Is 1200 MS Points a Fair Price for XBLA Games?

Xboxist.com writes:

"Everywhere you look these days, the price of games seems to be falling. Everywhere, that is, except on Microsoft's Xbox Live Arcade service. Here, prices have been slowly creeping upwards, with the majority of new releases now selling for $15 or 1200 Microsoft Points. A few months ago, the standard price was a more reasonable $10 or 800 points, a price that many fans have told us put XBLA titles in the "spontaneous purchase" sweet spot.

Those days are behind us, and it is nearly impossible to find a newly released game for under 1200 points. "

[clinker]

I'm amazed that they can even think of charging $15 for something like Outrun in the current economic climate. That game is totally not worth 1200 points, and it is still not as bad as Lode Runner!

[akohut]

Good thing Outrun is only 800 then....

[edgeofblade]

You can't just invoke the "current economic climate" to make your point. In fact, I believe only a very small percentage of people actually understand what's going on, and even fewer want to explain it to those who don't. To clarify, that puts me in the former category and not in the later. Suffice it to say, your confidence in the system makes the system work and doubt will just prolong the depression.

Would I like to pay LESS for a game? Of course! But I also don't want the companies I support going out of business because there is some abstract "economic troubles" that made the price arbitrarily lower.

I thought games priced at a max of 800 made more sense to me. At 1200, it's harder to justify a purchase. I used to buy tons of Arcade games, but after I realized how much I spent on games I don't play very often, I backed off.

[table]

you dont have to worry about MS or sony going out of business (even though you would obviously like to see sony go under). Thats for them to worry about. We consumers want products for cheap. We don't care how many billions a company makes and I'm not going to cry if their profits are down.

I honestly believe that xbox fanboys enjoy paying for live... maybe because it's their mommys money...

[darthv72]

I do have to give the 360 and MS credit for allowing there to be a trial of each game on live. That way you can see if it is worth the price. Granted there are no refunds but I feel better about paying for a game provided I have had a chance to try before I buy.

PSN should get such system of trialware. there are several PSN titles I would like to try but they lack an available demo. I don't know if it is mandated by MS to have a demo of the game if it is to be distributed over live. We all know sony and their psn regulations and added costs to have demos. It is a funny comparison of the two services.

PSN free but the devs get charged for each dl a consumer makes. I imagine it is done that way to ensure the service remains "free". If a demo is available and downloaded, they get charged even if that consumer doesnt end up getting the full game.

Live has free and paid the later granting early access to content that becomes available to the silver a week later. A demo of practically every title (full version actually) is offered. No reported charging of the devs to post their content on live (so we think).

[dragunrising]

XBLA should be more like Steam. Charge a little bit extra for early adopters and hold frequent sales on multiple titles. 'Deal of the Week' isn't good enough. They should fall by 100 points every other month. The prices are too static. I bought Worms on XBLA only after it became an arcade hit and dropped to 400 points.

Is a game worth paying $15 dollars on XBLA (or PSN for that matter)? Yes, if it can prove its worth. Virtua On is a good example. If I recall it was a full fledged Dreamcast title that sold for $50 back in the day. The re release bumps up the resolution to HD and keeps the framerate buttery smooth. Online is a big plus as well and the controls are refined for dual analog play. Worth it? For many people yes. Unfortunately, if we keep buying it at those prices it will send the wrong message.

My problem with DLC are title updates like map packs...$10 for 3 maps (I'm looking at you COD: W@W and GeOW1,2) is outrageous. To add insult to injury, PC gamers get the same map packs for free. In my opinion, map packs are an a complete rip off and spit in the face to loyal fans. This is especially true, given that PC gamers receive preferential treatment.

[Bnet343]

Some games yes, but it's starting to become annoying.

[y0haN]

Max Payne 1 and 2 are 1200 each, that's over £20 for two games that are badly emulated, non-360-optimised games that fill only 70% of an HDTV screen. Save yourself the trouble and buy them on Steam, £9 for both, with all of your screen and you can have some pretty awesome mods.

[IdleLeeSiuLung]

For the tiny little arcade games like outrun should be 800 points or less, but there are bargains too, such as MvC2, SSF2HD Remix and Puzzle Fighter.

The items are priced to whatever the market will bear, and it seems people will buy overpriced DLC and arcade games. Don't blame the seller, blame the buyer!!!

Stop buying overpriced stuff and the seller will lower the cost.

[DixieNormS]

SOme games are worth the 1200 points, But I don't buy enough arcade games because of the reason that I think they are overpriced. So what makes them think I will be purchasing stuff for that much.

