FairPlay: Action for Cheaper Games!!!

[Subject452]

Plz read the following:

 

 

Personally i would rather pay 20 bucks instead of 40/50 bucks for a game, if it is possible. I'm gonna support this campaign, how about you?

 

Check out the site here: http://www.fairplay-campaign.co.uk/

 

[Kstar__2]

good idea

 

the games industry IS a rip off, just as the music industry

 

however, they didn't take the payment for the people that made the games in the 40p

[acdcfanbill]

its a really nice thought, though i doubt it will help.

[Takeoffyouhoser]

First off, the music industry.. the only rip-off is the major labels and Sh*tty bands that mainstream media plays. there's tons of great music out there..

 

In terms of cd prices, don't buy them at the mall !!

 

Here's a few sites you can order online and save big..

 

This site is the best! all cd's are priced including first class shipping. takes about 2 days top to get em too

http://cheap-cds.com/surf/home

 

Never got anything from this site, but heard great things about it.

http://www.deepdiscountcd.com

 

The last cd i bought in a store was about 3 months ago, my last 15-20 were bought online.

 

 

to the video game prices...

i paid 65 bucks for the collector's edition of JO and would definatly pay it again... Besides, i bet the game 3 weeks after i bought it, and have been mapping it since. I got more than my money's worth.

[Subject452]

*BUMP*

[StormHammer]

Sorry, but I largely disagree with that poster/ad/thing* (*delete as appropriate).

 

I've heard so many arguments about game prices, and yes, I've no doubt that some are fixed, and sometimes you pay a bit more - but the price seems fair when you realise the actual cost of production. Sure, it probably costs 40p to burn a disk...but that discounts all of the hard work that goes into the development of a game, which could be over a few years. I can't say a great deal about console games (yet - though my son's getting a PS2 for Xmas - sssshhhh! *puts finger to lips*), but in terms of PC games, I can see why they're priced the way they are.

 

With the average game now costing between $1-5 million to develop (and some considerably more - we're now starting to talk Hollywood film budgets as games become more complex and realistic with ever-flashier effects), and the additional costs of distribution and marketing, and sales never totally assured, it seems reasonable to me to ask for $50 (or in the UK, around £30) per game.

 

If you have a best-seller on your hands, which suddenly starts selling a million copies, then sure, it would make sense to reduce the cost of the game to the end consumer. I get annoyed myself when I see a game doing really well, and the price never comes down. Unfortunately, those are the exceptions rather than the rule. A study done a year or so ago (can't remember where I read it, so don't ask for a link) suggested shifting 50,000 units of a PC title was doing extremely well, with a lot of titles falling below this mark. Say a game costs $2 million to develop over 3 years (you know, you have to pay your staff a reasonable wage, and all those other office expenses, which unfortunately add up), and you manage to sell 50,000 units...then in order to break even, you need to charge $40 per game. You want a profit...i.e., some cash to start development on the next game your fans demand...then you need to charge considerably more. You can't survive on fresh air for 2-3 years - you need financial backing, and it's better when you can stump up the cash yourself, which can give you a bit of breathing space, rather than rely on funding from elsewhere.

 

A case in point is Westka Interactive, which just went bankrupt halfway through producing The Y-Porject. I was really looking forward to that game, but they couldn't secure additional finance, so down the tubes they go.

 

I suppose that in terms of consoles, you might expect higher sales, so the end cost to the consumer should be proportionally lower. I have noticed that console titles are invariably more expensive than their PC counterparts - so definitely something should be done to reduce costs to a more acceptable level - but the notion that you should only pay 40p for a game is a bit far-fetched. Using the same example as above, you would have to shift a minimum of 5 million units just to break even, and that doesn't sound like good business sense unless you've managed to brainwash an extremely large proportion of the gaming community into buying your product.

 

If we're saying that a console version of a title can sell twice as much as the PC version, then cut the price the consumer pays in half, by all means. But if you sell every game for a dollar or less, don't expect many developers to remain in business, and therefore don't expect any quality titles to hit the gamestore shelves.

 

Of course, that's just my opinion, based on conjecture and common business practice, and subject to change without notice. All warranties are void if this post remains unread.

[Agen]

i doubt it will work but i hope it does.

 

Now i've seen stormie's post and it's reminded me of an article i saw in pcz a while ago. It does have to pay their wages, some goes to royalties, some goes to the manufacturing, but thne it has tyo pay a bit of the people who used the manufacturing machines etc.