Support NeoGAF

Man-is-Obsolete · May 30, 2013

There has been a lot of talk of price hikes for next gen games and the divide between $60 games and downloadable games becoming greater and greater with nothing in between. However, Sony seems to be making a case that retail games can also work at $40. Earlier this year they released Sly 4 on PS3 and Vita with the PS3 version releasing at $40, the result? It cracked the top ten on NPD and became the best launch of a Sly Cooper game to date despite next to no marketing. Later this year Puppeteer is coming out and it too will be a $40 title. This has been billed as a 15+ hour platformer and it looks really good. Earlier in this generation such a title would be $60 no questions asked. However, the quality of downloadable games has grown a lot and it is becoming harder and harder to justify a $60 retail release. So here is Sony saying how about $40 instead? There is also Rain, but I feel in the West at least that may end up on PSN. However, it wouldn't surprise me if the Rain also ended up as a $40 retail title, especially given the impression from recent previews and them suggesting it has a lot of length to it as well.

I don't think it stops with PS3 titles either. I predict that Knack will be a $40 title in the launch window of the PS4. I feel this pricing strategy can work, and creates a space for more unique titles being developed with the potential of reaching more people.

So what say you? Do you think the $40 price model can work or is this area between downloadable games and $60 a lost cause? Do you see next gen titles like Knack releasing at $40? Will anyone else follow suit?

Raven77 · May 30, 2013

No way can this model work for larger titles. Not in this current video game market with the (supposed) rising development costs and piracy, etc.

The biggest reason that they can do $40 titles now is cause as they get used to developing on the hardware, the costs can go down. These systems are old and about to be surpassed.

DBT85 · May 30, 2013

I think that a variable price model can work and IIRC someone did say that was what was going to happen with the PS4, games will cost anything from free to $60 depending on the content provided.

The only question as always is, by dropping the price $20, did they sell enough extra copies to make back what they might have made at $60. I'm sure it would have sold more, but was it enough.

I don;t expect all games to be like this, shit like COD and Uncharted and so on will still be high priced games, but mid tier stuff shouldn't be priced the same as that.

Calvarok · May 30, 2013

Raven77 said:
No way can this model work for larger titles. Not in this current video game market with the (supposed) rising development costs and piracy, etc.

What you talkin' bout with that "Supposed"?

1000 people working on one Assassin's Creed game and you say "Supposed"?

Flarin · May 30, 2013

I think it's really cool that they can use this model and still make money on games like Sly 4 (which looked like it was going to be doomed). But Sony Santa Monica and Naughty Dog games will ALWAYS be $60. They're top tier studios that create top tier games.

This certainly does open the door for a much broader price range though which I think is a big win for us gamers.

Gadirok · May 30, 2013

Man-is-Obsolete said:
There has been a lot of talk of price hikes for next gen games and the divide between $60 games and downloadable games becoming greater and greater with nothing in between. However, Sony seems to be making a case that retail games can also work at $40. Earlier this year they released Sly 4 on PS3 and Vita with the PS3 version releasing at $40, the result? It cracked the top ten on NPD and became the best launch of a Sly Cooper game to date despite next to no marketing. Later this year Puppeteer is coming out and it too will be a $40 title. This has been billed as a 15+ hour platformer and it looks really good. Earlier in this generation such a title would be $60 no questions asked. However, the quality of downloadable games has grown a lot and it is becoming harder and harder to justify a $60 retail release. So here is Sony saying how about $40 instead? There is also Rain, but I feel in the West at least that may end up on PSN. However, it wouldn't surprise me if the Rain also ended up as a $40 retail title, especially given the impression from recent previews and them suggesting it has a lot of length to it as well.

I don't think it stops with PS3 titles either. I predict that Knack will be a $40 title in the launch window of the PS4. I feel this pricing strategy can work, and creates a space for more unique titles being developed with the potential of reaching more people.

