You guys gave me some good explanation and ideas to why games are priced $60. While it is the industry standard for most physical copies, logically thinking it doesn't compute for the digital form.

The $60 price for the physical medium is composed by the retailer cut( $15) and distribution cut($4). Unless somebody come up with an explanation to why digital mediums cost $60, I assume that they are arbitrarily priced to benefit business partners; I have problem with that and should all the gamers repel this business practice that does not benefit us.

Nintendo are the only publishers-distributors to not offer price protection to retailers. Consequently, you never see Nintendo games go down in price and retailers only order limited copies of ''Nintendo'' games in order to limit their loses if ever the game bombs and to not have an excess of inventories.

All I know is digital is a lot more profitable, especially in extreme cases like Nintendo and Fire Emblem 3DS. Nintendo makes the game and also run the digital storefront, so they must have made HUGE profits on the 3DS digital copies. The only thing the developer has to worry about is bandwith costs when you go digital, just a few gigs to download and voila. Nothing to worry about when it comes to the actual printing and shipping process, that alone saves them a few dollars.

With that said, I bought a an actual copy of the game because it was $30 and the re-sale value is still there, where as digital I'm stuck with the game. Granted I don't mind buying digital (look at Steam sales) if the game is cheap or the game will be awesome.

think of t this way,what has happened to book stores when digital copies become significantly cheaper?

i bet retailers demanded parity prices or wont stock.

I have problem with that if it really happens. If that is not price fixing Maddoff is innocent.

There is absolutely no merit to making a law to have the government control and regulate prices of videogames.  You can't run to the feds every time you have a minor complaint about something as ridiculous as "why does digital cost the same as retail?".

It costs the same, because if it was cheaper, it would completely undercut and destroy the physical games market.   Neither the game console manufactutuers, the publishers, or the retail partners are willing to do anything to undermine the physical games market.

Games are cheaper than ever, nowadays.  Many N64 games cost $59.99 back in 1999 and 2000.  $59.99 today would have been worth $81.68 back in 1999.  Game costs remain flat, while inflation continually goes up, and the purchasing power of the currency precipitously drops.  Not to mention that development costs have increased exponentially in the last ten years, and marketing costs have increased alongside that.

Games are cheaper than they've ever been, and for people to complain about it is the epitome of whining

true... but soon enough people will complain and it would be more noticeable probably next gen... like in 3ds....

i really believe it applies the same with the ebook business... initially they are priced the same esp by apple.... then now they have the anti trust case about pricing it the same with the physical copy... it is not whining...

Yes but back in 2000 you didn't have DLC. Now companys can withold content for DLC to make up that $22 difference in the long run.

But yeah I'm honestly surprised games haven't hit $70 MSRP or even $80.

I wouldnt say its being withheld. Developers can develop a game with having an idea what extra content they will want to offer. Now, once you play a game and you get a mission to go into a building to progress through the story and at the loading screen going into that building it requires you to put a credit card number in to play that ssection then you can claim it being witheld

Well right now its just publishers taken advantage of niche trend in console gaming (at least for new titles).


EA sell their games for £60 on PSN. Thats more than the recommended retail prices which is £49.99