Was it the Chicken? Or was it the Egg? Is it the High Game Prices? Or is it the Lost Revenue to Pirates?


When it comes to the prices of video games, I think most would agree that the old standard price of $49.99 for new games is a little bit of a stretch. The price of $49.99 is left over from the old cartridge days when there was actually a "real" physical cost to the item. They simply have kept that $49.99 price, because people are used to paying $49.99 for games, and they continue to do so. Just like it was with music CD's. When CD's first appeared, to get a new CD was going to cost you $19.99 or $18.99 or $17.99 or more. People gladly payed the money, because they thought that CD's were this technological wonder, and that they must cost more to produce than a Vinyl record. Little did they know that Cd's only cost pennies to stamp.

So just because somebody charges something, and get's that price, doesn't necessarily mean that the item is actually worth that much.


Then you get to the Pirates. Most will say that prices of games are simply out of control, and that so much crap is released, and say that if games were priced the way they should be, that they would have no need to steal the intelectual property.

The pirates say that because of the high prices, they have been forced to pirate the material that they love. The Publishers say that because of all the lost revenue to the piracy that they have to charge a price that is higher than it needs to be. But because of this rampant piracy and these loss of revenues, they are forced to price their games higher then they would prefer to.

So, it's kind of like this chicken and egg scenario. Which came first? The High Prices, or the Piracy?