FairPlay

[Trend Whore]

http://www.fairplay-campaign.co.uk/

[kaze]

umm and this is?

[TreyDay]

It may be a call to warez games until they lower prices. Well, that's all I can conclude from it. Anybody know what it's about?

[Trend Whore]

god damnit. i tried to edit the url into the post, but since the admins refuse to update their version of phpBB....

its http://www.fairplay-campaign.co.uk

its NOT a call to warez games. it still amazes me how many people here are willing to open their mouths and spew crap out when they don't know what their talking about.

[Wasgo]

Right...the only thing missing is anything resembling proof that a decrease in price would represent an overly compensative increase in sales. I know I personally look to people with computer science degrees for help in economics.

Beyond that, from a psychological perspective, decreasing prices could actually lower sales. People would more than likely view a lower price as a sign of an inferior product, like the Game Cube. The PC industry is the standard example for this. Many competing products get killed off because consumers won't trust, for example, a cheaper office suite. Consumers regualarly equate cost with value.

Realistically, the only chance for lower prices would be if the prices rose more slowly than the inflation rate. This approach would lead to a deflation of real video game prices. However, it would also require years to achieve in any meaningful fashion. (Unless inflation skyrockets, in which case we're all screwed anyway.) In the mean time, I personally won't expect my costs to drop.

[melancholy]

I think that's why handhelds are so popular (despite the obvious mobile reasons). You can go out and buy a GBA for the price of one console game. Plus, GBA games are only around $29.99, which is a more reasonable price. Think about it. Do you think Pokemon would have did half as well if it was released on the N64 first for $60, instead of on the GBC for $25? I don't.

[CoasterKing]

Ever since I bought my first Snes, I have found it annoying that we pay ?20 more for games over here. Most of the time I don't buy a game unless it's great, so it's not that I feel ripped off as I don't mind paying for quality. I just don't see why we should pay more here than anywhere else. Not buying a new game for a whole week though!???? How would I survive!?

[pavelbure]

game prices are actually pretty cheap. 14 years ago they were 50 bucks for a nes game. a little later they were 60-70 for a snes game. todays games have a lot more stuff in them, plus inflation over the years. everything has gone up in price from 14 years ago. videogames may be one of the few things to come down.

[SonicJam]

earlier this year, they released the new Xbox console at ?300, insisting that it was a fair price and couldn't be sold any cheaper. Consumers, though, refused to buy it, and Microsoft swiftly slashed the price, first to ?200, and then to ?160. In less than six months, the price of brand new game technology was halved, through consumer power alone.

Yeah, it had nothing to do with sony changing its prices.... this sites such crap... Buy games or don't... I hope no one expects a pahetic site like this to actually work.

[Veggita2099]

game prices are actually pretty cheap. 14 years ago they were 50 bucks for a nes game. a little later they were 60-70 for a snes game. todays games have a lot more stuff in them, plus inflation over the years. everything has gone up in price from 14 years ago. videogames may be one of the few things to come down.

Yea it is a fact that it takes a lot of time and effort to produce modern video games. I mean compare Final Fantasy 10 to Super Mario Bros 2. Both games was 50 dollars when they came out. The media on Mario Bros 2 was probably about 10 bucks compared to about 2 bucks on Final Fantasy 10. Also 50 dollars in 1988 was more money then 50 dollars in 2001. Mario Bros 2, while a good game, probably didn't take near as many people and money to produce. Final Fantasy 10 had voice actors, a professial sound recorder (for the music), and tons and tons of people making it. Also Remember Final Fantasy 10 had to make money for both Sony AND Square as where Mario 2 was by Nintendo so they kept more money.

Do the math and you will see games are actually cheaper now then before. Most new releases now are 50 dollars, but back in the SNES, Genesis, N64 days they was 60 bucks and higher. And now its not uncommon to find new games for 20 bucks and less. Back in the NES days if a game was new for 20 bucks it was considered a steal (or a really pathetic game).

It does still bother me that a video game costs so much more then a DVD movie. I mean it takes more money to produce a movie then it does a video game. But I guess you should consider movies generally make most of there money from people buying movie tickets also. The few movies that are made on DVD/VHS only are usually cheap Disney cartoons made from pre-rendered graphics and therefore cheaper to make. Video Games money is strickly from people buying them.

[The Kron]

Developers would loose even more money if Videogame prices were cut in the UK or worldwide, what that site forgets to mention is the fact that from an official RRP the retailer currently takes the biggest cut, if the price of games were to be reduced retailers most likely wouldnt stock them if the mark up wasnt worth their while, and so the same mark up would most likely remain with the retailer and the Developer/publisher would take the brunt of the loss from the lower price.

Asking for ?25 videogames isnt realistic and is in no way fair to the dev co's with the way the retail market is.

I agree with the people who have said stupid site, there is no thought there or understanding.

[MetalGearRay]

Even Penny Arcade has commented on this.
http://www.penny-arcade.com
I agree that games should be cheaper, perhaps $30 or $40 for a new one, but this is stupid. I am a true gamer, so I will continue to buy $50 games because I understand how much work goes into them

[Lupin[lvl]]

It does still bother me that a video game costs so much more then a DVD movie. I mean it takes more money to produce a movie then it does a video game. But I guess you should consider movies generally make most of there money from people buying movie tickets also. The few movies that are made on DVD/VHS only are usually cheap Disney cartoons made from pre-rendered graphics and therefore cheaper to make. Video Games money is strickly from people buying them.

