Since when did PC games become $60?

[d/c]

I thought the console games were more expensive due to the fact that some of the money made on each game goes to either Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft, depending on which platform the game is on.

What I don't understand is how they can charge more on an open platform...

[CW]

It's unfair to console gamers because they pay the same amount but get a game that can only be played at low graphics on 1240x1024 resolution. Think about it and you'll be happy that you're paying the same amount as them.

Console gamers don't have to continuously upgrade their consoles to play games the way they were intended though, and they also don't have to put up with shitty console ports.

EDIT: In fact I'll give you an example. Play Fifa 11 on the PS3 or Xbox and then play it on the PC. Half of the content is missing, yet the game was more or less the same price at launch.

[Xodiac]

Well you can't say that there isn't some truth there. Sure not all people that play console games are kids, and there are tons of kids that play PC games as well... but when I can go look up any YouTube video of Halo, Call of Duty, etc and there is always guaranteed to be some 11 year old screaming kid in the video that wont shut up on the mic.

You only find those videos because adults aren't recording each other play video games? Most of the gamers I come across on the ps3 while playing multiplayer are in their 20s and 30s(I am in my 30s). I did not buy many computer games until the last couple years so I cannot contribute to what the prices used to be, but as the old adage says "If people will pay it they will continue to charge it"

[snaek]

Partly the reason I stick to PC games. Here in Norway (or Europe in general, I think) games are way more expensive. Up to $120 on many hyped up new games, which is frankly outrageous. Instead I save money by getting the game "by other means", and if I find the game worth the money I will pay the full price. That way I only support the game studios that are actually good and care about their games.

[Deleted]

If you buy them on the right sites they can drop to 20-30. But they are 60 euro's here in shops as well.

[noremac]

I found this interesting graph: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/ente...ideo-game.html

It shows a somewhat accurate breakdown of how the money made off of game sales is divided among the different areas involved in the distribution of that particular game. Looking at that chart it seems to me that the money devoted to the "platform royalty" could account for the price difference between a console and PC game. For one the PC really isn't a Microsoft platform like something like the Xbox is, where Microsoft developed the whole unit from ground up including both hardware and software. While my PC may be from a manufacturer like HP, Dell, etc. or assembled through parts from different OEM's that are unrelated to Microsoft. The only Microsoft part of the computer is the OS, and even that isn't always the same. I could play a PC game on a Mac using the Mac OS so why should Microsoft get payed for that. It just seems that PC is a neutral platform that no console manufaturer gains royalties from... and that way it keeps it so that Microsoft isn't gaining double royalty payments (one for Xbox and one for PC) for each game that is released.

So either Microsoft has decided to start demanding a platform royalty for PC games or the developers are charging more for their share since that platform royalty isn't there they can bump up the share of each game sale they get without putting the total price of the game above that of current console games.

[Xodiac]

I found this interesting graph: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/ente...ideo-game.html

It shows a somewhat accurate breakdown of how the money made off of game sales is divided among the different areas involved in the distribution of that particular game. Looking at that chart it seems to me that the money devoted to the "platform royalty" could account for the price difference between a console and PC game. For one the PC really isn't a Microsoft platform like something like the Xbox is, where Microsoft developed the whole unit from ground up including both hardware and software. While my PC may be from a manufacturer like HP, Dell, etc. or assembled through parts from different OEM's that are unrelated to Microsoft. The only Microsoft part of the computer is the OS, and even that isn't always the same. I could play a PC game on a Mac using the Mac OS so why should Microsoft get payed for that. It just seems that PC is a neutral platform that no console manufaturer gains royalties from... and that way it keeps it so that Microsoft isn't gaining double royalty payments (one for Xbox and one for PC) for each game that is released.

So either Microsoft has decided to start demanding a platform royalty for PC games or the developers are charging more for their share since that platform royalty isn't there they can bump up the share of each game sale they get without putting the total price of the game above that of current console games.

As Ewhenn posted on the first page of this thread,
"Since the gaming companies got greedier.

MS / Sony charge the developers ~$10 in licensing to put a game on their console. PC's didn't have this extra cost, so the game was $10 cheaper. The gaming companies then got greedy, and decided to just keep the $10 for themselves. It was a big F-U to the PC gamers

Since that point I only buy games when they hit the $20-30 mark. That's my big F-U back to them."

A little slow are we? If you were a developer and your game was forced to be $10 more on console, yet PC gamers were eating up the game too, wouldn't you just bake that $10 in? If the console gamers are willing to pony it up, so should the pc gamers realistically.

[ewhenn]

A little slow are we? If you were a developer and your game was forced to be $10 more on console, yet PC gamers were eating up the game too, wouldn't you just bake that $10 in? If the console gamers are willing to pony it up, so should the pc gamers realistically.

Why should I have to pony up another $10? There are *no* licensing fees to put a game on the PC, that's my point. If there was a PC licensing fee, then I'd understand the need to recoup it as part of the cost of making the game. They have some balls to try and charge me a fee to recoup a licensing cost that they don't have, hence why I only buy games at discount now instead of retail launch. By being greedy, they are actually losing money, instead of me buying games at $49.99 launch, I buy them at $29.99 a month or two later. Trying to charge me a licensing fee for a PC game would be like your water utility charging you an airline luggage fee.

