What's up with these next-gen prices?

[XYXZYZ]

Usually, when a game system comes out it retails for around $200-250 US, and most games are between $20-$50. Now here's the Xbox 360, retailing for $400 and $500, and games are between $60-70! Now we have talks of the Playstation 3 being what, $600? What the hell?! The cost of video gaming has almost doubled! Are they going to come back down to earth when the competition gets working?

I just find it crazy that the primary game systems in the upcoming run are retailing for what a Neo Geo went for in the early 90s. I know everything costs more on account of gas and whatnot, but this is.... not inviting me to join it.

[THATinkjar]

Which is why I plan to pick up a Revolution... and after I get bored, I'll buy an Xbox 360 and a PlayStation 3 at a price point I'm willing to pay.

[chrisbid]

casual gamers pay 50 dollars a pop for the same old madden game every year, even with an at least equal (if not better) 20 dollar alternative sitting right next to it on the shelf. so why not assume they will pay 10 or even 20 dollars more for the same madden game with a more realistic sweat engine?

[Slimedog]

I think the Revolution will be keeping prices down and I think it will pay off for them in the long run. Also, it wouldn't surprise me if the new higher price point for 360 games didn't stick. I noticed that the new Dynasty Warriors game came out at $40 and I think that if developers can get away with porting a game up from an earlier system, they will release at a lower cost to undercut the competition.

[Blitzwing256]

if the consummer will pay for it, they wil charge for it.
and people will pay that much for these games.

back in the days of the snes, some of the games were in the range of 60-90$, hell phantasy star 4 retailed for 89.99!

sure it had something to do with chips blah blah blah, but you know..the companies are out there to make money..and they know joe average will pay just about anything for his madden game...and the same guy will shell out half a grand for the next big thing.

its just bussness plain and simple.

(mostly why I just buy used stuff, i'm not a sucker)

[Arcade Antics]

games are between $60-70!
They were $60-70 (and higher) in the 16-bit days too. Genesis games like Strider debuted at $69.99

[YoshiM]

Eh, it's just cyclical. Like others said, the 16 bit era had their expensive games. As for the 360 (as we can't really discuss Nintendo's and Sony's systems) it packs a decent amount of power and functionality for the price.

While I'm kinda regretting chipping in on buying one (especially since I'm getting a ton more enjoyment out of my DS) the future does look bright for the 360.

[c0ldb33r]

While I'm kinda regretting chipping in on buying one (especially since I'm getting a ton more enjoyment out of my DS) the future does look bright for the 360.
How many people did you chip in with?

[nik]

Why is this unexpected?

It's not diffrent from any other time... PS1 at launch was just as expensive as XboX 360, I know, I bought one.

I can't remember price of the games however.
I think game prices are bullshit.
Hollywood movies cost the same to make, yet when they retail, they are 25$. Of course this is because of the movie showing... but it still sucks.

[XYXZYZ]

I know the 16 bit days had it's expensive games, I remember paying $70.00 for Street Fighter 2 and I know PSIV was worth a fortune out of the gate. But as I remember, they were exceptions for the most part. But with the 360 I'm talking every game, save one or two, is $59.99. In the 16 bit days the bulk of it was about $40-50, or am I not remembering correctly?

Of course, as it is currently, I really don't have much argument against the 360 prices. I mean, it is the premium system now and it's logical that it's a more expensive deal than the PS2 and Gamecube, etc. (Though I still think the price of the console itself is insane) But it's the future I'm worried about.

I'm sure that in the next couple of years, games will generally be $50-70, what with the production costs going up, inflation, gas, everything else in the world, etc. It's just that I'm kind of shocked at the contrast... I mean, it's jumped rather than gradually moved up there.

Actually, as far as the 360 being a preview of what gaming will cost in the coming years, am I just being pessimistic? Do I have no idea what I'm talking about? x_x

[SirDrexl]

Why is this unexpected?

It's not diffrent from any other time... PS1 at launch was just as expensive as XboX 360, I know, I bought one.

