Valve says games are too expensive

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: Red Storm
I'd gladly pay the same amount for a digital download that I can take with me to any capable PC without having to worry about taking care of, and transporting disks.

This is where steam succeeds. Also think of the environmental impact of not have all of those boxes inks and plastics.

 

[alcoholbob]

Cartridge games cost a lot due to the fact you were more or less buying a stick of RAM for every game you got. medium itself has high costs. A dvd disc costs pennies to produce.

Now that said, PS3 game prices are justified due to the unit cost of producing blu ray games, unlike the 360...

 

[sandorski]

Should DD be less Price than Boxed? I say No. Or I should say, Only if you are limited to 1 Download. That's not how it works though, so basically, in the case of Steam, the Buyer can Download their Purchased games many times over many years and Steam doesn't get anything other than what they got from the original Purchase.

Having a Box and DVD/CD of the Purchase may seem "better", but it's actually less when you consider that DVD/CDs get damaged over time. DD doesn't get "damaged".

 

[Martimus]

Originally posted by: chizow
Heh, I had a feeling the holiday sales and weekend deals were a glorified social experiment or case study. It looks like Valve learned something, hopefully they find creative ways to take advantage of that data.

Hopefully this is the start of some changes in the industry with regards to pricing models. I still prefer retail boxed copies for numerous reasons, although I never sell my games, but I'd be willing to deal with Steam's negatives if they reduced pricing and came up with more creative content/pricing models.

Still, I think the most important lesson learned here is that people will put up with restrictive DRM and actually buy games as long as you lower prices, which ultimately results in greater total revenue (and profits) despite smaller margins per sale. I think the biggest challenge will be getting Valve and other publishers to put their titles on sale while they're still relatively new and relevant.

I thought that the Weekend deals were a response to the Impulse buy weekends from Stardock. They didn't want to lose market share to their competitor, so they started running sales similar to Stardock to nip that in the bud.

In my opinion they do it better than Stardock did anyway, but I am happy for the extra competition as it means more games for me! (I have bought more games on Impulse buy weekends and Steam Weekend deals in the last 6 months than I have for the previous 5 years - mostly because I am cheap.)

 

[Pelu]

Originally posted by: Bateluer
A digital download should be markedly cheaper than a boxed title. While I'm a big fan of Steam, and they've often got some great deals, some pricing makes no sense. Take Dawn of War 2, for example. its currently 50 dollars on Steam. Its sitting on a shelf at Walmart for 39. Granted, there is a convenience factor when buying the game on Steam, but I can make the 5 minute trip to Walmart, buy the game, drive back, and install it before Steam even gets close to finishing the download.

Release a quality title, and people will pay for it. A game that is fun, polished, and offers plenty for the dollar will sell more copies than a title that offers only bugs and half a day's worth of entertainment.

SO TRUE!!!!!!!!!!

Mirrors edge is a big example... i install it... start playing it and finish it up in my first play of the game... one sit down that game was worth lol!!!!!

 

[smackababy]

I actually prefer DD over buying boxed copies. The main reason is simply less waste. It takes far less resources to download a game than to buy physical media. Not only is there zero packaging, the energy consumed in running the service is much less than factories pumping out discs. Granted, I don't mind paying "regular" price (albeit rather high, if you ask me) for this "luxury" of saving the environment one game a time policy I have. I believe if these retail chains opened up a bit, or region codes became undone with, there would be a much more healthy video game market. I would love to play games designed strictly for adults (not porn games, just games that would garnish an AO rating) and be able to find them. I know there are insane amounts of hentia games in Japan, and there is a market for them. I think everyone could benifit if most major retailers would get rid of this outdated, socially repressed idea that video games are for kids and adults shouldn't have their choice of markets as well. That is something I feel true cutting edge developers should take advantage of and just offer DD for games they don't want to censor or hold back. It, in essence, is really forcing self-censorship on the industry.

 

[mindcycle]

Makes sense to me. DD games are essentially rentals so they should be cheaper. They also cost less to produce than retail due to no packaging or transportation costs. It just makes sense to charge less than a retail copy. I'm glad to see a large company like Valve take a chance and see that price competition actually works. Maybe the industry will catch on and finally start moving in that direction and stop investing so much time and money into stopping pirates, which hasn't done anything but drive people away at this point. Changes like this will help get the PC industry back on track IMO.

