Why do new blu-rays cost $20 but new games cost $60?

[SexySamSosa67]

New games on Xbox One/PS4 cost three times as much as a blu-ray. Why is this? It's not like games are 4K or anything.

[baheidstu]

Originally Posted by SexySamSosa67

New games on Xbox One/PS4 cost three times as much as a blu-ray. Why is this? It's not like games are 4K or anything.

I'm thinking the only answer to this is, because they can.

[filmmusic]

Hmmm.. I'm not into games, but doesn't a game take much more to finish than a film?

[MifuneFan]

Try having a major film released only on home video and see how much it costs.

[jimidini]

Originally Posted by SexySamSosa67

New games on Xbox One/PS4 cost three times as much as a blu-ray. Why is this? It's not like games are 4K or anything.

Movies are sold in all sort of ways. They start in cinema. Go through pay TV. Then Home cinema. Regular TV. etc.

Games don't have the luxury. And those games also have an effectively limited audience.

Just take a look at the BEST SELLING ps3 games.

GTA 5 with 20 million copies
Gran Turismo with 12 million copies
Last of Us with 7 million
MGS4 with 6 million
...
Uncharted 2 for example sold 4 million only

Ni No Kuni sold 1.1 million only. Just compare that with worldwide Studio Ghibli movie sales numbers. And then take into account that game development costs are getting larger and larger. That also explains why there are more and more games with microtransactions and DLC and that crap out there. Why more and more games are dumbed down etc. That's because of the costs involved.

[gates70]

Because it's apples and oranges.

[DMRI2006]

Games cost a fortune to develop.

That said, new games have cost $50-$60 since the N64 days, so the fact they still cost $60 and haven't increased with inflation is not a bad thing.

[Scorpion Soldier]

Originally Posted by SexySamSosa67

New games on Xbox One/PS4 cost three times as much as a blu-ray. Why is this? It's not like games are 4K or anything.

Game production is a very different process than film production, and its revenues are gathered by different means as well. Engine licensing, post-release support and various other costs make game distribution and development very expensive endeavors. Also, the profits from game distribution are spread across a lot of different companies, including the publisher, the developer and as earlier mentioned possible licensing costs.

The economics of movies and games are quite different from each other, especially post-release, which is why releasing retail-sized games is as costful as it is.

[doctor_who]

It's completely different, so I'm not sure why the comparison.

But, I did stop buying games somewhere near the end of my college days, it just wasn't worth it to me. I'd rather watch movies or play sports then play a video game. But that's just me.

[Ihavecandygetnthevan]

Originally Posted by SexySamSosa67

New games on Xbox One/PS4 cost three times as much as a blu-ray. Why is this? It's not like games are 4K or anything.

[slimdude]

I'm not a gamer, but video games always costed more than movies, which why a lot of consumers buy them used.

[KillaCam]

The typical game usually takes around 10 hours to complete (more if it's an rpg) and an average movie last maybe 2 hours. Factor in online multiplayer and it could be played for hundreds of hours. Movies and video games can't really be compared this way imo.

[blufan187]

As others have said. It's apples / oranges. Games take a lot to develop unless it's a game like Madden (which is virtually the same thing year after year). Even then, the subtle changes they do make takes developers time.

[Ihavecandygetnthevan]

the only real answer is The hours of expected consumption x the value per hour, plus the catalog value. Also it takes most AAA games 2-4 years to develop and could cost just as much any Hollywood blockbuster.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by Ihavecandygetnthevan

the only real answer is The hours of expected consumption x the value per hour, plus the catalog value. Also it takes most AAA games 2-4 years of develop and could cost just as much any Hollywood blockbuster.

and don't forget that there's no theatrical run to make back costs there too.

[Scorpion Soldier]

Originally Posted by Ihavecandygetnthevan

the only real answer is The hours of expected consumption x the value per hour, plus the catalog value. Also it takes most AAA games 2-4 years to develop and could cost just as much any Hollywood blockbuster.

This is actually far from the truth. There is generally no direct link between the supposed length of a game and the retail price. Some smaller productions do tend to retail at a lower price (not taking into account the dynamic pricing of digital titles), but generally a 7 hour and a 100 hour retail game are released at the retail price (with the exception of some titles that are dynamically priced, which is a platform Sony is currently experimenting with.)

General pricing is being questioned nowadays though, especially the issue of digital and physical copies retailing at the same price on consoles.

[Ihavecandygetnthevan]

Originally Posted by Scorpion Soldier

This is actually far from the truth. There is generally no direct link between the supposed length of a game and the retail price. Some smaller productions do tend to retail at a lower price (not taking into account the dynamic pricing of digital titles), but generally a 7 hour and a 100 hour retail game are released at the retail price (with the exception of some titles that are dynamically priced, which is a platform Sony is currently experimenting with.)

false

The price per hour is pretty stable across all media. For example, a motion picture: You have two hours of experience in the theater, a very high-quality experience, zero catalog value. So what’s that worth? I guess about $5 an hour (on a per capita basis). If you apply that to a video rental, also zero catalog value, there’s multiple people watching typically, it’s a lower quality experience, that’s how you get a video rental of three bucks. Recorded music, you will listen to the album (up to 10 times — or hours — on average). The same equation applies. So What’s driving that front-line price point is the perceived quality of the experience.

[TheLaughingMann]

If you complain about games costing $50-60 now, ask your parents how much those games for your Super Nintendo cost at one point.



With inflation, those $40-70 games cost $60-110 in today's dollars. And that's not counting any that have genuine collector's value behind them.

Getting Blu's for $20 or less is a luxury. For $15 or less? It's a sale. $10 or less? It's Black Friday somewhere.

[Tony208]

Games were more expensive back in the day, but you also played them for a long ass time. The norm was you got a game and played it all summer with your friends. I played Goldeneye and other games for like a whole year.

You didn't finish a game and sell it like a lot of people do nowadays.

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by TheLaughingMann

If you complain about games costing $50-60 now, ask your parents how much those games for your Super Nintendo cost at one point.

[Show spoiler]

With inflation, those $40-70 games cost $60-110 in today's dollars. And that's not counting any that have genuine collector's value behind them.

Getting Blu's for $20 or less is a luxury. For $15 or less? It's a sale. $10 or less? It's Black Friday somewhere.

Are you sure that's not a Canadian or Australian ad? I don't remember paying more than $50 for any SNES game.