View Full Version : PS3 games price? Kaz Hirai remains vague
Interesting, if not a bit worring, is Kaz Hirai answer on the subject during an interview, due to appearing in the August issue of PSM.
PSM: Can we expect PS3 games to be priced in the same range as Xbox 360 titles?
KH: Generally Speaking, over the past twelve years or so, there has been a consumer expectation that disc-based games are maybe $59 on the high end to $39 on the low end. So, what I can say now is, I think it would be a bit of a stretch to think that we could suddenly turn around and say "PS3 Games now $99.99." I don't think consumers expect software pricing to suddenly double. So, the quick answer is that we want to make it as affordable as possible, knowing that there is a set consumer expectation for what software has cost for the past twelve years. That's kind of the best answer I can give you. So, if it becomes a bit higher than $59, don't ding me, but, again, I don't expect it to be $100.
Ok, aside the 100$ comment (who really though that Sony was going to price their games at $100?!?), if PS3 software is going to follow Microsoft $50-60 price range, why Hirai dodges the question like this?
(Source NeoGAF forums)
|MaguS|
06-28-06, 06:53 AM
Interesting, if not a bit worring, is Kaz Hirai answer on the subject during an interview, due to appearing in the August issue of PSM.
Ok, aside the 100$ comment (who really though that Sony was going to price their games at $100?!?), if PS3 software is going to follow Microsoft $50-60 price range, why Hirai dodges the question like this?
(Source NeoGAF forums)
Because 3rd Parties might want it higher and Sony has to please 3rd parties. Remember they are already screaming about the cost of developing titles for the X360 and PS3... I can see both consoles titles jumping in price come 2007.
But I don't think Sony will outprice X360, I think whatever MS sets the price to, sony will follow.
Yes, it would be the most logical thing to do. They've taken enough flak for the 500-600$ price point to burn themselves further with 70$ games at launch. Not unless their main competitor is successfully selling games at 70$
And this is -sadly- already happening: the "Collector Edition" of Oblivion (70-75$) remained for many weeks in the top 10, (according to the Best Buy weekly statistics) so there are a lot of gamers willing to go for a 70$ price point. Personally, I think it's insane even for the "extras" of a collection edition not to mention for a plain game.
The 60$ price tag of third party Xbox 360 games is high enough to make me wait a few weeks until it drops to a more reasonable 45-50 bucks (or Euro in my case). I can't say I'm really thrilled to see it raised any further.
H3avyM3tal
06-28-06, 08:30 AM
Tough times ahead of us, thats for sure. And I do think that according to what Kaz said, a 70$ price point is possible at launch. As scary as it may sound.
It seems that gaming is turning to be as expensive as anything else. I guess only us consumers are to blame - we buy everything. But this still sucks...
I think they need to hurry and settle on fair prics asasp.
toxikneedle
06-28-06, 08:58 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought that publishers set the 59.99 pricetag for 360 games, not MS themselves. MS are not taking on the extra expenses of creating next-gen games which require more detail and therefore more time, people... and money.
P.S. Unless MS is the publisher, but I'm talking about MS as the console maker.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought that publishers set the 59.99 pricetag for 360 games, not MS themselves. MS are not taking on the extra expenses of creating next-gen games which require more detail and therefore more time, people... and money.
As I recall, 59.99 is a policy that MS made for new games on the 360. They can enforce this by with holding the license to allow publishing on the 360. My understanding of this could be wrong however.
What I do know, is that MS definately enforces a policy that new games cannot sell for less than $40. Supposedly, thats the only reason Table Tennis costs as much as it does (initially at least). Not like retailers didn't have sales though.
toxikneedle
06-28-06, 09:04 AM
Well Top Spin 2 was also launched for a discounted price, same as Table Tennis. I don't understand why MS has to introduce a policy like that, this would only seem as a negative way to sell more games which could sell extra systems for them.
Not to mention when a lot of times that same game is 10 dollars less for PC.
Microsoft published titles are retailed for 49.99$ while third party have a maximum suggested retail price of 59.99. I don't know if Microsoft actually imposes any maximum and minimum limit. It would be against their interest to force the publishers in either way.
On a side note, Nintendo president Satoru Iwata, in a recent interview, has expressed his concerns for price reductions during the life of a console and apparently his company will try to promote a fixed pricing scheme. Meh.
http://www.nintendorevolution.ca/06232006/11/nintendo_wii_to_have_fixed_price
Microsoft published titles are retailed for 49.99$ while third party have a maximum suggested retail price of 59.99. I don't know if Microsoft actually imposes any maximum and minimum limit. It would be against their interest to force the publishers in either way.
On a side note, Nintendo president Satoru Iwata, in a recent interview, has expressed his concerns for price reductions during the life of a console and apparently his company will try to promote a fixed pricing scheme. Meh.
http://www.nintendorevolution.ca/06232006/11/nintendo_wii_to_have_fixed_price
Yeah, that worries me too. I'm hoping its price fixing cheap rather than price fixing high. He is commenting about how a game will open at $50-60 and then sometimes rapidly fall to $30-20 at which time most people buy it. I'm hoping what he plans to do have the price fixed at $35-$45 as opposed to having it start high and falling low. It'd give this about 50:50 odds? Well, thats probably too generous.