 

[smackababy]

The only problem with stopping piracy is they just implement more and more intrusive and flawed DRM, which in turn gets cracked and piracy skyrockets. Or they make a game that isn't very good, but incredibly demanding, so you want to download (or borrow from a friend as I did) to see how it runs (Cysis). I did know it would work amazing though. If Steam had a system scanning that could let you know if you meet the basic requirements for certain games, and if it will run amazing or poor, it might help out a lot as well. Hopefully, EA is taking notes and instead of buying up all the companies they can, they drop prices and totally under cut people rather than destroy good developers. Competition leads to true innovation.

 

[Adam8281]

Originally posted by: smackababy
...I would love to play games designed strictly for adults (not porn games, just games that would garnish an AO rating) and be able to find them. I know there are insane amounts of hentia games in Japan, and there is a market for them.

What, you don't remember Day of the Tentacle?

 

[MikeyLSU]

I think the biggest problem is the set price issue. Not all games are made equal and shouldn't cost the same either. When I think of games like Heavanly Sword or Mirrors Edge or many other single player only games that only last 6-10 hours, they should not cost the same amount as a game like a FF 13 that will likely have 50+ hours of playtime or a great single/multiplayer game that will hvae 50+ total hours of playtime.

I just can't bring myself to buy some of these short single player games that end in 6-10 hours for $50-$60. Just not worth it in any way shape or form. Now if they cost $30 when they came out, I probably would be all over them.

They need to start with a pricing structure that allows for games to be priced differently.

 

[Regs]

I agree with you MikeyLSU. Quality is a standard and the price should be reflected on their standards, yet production costs are soaring for these games without any quality control. EA im sure fell victim to this time and again, and with cancellations and indefinite delays of some of their titles, I think they're starting to get the point. No point spending millions on developing a game that failing in it's early phases of production and to try to force feed it to people at 50 dollars a pop.

 

[novasatori]

Originally posted by: Saga

Originally posted by: ZenothIf some random and "boring" game from a no-name company costs $50 then I still don't have a problem with that price, and if I don't like it there's a good chance I will return it for a refund anyway.

Out of curiosity, how often do you do this, and how often does it succeed? Recently, any game I've purchased, even from the so-called no-name company's, all include CD-Keys. I have NEVER successfully returned an opened piece of software for a full refund to ANY store, with or without CD-Key. Replacement of defective product, sure - as two copies in a row of BF2014 came without a CD key printed on the manual, but I have not found a single retail store where I can buy software and return it for a refund once it's opened. Add in the fact that most use CD keys and are thus even LESS likey to accept a return and you'll have to color me confused as to how you suggest this as an option.

I've basically always been under the assumption that once I opened that shiny shrink wrap, nothing less than parting the red sea outside the store I bought it from would see me returning it for a refund.

Are you from the US?

I think its against the law here because of copyright laws, since its so easy to duplicate PC software they made it so you can't return open software for a refund, only exchange.

At least that's what I was told when I tried to return a game once.

Oddly enough sometimes you can get around it by exchanging for a new game and then returning the new one which will still be sealed at a different store.

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
I think the biggest problem is the set price issue. Not all games are made equal and shouldn't cost the same either. When I think of games like Heavanly Sword or Mirrors Edge or many other single player only games that only last 6-10 hours, they should not cost the same amount as a game like a FF 13 that will likely have 50+ hours of playtime or a great single/multiplayer game that will hvae 50+ total hours of playtime.

I just can't bring myself to buy some of these short single player games that end in 6-10 hours for $50-$60. Just not worth it in any way shape or form. Now if they cost $30 when they came out, I probably would be all over them.

They need to start with a pricing structure that allows for games to be priced differently.

Pretty much a good write up, although I'd caution against using lenght as the sole factor for higher price. Some games have been known to go on with no purpose and little added fun for the player.

 

[TidusZ]

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
I think the biggest problem is the set price issue. Not all games are made equal and shouldn't cost the same either. When I think of games like Heavanly Sword or Mirrors Edge or many other single player only games that only last 6-10 hours, they should not cost the same amount as a game like a FF 13 that will likely have 50+ hours of playtime or a great single/multiplayer game that will hvae 50+ total hours of playtime.

I just can't bring myself to buy some of these short single player games that end in 6-10 hours for $50-$60. Just not worth it in any way shape or form. Now if they cost $30 when they came out, I probably would be all over them.

They need to start with a pricing structure that allows for games to be priced differently.

Pretty much a good write up, although I'd caution against using lenght as the sole factor for higher price. Some games have been known to go on with no purpose and little added fun for the player.

I think your talking about Spore except there wasn't fun at any point not just the end.

