[Terramax]

Sorry if this topic has been raised before, but can someone make it official, is paying for a download of a full game cheaper for developers than packaging and selling it on disc + box?

I ask because I look on sites like this new adventure shop and other online game stores with a similar service yet the prices you pay for the games doesn't seem any different to boxed versions other than you don't pay another £1.50 for postage and wait 1-3 days to receive the item.

Also, boxed versions on online retailers like Amazon, etc have a habit of costing drastically less if you wait a month or two (or sometimes just a few weeks) whilst these download sites are bound to be charging the RRP price for most likely months.

The only thing I can think of that could excuse this is if online download actually costs more than making hard copies?

If downloading a game from a site is significantly cheaper then I'd rather walk down to my local Gamestation for the same amount of time if I'm essentially paying the same, or technically more, for less.

[Lucien21]

My guess would be that there are more costs involved in a physical product.

[honeycomb]

My guess would be the costs are about the same. You're really paying for the development and marketing costs; physical distribution savings would be a small factor. The plus side is the convenience and the environmentally friendly nature of the transaction. Assume the file downloads could be quite large - that wouldbe a consideration for me.

[Jatsie]

I'm with Lucien. With a physical product you have costs of raw materials, manufacturing costs: pressing the discs, printing the manuals, moulding the cases, etc, then there's distribution costs to get the products from the factories to the stores, and the costs involved with having a physical store complete with employees to sell it to you.

[Ninja Dodo]

I'm going to guess that developers are making more money on the whole, but they are still charging the same as retail because they can. Indie downloadable games have hit an average price of $20 dollars because that's what people are prepared to pay. For AAA titles it's $50-60ish. That said, us Europeans tend to get ripped off at retail. I saw Assassins Creed in a store for 69 euros (!). That's extortion.

At the end of the day, if you think something costs too much, just don't buy it. What developers making more money does mean though, or at least *can* mean is that they have more room to make games that are a little less safe. Maybe kind of an exceptional case, but Valve is a company that can do basically whatever the hell it wants... so we get something like Portal.

[Terramax]

Well this is why the only game I've ever bought via download is the Sam & Max games, because at the time of their release it was the only choice.

I think it's greedy if someone is going to sell a game at the same or higher price if they're saving more money. I understand developers need to find ways of getting more profit, but with adventure games, I'm certain that, wait two months, a game drops at a price of new from £20-£30 to £10-15 whist online I'm still having to fork out £25.

I've not even played the Demo of Half Life 2 because of this same 'give out all your personal details so we do whatever the hell we want with you' when registering to play a freakin' demo.

Guess it's going to be a little longer before I give into digital download.

Thanks for the info guys.

[Ninja Dodo]

It's not a question of greed. Prices will rise to the extent that people are prepared to pay them. That's how 'the market' works. Whether that's entirely a good thing is debatable, but I think money going to developers instead of Walmart most definitely is.

Regarding Valve, unless you're talking about the creditcard info you have to give if you buy something I'm not sure they take a whole lot of details at all. I can't remember exactly what I had to enter when I registered on Steam but it wasn't much. They send out periodic surveys that record hardware details and such but they're strictly voluntary (and they use it make decisions like not bothering with DX10 support because apparently no one is using Vista). The only stats they get without asking is playing time and they use that to track where people get stuck and whether they finish the game at all so they can improve the next one enough for everyone to finish it.

So I hardly think there's anything nefarious going on there.

Frankly with all this "Games for Windows" BS, game boxes have gotten so ugly (and manuals so thin, if any) that there's really very little value left in having something on your shelf, if you have the space at all. The only boxes occasionally worth getting are collector's editions.

[Terramax]

All in all I'd prefer download over box. But still, if it's gonna be cheaper for them, and we, the consumers are physically getting less, then I think the price should be lowered.

Further more, although not anything for developers to think about, considering you can't sell downloaded games second hand, this creates another risk for consumers if they aren't able to play the game before hand.

As for the Valve thing, I can't remember quite how much info I had to give, but considering I had to give ANY information just to play a flipping demo is a joke.

[Catbert]

You'd also have to account for server maintenance, bandwidth, etc on top of it all.

[Monroeski]

One thing to keep in mind is that it is very likely that game company's contracts with game stores (Gamestop, Best Buy, whatever) may prohibit them from selling the game for cheaper and undercutting them. I don't think electronic distribution is even close to large enough yet that they can start to ignore the brick and mortar stores yet, as the sales are too great, but the brick and mortar stores are likely saying "look, we'll sell your games, but you can't come out and sell for less than us."

