http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=9901

Haha, its possible for some games to retail upwards of $100!

Oh god

Games in America that release for $50 sell in Australia for $100-110
Games in America selling for $100 will mean like $200 games

Just another reason to fondle my Wii instead of getting a Pee-S3.

The possibility of PS3 games having astronomical prices doesn't surprise me at all. What does interest me is the mention of developers feeling like prices are too high.

Did you guys actually read the article? He said that it won't go as high as a hundred dollars. It sounds like he's just allowing for the possibility of them having to go over sixty, which I'd guess would mean sixty-five or seventy. He pointed out that people have grown accustomed to 60 being the limit, so it would be unwise to shoot a lot higher than that.

Personally I think 60 is generally too high for a game anyway, but sheesh. I swear sometimes you guys are almost as bad as the LOL GAYCUBE retards.

that's what I get for the one time I don't read the article.

Also, I'm not an anti-PS3 pro-Wii fanboy. I'm a "Whoohoo! My budget means I can afford a Wii!", while I look at the PS3 with longing, just because I won't be able to have one ;_;

that's what I get for the one time I don't read the article.

Also, I'm not an anti-PS3 pro-Wii fanboy. I'm a "Whoohoo! My budget means I can afford a Wii!", while I look at the PS3 with longing, just because I won't be able to have one ;_;
Save up money to move over here, and I'll buy you a Wii :D

cartridge games for the snes and megadrive/genesis were sometimes around $60/£60 (i sometimes wonder if these companies know the public understand exchange rates)
i guess bluray disks can't be mass produced as cheaply as dvd's or cd's, much like cartridges were more expensive than diskettes.

why the hell dsid sony waste money developing this new technology when dvd's are fine for now. now prices for their console and games are stupidly high! it just seems like such a stupid risk.

why the hell dsid sony waste money developing this new technology when dvd's are fine for now. now prices for their console and games are stupidly high! it just seems like such a stupid risk.
They are way too confident with how well the PS3 is going to fare, as well as Blue-Ray.

EDIT: Also, the article says that prices aren't expected to reach $100. But it's possible.

they probaby thought that the blue ray was the thing of the future and wanted to be ahead of the crowd

cartridge games for the snes and megadrive/genesis were sometimes around $60/�60 (i sometimes wonder if these companies know the public understand exchange rates)
i guess bluray disks can't be mass produced as cheaply as dvd's or cd's, much like cartridges were more expensive than diskettes.

why the hell dsid sony waste money developing this new technology when dvd's are fine for now. now prices for their console and games are stupidly high! it just seems like such a stupid risk.
not all games will be on blu-ray discs, just like at launch for the PS2 a lot of games were on CDs, not DVDs.

They are way too confident with how well the PS3 is going to fare, as well as Blue-Ray.

EDIT: Also, the article says that prices aren't expected to reach $100. But it's possible.

Sure, "it's possible." It's also possible that tomorrow Wal Mart is going to announce they are giving their items away for free, and that all of them are going to come with a complimentary K-Mart logo magnet.

That would be pretty bad business, though, so we can generally assume that, if everyone at Wal Mart doesn't go batshit loco tomorrow, that's not going to happen. Same thing with PS3 games costing a hundred bucks. The guy in this interview never says anything implying that they will, and since they are already charging an arm and a soul for the machine itself, I think you can rest assured that no PS3 games will cost a hundred bucks.


they probaby thought that the blue ray was the thing of the future and wanted to be ahead of the crowd

Blu Ray is Sony's own product, so from their point of view of course it is the wave of the future. It's not an issue of being ahead though, it's an issue of them trying to make Blu Ray the wave of the future, because it's in their own best interests to do so. They're competing directly with HD-DVD.

Anyway, the costs of games these days have nothing to do with the manufacturing cost of the material. Well, I guess they have something to do with it�that's a lot of the reason so many companies switched to Sony back in the original PlayStation era. But the main thing is the costs of developing the game. Cartridges are more expensive to produce than CDs, so did you ever wonder why Game Boy games are cheaper than PlayStation ones? Because PlayStation games are expected to have fancy-schmancy graphics, hip cinematics and soundtracks, and DARK AND MYSTERIOUS storylines. You have to pay a lot of money for all that shit.