Actually the PS was $299, unless you were comparing the price to the core 360 system.

What people are upset about is that it seemed that $299 or less was the standard price for these things for about 10 years, and suddenly now it's higher (at least for MS and Sony's offerings). People are thinking that the system just can't be succesful if it launches higher than that (see 3DO, Neo*Geo, Saturn, CD-I).

[Putney]

I think I still have my receipt for $76.99 for Street Fighter 2 Turbo SNES from back in '93 or so, so $60 isn't too outrageous.

However, I really don't think these prices are going to stick. If you've noticed, a few of the 360 games, Condemned and Ridge Racer 6 for example, have recently dropped to $50 prices, and as has already been cited, Dynasty Warriors 5 Empires, Top Spin 2, and soon to be Table Tennis have been released at a $40 price point. I really think games aren't selling at the rates that companies would like...check any Gamestop or EB, and you'll see multiple copies of almost every 360 title used. So I bet there's a lot more sales of used vs. new games, which is good for the stores, but bad for the companies.

Remember when the PSP came out most of the games were priced at $50 new. Now, it's mostly just EA and a few other big titles (GTA comes to mind) that are retailing at that price, with a bulk of them at $40 or even $30. So it's just speculation, but I'm guessing that by the end of the summer most games for the 360 are going to come out at $50, with EA and major titles clocking in at $60. Just a guess though :)

[heybtbm]

The Saturn was the same price as the 360 premium ($399.99) when it first came out.

For every pricing "rule" associated with video game consoles or games, you'll find just as many exceptions. Also you're not adjusting prices for inflation.

[chrisbid]

^^^^

wages havent adjusted for inflation either

the difference between now and then, is higher costs in the 16 bit days were for hardware. special carts and chips were expensive to produce. now all your paying for is the bragging rights of playing a game as soon as it comes out. pressing a DVD costs next to nothing, a good chunk of the money spent on current games goes to making up for the losses sony and ms incur on hardware sales. thats what you are really paying for

[Griking]

They're going to charge as much as they can as long as people are still willing to pay for them. If people refuse to pay the price you can be sure that the prices will eventually drop.

[norkusa]

I think I still have my receipt for $76.99 for Street Fighter 2 Turbo SNES from back in '93 or so, so $60 isn't too outrageous.

I bought Street Fighter II for the SNES the weekend it was released (in '92 I think) for $90+ after tax at Babages. Didn't mind paying that much since me and my friends dropped at least $10 each a week at the arcade on it.

Considering the all the work and development time that goes into current-gen games now, $60-$70 for a game doesn't seem that ridiculous. I'm actually surprised that they didn't cost that much 4-5 years ago.

[Bronty-2]

that's true about inflation - I remember my older brother buying a colecovision for the ungodly sum of $250 Cdn back in 83/84. That being said though, the older systems came with a pack in game, two controllers, all cables, etc out of the box. Nowadays buying the console is just the starting point - you need to buy a game, an extra controller, two memory sticks, etc. The cost of being able to play a new next-gen sony or ms game with extra controller, an actual game, etc is probably over 550 or 600 isn't it? (guessing, I haven't bought one and don't intend to).

When you throw around those kinds of #s it's no wonder people get turned off. Especially when they already have perfectly good (if slightly older) predecessor systems at home.

I think ms and sony are really starting to stretch what people are willing to pony up every five years. Bring on the revolution :)

[NE146]

I remember I payed $99 for Phantasy Star on the SMS... but hey.

As far as the console prices now, I think they're just trying to push the envelope and see how much consumers would stand for. Personally, it's all like the 3DO to me. I aint buying it :P

[chrisbid]

I think I still have my receipt for $76.99 for Street Fighter 2 Turbo SNES from back in '93 or so, so $60 isn't too outrageous.

I bought Street Fighter II for the SNES the weekend it was released (in '92 I think) for $90+ after tax at Babages. Didn't mind paying that much since me and my friends dropped at least $10 each a week at the arcade on it.

