Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper"

Posted by: Darleen03

Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/20/13 10:15 AM

I really want the game Secret Files 3, but its expensive because its an import...Now its a hard copy so I can expect to pay more...

I just can't understand how a download is the same price smirk

Maybe someone can explain why downloads are the same price....

Posted by: BrownEyedTigre

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/20/13 10:35 AM

The price of the game, is the price of the game regardless of how it's delivered to you. I know we have a dozen or more threads on the same issue over the last 5 or more years and there is no explanation except that that's the way it is.
Posted by: Darleen03

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/20/13 11:01 AM

I know this topic on the subject is getting old....

I was hoping on maybe one of the publishers to come, and explain....

One thought that comes to my mind is...

If it was cheaper to download no one would buy hard copies duh

Oh Well... It is what it is.. yes
Posted by: Kaki's Sister

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/21/13 05:24 AM

Not me Darleen. I'd pay more if I could get a hard copy!
Posted by: Mad

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/21/13 07:38 AM

Me too !! yes
Posted by: oldbroad

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/21/13 10:12 PM

Me three!!!
Posted by: Draclvr

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/21/13 10:50 PM

And I have!

I think if we knew first hand the work it takes to develop a first class game, it might explain a lot. When we pay for a game, we are paying for the work, artistic design, voice actors, hard work, frustration and heart and soul that go into making a game. As Ana says, the delivery method shouldn't make any difference. There are also costs associated with setting up a download site and a secure payment system for downloading games.

I know I'm learning a lot about all this after becoming part of Agustin Cordes' Kickstarter campaign for Asylum.
Posted by: kazzmo

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/22/13 12:39 AM

I would gladly pay more for a hard copy boxed game. It makes no sense to me to pay the same for a download. I started to buy a download recently and discovered I could get the same game at the same price in DVD case.
Posted by: Mad

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/23/13 08:11 AM

Wouldn't it be great if developers were always able to totally market AND supply their own games. Then (piracy permitting) they would surely reap the rewards for their labours ??

I would certainly support them - for download or disk versions. [preferably DRM Free.]

But I expect for some the costs to set all that up would just be way too prohibitive whistle
Posted by: gremlin

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/23/13 10:20 AM

I can't see why more development houses don't do just that, Mad.

Most development houses run a website, contracting out the e-fulfilment side of a download store to a place like Steam, or Amazon, or other such credible stores can't be *that* hard that it wouldn't be preferable to dealing with conventional games publishers.

Many small bands do it for their music, no reason why developers couldn't do it too.

ETA: there's even a name for the process: "disintermediation" ... and the music publishers and games publishers (i.e. old-school sellers of plastic disks) hate it.
Posted by: thehood

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/23/13 10:46 AM

The price for Download and retail are the same, because the retailer want it.

the analysis below is true ONLY for PC, for Consoles, there are other specific surprises smile

Of course you could imagine that, as a customer, you have the right to pay only for what things worth, and of course it is not true... We are the consumer, the lower step on the food chain.

So to make a summary of the situation, the download version cost less, of course, there is not "cost of goods"(that is 0.5-1USD) that's the box the manual.
There are no logistics (no truck to deliver boxes from warehouse to warehouse). the cost for delivery of games in term of bandwitdth is nothing, few cents for the people delivering you the game. the distribution cost retail vs web shop is something like 30-50% of the price on retail, less than 20 on digital, of course some portals take more, but they bring something more usually, or they sell so little that it doesn't worth the embarassment.
In the end you could pay your Digital version 30% less than the retail. BUT the retail is blackmailing the publisher and say : if you put it at 19.99 in digital and 29.99 retail, we'll put it too at this price, otherwise all people will buy digital over retail, and retail will sell ONLY to the the people that REALLY want a box, not enough people to actually reference and carry a product.
So if you want a box, and if publisher make boxes, they have to keep the price of the game more expensive for everyone. Of course many publishers are not interested into that, and stop to make boxes.

this is why, there will never be price differences for NEW games between digital and retail, after few weeks or months, you'll be able to observe divergence between retail and digital.
Posted by: Marian

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/23/13 11:20 AM

Thanks, thehood; your input is appreciated. wave yes
Posted by: Mad

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/24/13 11:26 AM

gremlin smile

I meant for developers not to contract out any aspect of their game distribution and have customers buy downloads or disk versions direct from them.

Maybe that would be too expensive - or even downright impossible ?? Never having been involved in the industry I just don't know woozy

But I don't wish to prolong this discussion if the Mods prefer it not to be carried on ....
Posted by: Jarkeld

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/24/13 11:58 AM

For downloads there is the matter of bandwith costs. All those downloads aren't cheap, especially when a lot of people try to download it at the same time. I loved the Pins and Needles special edition of Dark Fall I & II that Jonathan Boakes distributed himself. Jonathan's blog
Posted by: Darleen03

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/24/13 12:34 PM

Thank You, thehood

It is nice of you to explain the differences.

You do make sense on the subject...
Posted by: gremlin

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/25/13 02:09 PM

Originally Posted By: Mad

I meant for developers not to contract out any aspect of their game distribution and have customers buy downloads or disk versions direct from them.

The reason I suggested a developer would chose to contract out those services is because e-retail is something that's very easy to do centrally for a lot of clients - look at how eBay and Amazon Marketplace handle all the payment processing, and website management for lots of companies. No sense in a game developer re-inventing the e-retail wheel when there are people out there to do it for them.

Also, most game developers have zero interest in the "exciting world of retail order fulfillment" (that's sarcasm, by the way wink). Their passion is for the games. And this is the reason game developers are usually happy to let publishers take the retail & marketing side on for them... for a much larger cut than is really justified frown
Posted by: thehood

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/25/13 03:21 PM

Making a game and publishing a game is not the same thing. Yes publishing seems simpler than doing the game and we at Frogwares create between 1 to 3 games a year with nearly one hundred people, our publisher can have 40 people and publish 10-15 titles a year. But on the other hand it's a lot of money on their side, console manufacturing, international marketing, business development and a lot of travels, printing and setup demos, press event in at least 6 countries, web site development, now on many OS and so on...

It's not that we don't care about selling the game (it's true too, but read more), if you have a full team to sell one game, business development, console relation manager with stinky multinational companies, printing team, production team, localization team, accounting team and reporting team, you cannot recoup, it's too expensive, thus the publisher necessity.

There is an illusion that implies that as soon as a game is available it will find its audience, that's just not true. We experienced it, many times, however good can be the product, you need a good seller, but you probably know more than me about this.

Believe me, there is no nice story and ideal way of working as soon as you have to pay someone else than yourself, specially when it is a permanent staff of programmers, 3D artists, 2D artists, animators, motion capture specialist, concept artist, video artists, sound engineer and management, it's just like any other company competing with the world, you'd better concentrate on what you do best and do it the best possible.

What changed with publishers and digital downloads, and changed for the best, is that we, as developer, we are not forced anymore to make a stupid standard adventure game, because any creativity a few years back would disqualify the game for the so called "publishers"(dead companies will recognize themselves) and prevent them to even sell it, because it was too expensive for them to take the risk of publishing and selling boxes to Walmart. Today we are free to invent and do more things than ever before, because the publishing cost decreased. Digital sales allow this, not box sales.
Posted by: Mad

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/26/13 10:23 AM

Much appreciate you explaining all this for us, thehood, thank you !! yes
Posted by: Darleen03

Re: Shouldn't It Be "Cheaper" - 02/26/13 08:24 PM

Thank You thehood....

I appreciate you taking the time to post on my Topic.... thumbsup