 

[MikeyLSU]

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
I think the biggest problem is the set price issue. Not all games are made equal and shouldn't cost the same either. When I think of games like Heavanly Sword or Mirrors Edge or many other single player only games that only last 6-10 hours, they should not cost the same amount as a game like a FF 13 that will likely have 50+ hours of playtime or a great single/multiplayer game that will hvae 50+ total hours of playtime.

I just can't bring myself to buy some of these short single player games that end in 6-10 hours for $50-$60. Just not worth it in any way shape or form. Now if they cost $30 when they came out, I probably would be all over them.

They need to start with a pricing structure that allows for games to be priced differently.

Pretty much a good write up, although I'd caution against using lenght as the sole factor for higher price. Some games have been known to go on with no purpose and little added fun for the player.

good point, and yes it was an overgeneralization about the quality.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: mindcycle
Makes sense to me. DD games are essentially rentals so they should be cheaper. They also cost less to produce than retail due to no packaging or transportation costs. It just makes sense to charge less than a retail copy. I'm glad to see a large company like Valve take a chance and see that price competition actually works. Maybe the industry will catch on and finally start moving in that direction and stop investing so much time and money into stopping pirates, which hasn't done anything but drive people away at this point. Changes like this will help get the PC industry back on track IMO.

Valve are one of the guilty parties when it comes to high prices, and in the UK they always have been.
Valve are having a short sale on one game, a game that I pre-ordered from Amazon for £20, while Steam price is £27.
A game that just after launch could be purchased for $40 from some US B&M stores, while being $50 on Steam.
A game that shouldn't even be $50 given the amount of content it has.

Valve can talk about prices when they have reasonable prices, not when they have short one-off weekend sales.

Other developers are quite capable of dropping the price of their titles, such as Epic, EA and id (UT3, Red Alert 3, ETQW), in the long term, not just for one off weekend sales.

 

[shortylickens]

I think all games are way too damn expensive. Digital downloads at their normal price are especially so.

I'm not worried though. Like most overpriced crap that Americans have been buying over the past 10 years this industry will eventually implode on itself and we will start fresh someday.

 

[Craig234]

Bad logic.

For one, higher sales at a lower price doesn't prove they're overpriced. 'This weekend, new Corvettes for $5,000. Hey a lot sold, proving autos are overpriced'.

Second, if the prices were slashed, sales wouldn't go up for all games the way they do for the weekend special on one game.

The real result of slashed prices would just be fewer, lower quality games.

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: Elcs

Originally posted by: Bateluer
A digital download should be markedly cheaper than a boxed title. While I'm a big fan of Steam, and they've often got some great deals, some pricing makes no sense. Take Dawn of War 2, for example. its currently 50 dollars on Steam. Its sitting on a shelf at Walmart for 39. Granted, there is a convenience factor when buying the game on Steam, but I can make the 5 minute trip to Walmart, buy the game, drive back, and install it before Steam even gets close to finishing the download.

Release a quality title, and people will pay for it. A game that is fun, polished, and offers plenty for the dollar will sell more copies than a title that offers only bugs and half a day's worth of entertainment.

For reference in UK Stores (GAME), Dawn of War 2 is £35 and on UK Steam it is also £35.

But on their website its £24, and for play.com its £22 with free delivery, £24 for gameplay.co.uk as well also free delivery.

Game box delivered to door > Steam >>> Buying it from the store

Plus you can even register some boxed products with steam, get the updates through it etc.

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: AVP
You also have to take into consideration the emotional and mental factors that accompany consumers when they purchase items that are "on sale." When prices are cut, a lot of economic and rational decisions are ignored because people are afraid to miss opportunities and think they are getting a steal. Fixated prices on "weekend deal" levels will not necessarily turn into exactly the same general volume of sales taking into account the decrease after initial offerings.

Yeah I think this may be a big reason why the Steam sales are so successful.

Not to say that lower prices wouldn't help, I think it would definitely increase revenue, but not hundreds or thousands of percent like Steam has seen with their sales.

 

[JoshGuru7]

I do think length is an important consideration. Of course quality matters, but people who put 40 hours into a game in general are getting more value than those that put 4 hours into a game. Presumably, if it was terrible gameplay they wouldn't have put 40 hours into it in the first place. I think too many game reviewers are only dealing with a game for a few hours and not really looking at whether the product will be worth the price to the average consumer in terms of value/replayability.

Mirror's Edge is a great example. It could have been great gameplay, but for a lot of people it would still have been 6 hours with low replay value for $50. Mount&Blade with average gameplay for 25 hours at $20 sure sounds like a better value, especially once somebody tells you about the very active modding scene that adds a lot of replayability on top of that. The metacritic scores don't properly account for the huge difference in value between these two products from my perspective, and I expect that my tolerance towards game pricing is high on average as it is.

