Um.. Ok.. so why are digital titles $60 again?

because you own a console? Not that digital games should cost less than physical copies, the materials that go into printing and distributing a video game amount to a very small $4 per copy. So maybe $5 less.

source: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0120a8b7438c970b-600wi

I've read other articles that even go as low as a US dollar or less.

Very few games are worth $60 to begin with. I don't know how they even make sales when the prices remain at that level for so long.

Which is not retail. Which I work in...and I have a business degree in business.

You know **** all....

@sts106mat: You're trying too hard. Some people aren't worth the time, nor effort.

Consolites will take whatever console makers give them and like it.

So you recognize that Gamestop's whole business is based on selling new and used games. So perhaps you could use all that business knowledge to explain why Gamestop would sell a console that undermined that very business? Why would any retailer sell a console for about cost without the hopes of making a profit on the games? And what would happen to the sales of a console that is only sold by the manufacturer and it's competition is given marketing and displays at every major retailer?

To put it simple, greed. Also it's not just on consoles it's rampant on PC also.

Gaming is a business too. Digital movies can be as much as their disc counterpart. This is why I game share with my bro on the Xbox One. At least one of us could buy a new release at $60 but both of us could play on each of our consoles. Also I'm glad there's various ways to gather up Xbox credits and there's also sales for them. I wish the PS4 would let you game share like PS3 and Xbox One.

Yes, but that ruins the economy - as if the games were priced more reasonably from the get-go - especially the ones from the makers that know they aren't very good, the sales would've been better. The publishers have to actively keep track of the sales and change their pricing more often according to the situation.

They don't want to piss off the retailers

Aren't those little plastic discs only like $0.05 anyway.

Its business. Let's be honest the console makers have a rough enough time making money. If you don't like the price wait for the inevitable drop

It was that way on the 360, when a title first released Digital it was the same price as Retail and in some cases even more expensive, in the case of Skyrim it was 45 quid on XBL games on demand but i could pick it up at retail for 40 quid.

Microsoft and SONY are not doing it right quite frankly, they have not embraced one of the Biggest Draws of Digital downloads which is games being Cheaper.

They should take a serious look at Steams Business model and realise that Cheaper games and awesome deals all the time is one of the many reasons steam is so successful.

Microsofts DRM policies are aweful as Well, with the 360 the DRM is tied to the Console and not to the Account, if you billbox breaks you have to transfer your license to the new console and you can only do that once every 4 months.

@pyro1245 said:

because you own a console? Not that digital games should cost less than physical copies, the materials that go into printing and distributing a video game amount to a very small $4 per copy. So maybe $5 less.

source: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0120a8b7438c970b-600wi

I've read other articles that even go as low as a US dollar or less.

Very few games are worth $60 to begin with. I don't know how they even make sales when the prices remain at that level for so long.

By reading that.. $4 is calculated for Distribution/Goods and $7 for Returns by the retailers. Two fees that are negated by Digital products.

So theoretically DD games should cost around $49.00 (USD) new. It's funny.. that was my guess as to how much these games SHOULD cost.

I honestly believe that retailers have a hand in the pricing structure of Digital content. Manufacturer's don't want to "rock the boat" with the sellers of there physical media.

btw, thanks for the post.

I agree, its fucking bullshit. There is no excuse why DD games cost the same as retail games since there is no middle man involved..they should be at least $40-$50.

It has drawbacks, but certainly just as many/less than physical copies.

The manufacturing/printing costs of the discs themselves are not even $1 in bulk, so it's just a matter of how much an entire shipment costs to get to the destination, the "overhead" costs of the store to stock it and maintain inventory. I could see that totalling up to about $10 for a mass produced game - it probably varies a bit depending on how many units are produced/shipped. The bigger the game, the less each unit costs to distribute physical copies. Everything else is marketing, development costs, inflated executive bonuses at EA/Activision, etc.

That being said, they should probably knock about $5 or $10 off digital games. For a $59.99 game, the digital version should be $49.99. From a customer point of view, it seems crazy to pay the same price for digital. If not just for the fact that you cant re-sell or trade in a digital game. Also it totally eliminates inventory risk (i.e. having inventory you can only sell for a loss). However expectations for more radical discounting for digital version is off base.

Gamestop is in the business of selling video games and consoles. They don't have much choice but to sell whatever gaming consoles the manufacturers produce - even if it might be against their long term interests. The alternative would be to develop their own console or content (i.e. Barnes and Noble creating the Nook, instead of selling Amazon's Kindle). That didn't work out so well for them, at the end of the day Gamestop has an inevitable fate where their business model is irrelevant.

If Sony or MS produced a console that was 100% digital, Gamestop could say no to stocking it on principal. But I'm sure Target, Wal-Mart, Costco, etc would all stock the hardware regardless of the trends in physical packaged games. I do think Gamestop still has barely enough power that if one console went all digital, and the other didn't, that it would be hard for the "all digital" console to win the console war. That's probably why all new generation consoles still support physical discs. However I think we are probably 1 generation away from where that won't even matter anymore.

of course cheaper is better but if there was a $15 difference i'd certainly consider getting games digitally, right now i only get boxed copy.

Yeah, that isn't the way anything works. When you buy something with a high profile brand name (I.E most of the stuff you purchase) only a tiny fraction of that money actually goes to the people who make it. The rest goes to the world of middlemen and financiers. The folks who do the grunt work tend to be the largest numerically, but they also tend to share one of the smallest pieces of the pie.