So what say you? Do you think the $40 price model can work or is this area between downloadable games and $60 a lost cause? Do you see next gen titles like Knack releasing at $40? Will anyone else follow suit?

It really became the best launch for a Sly Cooper game?

I never imagined it doing well, but I never even looked at Sly games.

I think Sony was humbled with the aftermath of 2012. Starhawk didn't warrant the $60 pricetag, and their lackluster support of the title was just nick and diming their faithful from the beginning.

With PSASBR and LBP Karting they knew after a month it wouldn't do well but still launched it at $59.99, only to reduce the MSRP to $39.99 just over a month later, even across the online store and web store.

They didn't want the same thing to happen to Sly so they made it $40 from the beginning.

For Ratchet: FFA, it didn't warrant a $40 price but it seemed logical to fans to put out a physical copy so they put out a $20 copy (which is great for a spinoff and the content it warrants).

Pupeteer is on the right track too but I think they generally put higher risk games at lower price points to gain a larger install base, incase the title actually performs well and may warrant future sequels.

Impeccable · May 30, 2013

Sly Cooper 4 was fucking fantastic and priced well, deserved success, a tiered pricing system absolutely makes sense.

Monty Mole · May 30, 2013

Man-is-Obsolete said:
I predict that Knack will be a $40 title in the launch window of the PS4.

It irks me that just because a game is colourful and doesn't have guns or dude-bros, it therefore is perceived as being less value. Explain yourself.

daveo42 · May 30, 2013

Not sure if we will see bigger games at the $40 level at all. I'd like to think that they'd start selling their digital titles at a lower amount to help drive home the digital future we're all anticipating. I'd say anywhere between a $5-$20 discount depending mostly on age of the game and publisher.

I still fee like this won't happen next-gen as AAA titles drive publishers into bankruptcy for doing the same things over and over to try make more money off of people and slim down the types and amount of games they publish.

Maybe next next gen we'll start seeing it.

krae_man · May 30, 2013

Flarin said:
I think it's really cool that they can use this model and still make money on games like Sly 4 (which looked like it was going to be doomed). But Sony Santa Monica and Naughty Dog games will ALWAYS be $60. They're top tier studios that create top tier games.

This certainly does open the door for a much broader price range though which I think is a big win for us gamers.

I got The Last of Us and God of War Ascension for $40. Futureshop and BestBuy up here have managed to work out some awesome preorder deals with Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo and all the publishers.

drspeedy · May 30, 2013

I agree that big devs would cry and complain, but personally $40 Day 1 titles would push me MUCH more than waiting for sales or a finding used (lol Xbone) copy.

If Sony would pioneer a lower price point model, even if included some kind of minor DLC paywall ala F2P, I'd 100% definitely buy a PS4. Consumer-aware companies deserve our dollar moneys.

The_Darkest_Red · May 30, 2013

Raven77 said:
No way can this model work for larger titles. Not in this current video game market with the (supposed) rising development costs and piracy, etc.

The biggest reason that they can do $40 titles now is cause as they get used to developing on the hardware, the costs can go down. These systems are old and about to be surpassed.

I think the idea is that the typical game you would sell for $40 would also fit somewhere between the $60 "AAA" games and $15 downloadable games in terms of scope and budget. I don't think anyone expects a new Assassin's Creed to be sold for $40, but that price could fit well with something that's produced with a smaller team and budget.

My question is (and this is kind of off-topic), would consumers be more willing to deal with used game DRM if every big retail game sold for something like $50 new instead of $60?

Rogue_Ledr · May 30, 2013

$40 game aint happening on consoles .......... sorry!

Tuck · May 30, 2013

Tiered pricing makes sense. Some games should NOT cost 60 dollars. Case in point: NSMB U is 60, NSMB Wii released for 50. Ten dollar price increase... why? Just for a new generation? Thats bullshit. Both should have released for 40.

Honestly, 40 is the sweet spot for a new game. I'd buy new games at 40, but at 50 or 60? No chance.