Actually if you did take it that most movies make most of their money from box office revenue, then they are only earning ?5 a movie, instead of ?20 as people might not bother buy the movie after seeing it on the big screen. Also to say most movies make their revenue in the box office does not mean the U.S box office, many European and Asian movies dont recieve the kinds of box office money that Hollywood or Bollywood counter parts might and though still do get enough

Developers would loose even more money if Videogame prices were cut in the UK or worldwide, what that site forgets to mention is the fact that from an official RRP the retailer currently takes the biggest cut, if the price of games were to be reduced retailers most likely wouldnt stock them if the mark up wasnt worth their while, and so the same mark up would most likely remain with the retailer and the Developer/publisher would take the brunt of the loss from the lower price.

The overall point is prices should be cut, though he suggests it should be on the side of the Developer/Publisher it doesnt negate that prices should drop, be it on the retailers side or not (the potential strike action would effect the retailer as much as it would effect the publisher/developer, which is not at all since the suggestion is to buy the games before or after the period)

And retailers can charge less, case and point is Game, the largest U.K and Irish games retailer, is charging ?40 for the 251 GC mem cards, while Smyths Toy Stores were selling them for ?30. now thats hardware, but that has happened on countless occasions for games too. Retailers can completely afford to drop the prices and should be made to do so, not so much the publisher and certianly not the developer.

The intent of the campaign isnt wrong but some of the reasoning is, as a wise puppet once said

The urge is righteous but the face is wrong, I hope that something better comes along.

I am a true gamer, so I will continue to buy $50 games because I understand how much work goes into them

then as a 'true gamer' you should know the people who worked so hard on those games are getting pittence out of the fist of cash you are handing to your local games retailer

[GoldbergWWE]

So, if Im getting the message correct...
If a game is regularly $100 and Walmart (or Big W where I come from) has a sale making the game $70 .. you wouldnt buy it because you think the creators wont get due money?
You must be rich, as I, a lowly commoner have to rely on sales to get anything. I personally could not afford the PS2 when it came out at over $800 .. its sitting now at $398... within 2 months the price is cut in half..
When i see that kind of stuff, I believe that the companies have a major 'price bloat' system that catches out all the people with to much money to know what to do with it.
All these rumours about Microsoft losing money with each sale is, in my eyes, a pile of poop. The company did not gain their wealth by losing money. THAT is not good business sense at all, and a businessman like bill gates is NOT that stupid. He is not in the business to do things to make the public happy. He's there to make money. If something is failing, Im afraid he would drop it as fast as you can blink
As far as the game makers losing money, they (the good developers)recieve over $400,000 a year. If thats not enough for someone to live on, then they have a serious problem. The CD that the game is put on is worth about 5 cents, and the graphics on the CD is worth about 5 cents. After the initial creation of the game, there is no other expense.. exept for advertizement, and if the company is a good one, then thier way of advertizing wont cost a lot either. So, please, tell me how the companies are losing money on sales when in costs about 10 cents to manufacture, and the cost to buy one is $100 or more... lets do the math shall we?
-G

[MetalGearRay]

Yes, I understand. Someone is making a killing off these games. Whether it's the developers, the publishers, the resellers, I don't know. But I do know that if a game is out there, and I want it, and I have enough money for it, I buy it.

[Nyarlathotep]

All these rumours about Microsoft losing money with each sale is, in my eyes, a pile of poop. The company did not gain their wealth by losing money. THAT is not good business sense at all, and a businessman like bill gates is NOT that stupid. He is not in the business to do things to make the public happy. He's there to make money. If something is failing, Im afraid he would drop it as fast as you can blink

a) Its a fact that consoles tend to sell at either cost or below cost, to get more units into peoples homes and make money from the software licencing - didn't you ever wonder why console games are more expensive than their PC equivalents? Or why (where I live anyway) the exact same game available on all 3 console formats will be more expensive to buy on Xbox?

b) There is a business practice if you are the biggest manufacturer of soemthing to sell at massive losses knowing you can sustain those losses longer than your competition as you have more money to keep yourself afloat - this is basically whats been happening in the RAM market for the last 5 years, where RAM is now being sold at below cost in an attempt to knock the smaller manufacturers out of the market.

[Lupin[lvl]]

Peter Molineux: "The quote from me that appears on the FairPlay site was given in 1996," Molyneux told GamesIndustry.biz yesterday afternoon, "when software had just increased in price - and in actual fact led to the production of some amazing games? Whilst most people, even the IDSA, are anticipating a gradual decrease in the cost of games, we don't know of any major price drop in the near future - year on year the cost of making games has gone up by ?1 million since 1996, when this quote was given."

Sports Interactive: Sports Interactive managing director Miles Jacobson can't be accused of losing the industry either money or jobs in the past few years, with his company riding high on the list of the top-performing technical companies in the UK in this week's Sunday Times TechTrack 100. "It's not realistic", he says bluntly of the FairPlay campaigns aims.

"To me, the arguments of the FairPlay campaign do not add up," he told GI.biz. "The organisers have made one good point - 'the price of games is too expensive, and if they were cheaper we'd buy more of them'. That's true. But the economies of scale are not - how many people do you know who want to own 50 console titles? I've bought just about every console since the NES, and have never owned 50 games on one (even with the ability to get the games for free!)"

Jacobson continues, "They have also interpreted their results in a very journalistic way, rather than a business way - huge costs have been missed out from their equations, and they've given no proof that their equations work, just subjective comments. Without conclusive proof, they won't change a thing."

Overall, FairPlay comes across as an ill-researched and bitter broadside against the games industry as opposed to a consumer campaign, even going so far as to criticise ELSPA's efforts to secure tax breaks for the industry similar to those enjoyed by the film industry as "asking for huge subsidies of taxpayers' money" so that they can continue to "rip off" the consumers.

Like I already said, Publishers and Developers shouldnt be the ones dropping the prices, I've yet to see a retailer able to defend the prices they charge
(and like i said his reasoning is wrong but the cause isnt, hence i dont support his 'fight', but i do support games prices should drop)