Peoples-Agent
06-28-06, 10:14 AM
Considering the arguments that piracy drives prices up, and that there is hardly any working "back up" usage on the new gen platform, why are prices still so high? ...£40 - £50 IMO is a little steep for a game.
Why are development costs higher than say, the PC platform?
Is it because they can't get the general public to beta test their crap first?
I worked for a company that beta tested Xbox games and the QA process was amazingly thorough, so I assume
this is where the cost comes in.
toxikneedle
06-28-06, 10:18 AM
Maybe because if the prices of PC games go up, they will sell even less. PC games are already not selling that much due to piracy and all. I can only imagine how many people pirated Oblivion for PC since it has no multiplayer aspect at all. Obviously the same cannot be said about console game sales, especially 360 with no widely available hacks out yet.
I wouldn't be surprised to see $70 games for the PS3, at least on the 3rd party side. First party games will probably be $50-$60, but I'm not sure what 3rd parties will do. Multiplatform games like Madden will probably be $60 across all the next-gen platforms, but exclusive games I'm not sure about.
Well Top Spin 2 was also launched for a discounted price, same as Table Tennis. I don't understand why MS has to introduce a policy like that, this would only seem as a negative way to sell more games which could sell extra systems for them.
Not to mention when a lot of times that same game is 10 dollars less for PC.
The original Xbox had a similar pricing restriction, at $20. That's why some games such as Blowout were $20 on the system when they were $10 on the Gamecube/PS2. Supposedly, it's to keep the "quality" of the games closer together (i.e. so a publisher can't totally lowball a crappy game to help it sell), but I think it's really just because they don't want a huge price gap between games that may cause the "value" on games for the system to go down. After all, $60 games would be harder to swallow if some new games were selling for $10-$20. I guess they want all the cheapy games to go to the Xbox Live Arcade and leaving the retail market for the higher priced games. Ironically, Microsoft ended up pricing many original Xbox games at $10 about a year ago under the "Best of Platinum Hits" series.
Oh, and on that note, are there any restrictions that Nintendo puts on their platforms? Microsoft has pricing restrictions, and Sony has restrictions on types of games (for example ports of older 2d games aren't allowed to be sold individually, which was a contributing factor of Working Design's demise), does Nintendo have any as well?
Maybe because if the prices of PC games go up, they will sell even less. PC games are already not selling that much due to piracy and all. I can only imagine how many people pirated Oblivion for PC since it has no multiplayer aspect at all. Obviously the same cannot be said about console game sales, especially 360 with no widely available hacks out yet.
I doubt piracy has that big of an effect. Coincidentally, most of the best-selling titles have been pirated to hell and back. Would they have sold more if they couldn't be pirated? Possible, but I doubt it had a very profound effect. The ratio of Xbox 360-to-PC sales seems pretty consistant across all games despite how easily pirated the game is on PC, so there doesn't seem to be any correlation between sales and piracy.
Ninja Prime
06-28-06, 11:56 AM
I would think this has something to do with Blu-Ray. More expensive discs, and the mastering cost on a Blu-Ray disc is something like 10 times that of a DVD, so yeah, probably most games will be $5 or $10 more, I would guess.
Zelda_fan
06-28-06, 11:59 AM
I imagine it'll be $70 per PS3 game.
I would think this has something to do with Blu-Ray. More expensive discs, and the mastering cost on a Blu-Ray disc is something like 10 times that of a DVD, so yeah, probably most games will be $5 or $10 more, I would guess.
10x that of DVD still isn't much. Those only cost PENNIES I beleive.
toxikneedle
06-28-06, 12:28 PM
10x that of DVD still isn't much. Those only cost PENNIES I beleive.
But what about the actual printing sites. I imagine there's many more factories that can print game DVDs versus Game BDs, this must effect the price as well. Wasn't it the same way when the industry switched to CD formats.
But what about the actual printing sites. I imagine there's many more factories that can print game DVDs versus Game BDs, this must effect the price as well. Wasn't it the same way when the industry switched to CD formats.
The same thing may have happened when the industry moved from floppies/carts to CD, and CD to DVD. However, I never recall the price of games going up in those cases on account of the medium being more expensive. As I recall the price went down when it went from carts to CD. I suppose the only valid comparison is when things moved from CD to DVD, and like I said, I don't recall the price going up.
|MaguS|
06-28-06, 12:59 PM
The same thing may have happened when the industry moved from floppies/carts to CD, and CD to DVD. However, I never recall the price of games going up in those cases on account of the medium being more expensive. As I recall the price went down when it went from carts to CD. I suppose the only valid comparison is when things moved from CD to DVD, and like I said, I don't recall the price going up.
But when games went from Carts to CDs they didn't move to a more expensive medium... Carts are far more expensive to produce then CDs are. There was no price increase on the move to DVD though because CD and DVDs are almost the same, theres no a huge difference in the way they are created.