The difference between a $50 copy of Titanfall and a $60 copy of Titanfall is that EA and Microsoft get to split an extra ten dollars. The people who actually built the code can end up jobless after the game is released regardless of if the game is a hit or a bomb.

But why would Target, Walmart, Cosco, etc. sell a console for little to no gains with no hope for a hefty profit on the games? It's not just Gamestop that likes the retail markup on video games.

The only way any store would carry such a console is if, like PC's, there was a healthy markup on the hardware. Then we would have, say, the PS4 for $500 or even $600. How well did the PS3 do at that price? (And that was when Sony was losing more than $200 each.)

Because you are getting the exact same game. The physical materials are just the cost of business for the publisher.

This. Thank you for saying this.

I agree. But the Digitals I do own on consoles were all bought on sale. 360 34 games, and PS3 27, not including the PS+ ones.

I don't like a full price on digital games. I mean some games actually should cost more than $60 whether it's digital or on discs because they deserve it and some games deserve to cost $40 mostly those multiplayer games like COD for example or even Evolve. Anyways, pricing is f***ed up and no one has looked into it. The industry is changing and digital games is becoming the norm, yet the market fails to meet customers expectation. No way I am buying games at $60 on PSN NO WAY! except the ones I really want

Breaking NEWS!!!!!!

Publishers are Greedy.

If you believe all that crap you wrote, you are more of an idiot than I thought. Way to be a corporate shill. Keep choking on whatever bs they feed you. There is no reasonable reason for them to be the same price. End of story.

It's dumbass like you that just go along with it that have caused this in the first place.

ok well if there is a price difference for digital games on consoles it could be for a few reasons. maybe they're not allowed to undercut retailers carrying the games, maybe the publishing costs for PSN/XBL are quite steep, maybe there are extra QA steps.

i don't know.

DANCE MAGIC DANCE

I like having hard copies, but Im not going to say no to digital when it starts being worth the difference. Until then, I'll just keep going to Gamestop when I get paid to pick up whatever I want, unless of course its like Outlast where they dont have hard copies available (For Xbox One)

They save so much in packaging, shipping costs, etc there is absolutely no reason a digital copy should cost as much as a physical title, yet this is the shitty world we live in. Hell, even a digital console copy has a reasonable guarantee of they bought it new instead of paying $5 less for buying it used at Gamestop.

Until people start complaining and back it up with lower sales the cycle will never change.

@highking_kallor:

Fact, fact, fact, and yet more facts. He's stating the truth - not being what you call 'a corporate shill'. A stupidly huge amount of work goes into making games.

You two are morons. They saving on freight, packaging and you got to use your own data to download the game. Why are they the same price again? But it’s not greed? Why then? They save cost yet keep the money themselves? You buy digital games at the same rrp price yet it cost you more in the end and you have less rights. Way to go!

Looking after the consumer once again.

Oh and dont keep crying they work hard. We all do. Dosent mean its ok to ripoff your customers.

How old are you? Have you ever owned/operated a business?

Do you have any idea how a business is run and how the concept of making money works?

Wanting to make money is not greed.

You clearly must either be a teenager with no world experience, or completely out to lunch.

Not going to respond anymore. You clearly dont have a clue and are helping these companies to abuse you. Good one.

Because of stupid publishers like Ubisoft and Activision.

To be honest, if your business degree was in something other than business that would be rather surprising

...because apparently that is what the market is willing to pay?

this..most gamers don't know the reasons why most games are sold for $60..so why not take advantage of it

So you are giving up because you don't have an argument to stand on? Alright then.

I hope you never own a business that employs other people.

@lostrib:

i swear that once upon a time he said he had a bachelor of science degree.

Not so, they are both just as dependant on each other, Digital Distribution makes up nowhere near enough of the Market for games to support publishers with DD alone (34%) they need the retail branches to get there product to customers who Buy retail, customers who still make up the Bulk of the Market (66%).

Why waste my time. Your wrong. You cant see it. I dont care if you continue to sprout off like a moron.

You claim that I am wrong. So prove it.

If you are willing to start an argument, and have a reasonable position to stand on, then you should be more than capable and willing to see it through to it's conclusion. If you cannot argue my point, and just claim that I am wrong without any proof or reasoning, then you are failing to prove your point and failing the argument.

Backing down and saying "I won't argue with a moron" just makes you look stupid. At the very least prove your point with some evidence.

You fail to comprehend simple concepts. Not going to waste anymore of my time.

What are these "simple concepts". You don't even understand the basics of a debate. You say I'm stupid? You can't be right by claiming your opponent is wrong without reason.

Because video games exist for one reason, and one reason only.

Not for artistic expression.

Not to make you happy.

To make money.

That's it.

$60 is more money than an amount of money less than $60. And publishers think they can get that much money for them. When sales dwindle, prices are lowered to again boost sales.

Oh, come on. Quit with the name calling. It doesn't help prove anybody's point.

I never said they should be the same price. If anything, I believe the digital version should be a bit cheaper for the reasons you describe. Even by making the games $50, they'll achieve a higher profit than if they were at retail(depending on digital policies, of course). I stated why I think the prices are the same earlier in the thread.

Foxhound did have some truth to his post, though. Perhaps I should have presented that a little differently. Apologies if I came across as condescending.