Serious question: why the difference in price between console and PC games?

Discussion in 'Gaming' started by mookboy, 9 Nov 2007.

  1. mookboy

    mookboy BRAAAAAAP

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2002
    Posts:
    3,789
    Likes Received:
    5
    Case in point at Morrisons:

    The Orange Box - £39.99 Xbox360 vs £27.99 PC
    Call of Duty 4 - £37.99 Xbox360 vs £29.99 PC

    Now this isn't me complaining about the jump from PS2 or some other redundant system to PC, this is top notch PC game vs top notch 360. And from what I gather not a million miles from each other code wise either. So, what's the difference and why? I'm sure someone more informed than I, can help answer this as I would genuinely like to know how this difference can be justified for the same game with very little difference bar the hardware required to run it.
     
  2. Jamie

    Jamie ex-Bit-Tech code junkie

    Joined:
    12 Mar 2001
    Posts:
    8,180
    Likes Received:
    54
    Premium Microsoft puts on the game to pay off the cost of the platform?
     
  3. Nexxo

    Nexxo * Prefab Sprout – The King of Rock 'n' Roll

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    34,559
    Likes Received:
    1,981
    Game consoles are subsidised. If they were sold at anything like a decent profit margin they'd cost twice what you pay for them now (rumour has it that some are sold below manufacturing cost). The manufacturer gets its profits from selling games for the console (think the cost of inkjet printers vs. their cartridges), or from licensing others to make games for it. This licence costs, of course.

    PCs are owned by no-one --they are just generic platform, so there are no cost recoup or licensing issues. Hence console games are more expensive than PC games.
     
  4. mookboy

    mookboy BRAAAAAAP

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2002
    Posts:
    3,789
    Likes Received:
    5
    I've heard this argument before, but never really bought into it.

    So who makes the extra money? Microsoft? Surely a markup of £10-12 per title is totally out of proportion though, considering console games sell bucket loads more than PC games? Also in the case of Microsoft, surely they must be making back the loss on the consoles via the peripherals and Xbox Live subscriptions, Marketplace purchases etc?

    Take me as a typical user - neither hardcore or casual: Live Gold yearly £40, say around another £30-40 per year on Arcade purchases, an extra pad, a battery recharger... over a couple of years Microsoft has already made another £200 on top of the console price.

    Seems a good reason a few years ago, but console makers can hardly cry poverty these days, can they?

    Just wondering really, as until recently I've never had to ponder whether to buy the same game on either PC or console.
     
  5. Veles

    Veles DUR HUR

    Joined:
    18 Nov 2005
    Posts:
    6,188
    Likes Received:
    34
    Yet MS games division has only just broken into a profit, there's a lot more costs than just the hardware to factor in, as nexxo said, PCs aren't owned by a single company, there is no expensive PC ad campaign, there is no expensive E3 conference for PC (talking in general terms). MS incurs every cost the console makes, it also doesn't get all of the revenue from the sales, on an individual sale the shop takes most of the revenue off a game/CD/DVD/whatever. Just because something is expensive doesn't mean a lot of profit is being generated from it, Starbucks makes a lot less from it's overpriced coffee than you might think.

    Plus you have to remember that MS need to recoup costs of R&D of not only the console but all it's peripherals, designing a console is very costly.

    This applies to many businesses, for example a Rolls Royce Pegasus might cost you 5 million for the complete thing, they don't make a lot of money from that, where they do make the money is after sales stuff, a compressor blade costs you 2k each if you're the Indian Air Force. Also Nexxo's example of printer cartridges, the main hardware very rarely makes much money, if any at all, because if they jacked the prices up for the hardware they wouldn't sell, so they make their money on the stuff you have to buy to keep your hardware running. In the long run this method ends up being even more profitable.
     
    Last edited: 9 Nov 2007
  6. Neogumbercules

    Neogumbercules What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    14 Aug 2004
    Posts:
    2,464
    Likes Received:
    29
    The only official answer MS has ever given on this issue basically boiled down to "this is how much we feel like charging."
     
  7. johnnyboy700

    johnnyboy700 Minimodder

    Joined:
    27 May 2007
    Posts:
    1,554
    Likes Received:
    18
    This is why I'll stick to PC's as my main game machine, the cost of console games never seems to drop but a PC game quite often starts below the RRP, especially if you look around for it, and if you are prepared to wait for a few months the prices either drop further or you get special offers such as two for £25.

    You can argue the point that if you buy a console then you know that any game you buy will work straight away but with a PC you are forever on the upgrade merry-go-round and you hope that your creaky old rig will run the latest software but if you futureproof your PC as best you can at the start you'll last a long time. Besides, how long does it take for for the next generation of consoles to follow on from the current batch, you can bet that the next X-Box and PS are already under development.
     
  8. Veles

    Veles DUR HUR

    Joined:
    18 Nov 2005
    Posts:
    6,188
    Likes Received:
    34
    Yeah I agree, if you buy a lot of games for a 360 it ends up being as expensive as a PC. My PC cost me £1300 2 years ago, the only upgrade I had was the hard drives which is completely unrelated to gaming. I must have easily spent that much on my 360 by now and that is only a year old.

    I made a poll on a forum once asking if people would prefer it if the 360 was £100 more expensive but games with an RRP of £40 (which means £30-35 online for a AAA new release) and cheaper peripherals but pretty much everyone voted no.
     
