridges are more expensive than cds/dvds to mass produce[/QUOTE]
Hopefully this wont be games will cost even more with blu ray disc.
 
$60 for 360 games does seem like too much; however, new PS1 games were $40 and current gen games are $50 so it's not really that surprising. I'm a hardcore CAG, though. $20 is too much for me.:lol:
 
[quote name='wubb'][quote name='Ecofreak']
Given the higher cost of production now a days and decrease in the number of gamers, it's a wonder that there are still so many game companies. But then again, it also explains where there have been so many mergers and acquisitions as of the past few years.[/QUOTE]Decrease in the number of gamers?[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that doesnt make sense. Gaming is now much more main stream. It has become a part of popular culture and there are now more gamers than ever before. I mean how else could the gaming industry become a mulit-billion dollar business?
 
[quote name='neocisco']I'm a hardcore CAG, though. $20 is too much for me.:lol:[/QUOTE]

Until only recently (like, 2 weeks ago), I had only spend more than $20 on one of the 30 games I own for PS2. Then, i spent $25 and $30 on 2 games.
 
[quote name='electrictroy']Adjusting for inflation (the fact that people get paid more):

- a game that cost $50 in 1989 would cost $78 in today's currency.


So we're actually paying LESS for games today than we did when the NES was popular.

troy[/QUOTE]

Yea but what would a $50 game now cost back then. :D
 
To be fair about the 16 bit cartridge costs a $69.99 SF II game may have cost Capcom $30-35 just to cover manufacturing, printing and license fees to Nintendo $10 for retail markup leaving Capcom $25-30 in gross profit to offset development costs and company expenses. You can apply a similar cost structure to other $70-80 games of the era and the N64 as well.

A game like SF II probably cost $200-300K to develop since a team of 8-12 was the norm for games of the era and took 6-10 months of development time.

Now we're looking at teams of 80-200 working on major titles, development times of 2-3 years, full scale video production, complete musical scoring, licensing fees for intellectual property/tie in licenses or game engines on top of the traditional licensing and manufacturing fees. I fully expect a game in the next 5 years to hit $50 million in development and associated costs.

Plus there's somethings you didn't have in the 16 bit era that you did now. You didn't have corporate game sellers plying the used game trade. You also didn't have as widespread game rentals.

I read an interview with a game developer in the past week or two that summed up the game industry like this. 1/3rd of the people that played his game bought it new. 1/3rd rented it or borrowed it. 1/3rd bought it used. Think about that. 2/3rds of the audience got to experience all his comapny's and team's efforts without him seeing any or little revenue.

Imagine what the music or movie industry would do if that same ratio held true in regards to their mediums. If you think the RIAA and MPAA are bastards about digital rights now? You have no idea how bad they'd be if they were faced with the same marketplace scenario as games makers.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']To be fair about the 16 bit cartridge costs a $69.99 SF II game may have cost Capcom $30-35 just to cover manufacturing, printing and license fees to Nintendo $10 for retail markup leaving Capcom $25-30 in gross profit to offset development costs and company expenses. You can apply a similar cost structure to other $70-80 games of the era and the N64 as well.

A game like SF II probably cost $200-300K to develop since a team of 8-12 was the norm for games of the era and took 6-10 months of development time.

Now we're looking at teams of 80-200 working on major titles, development times of 2-3 years, full scale video production, complete musical scoring, licensing fees for intellectual property/tie in licenses or game engines on top of the traditional licensing and manufacturing fees. I fully expect a game in the next 5 years to hit $50 million in development and associated costs.

Plus there's somethings you didn't have in the 16 bit era that you did now. You didn't have corporate game sellers plying the used game trade. You also didn't have as widespread game rentals.

I read an interview with a game developer in the past week or two that summed up the game industry like this. 1/3rd of the people that played his game bought it new. 1/3rd rented it or borrowed it. 1/3rd bought it used. Think about that. 2/3rds of the audience got to experience all his comapny's and team's efforts without him seeing any or little revenue.

Imagine what the music or movie industry would do if that same ratio held true in regards to their mediums. If you think the RIAA and MPAA are bastards about digital rights now? You have no idea how bad they'd be if they were faced with the same marketplace scenario as games makers.[/QUOTE]
About the only point I would have to disagree about is the "not very widespread rentals" during the 16-bit era. I've lived in Kansas my whole life and during my youngers years I bought very few games during a console cycle (about 15 to 20) and rented about a game a week during the 8-bit and 16-bit era from a grocery store's video department. If grocery stores had a healthy selection of games to rent in a mid-sized town in Kansas, it had to be somewhat widespread. Nowadays I hardly rent at all, I just wait for a fairly reasonable price and then buy it, that way I can finish it at my own pace.
 