What do airline fees have to do with water delivery? Nothing.

What do console fees have to do with PC games? Nothing.

If everyone started buying PC games at $49.99 compared to console games at $59.99, the game studios / publishers would make the same amount of money. The loser would be Sony / MS / Nintendo since they wouldn't get the licensing fee. What does Sony do outside of give the developer a platform? Nothing. Since I'm providing my own platform (my PC), the developer doesn't have that cost, so it was never tacked on to the price of the games, and this was fair. Now they want me to provide my platform, and pay them extra for it? They can F-off. This is why I'm saying it's the studios being greedy.

[noremac]

Why should I have to pony up another $10? There are *no* licensing fees to put a game on the PC, that's my point. If there was a PC licensing fee, then I'd understand the need to recoup it as part of the cost of making the game. They have some balls to try and charge me a fee to recoup a licensing cost that they don't have, hence why I only buy games at discount now instead of retail launch. By being greedy, they are actually losing money, instead of me buying games at $49.99 launch, I buy them at $29.99 a month or two later. Trying to charge me a licensing fee for a PC game would be like your water utility charging you an airline luggage fee.

What do airline fees have to do with water delivery? Nothing.

What do console fees have to do with PC games? Nothing.

Well they will continue to do it now that they have seen it's success with games like the later CoD releases and BC2 and BF3 soon to come. The problem is everyone wants these big anticipated games when the come out. Like Diablo 3 for instance is going to be $60 but I am sure nearly everyone interested in playing it is going to buy it as close to the release date as it is available to them. There will surely be enough people to buy Diablo 3, ToR, BF3, etc when they launch to keep the producers reassured that using this marketing strategy is going to yield them more profits.

I just think it is really lame that a single game being released for that higher price sparked a trend that will now probably continue from this point on...

[Deleted]

the same thing as with music, "music gets more expensive cause of illegal copys" " people steal music cause it is too expensive" they raise the prices cause they have to account for the "loss" on the ilegal copys(doenst matter that atleast 80% of the stolen games would never have been bought so its only a theoretical loss and not a direct one).
I would have no problem with paying the higher price for a game though, since developling got more expensive aswell, what i have a problem with is, that we dont get full games anymore and get most of the things which would have been patches in the last 4 years as dlc .
but there is one thing i never understand, why are digital copys as expensive as a physical copys? they save the transport, the wrapping, possible artbooks/gamemanual(which got way worse with the time, just remeber back at the empire earth manual and compare it to todays manuals), the manufacturing costs and just have to pay for the bandwith to let you download the game.

[Xodiac]

I agree Ewhenn, but again they saw people buying their games at a higher price on the consoles and I am sure they always believed they could charge 10 more for the pc version and get people to still pay it. Then some one did, and the consumers paid for it. And now more and more big releases will come out with those price tags. I don't agree with it, I don't like it. But honestly I normally buy the games on my consoles anyways, so either way I am paying the same amount of money for the same game whichever way I go now.

Although lately with money being tighter I often wait for game of the year versions to try and get a much better deal.

ps the little slow thing was directed at the op posting the same damn thing you did, just much later and with too many words.

[noremac]

ps the little slow thing was directed at the op posting the same damn thing you did, just much later and with too many words.

I saw his post I just take everything I read on a forum with a grain of salt unless the person posted a reputable source. What he said made sense to me but since I am no expert in marketing video games (and he might not be either I have no idea) I found and posted a source which backed up what he said along with what I gained by reading it for anyone else who was interested in this discussion.

And too many words? I understand this is a forum on the internet, and not a 300 page novel, but everything in life involves reading more than a sentence at a time... sometimes multiple paragraphs, and I tend to find it disrespectful when people feel the need just to post that they didn't read my post because it was too many words.

[Xodiac]

I read it, and I already honestly knew it having been a console gamer for most of my adult life. However he said what you said in 1-2 sentences. Which you could have done with a link for interested parties to check your source.

Just saying. I love long posts, just(and its just my opinion) it wasn't needed there. So the moral of the story? Big time distributors(usually not the developers) are extremely greedy, and we continue to endorse that greed buy buying their games at full price. So if you truly hate the distributors, buy second hand.

[noremac]

I read it, and I already honestly knew it having been a console gamer for most of my adult life. However he said what you said in 1-2 sentences. Which you could have done with a link for interested parties to check your source.

Just saying. I love long posts, just(and its just my opinion) it wasn't needed there. So the moral of the story? Big time distributors(usually not the developers) are extremely greedy, and we continue to endorse that greed buy buying their games at full price. So if you truly hate the distributors, buy second hand.

Yeah with FPS type games it is easy to wait to buy it because it really doesn't matter when you start playing. You could get the game 6 months later and you would be on even footing with everyone else in terms of actual progress in the game since in a multiplayer FPS there really is no "progress" apart from the campaign but I am sure nobody buys CoD or BF games just to play single player.

The problem is with the design with games like ToR and Diablo you are almost forced to buy them ASAP or you will be burdened with playing catch-up with all your friends and other players. It would be like waiting for 6 months to buy the next WoW expansion and then come in to the game where everyone is already level capped, cleared all PvE content, and have high level arena rankings. Then you come in with no gear, no experience, and it just sucks trying to catch up with everyone.