    Last edited: 10 Nov 2007
  9. mushky

    mushky gimme snails

    Joined:
    24 Mar 2003
    Posts:
    5,755
    Likes Received:
    3
    Console hardware is subsidised, and also PC games are easier to steal.
     
  10. mookboy

    mookboy BRAAAAAAP

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2002
    Posts:
    3,789
    Likes Received:
    5
    Do you think that PC software games being easier to pirate, motivates lower prices, or should it infact promote higher prices?
     
  11. boiled_elephant

    boiled_elephant Merom Celeron 4 lyfe

    Joined:
    14 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    6,667
    Likes Received:
    914
    Lower prices, I'd guess. The higher they rack the price, the more people shrug their shoulders and get a pirate copy instead for nothing. They have to keep it fairly low for gamers to justify buying them, and when gamers do, it's mainly on good-will and affection for a company's efforts, because lets face it, pirating is stupidly easy now. It's more an act of charity than conformity, to buy a game.
     
  12. will.

    will. A motorbike of jealousy!

    Joined:
    2 Mar 2005
    Posts:
    4,461
    Likes Received:
    20
    Sony have to be making a loss on every PS3 Sold. The Cell processor alone must be worth a fair bit. For at least a few years until they have their manufacturing costs to a bare minimum at least.
     
  13. Amon

    Amon inch-perfect

    Joined:
    1 Jun 2007
    Posts:
    2,467
    Likes Received:
    2
    It took Microsoft something between 2 to 3 years to make up for the investment made in developing the first Xbox.
    It was a joint venture with IBM, although I believe Sony was the primary benefactor, financially, and funded the construction of the research lab for Cell in Texas, whereas IBM handled all of the development.
     
  14. sandys

    sandys Multimodder

    Joined:
    26 Mar 2006
    Posts:
    4,087
    Likes Received:
    358
    Its going to be a mix of what they can get away with tied into the size of the market and the license fees to platform holders.

    The PC market is bigger than the Console market on both the full value and budget side of things the PC is always top, for next gen consoles especially in the UK the market is puny, approx 500k PS3, 1.5M 360 and similar for the Wii, you won't sell your game to everyone who owns the console as different people want different things, if only 5% of the market wants your game its a bloody small sample of people, through what you've sold you have to recoup license fees, distribution, advertising, retailer fees and numerous other things like the support structure.

    If you can't sell a lot you have to charge more to recoup fees.

    Cod 4 is £21 at gamestation on PC. BTW ;) If Xbox is region free you can buy from the US like I do for PS3 and then most games are £25-30 after postage and charges :cooldude:
     
  15. mookboy

    mookboy BRAAAAAAP

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2002
    Posts:
    3,789
    Likes Received:
    5
    Something tells me you might be wrong there.
     
  16. sandys

    sandys Multimodder

    Joined:
    26 Mar 2006
    Posts:
    4,087
    Likes Received:
    358
    Nope you can get the numbers from Chart track which is just talking UK, once the rest of the world gets brought into the equation PC is bound to be even more dominant of course I am talking PC versus next/new gen consoles as per your post rather than the entire console market.
     
  17. sandys

    sandys Multimodder

    Joined:
    26 Mar 2006
    Posts:
    4,087
    Likes Received:
    358
    Of course not only that, because of the secondhand game market the publisher looses out on a number of console game sales whereas on the PC you buy the game new and have no choice. I mean think about it places like Game take the piss, sell something like CoD4 for £45 and sell it secondhand for £35, that second purchase is pure profit for Game but the developers and platform holders who've put all the work in to it get nothing so thats got to be figured into your sale price thats before getting to piracy :rolleyes:

    I'd imagine if more units were sold legitimately then unit prices would come down.
     
  18. Veles

    Veles DUR HUR

    Joined:
    18 Nov 2005
    Posts:
    6,188
    Likes Received:
    34
    You can't compare the entire PC gaming market to just the new gen console market though, to make a more accurate comparison you need to compare people with top end PC hardware which is a very tiny market and is much smaller than the new gen console market. For example, my housemate has a PC that can run games like portal but just barely, I wouldn't call it accurate to add him into the group of PC gamers who are considered "next gen".
     
  19. sandys

    sandys Multimodder

    Joined:
    26 Mar 2006
    Posts:
    4,087
    Likes Received:
    358
    plenty of PC gamers buy and play the latest games but have not very highend systems, you can't just exclude them from the group of people who buy new games.

    Check the amount of crappy video cards that get picked up in the valve hardware survey data from may 07 -august 07 so quite relevant, their money is as good as all the hardcore PC gamers running 8800s etc.
     
  20. Veles

    Veles DUR HUR

    Joined:
    18 Nov 2005
    Posts:
    6,188
    Likes Received:
    34
    It still doesn't equate, there is a massive difference between playing a game on low and playing a game on max at full res. Unless you have high end kit you're not going to be able to pull off a "next gen experience". So comparing the entirety of the PC gaming market to the new generation console market is completely inaccurate. Someone with a 6 series card is essentially still using a PS2 in terms of a console, if you're going to take into account mediocre hardware then you'll have to take into account all of the previous generation of consoles as well. Which means the console market is still much bigger.
     

Share This Page