Kintaro · May 30, 2013

Remember when Sony's first party games were generally cheaper than everyone else's on PS2? Yeah, me too. This nothing new for them.

Man-is-Obsolete · May 30, 2013

Monty Mole said:
It irks me that just because a game is colourful and doesn't have guns or dude-bros, it therefore is perceived as being less value. Explain yourself.

Hey I feel the same, but it is a new IP in a genre that doesn't really garner a lot of interest outside of Mario games. Rayman Origins comes from a known IP and it bombed at $60 and then found success at a reduced $40 and less price.

Also as mentioned by someone else, team size and budget should have an affect on this. There is no way Sony is putting $20-$60 million into Knack, so why I should be paying to own as if it was?

Callibretto · May 30, 2013

Monty Mole said:
It irks me that just because a game is colourful and doesn't have guns or dude-bros, it therefore is perceived as being less value. Explain yourself.

it's a game for kiddies, they don't have lots of money... I guess.

on topic, the budget for aaa titles may increased, but Sony keep saying that they make development easy now, so maybe the indies will have easier time to step up their game and production value from the normal $15 to fill the $30-$40 range title.

ascii42 · May 30, 2013

Monty Mole said:
It irks me that just because a game is colourful and doesn't have guns or dude-bros, it therefore is perceived as being less value. Explain yourself.

Well, it most likely won't have multiplayer, so there's that.

jcm · May 30, 2013

Raven77 said:
No way can this model work for larger titles. Not in this current video game market with the (supposed) rising development costs and piracy, etc.

The biggest reason that they can do $40 titles now is cause as they get used to developing on the hardware, the costs can go down. These systems are old and about to be surpassed.

Of course it can work. You've just got to budget accordingly. Hollywood makes some movies with $250M budgets, and they make some movies with $25M budgets. Not every video game needs to be the equivalent of a summer tentpole film.

valkillmore · May 30, 2013

I believe they priced Sly 4 at that price because thats what needed to happen to get it to sell. As you said barely any marketing supporte it, right? So the savings in advertising were passed on to the customer. Lets be honest Sly isn't a huge brand for Sony, but it is a series thy has historicallydelivered a fun and unique gameplay experience. More companies should be doing this.

If a game is awesome word gets around. Consumers are more informed, connected and empowered now than ever before and much less susceptible to marketing and PR bullshit (see Xbone.)

Man-is-Obsolete · May 30, 2013

Also with regards to Knack, as mentioned by someone else team size and budget should have an affect on this. There is no way Sony is putting $20-$60 million into Knack or devoting a 200 person team into it. So why should I be paying to own it as if it was?

Shai-Tan · May 30, 2013

The costs of retail get in the way.

The_Darkest_Red · May 30, 2013

Man-is-Obsolete said:
Also with regards to Knack, as mentioned by someone else team size and budget should have an affect on this. There is no way Sony is putting $20-$60 million into Knack or devoting a 200 person team into it. So why should I be paying to own it as if it was?

Exactly. It isn't fair to act like Knack is only being priced lower than the typical retail game because it's a 2D platformer. The price should be determined based on demand for the specific game and genre as well as the budget of the project.

DidntKnowJack · May 30, 2013

Kintaro said:
Remember when Sony's first party games were generally cheaper than everyone else's on PS2? Yeah, me too. This nothing new for them.

PS1 as well. A couple years into the PS1's cycle, they brought all first party games down to $39.99 for new titles.

Flying Toaster · May 30, 2013

I could see some types of games selling for less than the $60 price, but they are going to be lacking big budgets, huge teams of devs and will be oddball games in general.

Nothing is wrong with that but I highly doubt that developers are going to be thrilled about releasing games at less than the current price point for main consoles.

Absinthian · May 30, 2013

Amazon UK has already started listing xbone games as £89.00, which translates to around $135 per game.

Z3M0G · May 30, 2013

Calvarok said:
What you talkin' bout with that "Supposed"?