That's generally why you can't always get stuff cheaper if you go direct to the source than to a middleman retailer; Even if you're buying a hard copy of a game directly from the game company instead of a download, by definition the costs would be lower since they're not having to pay for distribution to the game stores or account for the middlemen making their own profits. It would just be shady business if you sell a game to Gamestop to sell for $50, then come around and become their greatest market threat by selling the exact same game for less.

This basic principle applies to most/all industries. The higher prices on downloads or direct sales aren't necessarily a product of them being able to sell it for full price and being greedy, they're a product of them being required to sell for full price because of their distribution contracts.

[Ninja Dodo]

That's a good point actually. Walmart et all still have a lot of clout.

[Marek]

Based on what I've read and heard over the years I can say that Monroeski is right.

(On the plus side, developers get a much bigger royalties cut from digital releases.)

[Davies]

Given a roughly equal price, I'd rather buy a physical copy with a proper box and manual, and preferably a few other extras. But as Ninja Dodo said, nowadays all you seem to get for your money is a CD, no manual, and not much of a box.

Assuming I'm not missing out on a manual or other stuff, and the price is advantageous, I would happily buy a download -- IF I'm allowed to burn it onto a CD. No way am I going to pay for anything I can't back up. Of course, you end up with a disk that looks pirated.

[Terramax]

Nah! I'm sticking to physical unless the game is real cheap to download (seeing Syberia for £4.99 is pretty good) or there's no other way to play (like Sam & Max, although I'm not bothering with series 2).

Many of the adventures I've bought and not liked I've been able to sell second hand and at least get a fraction of my money back. Instance, when I got Orient Express at the start of this year I bought for £20, played for a few weeks, almost to the end, then sold for about £14. Take away Amazon's cut and P+P, I was left with about £11.

Unless the game really grabs me by the nuts on a demo and I know I'm gonna play this game to the very end no matter what, I'll stick to physical. I think download it giving me a bum deal here.

[CrimsonBlue]

Originally Posted by Ninja Dodo

I saw Assassins Creed in a store for 69 euros (!). That's extortion.

Sadly, that's a bit lower than the average price on new console games here in Norway.

[Ninja Dodo]

I used to (and still) think 50 euros is pushing what I'm prepared to pay for a brand new game. And even then only if I'm pretty sure it's going to be good. I think the indies have it right with $20. For that kind of price I'll buy it on a whim even if it looks like I'll only play it occasionally.

[Cris Pandry]

@Monroeski,

The developers or publishers won't be selling the game to high street retailers for anything near the price they're selling it for download.

I used to work in the game industry as a mail order reseller and I know that major retailers receive at least 60% discount from the distributors.

When you consider that the distributors are also receiving a discount from the publishers (obviously) then you can see that there's a very lucrative profit being made, especially on AAA titles. Myself, as small fry compared to the high street could only squeeze 20-30% discount out of the distributors.

This argument has been going on for years within the industry itself. There's often an outcry when one firm like Game for example suddenly discounts one title to the 'detriment' of other high street retailers selling at the FULL 'RRP'! The solution of course is not to charge such extortionate prices in the FIRST place, then everyone's happy, especially the consumer! High prices just encourages more piracy, which further reduces profits. It's so obvious it hurts.

@Terramax

Why can't you re-sell the downloaded game? I'm not familiar with the protocol, but I saw on the Sherlock Holmes website that they send a separate 'unlock' key or something? Can't you give that away to the person who wants to buy it from you, or is there some sort of clause in the T&Cs that prevent you from doing that?

[Cris Pandry]

Originally Posted by Ninja Dodo

It's not a question of greed. Prices will rise to the extent that people are prepared to pay them. That's how 'the market' works...

I think that's a good definition of greed actually.

[Bastich]

Originally Posted by Davies

IF I'm allowed to burn it onto a CD. No way am I going to pay for anything I can't back up. Of course, you end up with a disk that looks pirated.

I would follow up your comment with the ability to play the game without Internet access or activation. Games that do are really nothing more than long term rentals, with the required "return" purely at the whim of the company, should it even continue to exist 10 years from now.

I can still put my 5.25" floppy of Adventure in Serenia in my computer and play it today, 25+ years after its release. That is because I actually own it. The same can't be said for anything requiring activation.

[Cris Pandry]

Yes, Bioshock anyone?! 5 (formerly 2) activations and that's it!

As Terramax doesn't appear to want to answer my question...

Does anyone else know why you can't re-sell your downloaded game(s)?

TIA