Microsoft confirms XBOX ONE game pricing

[Xithryl]

I think what will happen, at least at first, is the prices will go down faster, give it some time, and all these nice games are like 40 bucks, while the same game USED on another console is 54.99.... I'm sure with all the DRM stuff we will see nice sales and things like that, but its going to start off slow at first.

 

[Reflexx]

While it's good that the price isn't any higher, I was really hoping that the price would go down because of the DRM checks and such.

Keep in mind that games are getting more expensive to make.

I do expect to see some good deals on games a few months after release though.

 

[Courtney S]

I'm fairly confident that digital downloads will be cheaper. If not through the full-game price, then it will be cheaper by frequent sales or things like that. Plus if the whole digital trading system that is being talked about is put into place, you can buy games for cheaper than they would normally be anyway.

 

[tmccaghren]

Intellivision, wow now that was a console, I still have mine plus I still got the computer keyboard and music synthesizer too.

I still have mine too, with the voice module. That way I can play B-17 Bomber and Space Spartans the RIGHT way :-D

 

[Pete]

Box price is only one aspect of pricing.

I can't think of many premium games these days that aren't driven by DLC packs. For the battle games, they're pretty much mandatory if you're an online gamer. Cheevo hunters also get sucked into buying these. The costs soon mount up.

 

[Polychrome]

Now they just need to offer a Digital only version, with no resale/lending on it, for $40 or less, which once purchased doesn't need the 24 hour callback stuff. Bobs your uncle, i go completely DD for my xbox games.

Part of me thinks that if they really wanted to stick it to Gamestop, they should offer digital downloads at a low price like this, BUT, disk games should still be $60.

 

[EchoRedux]

Why errybody so mad at gamestop? They buy games at a price people are willing to take, assume the risks of owning it, and sell games at a price people are willing to pay. Don't like it? Use ebay or craigslist.

 

[Keith Wallace]

Why errybody so mad at gamestop? They buy games at a price people are willing to take, assume the risks of owning it, and sell games at a price people are willing to pay. Don't like it? Use ebay or craigslist.

They rake in money and offer no cut to the publishers and developers, from whom they are taking income with each sale. That's while those publishers and developers are letting GameStop get a cut of the new game sales by supplying them to the GameStop stores. On top of that, it's not that they're offering a price that people are willing to take happily. It's a matter that they have a borderline monopoly on the market Craigslist is WAY too sketchy to trust, and eBay is a big hassle with having to pay a fee to sell something and deal with shipping.

GameStop only survives because there is no reasonable alternative to it. If digital games sell at $50 or less, then they're going to get slaughtered in the long run.

 

[Robert Carpenter]

Why errybody so mad at gamestop? They buy games at a price people are willing to take, assume the risks of owning it, and sell games at a price people are willing to pay. Don't like it? Use ebay or craigslist.

"Here we observe the clueless consumer in its natural habitat."

 

[EchoRedux]

They rake in money and offer no cut to the publishers and developers, from whom they are taking income with each sale. That's while those publishers and developers are letting GameStop get a cut of the new game sales by supplying them to the GameStop stores. On top of that, it's not that they're offering a price that people are willing to take happily. It's a matter that they have a borderline monopoly on the market Craigslist is WAY too sketchy to trust, and eBay is a big hassle with having to pay a fee to sell something and deal with shipping.

GameStop only survives because there is no reasonable alternative to it. If digital games sell at $50 or less, then they're going to get slaughtered in the long run.

Looks like gamestop lost 269.8 million dollars last year which ended Feb 2, 2013. They're raking in the dough! Gamestop sells new games, and used games, so yes, dev's get their cut on new games. Dev's also build used games into their price, so yes, that initial cut covers the used games market. Gamestop is just a medium used in the aftermarket. Hey, does Ford get a cut if someone trades their car in to the dealer? Do they get a cut when the dealer sells it? What about used books? Where's the cut to the author and publisher? What makes game developers special?

You guys complain about a business that's providing a good service, hires employees, has to pay rent, utilities, etc, takes on risks... it's not guaranteed that the used games they buy will sell anyways. Seriously, stop complaining.

 

[EchoRedux]

"Here we observe the clueless consumer in its natural habitat."

I don't find you very informed

 

[Polychrome]

Why errybody so mad at gamestop? They buy games at a price people are willing to take, assume the risks of owning it, and sell games at a price people are willing to pay. Don't like it? Use ebay or craigslist.

Dunno about mad. I used to work for them, and their shop was clean enough. Certainly not the bastion of evil people make them out to be.

However, there's no doubt that they push used copies over new copies. If it's happening to the point that it's hurting the developers, I'm gonna have to side with the developers. Without games there'd be no Gamestop in the first place.

 

[Courtney S]

@EchoRedux check out

when you get a chance.

The guy goes in depth on why the used game market, particularly gamestop, is bad for game developers. It's mainly the fact that most other media has various revenue streams through royalties and such. With console games, there is only the initial purchase (i'm purely talking about the game, not any DLC or other purchasable content)

 

[HeyCori]

Looks like gamestop lost 269.8 million dollars last year which ended Feb 2, 2013. They're raking in the dough! Gamestop sells new games, and used games, so yes, dev's get their cut on new games. Dev's also build used games into their price, so yes, that initial cut covers the used games market. Gamestop is just a medium used in the aftermarket. Hey, does Ford get a cut if someone trades their car in to the dealer? Do they get a cut when the dealer sells it? What about used books? Where's the cut to the author and publisher? What makes game developers special?