 

[JoshGuru7]

Originally posted by: AVP
You also have to take into consideration the emotional and mental factors that accompany consumers when they purchase items that are "on sale."

Agreed. It's like when Safeway normally marks up their products but then lists club card prices at normal prices that then look like great bargains in comparison.

This is perhaps exaggerated even more so in an online context that is very heavily driven by impulse buys. The person who goes to a store specifically to buy Mass Effect is probably going to buy it whether it's $20, $30, or $50 - their demand is pretty inelastic. The person who browses past it online is an entirely different story and a lower price will make a bigger difference in sales volume.

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: Zenoth

Originally posted by: novasatori

Originally posted by: Zenoth
If some random and "boring" game from a no-name company costs $50 then I still don't have a problem with that price, and if I don't like it there's a good chance I will return it for a refund anyway.

You can do that in Canada?

You can't in the US, I remember when you used to be able to.

Most of the time, yes, but not for games in which there's too much DRM (or any DRM I think, I'm not entirely certain). I had a LOT of problems for my local Future Shop to accept my copy of Spore when I returned it, and after meeting with two different guys I finally asked to talk to a tech-support representative, claiming that my reason for return wasn't that I thought it was "boring" but that it refused to work.

They finally accepted, and they didn't test it to make sure it was true or not. I just didn't want to get stuck with such a boring game and I wanted my money back. But that was one rare case out of a very few others I've had. I'd say that a good 8 times out of 10 if you say that your game don't work they will accept to refund it. It may also depend on the store's own return policies.

Um you got extremely lucky then, but Futureshop won't accept open games.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
They need to start with a pricing structure that allows for games to be priced differently.

We have a price structure that allows games to be priced different, it is just market driven. All new games start at a small range of prices ~$50. They then quickly get separated out by the market into crud that costs $10 in the bargain bin, decent games ~$20-$30, and primer games that stay at ~$50 for a year.

Originally posted by: JoshGuru7
The person who goes to a store specifically to buy Mass Effect is probably going to buy it whether it's $20, $30, or $50 - their demand is pretty inelastic. The person who browses past it online is an entirely different story and a lower price will make a bigger difference in sales volume.

We are talking about a luxury item, they are all very elastic. Quite a few people here wait for weeks or months to by the new games on the secondary market. If the prices were more reasonable you would catch a lot more of those people buying the game in from the primary market and the secondary market would suffer.

Originally posted by: Craig234
Bad logic.
For one, higher sales at a lower price doesn't prove they're overpriced. 'This weekend, new Corvettes for $5,000. Hey a lot sold, proving autos are overpriced'.
Second, if the prices were slashed, sales wouldn't go up for all games the way they do for the weekend special on one game.
The real result of slashed prices would just be fewer, lower quality games.

Corvettes and other hard products have a high production cost per unit attached to them. Video games, and especially DD games, have a very low production cost per unit that easily makes volume sales more profitable. Basically if I sell 10 corvettes at $50,000 each, and each cost me $4,000 to make I have made $460,000. If I sell 100 corvettes at $5,000 each with the same cost to produce, I have only made $100,000. Software does not have that problem as the cost to produce each unit is nearly insignificant, so profit is nearly the same if I sell 10 copies at $10, or 100 copies at $1. In this case I want to sell as many copies as I can, so I want to lower my price until I saturate the market.
As for the 'sale effect' you are probably right you would not see the same upturn in sales, but you would see a upturn in sales. The correct price will probably be somewhere above the sale price, but below the current retail price, but even that might be wrong. Lower inital cost could drive a market shift that allows for many new sales. It is up to the marketing people to determine where the right price mark is, and to do that they will probably need to take some risks with some titles to see the effects.

 

[Alex C]

Steam's deals are the only reason I started using it. I was really against the idea of not owning a physical copy of the game, but Bioshock for $5 I couldn't resist. Then there followed a period of "hey, this isn't so bad" and a bought a few other cheap games. When L4D came out, I really wanted to play but thought $50 might be too much, and I managed to get in on a Steam 4 pack for $38 (it was worth it). Now I've preordered Empire: Total War from them at $50, but only because they included Rome. I really like the flexibility that DD gives Steam, I wouldn't buy their games at normal prices, but they've been doing a great job of getting me to buy games I never would have without them, and adding value to the one's I could have bought elsewhere. To me getting a whole other game for free makes up for the lack of a disk and a box.