Well, I''m happy to continue selling games for under £20 each.

If people want to boycott $50 games and see more $20 games on shelves, that sounds good to me. Of course, our $20 games have budgets measured in $thousands, not $millions.


Steve Pavlina
Dexterity Software
www.dexterity.com
"Boredom''s Greatest Enemy"
-------------------------------------------------------
Earn $1000 - $10,000 USD per month in royalties when we publish your next game. See developer.dexterity.com for details.

This is like those gas boycotts where everybody doesn''t get gas on one day of the week. Well, obviously people are just getting gas the day before or after. What would work is boycotting a single brand of gasoline.

If you want to flex your consumer power, don''t buy games that are too expensive. Wait for the prices to come down. If games are two expensive they won''t move. Obviously if they''re able to move the newest thang at $60 a pop, people are willing to pay that, therefore it is not too expensive. It''s kinda like a truism, but I think there''s a Latin term for this (something like the truth presents itself--I can never remember these things).

But my bicycle only cost $100! Why does a new car cost $10,000 or more?

Anyway, I do think that Play Fair is making a valid point when it comes to games.
Music and movies cost a lot to get them to the store (production, marketing, etc). They sell between $5-$20. They have lots of hits. They make their money.

Games cost comparatively as much to do the same. They somehow cost between $40-$60 when newly released.

For console games where there is a licensing fee, I can understand them being a little more expensive...
But why can''t they be $20? Or even $10?

Does anyone have stats on the $10 games that do exist? Most stores have that section where the "1000 Best Windows Games Ever" and "game demos you pay for" exist. Anyone know if they make money?

Still, Fair Play makes a good argument. I have seen the breakdown of prices for games in PC Gamer and such, and they always include development costs and piracy.
So basically I am paying for the cost to develop the game, which is fine since someone has to, but I am also paying for the games that people pirate? So who is getting punished there?
And I find it hard to believe that Quake III Arena and Starcraft and such are still making money when it is perfectly possible to crack your own copy IF piracy was really causing that much damage to revenues.

They are not punishing you by making you pay for piracy losses. They are trying to keep themsleves in business.

I''ll tell you why games cost $50... It''s my fault. As a professional developer in a well known company, I need to get a paycheck every two weeks. And it''s not just me. There are a couple hundred at my company in the same situation. Take this, plus money for buildings, insurance, etc etc, don''t forget how much corporate profits are taxed by the government, etc etc...

quote: Original post by Stoffel
This is like those gas boycotts where everybody doesn''t get gas on one day of the week. Well, obviously people are just getting gas the day before or after. What would work is boycotting a single brand of gasoline.

If you want to flex your consumer power, don''t buy games that are too expensive. Wait for the prices to come down. If games are two expensive they won''t move. Obviously if they''re able to move the newest thang at $60 a pop, people are willing to pay that, therefore it is not too expensive. It''s kinda like a truism, but I think there''s a Latin term for this (something like the truth presents itself--I can never remember these things).

That is what I do. And to think I have been feeling guilty about paying after the prices drop.

I bought Starcraft and Brood Wars for $7 the day of a sale. That was half price of $14 because of the sale. The game came out a long time before clearly, but still.
I bought Black and White for $40 when it was regular price at $50.
I bought AvP for $5 and AvP2 for $10 at Microcenter.
I bought The Moon Project for $5.
In one day I bought Daikatana, Railroad Tycoon 2 for Linux, and Myth 2 for Linxu each for $5-$7.

I bought 3 games a time for these great prices usually.
I like paying $10-$30 for a game. I buy more games that way.