But then again, Sony could have kept the prices low to boost sales since they didn't want the medium to fail. Who's to say Sony wont do the same thing for Blu-Ray Games, Heck people claimed that the BR Movies would cost far more then HD-DVD but that isn't the case.
I honestly think its going to come down to launch lineup, if Sony has some titles that they know they can sell at a higher cost, I can see them pricing it higher but as a standard, they will probably follow MS.
I wish I could remember where I read this but I am pretty sure I read that the new PS3 games would be 69.99
Searching to find where I read this, if I find it I will edit my post.
PikachuMan
06-28-06, 05:35 PM
I wish I could remember where I read this but I am pretty sure I read that the new PS3 games would be 69.99
Searching to find where I read this, if I find it I will edit my post.
Doesn't matter really. I really doubt anyone bothers with any anti-PS3 rumors after the wild goosechases we've seen recently.
Ninja Prime
06-28-06, 05:58 PM
10x that of DVD still isn't much. Those only cost PENNIES I beleive.
No, not the disc cost, which while twice as much as a DVD, it doesn't make that much of a difference. I'm talking about mastering a disc, which is actually 20 times as expensive as a DVD, costing $40,000 verses only $2,000 for a DVD. Still should be easily absorbed into current game development budgets, but of course, the cost will be passed on to the consumer. Couple that with PS3's longer and more expensive development, one can only assume it PS3 games will be at least $5-10 more than normal DVD games.
PikachuMan
06-28-06, 06:30 PM
No, not the disc cost, which while twice as much as a DVD, it doesn't make that much of a difference. I'm talking about mastering a disc, which is actually 20 times as expensive as a DVD, costing $40,000 verses only $2,000 for a DVD. Still should be easily absorbed into current game development budgets, but of course, the cost will be passed on to the consumer. Couple that with PS3's longer and more expensive development, one can only assume it PS3 games will be at least $5-10 more than normal DVD games.
That last part doesn't follow.
No, not the disc cost, which while twice as much as a DVD, it doesn't make that much of a difference. I'm talking about mastering a disc, which is actually 20 times as expensive as a DVD, costing $40,000 verses only $2,000 for a DVD. Still should be easily absorbed into current game development budgets, but of course, the cost will be passed on to the consumer. Couple that with PS3's longer and more expensive development, one can only assume it PS3 games will be at least $5-10 more than normal DVD games.
Ok, let me put some things into perspective. Something being 1 penny more, times a million sales, is $10,000. Now I'm not sure how much DVD takes to make, and I'm not sure how much Blueray takes, but assuming its 10 cents more, well now we're up to $100,000 more expensive. That's probably going to be less that one persons salary over the course of a games developement life cycle.
Mastering a DVD? You do that ONCE. No big deal. It gets absorbed into the same costs as tool licensing (Visual Studio, 3D Studio, etc, are EXPENSIVE!), hardware, etc. The real costs for ANY software development is in personel. If it takes 2 years to make something, and you have a "small" team of 20 people, and each of them makes $40k a year, you are up to 1.6 million. And then there is the voice talent, and the marketting, and blah blah blah.
Basically the medium is only the tinest fraction of the cost of a game. TINY. Sure it's the most visible, physical part to us, but its insignificant.
Ninja Prime
06-28-06, 11:33 PM
Ok, let me put some things into perspective. Something being 1 penny more, times a million sales, is $10,000. Now I'm not sure how much DVD takes to make, and I'm not sure how much Blueray takes, but assuming its 10 cents more, well now we're up to $100,000 more expensive. That's probably going to be less that one persons salary over the course of a games developement life cycle.
Mastering a DVD? You do that ONCE. No big deal. It gets absorbed into the same costs as tool licensing (Visual Studio, 3D Studio, etc, are EXPENSIVE!), hardware, etc. The real costs for ANY software development is in personel. If it takes 2 years to make something, and you have a "small" team of 20 people, and each of them makes $40k a year, you are up to 1.6 million. And then there is the voice talent, and the marketting, and blah blah blah.
Basically the medium is only the tinest fraction of the cost of a game. TINY. Sure it's the most visible, physical part to us, but its insignificant.
Err... most games don't sell 1 million copies, now do they? ;)
Also, DVD's are about $1 a disc and BluRay discs are just over $2. So, thats $1,040,000 more. On a small game budget, that could be 10-20% of the game development cost. Basically knocking out the little guys who make new, fresh games and ensuring only giant sh!tty companies like EA can afford to make games.
I''m surprised nobody is mentioning yields.
It seems that the first wave of Blu Ray discs don't hold as advertised 25GB of data but only 21-22GB. Manufacturers had to decrease the storage size (=less dense tracks) to increase the very bad yields. The situation for DL is even worse and some people in the loop predict that they won't be available en masse before the next year.
This is the reason why the released BD movies look worse than HD-DVD. Not to mention that Sony authoring tools for now only support MPEG2 and not the more efficient VC-1 (Microsoft WMV9, eh how ironic Microsoft is going to profit even if BD will win).
I don't think any of the first wave of games will need 25GB and not even 20GB but if the disk manufacturers are still having problems, this will impact both price or availability.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.