[quote name='guardian_owl']About the only point I would have to disagree about is the "not very widespread rentals" during the 16-bit era. I've lived in Kansas my whole life and during my youngers years I bought very few games during a console cycle (about 15 to 20) and rented about a game a week during the 8-bit and 16-bit era from a grocery store's video department. If grocery stores had a healthy selection of games to rent in a mid-sized town in Kansas, it had to be somewhat widespread. Nowadays I hardly rent at all, I just wait for a fairly reasonable price and then buy it, that way I can finish it at my own pace.[/QUOTE]

Yep, and most other people do the same. The rental market is not that strong any more. Blockbuster and Movie Gallery are both teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Movie Gallery is even attempting to sell off it's Game Crazy share to stay afloat.
 
[quote name='dpatel']in those days, I didn't pay for my games. I would get 1 game a year (on my bday) and occasionally on xmas as well.[/QUOTE] You serious? When I was a kid, almost half my collection was self-bought. I saved my allowance & used every penny towards Atari cartridges.

Did you not have a spending allowance to buy games yourself?
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']I read an interview with a game developer - 1/3rd of the people that played his game bought it new. 1/3rd rented it or borrowed it. 1/3rd bought it used. Think about that. 2/3rds of the audience got to experience all his comapny's and team's efforts with him little revenue.

Imagine what the music or movie industry would do if that same ratio held true in regards to their mediums. [/QUOTE]
The movie industry *does* have that same ratio. 1/3rd buy the dvd. The other 2/3rds rent it or get it used.

troy
 
[quote name='electrictroy']Did you not have a spending allowance to buy games yourself?[/QUOTE]

I spent my money on new CDs, played the 5 or 6 games I had a bunch and maybe bought a used game here and there.
 
[quote name='electrictroy']You serious? When I was a kid, almost half my collection was self-bought. I saved my allowance & used every penny towards Atari cartridges.

Did you not have a spending allowance to buy games yourself?[/QUOTE]

I got an allowance, but it wasn't really enough and my parents didn't want me "wasting" it on games (I'm now 20 and "wasting" even more money on games :) ) It didn't seem like a big deal to me then. I had plenty of friends with a SNES so we could trade games. That 1 game a year would be enough for me though, which is weird. I could play a single game for hours. Now I have a backlog of some great AAA titles and still want to buy more. Plus, from 3rd grade - 6th grade, we moved outside the US and I had an NTSC SNES and later bought an NTSC playstation. I couldn't play the local games so even if I had the money, buying games wasn't an option.
 
[quote name='electrictroy']You serious? When I was a kid, almost half my collection was self-bought. I saved my allowance & used every penny towards Atari cartridges.

Did you not have a spending allowance to buy games yourself?[/QUOTE]


when i was 11, if i saved my allowance for 4 months, i could afford a Snes game ;) my parents have cash but i certainly didn't get enough to buy any games.

Besides, my allowance (along with any quarters I found in our couches) went to SF2, MK, and NBA Jam in the arcades.
 
[quote name='Apossum']when i was 11, if i saved my allowance for 4 months, i could afford a Snes game ;) my parents have cash but i certainly didn't get enough to buy any games.

Besides, my allowance (along with any quarters I found in our couches) went to SF2, MK, and NBA Jam in the arcades.[/QUOTE]
Yep, back when I was younger I got a whopping $1 a week, starting at about 10 each additional chore (doing the laundry, vacumming the house, etc.) netted me an extra $1-2 depending on the length of the chore. So it would take me quite a bit of time to buy a game. *random flashback triggered* I remember taking a trip to Kansas City for shopping on a Saturday Afternoon. Typically I don't do much clothes shopping so at stores such as Sears I would just hang around in the video game department and sample the new releases on the Kiosks. I played the first level of Star Fox and knew immediately, I must have this game (which coincidentally was the same day it was released). I prepayed my allowance for several followingmonths to buy that game and I played the hell out of it. *end triggered random flashback*
 
In 2nd grade I used to trade games with my friends. One day I lost my friend's Ikari Warriors for NES on the bus. I took me forever to replace that with my $3 a week allowance since it was 50 bucks then.
 
[quote name='electrictroy']You serious? When I was a kid, almost half my collection was self-bought. I saved my allowance & used every penny towards Atari cartridges.

Did you not have a spending allowance to buy games yourself?[/QUOTE]


Most of my collection was self bought as well. I got a paper route almost solely to buy Sega Master System cartridges.
 
[quote name='electrictroy']The movie industry *does* have that same ratio. 1/3rd buy the dvd. The other 2/3rds rent it or get it used.

troy[/QUOTE]


I think the difference is that the movie industry has a lead time when the film is exclusively in theaters.
 
That's true. But it keeps shrinking. Used to be 2-3 years. Now it's shrunk to only 2-3 months between theater release & video release.

Many people are now skipping the theater completely. Just as many of us wait for the $20 pricedrop on games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top