» Sat Feb 19, 2011 8:48 am Console games are more expensive than PC games because publishers/developers must pay licensing fees to the console manufacturer in order to release a game on that platform (Sony and Microsoft).
PC games have been cheaper than their console counterparts because there is NO licensing fee for the publisher/developer to release a game for the PC.
The problem here isn't so much that I am unwilling to pay an "extra" ten dollars for the PC version of the game, but rather, that Bethesda is essentially bringing in more revenue per PC sale than per console sale. My problem is the lack of difference in price between the console and pc versions of the game.
If they want to price the pc version at $60, fine, but they better well price the console games at $70 then.
I'd be willing to pay whatever I could (though I'm dirt poor right now), for Skyrim provided it really is a great game, but Oblivion was terrible, I pre-ordered that and felt completely cheated.
People talked about PC gamers being rich to spend money on rigs and such...
I spent $400 dollars upgrading my PC for this generation three years ago. When I chose PC gaming I did so because it made economic sense. I get better resolution, better controls, mods, and the ever important but seemingly always ignored vertical sync (tearing makes a game unplayable). Games are cheaper (that goes into my calculations), and my gaming "console" doubles as an actual computer for work, school, hobbies, and internet. I can also play all of the games I've ever bought for PC... I'd like to see someone play an N64 game on their PS3....
I don't want this to become a PC vs. consoles thread... I'm just saying they are changing the formula PC gamers use for their budgeting; and PC gamers are often more budget conscious than their console counterparts (Steam sales FTW).
Prices determined by "market"
Bethesda has what is called "market power" -- their product is different from the other video games (video games are a non-homogeneous product). This means that Bethesda can determine the price (and aren't just price takers) without losing all of their customers to substitutes. Bethesda has a market share (fans of the series based on "taste"), and rides on the quality of their previous work.
The Elder Scrolls games have greater value than other games so should be priced higher...
While a play through of the Elder Scrolls games can take much longer than a play-through of other games, it doesn't have to, and value is a subjective to each individual buyer, and is not an objective reality based on the amount of content or length of game. Final Fantasy games are extremely long, World of War-craft can be played seemingly forever -- but these games have 0 value to me because I just don't enjoy them (taste). Price is a measure of marginal value. For some people (like those willing to pay 200$ for the game), their consumer surplus for buying the game is huge ($200 - $60 = $140), while the surplus to others may be negative, so no purchase occurs... ($50 - 60$ = -$10). Of course, people aren't "fully-informed" in real life, so some people might make mistakes and purchase a game that really isn't worth $60 dollars to them ($30 - 60$ = -$30 = buyer's remorse).
Also, there is a time factor... some people just don't have the time to sink hours into a game, and prefer concentrated quality to the long investment an Elder Scrolls game requires.
Bethesda is a business:
Bethesda, as a business, only cares about one thing, "profit", they will price the game at 60$ if they believe that will maximize profit. And so I am not wrong in saying that their increasing the price is based solely on greed.
The fact of the matter is, society treats businesses like individuals. Businesses are individuals motivated solely by greed. Confronted with an individual motivated solely by greed, it only makes sense to "stoop to their level" and be motivated solely by greed as well. Should Bethesda demonstrate it is a more human and well-rounded individual, motivated by things other than greed, then it is easier for consumers to interact with the business with motivations other than greed (like good-will).
When I talked about Valve, it wasn't a cue for the internet mob to dismiss me with a "go to the Valve forums" (where, ironically, I've been dismissed to go to other forums as well).
I talked about Valve because this is what they are doing.... they are presenting a business-individual through actions that demonstrates to the consumers that they are not motivated solely by greed; whether that is providing more value to the consumer or caring about them. This generates a different (and better) relationship between the consumer and the business... one that is allowed to be motivated by things other than greed, like good-will, trust, friendship, dedication, etc.