About piracy and the cost "factored in"... EVERYTHING that you buy has the "piracy/theft" included. When you buy milk at the store it has the .2% (or whatever it is) markup to pay for the ones that are stolen. So if you don''t like paying for somthing that somone else got for free don''t buy anything... And the point about movies you can''t compare them because when they get out to the consumer to buy they have allready made most of their money in the theatre and movie stores and merchentising <sp> so they can be cheap (compare it to a game that has allready been out for a year, it has allready made most of it''s money so it''s price drops). The point is if you are willing to pay $60 for the game it will sell at that. Big companies always sell as high as they can with the most sales so they can get the maximum money. Case in point I used to work at a "discount" place that had their furnature "lower then the rest" It was for the most part cheaper then most of the competition and it was still 100% marked up. Ok enough typing basically what I want to say is this comanies will sell for the most money 80% (I don''t know if this is a real figure it is just an example) of the consumers will pay for the game so if you want prices to drop do two things. First wait till the price drops then buy it eventually the companies will get the point and when a game comes out it will start to sell at the price you want. Or you can stop demanding such high quality games so the producers of the game can save the costs of say 1 hour of cg. So really the only choice is wait for the price to lower to the rate you are willing to pay. Because I for one LOVE the cg :D

quote: Original post by GBGames
[SNIP]
Music and movies cost a lot to get them to the store (production, marketing, etc). They sell between $5-$20. They have lots of hits. They make their money.

Games cost comparatively as much to do the same. They somehow cost between $40-$60 when newly released.

For console games where there is a licensing fee, I can understand them being a little more expensive...
But why can''t they be $20? Or even $10?
[SNIP]

Geez, have you guys never worked in the games industry?

Movies are very similar to games as far as dev costs to profits recouped ratios are concerned. The movie industry is very similar to the games industry in almost all respects, including the proportions of costs to sales. Music however is dirt cheap to get to market by comparison to computer games. Do you know how much most games cost to make by comparison to music? Most computer games do not break even. Let me say that again: MOST COMPUTER GAMES DO NOT BREAK EVEN. Ask yourself why. That''s right, the sale price of games is too low in relation to the number of units sold and the development/publishing costs you have to recoup.

And it isn''t a ''licensing fee'' on console games. FrEx Nintendo want all the cash up front in advance for all the GBA carts for your game. So before you start developing your GBA game that''s due out in 6 months'' time, you have to front the cash, pure and simple. Its not like you pay them out of the profits. You''re lucky to ever see any profits. Try guessing how many cartridges you are going to sell next year. Then try having the money so you can pay Nintendo. Then try surviving for a year or more until you might get some of that money back.

You can understand console games being ''a little more expensive''? That''s interesting considering Sony charge developers and publishers ''a lot more expensive''. How can I sell a game for $10 when that doesn''t cover what I had to pay Sony per unit?

Games are only as expensive as they are because the consumer (that''s you and me) demand it. We demand the best graphics, best sound, best gameplay, on continually changing and increasingly difficult to develop for cutting edge technology - who do you think pays for this to happen, and how?

The industry is an ugly place to work, if you''ve ever done so, you''ll know what I''m talking about. Its a pity that more companies don''t make a profit and survive, or we might see better games made by happier people.

quote: Original post by Anonymous Poster
And the point about movies you can''t compare them because when they get out to the consumer to buy they have allready made most of their money in the theatre and movie stores and merchentising so they can be cheap (compare it to a game that has allready been out for a year, it has allready made most of it''s money so it''s price drops).

I think I can make the point about movies.
It costs $8 at my local theater to see any movie there, whether new or out for a few weeks.

A new game out for a year is still $30 at least. Not all movies have merchandising arrangements. They still cost $8.

I totally agree with what tls284 said.

Games are not too expensiv. --- Although, they used to be ... We had to pay about 120.00 dollars (cad) to get X-Wing vs. Tie fighter when it came out and I typically spent $90.00 or so to purchase a new game just a few years ago (around 1995).
Now everything is sold for around $60.00 bucks at future shop!

As for what Michalson said:
"guess you''ve never worked in retail (I''ve been an admin handling monthly supplier pricelists, which meant adjusting markups on merchandise). A 50% markup is the norm (in fact many items are normally much higher..."

That kind of markup is a complete ripoff - and isnt typical with all types sales.

I worked for a computer reseller for years and handled countless price lists from major suppliers (same people stores like future shop buy from)

Computer parts are NOT marked up that much - the most people ever mark electronics type equipment up is around 15%. The same thing seems to go for all ''big ticket'' sorts of items. Any more and noone will buy the damn stuff. (you probobly work selling clothing judging by your opinions about retail ;P).