Sony Expects PS3 Game Prices from $59, under $99
SCEA's Kaz Hirai breaks PlayStation 3 software price silence
Hirai showing a PSP. And waistband issues...
Those wondering how much they'll be shelling out for PlayStation 3 software were given a morsel of information today, as an interview conducted with Sony Computer Entertainment America boss Kaz Hirai broached the company's line on the potentially thorny subject.
In an interview with US magazine PSM, Hirai explained, "...generally speaking, over the past twelve years or so, there has been a consumer expectation that disc-based games are maybe $59 on the high end to $39 on the low end. So, what I can say now is, I think it would be a bit of a stretch to think that we could suddenly turn around and say "PS3 Games now $99.99."" outlined Hirai.
"I don't think consumers expect software pricing to suddenly double," he continued. "So, the quick answer is that we want to make it as affordable as possible, knowing that there is a set consumer expectation for what software has cost for the past twelve years. That's kind of the best answer I can give you. So, if it becomes a bit higher than $59, don't ding me, but, again, I don't expect it to be $100."
This leaves a great deal of space in which Sony can potentially offer consumers a tiered game pricing structure, whilst at the same time leaving plenty of scope for profit on the massive and ambitious titles it and other developers have in the pipeline. As game technology expands, the cost to make use of it expands too, a problem faced by Sony, its third-parties and its increasingly antsy shareholders.
It is expected that within the next two months, Sony will fully outline launch titles and pricing for PlayStation 3. We'll join you in baiting our breath until then.
In an interview with US magazine PSM, Hirai explained, "...generally speaking, over the past twelve years or so, there has been a consumer expectation that disc-based games are maybe $59 on the high end to $39 on the low end. So, what I can say now is, I think it would be a bit of a stretch to think that we could suddenly turn around and say "PS3 Games now $99.99."" outlined Hirai.
"I don't think consumers expect software pricing to suddenly double," he continued. "So, the quick answer is that we want to make it as affordable as possible, knowing that there is a set consumer expectation for what software has cost for the past twelve years. That's kind of the best answer I can give you. So, if it becomes a bit higher than $59, don't ding me, but, again, I don't expect it to be $100."
This leaves a great deal of space in which Sony can potentially offer consumers a tiered game pricing structure, whilst at the same time leaving plenty of scope for profit on the massive and ambitious titles it and other developers have in the pipeline. As game technology expands, the cost to make use of it expands too, a problem faced by Sony, its third-parties and its increasingly antsy shareholders.
It is expected that within the next two months, Sony will fully outline launch titles and pricing for PlayStation 3. We'll join you in baiting our breath until then.
Read More Like This
Comments
majin dboy 28 Jun 2006 11:26
1/11
i think the best idea for sony and affilated 3rd parties is to price there games as honestly as possible.they just cant stick a £60/70 price tag on them all.well they cud,but its not a good idea.Sony have to get the idea out that ther r games ranging from 45-65, for example.if only to create soom sense of value via options.
thane_jaw 28 Jun 2006 11:49
2/11
Well they have to justify it to themselves and the developers. Hopefully Rockstar is leading the way with their "budget" release of Table Tennis, where a more "shallow" game with smaller development costs will be introduced at a lower price.
more comments below our sponsor's message
Joji 28 Jun 2006 13:18
3/11
What's funny is Sony think people will pay for those games. at that price. I can see a lot of suckers but also a lot of possible buyers jumping to 360.
Where does this leave the likes of Game and Gamestation? Guess there'll be no 2 for 1 deal ever at those high prices.
For many people that will be one game every two months. Don't forget while many work a lot of gamers are underage and can't.
Where does this leave the likes of Game and Gamestation? Guess there'll be no 2 for 1 deal ever at those high prices.
For many people that will be one game every two months. Don't forget while many work a lot of gamers are underage and can't.
thane_jaw 28 Jun 2006 13:55
4/11
Joji wrote:
For many people that will be one game every two months. Don't forget while many work a lot of gamers are underage and can't.
But they're in the minority. Average age of gamer is 18-30, e.g. the playstation generation who aren't stigmatised for playing games. Under 18 sales (or rather sales to under 18s) aren't as important as those key demographic sales.
realvictory 28 Jun 2006 14:27
5/11
It might be less important given the age range, but it's still important - and there are alternative consoles to buy. And just because people can afford paying more doesn't mean they will want to. If I can get a game almost as good, or even the same, for cheaper, why not do that instead.
