Games are too expensive. In this cost conscious economy, the fact that most games start at a $59.99 MSRP is laughable. Game publishers aren't thinking clearly at the moment, and are blinded in a struggle for high metacritic scores. If the game does well, what does it matter what the score is? Review scores are a large part of this issue, and are completely useless to me. Sure, at sixty dollars, it's clear that some sort of reviewing system has a place in determining the quality from the piss poor. The inherent problem is that $60 dollar price tag.
I'm a cost conscious buyer, and I'm constantly searching for the best deals. Full disclosure, I'm an absolute huge fan of Cheap Ass Gamer and I use it religiously. Because of this, I don't see games in terms of scores. I don't see Dark Void as a 59 on Metacritic, because that doesn't mean anything to me. Instead, I see it as a $10 purchase, maybe even $20 if that had been the starting MSRP.
After I read the reviews for Mirror's Edge, I knew that wasn't a $60 game. It's only 6-7 hours long, and has very little replay value. It's a fun and quality title, and I'm glad I picked it up at $30. I can't even fathom paying $60 for that game; the thought of it is just ridiculous.
Publishers do mock reviews. They hire journalists to come in and review the game for them to garner an expectation for that the actual reviews might look like. They should instead use this system to figure out a good price point to launch the game at. I'm positive that a lot of games could easily triple their final revenue streams by releasing at a lower MSRP out of the gate.
Go digital already! I love to collect games. I love game cases and am slightly irked by the uncertain future of my entire digital library, but that doesn't stop me from dropping more money than I should on the ridiculous Steam sales that Valve is always putting on. Console publishers could take a few cues from Steam with their digital marketplaces, because these sales generate a crazy amount of money with virtually no overhead. Publishers also need to realize when it's fine to box a product and when digital is the way to go.
Besides the lack of sales and promotions, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo also have some pricing issues they need to work out soon. Just as some games aren't worth $60, other games aren't even worth $15. It certainly doesn't do publishers or consumers any favors that these services have fixed price levels and Microsoft and Nintendo have annoying carnival ticket currency. Variable pricing helps everyone. It gives publishers more room to explore price points for their games allowing for greater sales. Consumers get more games for less and arguably a better experience.
Lastly, high prices are still keeping video games from going more mainstream. Obviously, some people are very defensive about the industry and don't want these new gamers, but like it or not, these new gamers are what pay for our bigger and better games. In a world with twice as many gamers, Alan Wake might have gotten that sequel you wanted. The barrier to entry for console gaming is high, and it's time publishers realized that and make some serious changes.
I'm a comedian, writer, electrical engineer, and all around awesome person! Follow me Twitter at @CWDavidson
Joystiq actually discussed this same predicament on their podcast.
I completely agree with you. With Red Dead Redemption releasing alongside Alan Wake, it would have been much more beneficial for Alan Wake to have had a $40 price point. I think the sales would have been much better.
I agree with you, as I believe any gamer who buys more than one game a month would, but that's the industry for you. Its a predicament that has been discussed from a gamer's point of view, but I haven't seen it written or spoken about from a business point of view. The price of production of games is going up and up with HD and having to tack on multiplayer so your game isn't thrown into the nearest Gamestop's Used Pile too soon. All of that keeps the prices at the price point that its at, and unfortunately, that's not going to change over night.
Companies set their prices that high so they can at least break even, whether that's the retailer or the publisher setting the RRP. Without that price, they would have to produce and ship more copies, pray that people would buy those copies that are at a lower price point, and pray even harder that they would even come close to breaking even.
I love digital, but I think that a few triple A titles could go lower and sell more to recoup costs as well once it is first release as an offer before price goes up to standard price of 59.99 ... So that way there is a reason to buy new over used down the road.
Where I come from (Asia - SIngapore), games have always been expensive. In fact, game prices have dropped marginally with each successive console generation. It was common to pay over S$100 (approx. USD$60-70) for a single SNES game. In comparison, a newly-released PS3 game goes for S$70-80 (USD$50) on average.
Here in Australia new games typically retail for $100 AUD (approx USD$90), and sometimes slightly more. So quit complaining - it could be much worse :p (Thank god for imports and region-free consoles.)
@Richard For me personally, it doesn't matter too much. I'm a deal hunter, so I know how to get all my games at the price I want anyway. I was just trying to argue that publishers could possibly make more money by experimenting with more price points, and more people could buy and enjoy video games if it wasn't so ridiculously expensive. The high price point is a giant red flag at our lack of maturity as an industry.
@Micheal Justin from Joystiq stands firmly on the other side of this argument. He doesn't care about game prices, but figures if a game is worth playing we should buy it at any price. I respect his opinion, but not every game is going to be a 90+ on Metacritic, and that doesn't mean no one should play it.
@Stephen It's a gamble because very few games have taken the risk already. There's no data to run off of. I think more companies should start taking risks with some lower budget games and work from there, and just take baby steps for now. I'm not asking for this to change over night, but I would like to see more than 2 companies consider the possibility that $60 MSRP is not the be all end all.