Considering the all the work and development time that goes into current-gen games now, $60-$70 for a game doesn't seem that ridiculous. I'm actually surprised that they didn't cost that much 4-5 years ago.

its not dev costs, its the licensing. the reason publishers do not make a profit is that more than half of the money they make on the sale of a particular game goes right back to MS/Sony/Nintendo

[blissfulnoise]

Let's be clear here, the 360 games are, currently $39.99 - $59.99 MSRP. Not $70. There are no 360 games released at a 69.99 price point.

First party titles, Microsoft has committed to releasing them at $49.99. Thus the price of Kameo and Perfect Dark Zero out of the gate.

These prices are more to do with the developers than Microsoft specifically. They will charge what the market will bear.

And no one has mentioned the other 16-bit games that routinely released at 69.99 and 74.99. Namely RPGs (Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy III, Earthbound) and cartridges with special features (Virtua Racing, Donkey Kong Country).

So these kinds of prices aren't unprecedented. We were just spoiled on the Saturn and Playstation where compact discs were such a cheap medium that a solidified price point came about. Likewise for DVDs.

That said, I don't see 360 titles keeping this price point. It's hard for gamers to buy, say, The Outfit for $59.99 and just grin and bear it. That said, god help us all as to what Blu-Ray games are going to cost on the PS3. I know it's speculation, but I can't see them coming out for less than $69.99 since the media itself is slated for a $25 MSRP a disc.

[c0ldb33r]

I know it's speculation, but I can't see them coming out for less than $69.99 since the media itself is slated for a $25 MSRP a disc.
Jeebus, why are they so expensive?!? X_x

[YoshiM]

While I'm kinda regretting chipping in on buying one (especially since I'm getting a ton more enjoyment out of my DS) the future does look bright for the 360.
How many people did you chip in with?

I went halvsies.

[Bronty-2]

So these kinds of prices aren't unprecedented. We were just spoiled on the Saturn and Playstation where compact discs were such a cheap medium that a solidified price point came about. Likewise for DVDs.

That said, I don't see 360 titles keeping this price point. It's hard for gamers to buy, say, The Outfit for $59.99 and just grin and bear it. That said, god help us all as to what Blu-Ray games are going to cost on the PS3. I know it's speculation, but I can't see them coming out for less than $69.99 since the media itself is slated for a $25 MSRP a disc.

good points, but honestly... I think consumer willingness to pay those kinds of prices is not what it used to be. After all on an inflation-adjusted basis those snes rpg's were probably $100 a pop. No way would I pay anywhere close to that now for any game unless it's something like guitar hero that comes with a special attachment or something. Just software.... I'm not plunking down more than fifty bucks.

[biggzy]

There's a slight tradeoff going on currently, though. Some "current gen games" (i.e. xbox, ps2) are debuting at $40. Granted, the titles currently at this price point aren't the cream of the crop in my view, but it's fair to say quite a few folks would have paid $50 for the recent EA-produced Godfather and Fight Night R3.

My only point is that there is a little bit of adjusting going on in the opposite direction to some extent. Just a thought.

[whoisKeel]

Weren't new games $50 even in the Atari days? I know my copy of FF3 was $70 at release (few weeks after).

Makes sense to raise the price. You won't see me paying though, I can wait a year for a price drop on a game.

Besides, who's to say that Microsoft won't lower they're prices back to $49.99 when the PS3 is released? That'd be a nice dirty trick.

[jdc]

Blissfulnoise, I'll bet he's talking Canadian pricing. I live in Canada and yep, they're all $69.99 (plus 15% tax on top where I live) with the exception of those "budget" titles, which are $49.99.

Never mind the 360. What I still can't get over is how an "old" system like the PS2 is STILL commanding the price that it IS! $159 for a PS2. THAT'S the thing I'm waiting for a price drop on. I can't believe that they're still that high.

[chrisbid]

atari games were in the 20 dollar range, with the premium titles going for 30 or 35

[nik]

Why is this unexpected?