Maybe you will spend more on a PS3 because of the "potential", but potential what? I would say, buy what you want right now, don't buy things that promise to get better - everything else will improve anyway.
On the other hand, $59 is not the minimum price either, is it? That is just a guideline.
Maybe you will spend more on a PS3 because of the "potential", but potential what? I would say, buy what you want right now, don't buy things that promise to get better - everything else will improve anyway.
On the other hand, $59 is not the minimum price either, is it? That is just a guideline.
Joji 28 Jun 2006 14:31
6/11
Guide lines or not. Even though I work it's still expensive. Too expensive that I might not bother with it at all.
majin dboy 28 Jun 2006 16:22
7/11
nintendo have a real oppertunity here.they need to position themselves as a pricing opposite to Sony.it will be a shame to see games at £49.99, i want to see £39.99.Nintendo cost of production isnt gona be that high for the Wii(relatively and obvisouly)so they need to lower costs to the extent that gamers "see the other option" but still dnt see nintendo's next gen offering as the "tramps choice".
In a normal price war, X and Y just keep undercutting each other,sony do not have that option(even if they did,would they?).so Nintendo have to hit the ground running, really piss Sony off.
However im sure nintendo's R&D cost for the Wii are quite high,along with other costs this may push the price back up again.
In a normal price war, X and Y just keep undercutting each other,sony do not have that option(even if they did,would they?).so Nintendo have to hit the ground running, really piss Sony off.
However im sure nintendo's R&D cost for the Wii are quite high,along with other costs this may push the price back up again.
crs117 28 Jun 2006 16:30
8/11
So we need to buy a ps3 for "potential" and in reality they are selling us a super computer for $600. In my experience computer games usually cost $40-50 at the new price, and a couple of months easily drop to the $30-40 price. And its not to uncommon for me to pick up a game a year or 2 old for the $20-30 price range.
So what exactly is the ps3...a computer with future potential, or an overhyped attempt of a game machine bundled with an expesice dlu-ray drive that nobody asked for?
If sony thinks that people are going to be willing to shell out 600 + 100 = 700 for a single game system plus 1 game i think they are in for a rude awakening.
So what exactly is the ps3...a computer with future potential, or an overhyped attempt of a game machine bundled with an expesice dlu-ray drive that nobody asked for?
If sony thinks that people are going to be willing to shell out 600 + 100 = 700 for a single game system plus 1 game i think they are in for a rude awakening.
AndyGray 28 Jun 2006 16:35
9/11
I guess the price point of the game will not be such a sticking point for those who are prepared to shell out over £420 (£550 from Play.com - http://www.play.com/Games/PlayStation3/4-/1032615/-/Product.html?searchstring=ps3) for the console itself.
It remains to be seen how these prices will adapt after the initial stream of early adopters have got their units and it is left to the market at large to decide where to invest their cash.
I have to say that apart from Metal Gear 4 there isn't a great deal that is really pulling me towards the PS3 at present. This may well change as we get nearer to launch.
It remains to be seen how these prices will adapt after the initial stream of early adopters have got their units and it is left to the market at large to decide where to invest their cash.
I have to say that apart from Metal Gear 4 there isn't a great deal that is really pulling me towards the PS3 at present. This may well change as we get nearer to launch.
tyrion 28 Jun 2006 17:45
10/11
To be honest, the prices quoted aren't huge.
If we take the $59 price point, that's £32.48 in UK money, or £38.16 after VAT (17.5% for non-UK readers).
I'll bet PS3 games over here will be in the £40-£50 bracket - exactly the same as the prices for 360 games at the moment.
I was expecting $75-$90 prices, which would be £50-£60 over here.
If we take the $59 price point, that's £32.48 in UK money, or £38.16 after VAT (17.5% for non-UK readers).
I'll bet PS3 games over here will be in the £40-£50 bracket - exactly the same as the prices for 360 games at the moment.
I was expecting $75-$90 prices, which would be £50-£60 over here.
soanso 29 Jun 2006 01:23
11/11
game prices are rather like the price of transfer fees football agents ask for when a club qualifies for the champion's league.
They just change the $ or € for a £ sign.
If those games cost more than 360 games then there's a problem.
It'd be exactly like when Nintendo choose cartriges over cds and then charged £70 for games.
They choose the wrong media format and payed for it ever since.
They just change the $ or € for a £ sign.
If those games cost more than 360 games then there's a problem.
It'd be exactly like when Nintendo choose cartriges over cds and then charged £70 for games.
They choose the wrong media format and payed for it ever since.