Return of the overpriced game

    It's a great time to be a gamer.  Especially if you're not rich.  Videogames are, at the moment, the cheapest they've ever been.  Thanks to there being 3 successful consoles in the market this time around instead of just two, competition has competition and cheap media have driven prices down.  "Best-seller" games are just $20-$30, and even brand new games often arrive at $40, $30, or even $20 instead of $50.  And even $50 for a brand new game is a great price, historically speaking.  And everyone is smiling. 

   Well, almost everyone.  There are some people out there who think this happy picture isn't right, and they intend to change it.  But more on that later.  First, a little history...

   I once paid over $100 for a videogame.  And I don't mean a collector's item on eBay--I mean new, in a store, sticker price.  Admittedly, it was a special case.  It was a lousy, greedy retailer (Service Merchandise), and even though it had just come out, it was a game I was having a hard time finding (Secret of Mana).  Sticker price at Service Merchandise was, in my experience, about 10-15% over that of other retailers.  It certainly was in this case--I think the sticker was $95.  After tax, it was about $102.  Ouch.

   That was the exception.  The rule, at the time, was better, but still hurt.  Videogames for the Genesis and Super Nintendo in those later days of their lifespan generally cost no less than $60, with $70 being more common, and $80+ not unheard-of.  Again--ouch.

   The next generation of machines rolled out, and they were CD-based.  Hallelujah!  Game manufacturing costs went from a reported $20-$30 (and climbing as cart sizes increased) to less than $1 overnight.  New Playstation and Saturn games were $60, not $70 (or more)--not bad, but they were destined to go lower someday...

   A year later, the Nintendo 64 arrived.  And with it, it brought the return of cartridge gaming--a decision I applaud for gameplay reasons (CD drives were ass-slow back then), but also a decision that cost Nintendo big time.  Not only did 3rd-party game publishers abandon Nintendo in droves (preferring the ~$1 manufacturing price tag to a ~$25 one, go figure), but Nintendo 64 games were $10-$20 more at retail.  Generally, Nintendo games were $70 and other companies' N64 games were $80.

   But the N64 did great--it had the most successful hardware launch to date (selling over twice as many units as Sony's incredible Playstation launch a year earlier), and the N64 rolled into the next year looking rosy.

   Sony, then the hungry young newcomer in the videogame market (hard to picture now, I know), fought for marketshare (and won) with price drops on hardware and software.  During the Playstation's reign, the price of a new videogame dropped to $50 new, and "Greatest Hits" games showed up at $20.  Wow!  Good games--not bargain bin shovelware--for $20!  Nintendo couldn't compete, although N64 games did drop to $60 new, and the "budget" line of bestsellers were $40.  Competition at work!

   And the next round of consoles--the current round--brought those disc-based prices forward, and even introduced (as noted earlier) brand new games for $40 or less.  And so here we are with the best prices ever.

   So what's the problem?  Well, at some point, prices on everything go up.  Videogame prices have gone down over the last several years, but that's because they were way too high in the first place.  Videogames are expensive to make, and getting more so.  They'll have to go back up someday.

   Some companies are convinced that day is now.  Sony launched its Playstation Portable system this year.  Portable console games (which, until now, meant GBA games) this generation have been priced at $30-$35 new--not too bad considering they are cartridge-based games.  Sony decided on two suggested retail prices for PSP games--$40 (which is what Sony was using) or $50, despite the fact that they are using cheap disc-based media.  EA, Activision, and Koei decided to go with the $50 price for their games. 

   Those $50 games are some of the best-selling games on PSP so far.  Because of that, other companies are deciding to use the $50 price for at least some of their PSP games, including Ubisoft, Rockstar, Namco, SEGA, THQ, and even Sony.  It's a sad thing to see, because it was Sony's initiative that brought home console prices down, back when they were an ambitious newcomer to videogames.  Now they're doing the opposite, even though they once again have the cheaper media format.

   Fast-forward to this fall: the Xbox 360 launch.  Xbox 360 games are all listed at $60, although that price is not confirmed.  That could be good or bad--maybe they will be $50 after all, but there are also rumours that some may be $70.  EA and Activision (once again) have both been very vocal about the fact that their next-gen game prices will be higher.

   Now, you may be thinking, after reading this, that I wouldn't be ready to bitch about a $60 price tag on a game, when I paid more than that a decade ago.  And I wouldn't be, probably, except for one thing.  And that one thing is WHO it is that wants to raise prices.

   It's not the game companies that have had some financial troubles in the last couple of years--SEGA and Capcom, for example.  It's not the medium-sized, long-successful companies like Namco, LucasArts, or the recently very successful Ubisoft.  And it certainly isn't the numerous small studios who've been releasing brand new games at $20 or $30.

   No, it's EA and Activision who've been preaching the need to raise prices.  They claim that development costs are skyrocketing, that games will now cost more than movies to make, etc etc.  I might possibly be willing to buy all that, coming from somebody else.  But EA and Activision are two of the biggest, most successful videogame companies in the world.  EA is the largest videogame company on the planet, and they rake in more money than any other (except Nintendo, some years).  They're rolling in cash.

   So, if development costs are about to drown them, why haven't we heard about it from somebody else?  I don't see anything special about EA's games that would make willing to pay more for them.  But if they get away with a higher price, just about everyone else seems more than willing to follow. 

   In a word--this is bullshit.  EA and Activision are just being greedy bastards.  Unfortunately for us, they're probably going to get away with it.  As for me, I'm not going for it until the day I'm sure that this issue is decided.  I have yet to pay over $35 for a portable game--I've bought all my PSP games on sale or on eBay.  And I won't be paying $60 for home console games, either.  Not until I'm sure the battle's been lost.  I hope that day doesn't come--that consumers realize they can say no to this bullshit--but it probably will.