It's not diffrent from any other time... PS1 at launch was just as expensive as XboX 360, I know, I bought one.

Actually the PS was $299, unless you were comparing the price to the core 360 system.

What people are upset about is that it seemed that $299 or less was the standard price for these things for about 10 years, and suddenly now it's higher (at least for MS and Sony's offerings). People are thinking that the system just can't be succesful if it launches higher than that (see 3DO, Neo*Geo, Saturn, CD-I).

Actually, it was 499 here, I am in canada, although the premium unit has a HD, so that might be the price offset, and our $ was low at the time. Still got the receipt from the system though.


Blissfulnoise, I'll bet he's talking Canadian pricing. I live in Canada and yep, they're all $69.99 (plus 15% tax on top where I live) with the exception of those "budget" titles, which are $49.99.

Never mind the 360. What I still can't get over is how an "old" system like the PS2 is STILL commanding the price that it IS! $159 for a PS2. THAT'S the thing I'm waiting for a price drop on. I can't believe that they're still that high.

I'm in canada as well, I paid 79.99 for Oblivion SE, its really idiotic, aspecially since our $ has really gone up yet the prices are still sitting at the same level they were 5+ years ago.

[le geek]

I think it will be interesting to see how it all shakes out. I can see paying extra to play FNR3, GRAW and Oblivion...but is Tomb Raider Legends (which I want to play BTW) worth $60? And this is just me being hypothetical since I don't have a 360 yet...

And I think PSP games should be $40 tops (not that I have a PSP either). For some reason they should be less than PS2 games in my head...

I rarely buy new games at full retail anyway (Since Fall 2005: We <3 Katamari, Dragon Quest 8, Guitar Hero, Electroplankton, Castlevania: DoS and Suikoden V. Only TWO of them are $50 or over.) Part of it is, you know the games will be cheaper used in a year, particularly the big sellers.

I seem to have no problem paying $60 for import games though (Radilgy, Under Defeat). But I know they won't be cheap and easy to find later...

One nice trend is XBL, particularly arcade. Releasing cheap, fun pick up and play titles with next gen graphics (Marble Blast Ultra, Geometry Wars, etc) is a great move. And adding new content to games isn't a bad idea either, as long as the content is decent and the price is right.

It would be awesome if one of the companies making sports games had the balls to release updated player stats for football or baseball for $10 rather than charging $50 each year...

Anyway, I think what will happen is gaming budgets will stay the same and people will simply buy fewer games. The Zeldas, Metal Gears, HALOs and GTAs will do fine. The niche titles will probably do fine too. But the B games will flop...

Cheers,
Ben

[Iron Draggon]

I paid $100 for Phantasy Star 4 and Virtua Racing for the Genesis on release day. Most RPG's were around $75 back then, and the average game was around $50. So nothing has changed there. I agree that the system prices for all the next gen systems are outrageous though, with the exception of Nintendo's systems. They're still reasonable. Nintendo learned their lesson very well with the N64 and its average price of $75 or more for games. It was too much.

But really, for $300 or more, you should AT LEAST get a pack-in game and TWO controllers. Anything less than that for that price is just BULLSHIT. And anyone who pays that much for less than that is an idiot who just wants to brag.

[blissfulnoise]

But really, for $300 or more, you should AT LEAST get a pack-in game and TWO controllers. Anything less than that for that price is just BULLSHIT. And anyone who pays that much for less than that is an idiot who just wants to brag.

That's a pretty insular and confrontational opinion there. I find it insulting and totally out of touch.

[Fuyukaze]

Honestly I think a good number of you were ripped off on some of your games. I myself only payed more then 50 for a handfull of SNES titles. Games like Chrono Trigger, Civilization, and Ogre Battle being the big names that came to mind. Heck, I got Street Fighter 2 and Street Fighter Alpha 2 for 20$ each less then 4 months after release! When I bought my PS1 less then 6 months after launch, I didnt see a single game that retailed over 50 either. I do know some parts of the country do charge more then retail price for games though. Up in Minnisota where my brother in law's from, he could never find Phantasy Star 1-4 for anything cheaper then 99.99. Also could never find any of the Dragon Warrior games cheaper then the same price. I think region plays the biggest part when they price it because retail companies know just how much they can charge for stuff in any particular regions market.