Sure, "it's possible." It's also possible that tomorrow Wal Mart is going to announce they are giving their items away for free, and that all of them are going to come with a complimentary K-Mart logo magnet.

That would be pretty bad business, though, so we can generally assume that, if everyone at Wal Mart doesn't go batshit loco tomorrow, that's not going to happen. Same thing with PS3 games costing a hundred bucks. The guy in this interview never says anything implying that they will, and since they are already charging an arm and a soul for the machine itself, I think you can rest assured that no PS3 games will cost a hundred bucks.
Why do you always have to come up with some ludacrious explanation/example?

The fact that they even mentioned upwards of $100, and saying they don't expect them to be, doesn't mean its like 'oh yeah anything is possible', like whatever that Walmart shit was about. If they don't think any games are going to cost that much, don't even mention it in the first place. Just say that most will cost $60-$70. But since they threw it out there, and considering what Sony is doing with the PS3, I see it as more than a simple possibility. Like you said, they are charging a lot for a video game console, which they have yet to justify that price. So I wouldn't put it past them to retail some games upwards of $80-$100.

Oh boy, I want the PS3 to crash and burn now.

Blu Ray is Sony's own product, so from their point of view of course it is the wave of the future. It's not an issue of being ahead though, it's an issue of them trying to make Blu Ray the wave of the future, because it's in their own best interests to do so. They're competing directly with HD-DVD.
sony does not get royalties from blu-ray discs being used. basically, sony decide that it'd side with blu-ray over HD-DVD. all that means is that they're going to support it. if they thought HD-DVD had a better chance of succeeding, they'd be backing that, not blu-ray.

and while you're right that the majority of costs associated with games going up is the production, the media, when it's new like this, can be fairly significant. the profit margins on games are low as it is. if it costs them 8$ to be able to stick something on a blu-ray disc, that's a pretty damn huge chunk of their profits-- much larger than most people realize.

Does it cost $8? I would expect it to be lower than that, but I really don't know.


Why do you always have to come up with some ludacrious explanation/example?

The fact that they even mentioned upwards of $100, and saying they don't expect them to be, doesn't mean its like 'oh yeah anything is possible', like whatever that Walmart shit was about. If they don't think any games are going to cost that much, don't even mention it in the first place. Just say that most will cost $60-$70. But since they threw it out there, and considering what Sony is doing with the PS3, I see it as more than a simple possibility. Like you said, they are charging a lot for a video game console, which they have yet to justify that price. So I wouldn't put it past them to retail some games upwards of $80-$100.

The ludacrious explanation/example was an analogy. They are often used to emphasize a point. In this case, the point I was emphasizing was that although businesses can do incredibly stupid things that they've never implied they are going to do, it is sort of silly to talk about how they JUST MIGHT DO IT.

The only time he mentioned a hundred dollar price point was when he said, "It would be a stretch for us to turn around and say they are suddenly $99.99." He was using that as an example. He could just as easily have said a million billion dollars. (And I'm sure that, had he said that instead, somebody would still have created a thread condemning Sony over it. PS3 GAMES TO BE AFFORDABLE ONLY FOR BILL GATES! WHAT A SCANDAL! LOL!)

I'm only making an issue of it because this thread smacks of that anti-Sony-shit hunt that everybody has been on lately. I've never been a fan of their impact on video games, but really. Can we get over this thing where for some reason we have to post a link to every single article we can possibly construe as giving us something to diss the PS3 over? I'd like to think we are a little beyond the point where we have personal vendettas against plastic machines.

