Originally Posted by -Apocalypse-
Remember when book production costs were in the tens of millions per book and paid for entirely before it went on sale? I don't.
Demand is way up. Production cost is way up, even accounting for inflation. Price has been stable not
accounting for inflation.
With inflation, prices have fallen dramatically (I go back to $50 for Pong in '84 is equivalent to $224 in 2012). Moving games up to $70 would increase used games sales. So they're removing used games to boost sales, and I expect the second generation of AAA games on the next consoles to have a base price of $70 with the third generation having most games at $70.
I hope you're being sarcastic. You DON'T remember when book production was that way? How much do you think it cost publishers to push out the latest Grisham novel, or Stephen King novel? Back when the only way to get it was a physical book store, each of the thousands of which needed to have a hundred or so copies on hand.
You have continually quoted that Pong was $50 back in the day. Actually it was $100, but it was a console! Not only that, but it's widely regarded as the first console. Are you really going to cite that as a valid price comparison?
Pong was unprecedented. It was made in small quantities by factories that hadn't done video game systems before, and sold to a small audience. The central processing chip in the Pong system was also the most technologically advanced chip that had ever been sold to home markets. It had to be. Not true for today's games.
Fast forward almost 40 years to today, and you refuse to admit that manufacturing efficiency improvements, exponentially larger customer base (economies of scale), drastically increased knowledge of programming (compare any 1-man indie developed game to the teams that worked on Atari games, complexity-wise), ridiculously cheaper media (CDs, DVDs, digital distribution), cheaper console production costs (comparatively) etc etc, mean the price should be lower at all?
You are deluding yourself if you think this is the way the market should go. Enacting this no-used-games thing will shrink Sony's customer base. Raising prices will shrink Sony's customer base. Doing both will be catastrophic for the company.
The sales impact from price increases is exponential. A 10% increase in price will mean a larger than 10% decline in sales. The inverse is true too. When Steam put the original Left 4 Dead for sale at 50% off, they saw a 3000% increase in sales.
It sucks that major corporations' only response to low profits seems to be to raise prices. I will never pay $70 for a video game. I have never paid $60 for a game. I have never even paid $50 for a game. Granted I may not be Sony's target market (despite the fact that I own every single one of their consoles and probably 100 games for them), but shouldn't Sony be trying to draw in extra customers, rather than pushing away current ones?