[blissfulnoise]

Honestly I think a good number of you were ripped off on some of your games.

The prices quoted were the MSRP for the games in question. That's what manufacturer suggests the games be priced at all over the US, sales notwithstanding. Of course retailers reserve the right to mark up prices as they see fit but I've lived all over the country and never been subject to the price gouging you mention.

But more to the point: if you found them at the local KB for cheaper during some sort of sale four months later, than super, you get a gold star, but for those of us who didn't want to wait it out, it doesn't constitute getting "ripped off".

[Slate]

It isn't that bad, the 360 isn't the most expensive system ever, either - $250 per neo geo AES (MVS?) game back in the day, anyone?

[Hep038]

its not dev costs, its the licensing. the reason publishers do not make a profit is that more than half of the money they make on the sale of a particular game goes right back to MS/Sony/Nintendo

So you are saying Dev cost are the same as they were in the 16bit era? I would think that is the one area where the cost has skyrocketed in the past 15 years.

[CYRiX]

See: Inflation

[jdc]

Well, le geek....is the new Tomb Raider worth the higher prices? I'd say that if any 360 game IS worthy, it is indeed Tomb Raider Legends. IMO the game is so highly polished that you can't help but feel that you've gotten every penny's worth. It deserves SOME sort of award at the end of the year, that's for sure.

I'd recommend adding it to your "to buy for certain" list.

[le geek]

Well, le geek....is the new Tomb Raider worth the higher prices? I'd say that if any 360 game IS worthy, it is indeed Tomb Raider Legends. IMO the game is so highly polished that you can't help but feel that you've gotten every penny's worth. It deserves SOME sort of award at the end of the year, that's for sure.

I'd recommend adding it to your "to buy for certain" list.

Cool! 8-)

[heybtbm]

Well, le geek....is the new Tomb Raider worth the higher prices? I'd say that if any 360 game IS worthy, it is indeed Tomb Raider Legends. IMO the game is so highly polished that you can't help but feel that you've gotten every penny's worth. It deserves SOME sort of award at the end of the year, that's for sure.

I'd recommend adding it to your "to buy for certain" list.

The 360 version will be $49.99 next week at Circuit City btw.

[Yago]

I have an old TV Guide with ads for the latest video games and systems. The Atari 2600 was selling for $200 and the Intellividioni was selling for $300. New Atari 2600 games like Defender, were selling for $40.00. So, you really are not seeing that huge of inflation on games. You are talking over 20 years ago. I remember the Kings Quest series on the PC, they sold for $50.00. Again, your not seeing a huge difference. Back in 1978, $200 was A LOT more than $200 is worth today. You are getting alot for your money these days. Games in the Atari 2600 days only had a hand full of people working on each game. Now, you have hundreds of people working on a single game in which case the cost to develop a game is a heck of a lot more. You get my point...

[type_r_97]

Well, if you look at the 360 as a crossover between PC's and consoles I don't think the price is that bad considering I've got nearly $3000 in my PC, which runs oblivion just a hair better than the 360 does :) Honestly though, the only reasons I'm even considering a 360 is for Shenmue 3(supposedly), and the remake of Tengai Makyou Ziria which looks quite nifty. Speaking of PC's, don't know if anyone else on here collects older PC games, mainly stuff from the early CD days but I'd like to find some guys to chat with about that stuff.

[zerohero]

Don't know if this has been said already, but didn't all systems pre saturn ,and psx era come with a game so you could least enjoy it a while before you buy more stuff?

[nate1749]

I wonder how much of the gaming market is purchased by the person actually playing it... Meaning, what % of games sold are bought by parents, etc. vs. the actual gamer (adults who can buy them themselves).

