- Dec 13, 2004
- 1,963
- 0
- 76
Why are PC games cheaper than console games?
- Thread starter tigersty1e
- Start date
- Aug 22, 2001
- 28,575
- 20,883
- 146
Forbes coverage of why Console games prices are up over last gen. they ahve a nice breakdown of the cost of bringing Gears to market if you click on the link too.
Looks like the only real difference is that console games have TV ads (computer games have the cheaper banner/popup ads), and each game has a licensing fee. Does MS charge a fee to make Windows software? I'm thinking that's probably a no.
no, actually its to make up for the profit loss of selling the console under cost to lure idiots into buying one. learn your facts.
Fenixgoon
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2003
- 31,613
- 10,027
- 136
out of curiosity, have there been any articles regarding the number of GFW subscribers? i'm curious considering only halo2 and shadowrun use it so far.
that, and online gaming has been around forever on the PC, so something like GFW really isn't necessary like it is for the xbox
- Aug 22, 2001
- 28,575
- 20,883
- 146
I'm not certain what you mean "only Halo 2 and ShadowRun use it" ? GFW catalog Starting to be a fair number of titles in the program, including Crysis, Alan Wake, and Hellgate:London.
*tongue in cheek* The PC versions are probably cheaper because they are usually just a 1/2 ass crappy port over from console anyways.
VashHT
Diamond Member
- Feb 1, 2007
- 3,071
- 876
- 136
Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
I'm not certain what you mean "only Halo 2 and ShadowRun use it" ? GFW catalog Starting to be a fair number of titles in the program, including Crysis, Alan Wake, and Hellgate:London.
*tongue in cheek* The PC versions are probably cheaper because they are usually just a 1/2 ass crappy port over from console anyways.
I think he means that you have to use LIVE for halo 2 and shadowrun multiplayer. Personally I hope this whole idea of forcing people to use LIVE on their computer is retarded and I hope it dies. Event hough I have a gold LIVE account, I absolutely never want to be forced to use it for my PC just to play a game online. Luckily it seems so far that mostly MGS games are using it, and I hope it never gains support. Even though I use LIVE I never saw the big deal with it, its really nothing special, and it seems like I'm paying for something that I always got for free(hosting games with my connection?).
- Aug 22, 2001
- 28,575
- 20,883
- 146
I think piracy might have something to do with it. You can only make decent money on PC games if they are really worth it. I mean, console kids will get their mommy to buy any horribly designed/poor gameplay game (they even play FPS with a gamepad O.O). Most people playing on consoles are complete noobs in tech world. They prolly don't know about existence of p2p. PC players on the other hand, quite often would download the game before they buy it (at least my friends do). So producers will sell games for less to get people to buy them. For ex.: after I tried NFS: MW, i figured - this isn't a great game. Fun, but I won't pay $50 for it. Then I see it at the store for $20... and I get it. On the other hand, I got HL2 right away for $52... But I knew it would be good without trying it out first. Painkiller, Quake 4, Doom 3, PoP, and many other games were downloaded first by me and then purchased. Games like BF2, BF2142, RE4, and some others were also downloaded - I tried them, cussed a bit, uninstalled, and never bought them
novasatori
Diamond Member
- Feb 27, 2003
- 3,851
- 1
- 0
I also think it has something to do with piracy
There are very few games that aren't available for download via some form of P2P. If they priced PC games too high, everyone would download them, you don't need firmware mods, mod chips, etc to pirate a PC game. So basically anyone with a computer that is capable of running the game can pirate it.
Its a fine balance of trying to maximize profits while not losing your customers to piracy.
That's how I'd think it works anyways.
There are very few games that aren't available for download via some form of P2P. If they priced PC games too high, everyone would download them, you don't need firmware mods, mod chips, etc to pirate a PC game. So basically anyone with a computer that is capable of running the game can pirate it.
Its a fine balance of trying to maximize profits while not losing your customers to piracy.
That's how I'd think it works anyways.
Jag is correct they rack up the price to cover the loss of the console units. Piracy might play a part too but a small one if it does. I'm just glad they are cheaper than console games. I dislike consoles and their controllers but thats just me.
It's a game patch.
I personally love Live and my 360. FPS games arent so bad with the controller if you've had a little practice.
Schadenfroh
Elite Member
- Mar 8, 2003
- 38,416
- 4
- 0
I still prefer a keyboard / mouse over some console controller with autoaim. I will pick up a 360 when Microsoft provides keyboard / mouse support with software to emulate the controller so I can play all of the games with the keyboard / mouse. A DVI port would be nice as well, but not as critical as a mouse / keyboard.
MmmSkyscraper
Diamond Member
- Jul 6, 2004
- 9,475
- 1
- 76
shortylickens
No Lifer
- Jul 15, 2003
- 82,854
- 17,365
- 136
Well, the MAIN reason (as has already been pointed out) is they actually lose money on the console itself. They need to make it back with the extra 10 bucks on the game.
If they sold the console for the standard cost of manufacturing plus 20 percent markup, nobody would buy it. Too expensive.
The whole image of the console market is that its supposed to be better and faster than a computer and much cheaper. Problem is: Its not.
So they had to come up with a very unusual business model where they sell the main product for less than cost, and make it all back with the peripheral products (the games and controllers and cables).
I'm too ticked about the piracy issue to discuss that right now. When I calm down I may comment on it.
If they sold the console for the standard cost of manufacturing plus 20 percent markup, nobody would buy it. Too expensive.
The whole image of the console market is that its supposed to be better and faster than a computer and much cheaper. Problem is: Its not.
So they had to come up with a very unusual business model where they sell the main product for less than cost, and make it all back with the peripheral products (the games and controllers and cables).
I'm too ticked about the piracy issue to discuss that right now. When I calm down I may comment on it.
That's treading a little too close to the idea of PC/console convergence. The barrier between the 2 is made up largely of contrivances (and becomes moreso over time), but there's a necessity to it. If the barrier were removed and everyone owned a machine built to a universal spec that did everything without many hitches, there'd be less innovation. There would also be less profit made via retail sales of both hardware and OS software.
That's probably not what you were getting at, but this is something that's been in my mind the last few weeks - how the complexity and unpredictability of the PC has driven developers towards consoles, but at the same time, continues to enrich the technology pool. It's a double edged sword. I think we'll have that artificial barrier in place for some time to come, but maybe the consoles will get better controllers. The Wii actually seems to be a step in the right direction with the use of motion sensors, accelerometers and such.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 8K
-
Facebook
Twitter