Incidentally, "ludacrious" has a really great ring to it. I might just try to create some use for that.

over here some N64 games costed upward 80$ (Paper Mario, Conker, Majora) so Ninty still wears the crown of selling the most expensive games sofar
and the current prices for virtually any console/handheld are ridiculously high
i think the price for most DS games are outrageous
they rarely have high production costs and i doubt the small cartridges cost allot so i really dont get it why most of'm retail @40$ a piece when most of'm(even the great ones) arent even worth 20$

i'd happily pay 100$ for a game that would be actually worth it tho
if Sony would actually manage to get Killzone 2 to the level of detail as shown in the trailer and manage to get open ended gameplay, great leveldesing, insane amounts of variable realistic ai and keep it all consistent at around 20+ hours in that cinematic flavour they teased us with i'd definitly pay up
i doubt they'l even come close to it tho

The only time he mentioned a hundred dollar price point was when he said, "It would be a stretch for us to turn around and say they are suddenly $99.99." He was using that as an example. He could just as easily have said a million billion dollars. (And I'm sure that, had he said that instead, somebody would still have created a thread condemning Sony over it. PS3 GAMES TO BE AFFORDABLE ONLY FOR BILL GATES! WHAT A SCANDAL! LOL!)
Even so, I still wouldn't be surprised to see a decent amount of PS3 games creep up to $70 or $80.


I'm only making an issue of it because this thread smacks of that anti-Sony-shit hunt that everybody has been on lately. I've never been a fan of their impact on video games, but really. Can we get over this thing where for some reason we have to post a link to every single article we can possibly construe as giving us something to diss the PS3 over? I'd like to think we are a little beyond the point where we have personal vendettas against plastic machines.
It's pretty easy to go on a Sony witch-hunt when they have been doing some seriously stupid shit for the past several months. And besides, is there anything wrong with letting people see these links? It sparks conversation and debate, and it's a lot more than the occasional 'what's your favorite game' thread or something like that.

Yet, of course there are going to be those pricks who wait in line for hours to buy a PS3 because they HAVE to be the first to get them.

Lame.

Blue-ray will prevail now. as time warner left HD-dvd and signed to Blue-ray. Man that sucks i did not want sony to win (fuc*ing heroes)

As for PS3, i do not think it will do very well. i mean 360 is nearly half the price and it has better graphiocs than PS3 in 1080P. i mean Gears of War is 100 times better than all PS3 games. and by the tiem sony are on second wave M$ will be on third even fourth. plus uf you want 1080P out of the PS3 you have to buy the $600 (1K in AUS) pack. But warhawk did look cool.

And go wii. i mean i will be cooking with it, sewing people up with it, and eventually facing Darth Vader alone in my room. (lol i am such a geek)

over here some N64 games costed upward 80$ (Paper Mario, Conker, Majora) so Ninty still wears the crown of selling the most expensive games sofar

Where is "here"?

He is Belgian afaik.

They say that ps3 games will cost less to make then ps2 games. So why the hell are they increasing the price?!?! Fucken greedy little shits with their screwed up minds. They can only think about MONEY!

They say that ps3 games will cost less to make then ps2 games.
hahahaha

What does interest me is the mention of developers feeling like prices are too high.

Hah, its slowly starting to come out of the wood-work, but some of them are screaming because costs are too high and support is lacking. Something's got to change.


They say that ps3 games will cost less to make then ps2 games.

That's just stupid. Where on earth did you get an idea like that?

i mean 360 is nearly half the price and it has better graphiocs than PS3 in 1080P.

I can't see how one console in the same generation can 'have better graphics', graphics are down to the game developers and there really isn't much of a difference between the ps3's and xbox 360's specs as far as i can see (because i didn't look too much into them both)

The fact that you didn't look into them much is why you aren't aware of a difference. The PS3 is significantly more powerful than the Xbox 360, which is why it's so expensive. Obviously the developer plays a big role, but it is absolutely true that some consoles are capable of producing better graphics than others, even in the same generation. For example, on multi-platform games, Xbox games almost always look the best.

Whether the difference is really worth anything is another matter. As far as I'm concerned the current generation of consoles should be more than powerful enough for a developer to accomplish anything they need to. All this fancy-schmancy graphics pushing that Sony and MS are doing seems like a waste to me. Reason #5,789 why I like Wii and not the others.