[FantasyStar]

I'm a cheapass, so the lower the price, the better. I can't start discriminating XBLA games because then I would've made a fallacious error somewhere in reasoning like "better games cost more", or "give some money to the devs for their work". I'm just a straight up cheap ass and I want it my way. Great games for dirt cheap.

[OGharryjoysticks]

They let games sell for more money and have any file size and because publishers want things to be equal they jack up the price once they get the okay from MS to adjust the file size limit on LIVE to match PSN file size and price.

[UltimateIdiot911]

The only reason why Microsoft wanted to limit file size in the first place is because of their harddrive situation which would have hurted more people in the end. Why should a game get cut back because of a limit?
As for the price, you can blame consumers, if consumers accept the price obviously publishers will continue charging the price besides PS3 owners can share the game up to 4 other people. So 15 divided by 5 is $3. Not that bad really.

[Ace Killa 08]

im not complaining i dont have a but load of money to spend but if the game is good then ill buy it now if it is more than 1200 i wont buy but if its 1200 or below im good

[kevlar]

I like to buy new just released games, finish them and sell them fairly quickly on ebay( unless there is good multiplayer ) with hardly any lost money. You are stuck with xbla games, the total cost lost even if you never ever go back to it. Therefore games have to be 800 pts or less for me to part with the pts to minimise loss. I don't think I've bought 1 game above 800 pts, I'd have bought R-Type if it was 800 but no, they had to be greedy. That game was in the top 10 for 1 week only at 6th I think which is just rediculous for a game as highly regarded as R-Type. Come on MS do the math for f's sake, sell so many at 1200 or sell 3 times as many for 800!!!!!!!!

[clinker]

Interesting argument. But Microsoft must have tons of smart marketing people measuring how many units sold, etc. So maybe they actually ARE selling a good number of games at 1200 to make it more profitable.

[kewlkat007]

When something sells, as a company, it's all about profits to your not going to drop prices.

Now you will do limited sales here and there but that's about it.

MS's goal is to charge for XBL and price items accordingly. If they were not getting subscriptions or items being bought, I'm sure price would go down.

[BRG9000]

Indeed, if this is becoming the trend then it's a fair assumption that this is the price level that is maximizing Microsoft's profits. Baseless speculation saying "At $10 they'd sell three times more!" is all well and good, but realisically they'd probably sell something like 20% more (that number is also baseless speculation, but I believe the sales would far less than double), which doesn't necessarily bring in more profit.

[Traveler]

@ Kevlar

The reasons you give for preferring not to buy downloadable games is the same reason that I don't believe any console in the near future could rely on digital downloads as the primary means of distributing games.

People like physical copies of things. Especially when those things cost so much ($60 a copy). The chance of losing your purchased games through a harddrive crash and not being able to loan or sell your games are major detriments to widespread adoption. It's ok for games you only payed $10 or $15 and aren't too large in size, but I don't think the majority of people would want to go to a digital distribution method for full-priced 50GB games.

[I Call 9MM]

I think only if it is a brand new, built from the ground up game and has enough length and longevity to make it worthwhile, then they can charge 1200 points for it. Games like Banjo-Kazooie and Banjo-Tooie shouldn't be 1200 MS points, as they are a simple rehash of already finished products with minimal upgrades. Had they gone back and remodelled/retextured and done more upgrades to these games, then it could be justified. But short games and rehashes should be around the 800 or less pile, preferably less, especially for some of the older releases.

Another thing to consider is multiplayer options. I remember Doom came out with minimal to absolute zero visual upgrades (many great source ports are available online that fix this), but at least you could play split screen co-op, which is fun. Duke Nukem 3D came out with pretty much the same treatment (no visual upgrade, widescreen or resolution boost), and lacked split screen co-op. WTF??? It's not like a game from 1996 takes too much processing power. They should be well rounded to charge such a price. At least doom is now 400 points.

[I Call 9MM]

Personally, I have to say I have stopped purchasing these games at 1200 points unless there is some real value there, otherwise I am content to wait around until they drop in price or go on sale, and even then it better be at 800 or less.

[kevlar]

Maybe. I would love to see a graph of sales of Loderunner last week when the price went up from 800 to 1200 pts. Of course MS would never release such data. I was one of the lucky ones who got it for 800 otherwise I wouldn't have bothered. I also think MS made a huge mistake going with points instead of real money, 1200 pts just sounds SO much even if it isn't, thats's ONE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED POINTS!!!. Its a mental thing.

[-MD-]

Well if Sony can sell Final Fantasy 7 for 15$ then why can't Microsoft?