I can justify spending $300-600 on a system and $30-70 on games for myself, but if I had a kid (and I don't) I can't see myself spending anywhere near that type of cash on them for presents. Maybe split that in half.

Nate

[Bronty-2]

Totally agree.

[jdc]

Well, being a dad, my little guy is very lucky to have a wealth of video games and systems to choose from. No worries there. His gamer "career" is set. LOL

I remember in my days of running a shop, parents were so freaking cheap towards their kids when it came to software. They'd blow the farm on a console.....MAYBE a memory card if little Timmy was lucky.....but then the poor kid would have to rent software because there's no way that mom and dad would waste money on games. I can't recall how many inquiries concerning mod chips that I'd get in a typical week when the PSX was king. "Oh we won't buy games. His uncle can burn them for us". The main reason that the Dreamcast sold well for me was because you didn't need to mod it to play burns. Most people didn't give a shit what they played....as long as it was cheap.

Typical scenario of people who can't afford to game.

[zerohero]

Well, being a dad, my little guy is very lucky to have a wealth of video games and systems to choose from. No worries there. His gamer "career" is set. LOL

I remember in my days of running a shop, parents were so freaking cheap towards their kids when it came to software. They'd blow the farm on a console.....MAYBE a memory card if little Timmy was lucky.....but then the poor kid would have to rent software because there's no way that mom and dad would waste money on games. I can't recall how many inquiries concerning mod chips that I'd get in a typical week when the PSX was king. "Oh we won't buy games. His uncle can burn them for us". The main reason that the Dreamcast sold well for me was because you didn't need to mod it to play burns. Most people didn't give a shit what they played....as long as it was cheap.


Ah the good days, I still have burned copy of games. I'll never forget those memories before I got a job my sophmore year in HS.

I was lucky to get games here, and there. I was lucky period to even get my PSX. My friend broke it, I fixed it " by rebalancing the laser", and walla, my very own PSX. I bought another down the line as well.

Wow we are off topic lol.

Typical scenario of people who can't afford to game.

[badinsults]

Welcome to that wonderful concept known as inflation. :p

[Anthony1]

Well, my take on the whole thing is why actually "purchase" a game when you don't have to? Unless you keep your games from the time of purchase, all the way to your grave, then you are paying a fee for having something in your possession for a given time period.


Buying video games for full price, just isn't a very wise investment, from a number of vantage points. First off, few things depreciate as fast as a brand new $59.99 video game. With tax, you are talking roughly $65 smackers. The second you take the shrink wrap off, the value drops to like $45. And as time goes by, the value continues to plummet. And then like 7 or 8 months later, you see that $59.99 game in a $24.99 or $19.99 bargain bin. And that is for a brand spanking new one. Your used copy at that point it only worth like $17 or $22 or so.


The other big factor is the emergence of special rental plans. Renting an individual game, as a one time rental, also doesn't make much logical sense, but if you have a special rental plan, that you pay for monthly, and that allows you to sample a bunch of different games at once and you can swap them as many times as you want, then that changes things. I currently have a rental plan that costs me basically $22 per month, and it allows me to have 6 Xbox 360 games at one time. I can switch as many of those 6 games as often as I want. So I'm basically paying $3.50 to rent a Xbox 360 game for 1 month.


I will normally play a game heavily in it's first 60 days, then sporadically in the next 60 days, and then after that it often finds it's way to the shelf and I really hardly ever play it again at all. So instead of outright purchasing the game, I would rather rent it for 4 months at a price of $3.50. That's $14 to have the game for 4 months, and that works out great for me, cause I really don't play them much after 4 months. There are always new more exciting games coming out, so it's hard to be really loyal to any one title.


There are too many systems, and too many games, that I simply can't get caught up in a cycle of buying new retail games for all these various systems, it would be a very fast path to the poorhouse for me.


Why buy when you can lease?

[nik]

Glad we can rent.

Glad I can buy after renting and judging for myself what is justified costing 60$.