It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
mobutu: It wasn't the companies that "devalued games", it was the market. Do you really think these companies want to "devalue" (charge less) their products? Nah, they would be happy charging more if they could get it but fortunately the market doesn't let them do it.
This a sign of a healthy competing market and this is a good thing for us, the consumers. Getting cheaper games is very good and its a normal thing and we dont have to be "grateful" for it.
avatar
StingingVelvet: It didn't get like this until digital came along and was seen as "free money" because you didn't pack and ship anything. It's a somewhat recent development to have a new $60 game routinely be half that price in a couple months.

And since a few people responded this way, let me say: I'm not saying it's a bad thing. What I am saying is I wonder if they will regret it, for a variety of reasons. If it ever gets to the point where the majority are waiting for a sale on games they normally would have bought full price, well, that's a tricky thing. Also most indies are finding it hard, even on PC, to charge more than $20 on release and see any sales. This has been debated on business focused sites like Gamasutra with more than a few indie devs wondering if they're truly better off getting most of their sales at the $5 level.

It's a debate with no clear answers.
Of course there's an answer. Just start selling DLC packs for 70 bucks a pop. Then when a customer buys all that DLC garbage, you give them the actual game along with it for FREE. Problem solved.
avatar
babark: I'm probably not the right person to complain about specific game prices, because I personally feel the entire game pricing system is messed up.
I would very much be interested in seeing a breakdown of the cost of making a game. Somehow I'm not sure I'd take it on faith that games of a similar level cost much more to make now than they did back then. From what I read, it really does seem like the vast majority of the cost goes towards advertising and promotion, which I really find stupid.

And how you mentioned that the game prices have remained constant despite the fact that we no longer get a physical disc, a manual, or a box. Just some files added to our account on whatever distribution system.

Game launch prices to me simply seem like a desperation tax, which again annoys me. I've never in my entire life spent $60/$50 on a launch-time game (or on a single game at all).

In the case of Icewind Dale's Enhanced Edition, I suppose the problem is backwards. The original game (such as still available here) is priced higher than it should be, meaning they had to charge more than that for the EE.
The cost of creating games today is VASTLY more expensive than it was back in the day. Back in the day, games were made by small teams of people, usually anywhere from 2-5 people, and it required very little overhead or investment. All you needed were the computers. Today is a whole different ball game. Most game developers opt to use game engines as opposed to having to design the game from the ground up. Buying the rights to use those engines is not cheap, especially if you opt for the top of the line engine with customer support. Some examples include the Unreal engine, cry engine 4, Unity 5, Frostbite 3 and the Fox Engine . These engines save a LOT of time, but they can also add to the overall cost of the game significantly.

Games made today are made by much larger teams, require FAR more equipment, are much larger in size and far more complex, require significantly more development times etc. Basically games today are just VASTLY more expensive to produce than the games we played back in the day. Plus game companies back in the day didn't have to worry about advertising and marketing costs like the game companies today as there simply wasn't anywhere near the level of competition in the marketplace that exists today. If you don't market your game properly today, there is a good chance it will not be financially successful. So while you may deem such costs separate from the actual costs of producing the game itself, they are still investments that need to be made if you want your game to be successful, thus they have to be included in any real discussion on the cost of producing games.

I can't even tell you how many times I have seen posts on IMDB that basically rip on the movie studios for spending so much on marketing and advertising costs. What those people fail to realize is that with most of those films, the movie studio wound up making significantly more money in the long run by spending that much on marketing. They spent 100+ million, but that marketing brought in another 200-300 million in ticket sales. You have to spend money to make money. Its the same mindset behind companies spending a lot of money sending out a crap load of catalogs during the holiday season. They can spend a lot of money sending those out, but its worth it as it brings in a lot more money than was actually spent. Its the same with gaming. The more you can get your game out there for people to see, wether it be on covers of gaming magazines, commercials, adds in magazines, etc., the better the chances that people will buy it when its actually released. So again, marketing and advertising costs are a necessary part of the gaming industry these days and those costs must be included in the overall cost of developing a game. No offense, but anyone that deems such costs questionable or stupid simply doesn't understand the world of business very well at all. There are countless examples of games released over the last 15+ years that sold extremely poorly due to terrible marketing. Bottom line - its a necessary cost in the gaming market today, at least with major retail releases, and to risk releasing a game without properly investing in advertising and marketing is extremely risky and ultimately downright stupid.
Post edited December 18, 2014 by RighteousNixon