sabastian said:
kupomogli said:
I think cheaper video games would sell more. Not $10 or $15 cheap, but $40 instead of $60.
I used to buy a lot of games full price at $50, but after the jump to $60, I dont just buy less, I buy far less. I instead play the waiting game. When the games drop down to $40, I still don't buy them because once they start to drop in price from $60, it's a much shorter time to wait for them to hit $20 or less.
If games were $40 at the start though, I'd buy a lot more of them again. I'm good with paying $20 for just about anything I'm remotely interested in, and another $20 is worth it compared to waiting a few months to a year.
If game prices are going to drop though, they'd have to get third parties on board and all the first party publishers would have to be in agreement. If one first party publisher starts selling their games at a reduced MSRP, and that's the only one doing it, everyone would probably think the game must not be very good for launching at a reduced price. Sony tried it with a few of their games last gen and every one of them sold worse than any $60 game they've released last gen. |
This is partially true. Sony tried a cheaper pricing last year with both Puppeteer and Ratchet & Clank:ITN, and they both did not sell too well. (We still dont know about the digital sales though), but I can honestly say, I loved the pricing of Puppeteer. The game was a blast and the price was perfect.
|
The point I was making wasn't that it was any good, but lower pricing probably made people avoid the titles. It probably would have sold better if they released it and charged people $60 when it launched instead of $40.
Sly Thieves in Time was the other one that launched at $40. Had cross buy on it also.