You guys complain about a business that's providing a good service, hires employees, has to pay rent, utilities, etc, takes on risks... it's not guaranteed that the used games they buy will sell anyways. Seriously, stop complaining.

The car analogy is flawed. Cars suffer from wear-and-tear that require more money to fix. Tires that need to be replaced. Plates and insurance that need to purchased.

Disc based video games suffer from none of this. You'll never have to pay to fix wear-and-tear on level 3 or pay to keep the multi-player servers running. It's actually all explained in the video posted above.

And anyone that wants to read GameStop's full report can.

GameStop Reports Sales and Earnings for Fiscal 2012 and Provides 2013 Outlook | News from GameStop

 

[EchoRedux]

@Courtney S, I'm not watching a couple of gamers on a 30 minute youtube video. Give me the summary of their main points please.

@HeyCori, Actually, there are incredible similarities in both games and cars. Both depreciate while new and on the lot (I bought Morrowind new at Best Buy for 20 bucks a year after it came out). Neither have infinite life. Both have wear and tear, discs scratch and become unusable. Both have used markets, and neither industry gives the manufacturer/developers cuts in the used market. Yes, used games hurt new game sales, and yes, used cars hurt new car sales.

The point I made was that car manufacturers don't get a cut on used auto sales, like game devs on used game sales. How is it flawed, and how does wear and tear have anything to do with anything? If something has wear and tear, the maker isn't allowed to a cut? I don't follow. As explained already, I disagree with your claim that discs do not suffer from wear and tear.


Income statement starts on page F-5
GAMESTOP CORP. (GME) 10-K and 10-Q SEC Filings :: Last10K.com

 

[HeyCori]

Depreciation between a used car and a disc aren't even remotely close. The rest of your argument fails at the mere attempt of even making such a claim.

 

[EchoRedux]

Depreciation between a used car and a disc aren't even remotely close. The rest of your argument fails at the mere attempt of even making such a claim.

Well if that's your response so be it. If you ever want to grow up and have an actual discussion, refute my claim. Oh and yes, they are very close. Both time and use depreciate the value of both products. Oh and let's say they depreciate at different rates. Why should developers get a cut of used sales while automakers don't?

 

[HeyCori]

Well if that's your response so be it. If you ever want to grow up and have an actual discussion, refute my claim. Oh and yes, they are very close. Both time and use depreciate the value of both products. Oh and let's say they depreciate at different rates. Why should developers get a cut of used sales while automakers don't?

No. The math flat out does not work out. My Sega CD games from 1992 run perfectly, no tune-ups required. Find me a car from 1992 that has never had any work done on it and still runs perfectly. And while you're at it, make sure the car manufacturer is still paying for the server in case you want to drive with multiple people. Then you can start making a fair comparison. So, like I said, it's not even remotely close. Refuting your points would be me re-posting exactly what I started with.

I would also watch it with telling other people to "grow up." It's considered a Personal Attack and you will receive an infraction for it.

 

[EchoRedux]

No. The math flat out does not work out. My Sega CD games from 1992 run perfectly, no tune-ups required. Find me a car from 1992 that has never had any work done on it and still runs perfectly. And while you're at it, make sure the car manufacturer is still paying for the server in case you want to drive with multiple people. Then you can start making a fair comparison. So, like I said, it's not even remotely close. Refuting your points would be me re-posting exactly what I started with.

Again, the topic is that car manufacturers do not receive a cut for used car sales. Why do repairs and maintenance make it a prerequisite for different treatment? That's what I'm asking.

You brought up your Sega games from the early 90s. How much were they when you originally bought them? What are they worth now? According to amazon, I can get the original Sonic for the Genesis for $4.00-$8.00. Heck, I even see varying conditions. I don't think the devs are paying for servers to host Sonic for Genesis anyways. Fact is games break down, scratch up and eventually become unusable. Games depreciate when they're new and when they're used. But to get back on topic, why does any of this even matter when discussing why devs deserve a cut while auto manufacturers or just about any other business doesn't.

Hey, say I buy a car with a 10 year warranty. I sell the car to someone else 5 years after I buy it, and that new driver gets the remainder of the warranty too. Gamer buys an online game, the devs promise to support the servers for a period of time. Gamer sells the game, so the second gamer gets the remainder of the server support.

Again, similarities arise. So I ask you, why should the gaming industry be held to different standards than the automobile and book industries? You can agree or disagree with me that games do not need maintenance and repairs, but why would this lead to a need for different standards regarding selling the products used?

I would also watch it with telling other people to "grow up." It's considered a Personal Attack and you will receive an infraction for it.

Duly noted.

 

[HeyCori]

Buying a used car puts you at significant financial disadvantage. You have to make repairs and those repairs can run into the thousands. There is no way around that. In 20+ years I've never buffed any of my Sega CD games and they still work perfectly. And if I had to get one buffed I'm positive it wouldn't run into the thousands. The scale between cars and games does not work. The math does not compute. Buying a game used will not put you at a financial disadvantage like buying a used car will.

The point I was making about the servers is that those servers cost money to run. That wasn't a big deal in 1984 but it is now. Devs are losing money because players that buy used can still play online without contributing to the costs of running those servers.

Mind you, I'm not against the used market. But I do sympathize with devs that want players to buy new as much as possible. Not that the used market should be eliminated.