We've all gotten used to games costing $60 these days, but is there any going back? EA Canada senior producer Jason DeLong ruminates on video game pricing in 2010.
We talked to DeLong about what he thinks might happen to the video game industry in 2010 and beyond, and he told us that he thinks reduced software pricing is in the cards. "I think that we’re going to start to see – maybe not in the next year, but in the near future – games go down the route of smaller up-front experiences and lower prices at the beginning," he told us, "and then the ability to extend the game through episodic material or future feature material. I think that’s a direction we’re probably heading in."
DeLong also said that apart from being a good thing for consumers, cheaper software pricing is a shrewd move for companies as well. "Games are getting more expensive, and times are tough, and it’s getting harder to purchase every game you want. So, how can we keep people playing and offer them more but not have to make them break the bank to do it? It’s going to be an interesting creative problem for us to solve."
For more on what Jason DeLong and others in the industry think may happen in 2010, be sure to check out our Connect feature in the February issue (#202) entitled, "The Road Ahead: Experts & Insiders Look Ahead at 2010".
Only 60$ for PS3 and 360. And a lot of gamers don't have either of those, so you can't say that all gamers are used to paying 60 bucks for games.
(Also, first?) =o
There's absolutely no way that's doubletalk for "lower out-of-box prices slightly, charge people more for content that should have come with the package".
And then the games will be half baked and almost forcing people to buy the no doubt expensive content.
Price drop: Good.
Half-baked games with DLC to make up for the lack of quality: Bad.
I'm all for paying less, obviously. But I'm not going to buy a game if I know beforehand that I'll have to buy more DLC to make it worth playing than I payed for it originally.
P.C. Gamers have already have a cheaper entry point for games, it's called Steam. I don't want a neutered game experience, to be forced into buying DLC just to get the remainder of the story. F'n retards.
we have already started to see this trend with DLC's and smaller games (iphone games)..
P.C. gamers already have a "cheaper entry point" for games, it's called Steam. Who wants a neutered game experience, only to be forced into buying episodic DLC to get the remainder of the story...f'n retards.
So you charge us $30-$40 upfront, than do $40 of DLC. Does this make sense to anybody?
This is a good and a bad thing. They'll cost less, but we could get sucky games with DLC. I'd pay for the DLC to get a better game.
There is one problem with this that I see, and that is that he said we would pay less up front, and they would focus more on DLC. That means that we will have to first get the 30$ game and then download all of the fun stuff. I am all gung-ho about game prices dropping as well as more dlc for games, but I get the feeling that when this starts out, we will stop paying for game extensions and start paying for the actual game in dlc. Further more I think that we should look ahead and think if we really want game developers to get it into their heads that we want to have cheaper games. Recall all of the cover games that came out after gears, while some were good most others were terrible. They will try to do the exact same thing with this and sacrifice quality for the price of the game. The final point that i would like to make is that I want to buy a game, a full game when I get the disk. No "yes well here is a level that you didn't get with the game and that will be an additional 15 bucks, however to play it you need to first get the 30 dollar game mode that it takes place in as well as..." it is okay to add on to games but I would really hate it if I had to spend more money on a game that cost me 60 dollars. And besides if game developers are still using the mechanics shown up top how much money do they really need?
If they do decide to drop prices, expect lower quality and less actual content... More patches and less open worlds. The thing is, the good games are still going to be more expensive because the process of creating a game, which takes years, is expensive. Millions of dollars are spent by developers to create games that will sell, dropping the price is only going shorten that process and games will suffer.
Don't get me wrong, a price drop would be nice, but I don't expect to see companies sacrificing their profits to make their products cheaper, at least not without sacrificing something else in turn. The gaming industry has basically colluded with each other in an unofficial fashion to keep the very very vast majority of games releasing at that $60 price mark.
If this starts and a price war begins in the gaming industry no one will actually pay less. Instead gamers will be getting bare bones games. If this happens I would expect gamers to have to start paying for things like Multiplayer and Sidequests, maybe even Co-Op functionality. They're gonna get their money either way, whether they actually give you the content on the disc or you have to download it later.
Please God in heaven make things cheap again
All it takes is 4 map packs and that $60 game is now $100. Kinda like that five dollar foot-long that now has half the meat. You can add extra meat for $1.79, and now Sub-Way is making MORE on that sandwich than they were before.
lol awesome. Sounds good. Wii games are (for the most part) kidna already there, but PS3 and 360 should catch up on that. Some people might not get it, but the difference between $40 or $50 compared to $60 is a lot for people who actually have jobs and buy their own *** (aka Adults). Especially guys like me with fairly low paying jobs :(
Thats cool but now your going to get half a** games. Only if they are still dedicated and want to show their customers that they can still do the job with that price cut would be even better. GoW 4 for 45-50 bucks =greatness but I only can dream.
I don't see what the problem anyone try to buy Street Fighter Alpha 2 when it was released on the SNES? $100. It took them long enough to make a trend in game prices since before that any price was up for grabs.
yeah the $60 game prices make it difficult to buy games for my ps3 when i could go for a wii game costing $50
Okay, you guys need to leave the Wii out of this discussion. A) This article is obviously not directed towards that system, and B) The vast majority of Wii games are HORRIBLE. All Caps HORRIBLE. The only people who make good games for the Wii are those at Nintendo. The Wii only serves to perpetuate the argument that cheaper games would mean less quality. I would personally hedge my bet on less game for you money however.
I agree with Jack Holderman. It would be nice to see a drop in prices for video games. If you really think about it, you will be losing some content and the graphics may not be that great anymore. I already don't buy games that don't have a high replay value or one that doesn't have multiplayer in it. A cut in prices will only allow more games to come out with no replay value and no multiplayer unless you pay for it later. This idea is just dumb.
I can see the EA business model now. Pay $50 for Madden ($10 savings! the ads will scream). Pay $1 to put air in the ball. Pay $1 for referees. Pay $1 for cleats. Pay $1 for roster updates. And so on.
Now if only we could pay $1 for Favre to actually stay retired after this season...