1000 people working on one Assassin's Creed game and you say "Supposed"?

To me that's no fault of technology advancement... only shorter development cycles.

VanWinkle · May 30, 2013

I think it's VERY smart of Sony. Puppeteer at $40 is a no-brainer from the looks of it, and Sly, as you said, did pretty darn well. For games that may not be huge sellers just by the nature of the game, a $40 price point if a brilliant idea.

Man-is-Obsolete · May 30, 2013

DidntKnowJack said:
PS1 as well. A couple years into the PS1's cycle, they brought all first party games down to $39.99 for new titles.

That would be awesome to see. By nature 1st party games should cost less to produce anyways since their is only one platform in mind, and Sony has incredibly talented and more importantly efficient teams. I had no idea the first two Infamous games were made by less than 50 people. That's amazing. Media Molecule made the Little Big Planet games with less than 40 people. Tearaway, a Vita game, is being made by 15 people.

Mitsurugi · May 30, 2013

I think the OP may be right. Also, with everybody sharing videos of their gameplay with friends and the system itself making (supposedly) good recommendations for games, Publishers may not need to so much on marketing campaigns.

TheExodu5 · May 30, 2013

I've been saying for years that this is the direction in which the industry needs to go.

phosphor112 · May 30, 2013

It depends on the game's budget, really. But yes, they have been doing this a lot.

Speaking of which, why didn't twisted metal do better? I just started playing, and it is BY FAR the best TM game.

Man-is-Obsolete · May 30, 2013

phosphor112 said:
It depends on the game's budget, really. But yes, they have been doing this a lot.

Speaking of which, why didn't twisted metal do better? I just started playing, and it is BY FAR the best TM game.

OT, but it had a very rough launch. Online play wasn't borderline unplayable for many if I remember correctly, other than that though it was great. According to Jaffe it went on to do around 500,000 copies sold and recouped costs.

yurinka · May 30, 2013

$40 must be the maximum price of retail games. Then they would have way better sales and less problems with 2nd hand etc. Publishers and devs spend a lot of money on stuff that doesn't make sense at all.

phosphor112 · May 30, 2013

Man-is-Obsolete said:
OT, but it had a very rough launch. Online play wasn't borderline unplayable for many if I remember correctly, other than that though it was great. According to Jaffe it went on to do around 500,000 copies sold and recouped costs.

That sucks. I brought it up because it was a 40 dollar game.

pikablu · May 30, 2013

Might as well since manuals are nonexistant nowadays.

OnPoint · May 30, 2013

TheExodu5 said:
I've been saying for years that this is the direction in which the industry needs to go.

Yup. This is how it should be.

Canis lupus · May 30, 2013

Rain is a PSN game, no way its gonna cost 40 euros.

Man-is-Obsolete · May 30, 2013

Canis lupus said:
Rain is a PSN game, no way its gonna cost 40 euros.

I think it will be, but they have been incredibly mum about pricing and release format.

Monty Mole · May 30, 2013

The_Darkest_Red said:
Exactly. It isn't fair to act like Knack is only being priced lower than the typical retail game because it's a 2D platformer. The price should be determined based on demand for the specific game and genre as well as the budget of the project.

But movie prices aren't affected by their length or budget. And value is subjective - I'd take Knack over Infamous at any price.

Ace Harding · May 30, 2013

Without a doubt we will continue to see more variation in pricing moving forward. The biggest reason for the flat pricing model is the fear that consumers see sub-$60 console games as budget titles, somehow "less than." I think that perception is lower than ever with quality FtP, iOS, indie titles, PC sales, etc.

There is no way in hell you will see consistent $60 prices on next gen systems for very long. I expect it to be about the same as now. At launch, $60 will probably still be the norm. That price will hold for a while, and AAA games will continue to launch at $60. But after a few months you'll see prices drop, and outside the console launch windows (next summer, for example) we will start to see more games launching at sub-$60.