[Covenant]

Depends on the game.

Castle Crashers was worth it...but Flock?

This is not a good trend.

[UltimateIdiot911]

I agree, it isn't a good trend. Flock is terrible IMO. I would say it isn't worth anything over $7.
Consumers need to speak with their wallet and not on impulses. DD are designed to make it easier for impulsive spending. If enough consumers resists on making $15 purchases, companies need to rethink their pricing strategy.
So far, people are still buying a lot of games at $60 which basically gives all these companies the green light to keep it at $60.

[f789790]

As for impulse buying.........I fell for the Burnout Paradise party pack. I THOUGHT it would have new things in it, but I didn't READ what it really was. That $10 would have been better spent as toilet paper.

[Zuhk]

Of course this is going to happen when M$ is involved. They are trying to create a monopoly in teh gaming industry by running sony out, and then what do you think will happen? Games will be 75$, online will be 15$ a month, XBLA games will be 20$, and you will most likely be charged a fee every time you start up your console. Anyone who thinks M$ is a good company to have in the gaming industry needs to check the facts and/or get their head checked.

[clinker]

LOL and meanwhile Sony is giving away consoles for free and only charging $5 for PSN games.

[SpoonyRedMage]

You're comment stinks of ignorance, if MS is trying to get a monopoly then what about Sony. They nearly eliminated Nintendo in the home console scene and then went after the handheld scene as well.

And Nintendo is just as bad. They're all businesses and we shouldn't forget it.

@V: Yup, you're absolutely right, it also introcued WRPGs to consoles and WRPGs are really popular now.

[table]

well MS did bring quality console online gaming to the forefront. and lets not forget the original xbox was more powerful than the ps2 and you didn't need those bloody memory cards. I think every company would like a monopoly over the market, they are all just as bad as each other. Don't forget that they are all in it for themselves.

[GiantEnemyCrab]

So you make an account mocking another member and then you bring that naive comment to the Gamer Zone. Bravo! I'm sure the mods will catch up with.

You act like MS is alone in charging for DLC and "nickel and diming". As long as I can find a pair of dolly pants in HOME for 1.49 don't act as if MS is the only one guily of nickel and diming.

[Traveler]

It's true. All three console makers (like all companies) are in it to make a profit. The people working at those companies are doing so primarily to earn a living. However, this isn't to say that all companies have the same philosophies and business practices.

As an owner of both consoles I have to admit that I somehow feel more nickle-and-dimed by Microsoft than Sony. Maybe it has to do with the fact that I don't have to pay a subscription fee to play my PS3 games online, or pay exorbitantly high prices to get a larger hard drive, or the fact that it just seems that I have got a lot of top-quality games like Flower for only $9.99. For my tastes, it seems that I haven't found quite as many good deals on Xbox LIVE for games I actually care about.

Just the fact that Sony lists the prices in their store in real-world dollars right away seems a more honest and straight forward way to deal with customers. And I'll be honest, I really despise the Microsoft point system.

So, there are definitely differences between the three console makers, but of course, for the most part they are fairly similar. It would be wrong, however, to say that they are all exactly the same.

[GiantEnemyCrab]

Some games are worth the 1200 point but a lot aren't. I find that 800 is much more of an impulse buy for me. I basically haven't bought any XBLA games lately due mainly to price.

[Man_of_the_year]

Depends on the game. I for one will not pay 1200 pts for just any game. Too much money for an arcade game. However i do think Street Fighter 2 HD was around that price...that i did pay for. But it better be one hell of a game for 1200 pts.

[swingingape]

That's why I don't buy them until sales. Amazon offered Pac-Man CE for 50% recently. Guess I'll shop there for now on.

[Traveler]

I know. Most of the Arcade games are too high priced and I don't buy most of them. Although I must admit that games like Braid were so good that I thought the price was fair. It just depends. But I still can't shake the feeling that Microsoft are nickle-and-dime-ing us.

For example, Flower on PSN is every bit as good a game as Braid and only costs $10. That feels like a good deal.

I especially hate Microsoft's exorbitantly priced harddrives. I am still stuck with my original 20GB from launch, because I refuse to pay that much for a harddrive. I constantly have to erase stuff because I have so little space. It sucks, but I'm not about to pay nearly as much as the cost of a new console just to get a decent sized hard drive.

[Cajun Chicken]

NO. Get back to the 800 price point.

[CAPT IRISH]

Its too high

[labwarrior]

In fact a 4 hour game could well cost 35$ and still be 1000% worth it and a far better deal than most 60$ ones

And some of those titles tend to be more fun as well