The market isn't tolerating $60 prices now, and even with a new gen I don't think that's going to change. The longer-term, post-launch optimal price point (the price at which revenue is maximized) is well below that.

More DLC also helps maintain sub-$60 prices, and we'll see that trend continue.

StuBurns · May 30, 2013

I don't think it's that, I think Sly and Puppeteer were never intended to release at less than full price, the market just forced Sony's hand, and I don't think that means Sony will continue that, they'll just not make games of that ilk.

UberTag · May 30, 2013

TheExodu5 said:
I've been saying for years that this is the direction in which the industry needs to go.

You're absolutely right but they're going to be dragged kicking and screaming into this revelation.
Tiered pricing is going to be essential for a number of developers to survive.
We should have a $10 tier, a $20 tier, a $40 tier, a $60 tier... and, yes, an $80 tier.

Freshmaker · May 30, 2013

Raven77 said:
No way can this model work for larger titles. Not in this current video game market with the (supposed) rising development costs and piracy, etc.

The biggest reason that they can do $40 titles now is cause as they get used to developing on the hardware, the costs can go down. These systems are old and about to be surpassed.

Better sales and less incentive for pirates through a lower price could never offset this eh?

imperium · May 30, 2013

I personally would like to see more games in the $15-$40 pice range. Games that are full featured but perhaps a little shorter in length or episodic. The problem is getting developers to overcome the stigma that sub $60 games are inherently inferior because of the lower price.

To those that say you would never see a major release at $40, why not? I'm not familiar with the economics but wouldn't a developer selling a game digitally at $40 make about as much money as GameStop selling the same game for $60 when you factor in Gamestoo's cut, packaging, ect?

The_Darkest_Red · May 30, 2013

Monty Mole said:
But movie prices aren't affected by their length or budget. And value is subjective - I'd take Knack over Infamous at any price.

All I'm saying is that it might make sense from a business perspective to sell a game like Knack for $40 because of its relatively low budget (presumably) and its somewhat niche appeal (in terms of the general market). Value is subjective, but when it comes to selling games the subjective value that generally rules is that of the overall market, not that of a few select individuals.

Midnight Moon · May 30, 2013

I think the $40 price range would lead to more impulse buying. People are afraid to impulse buy over $50, so I think this is great. Lately I have been getting all my 3DS games for like $30 thanks to Newegg and stuff.

Just thinking a pricecut might actually help the industry, but I don't know anything that is just my opinion at a glance. I kind of laugh at New Super Mario Bros. U & Nintendo Land being priced at $59.99 just because that is the pricing tier for an HD console.

speedline · May 30, 2013

I remember when NFL2K5 launched at the new $19.99 price format and sold a fuck ton. That scared the shit out of EA so they spent a huge wad for exclusive rights to NFL after that.

Release good games at lower price points and the money will come. Release DLC for extra profit.

tim.mbp · May 30, 2013

I think tiered pricing can work, but it should go both ways like in the case of SMTIV.

RadarScope1 · May 30, 2013

DidntKnowJack said:
PS1 as well. A couple years into the PS1's cycle, they brought all first party games down to $39.99 for new titles.

I've been thinking a lot about this since the PS4 reveal. Lower MSRP on first party games is a powerful thing. I understand why it went away, but Sony was so smart to do this back in the 90s when they were a new player in the industry. I feel almost like they're in a similar position now, being hungry to take back the crown. Combine that with their new positioning as being so dev-friendly and well.... Could happen I guess. But yeah, I loved those awesome $40 games in the late 90s! That's pretty much an impulse purchase.

Regardless - variable pricing at both retail and digital would be the biggest innovation to come from the 8th gen. It HAS to happen. This $60/$15 bifurcation is nuts.

Support NeoGAF

Is Sony Making a Case for the $40 Game?

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Worships the porcelain goddess

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Neo Member

Member

Member

Member

Neo Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

I am Korean.

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Similar threads