Dear Game Publishers, what are you thinking? For years, loyal supporters of your games have dealt with ridiculous price increases, overpriced downloadable content, and silly DRM schemes. Yet now, in these most critical times for the game industry, your idea of repaying them is to make us pay even more? Really?
Furthermore — stooping to an all-time low — EA has stepped up for your industry and decided that users should be pushed (if not forced) to purchase new games only, punishing gamers who legitimately purchase used games. The idea behind this is essential to make them pay extra money for… nothing (or as they put it, “bonus features”, which come with the game when you purchase it anyways).
The fact is that the industry is going through one of its worst downturns in years, proving that the game industry is not recession-proof. This should enlighten you guys as to what is obvious to most: people want more value than ever before. But instead of looking for ways to provide that value to gamers, you look for ways to punish them instead.
So I have a simple question: have you guys lost your freaking minds?
Pushing The Wrong Buttons
The average price for games has gone up over the years: no doubt in response to the massive amount of effort that is required to create these games. But as the initial investment goes up, it shuts out those gamers who would like to play your games but can’t afford to. It also makes people consider their purchases more carefully — driving them to purchase games that can provide the most bang for their buck.
But things have gone wrong. For example: who was the genius that got the brilliant idea that withholding and then selling game content as DLC or expansions would provide more value? Instead of giving your customers the whole experience, some of you specifically plan on releasing that content later as DLC that could have been already been placed in the game. Just another scheme to make more money, right?

But this isn’t The Sims! Eventually, gamers are going to see right through this. And while history would predict that they will pay, regardless of the price. It will still turn even more potential customers away.
Now I haven’t purchased a single computer or console game in well over four years. I have always rented my games from GameFly, and it is worthwhile for me because I typically only play your games for a few hours anyway before I send them back. So if I have managed to avoid paying for your expensive titles for several years now — and I am fully willing to pay for games if I really want them — how do you think millions of other gamers feel about paying for these games?
How many others are there just like me that you have turned away?
It’s no wonder why rentals and used games are so appealing. Hint: it’s your customers telling you something.

But another issue that seems to make you guys steam is piracy. You hate that people acquire, circumvent DRM, and play your games without paying.
But did you ever step back for a moment and question why this happens? Maybe it is the price, of all things, that has been a motivating factor. Maybe if the barrier wasn’t so high, those people who have previously pirated your content would actually pay for it instead, because I am sure that many of them would love to support your efforts.
In case you didn’t notice, the world has been going through some pretty serious economic problems, you know? So, it is time for the industry to adapt.
(Update: Here is a great forum post by Stardock CEO Brad Wardell that goes in-depth about how piracy has impacted PC sales of his company’s titles.)
Second Life
If you want to better yourselves — which you should, before things get worse — you could start off simple.
How about lowering the barrier to entry? You say you want the revenues from a $60 investment per gamer, right? Fine. So why not charge $30 and entice twice as many gamers to shell out the cash for the game? You potentially make the same amount of money (if not more), yet you get significantly more exposure and engagement from gamers. This means more opportunity. And everyone knows how you could (and probably would) exploit that.
(Update: Many have been claiming basic economic theory against my idea of cutting the price in half and doubling the sales. Many are calling me crazy. However, it has been proven to work. Not only that, but sales have exceeded all expectations in these cases. For example, digital distribution platforms like Steam and GamersGate report massive sales boosts by reducing the prices slightly. Paradox Interactive noted a sales increase of 5,500% by temporarily cutting the price by 75% for some of their titles on Steam. That doesn’t sound crazy to me, and game publishers should take notice!)
Downloadable content. You could have developers put more effort into developing DLC, and those gamers who are passionate about your games will almost certainly pay for it. The lower barrier to entry means that more gamers will have the opportunity to purchase this DLC, which could, in turn, eventually result in you making significantly more money than you initially intended! Yes. Making more money! How crazy of an idea is that?

The problem with that is that there will be some of you who urge developers to withhold the development of content to provide a more bare game. Thus, you would require gamers to purchase DLC to have a proper experience. Don’t do it!
And finally, let’s talk about this whole used games mess. Most importantly (before you guys start following EA’s plan to punish those who purchase used games), you could come together to sell used games at a discounted price, while still getting a piece of the pie. Yeah, it is that simple.
Obviously, there are gamers who want to purchase your games without paying full price. They wait and buy used games, resulting in a missed opportunity for you to make money. This also happens at a time when the amount of revenue for your games have probably fallen off quite a bit. So why not provide easily accessible services to compete (or work with) with the likes of GameStop, GameFly, and others to provide used games at a discounted price, thus giving you a way to make money from used game sales? Why not work with the used game market to reap in more profits and sales instead of punishing it?
It makes sense. You make money that you wouldn’t have made otherwise. The gamer gets a great product that can also generate money through DLC. And everyone goes home happy.
(Update: It appears now that EA isn’t the only publisher thinking that they should charge $10 for… well… nothing. Ubisoft is considering charging you an extra $10 as well, simply for purchasing a used game. Every publisher is probably going to adopt this scheme now. So thanks for nothing, EA. Sigh.)
Game Over

But it is clear that things need to change, especially before things get worse.
The game industry is at a critical point where newer technologies are set to be released, being led by the idea of 3D gaming experiences, mobile gaming experiences, and social-aware gaming platforms. It is quite possible that games, as they are known today, will not exist as they are in a few years down the line. And all these plans that you come up with to extract more money from gamers will likely speed up the demise of your industry.
It’s only a matter of time. It happens in every industry, and while the game industry has managed to avoid it, one can’t help but wonder how long that will continue to last.
It can’t. Not unless things change. Not unless you change.
104 User Comments
Irollneedmmk
I am 18 I have been around from Snes/Turbo Graphix till now…..ALong the way AMAZING GAMES CAME OUT! I …….
EMULATERS screw fancy graphic link to the past wins all
Rob
Batman Begins the movie cost $150 million to make and made Worldwide: $371,853,783
After the first day Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 made U.S. and the UK $310 million. Also how much did they make with the DLC for 4 levels, two of them being from the last game and only actually making 3 new ones, so almost half the work was already done for them and it cost a third of what you paid for the game.
My question is, did they spend $150 million in creating the game?
A movie ticket cost 10 bucks, a Blu-ray $20 to $30, DVD $20 to $25, Video Game $69.99 on average today.
Now I know the argument here is going to be “did you get 60 hours worth of the movie you bought” Because with games you do get more then 2 hours worth of enjoyment out of it and that’s why I have no problem paying $49 to $59, I don’t even mind paying $69.99 if the game is worth it.
You need to keep in mind that a lot of the games now are online and there is cost in the maintenance so that all gamers can continue to enjoy the online benefits.
what I do mind is when the game has lots of glitches because it was rushed out the door and to try and make the most money before quarter end and then sell DLC that is over priced.
When it comes down to it you got to look at the value of what you are buying, when you buy a movie you could watch it 60 hours worth and have the same experience every time but with a Video game at least you pay more and get a lot more enjoyment and possibly a different experience every time (depending on the game).
My last comment would have to be aimed at EA sports and how every year they charge $69.99 for a new sports game and there is no discount for gamers that buy them every year. And its not like you can sell the last years game because they discount the retail price to $19.99, so what is the point. It would be nice if you could just pay for the upgrades each year as a DLC, they would save money on not having make packaging and discs and would easier on the old pocket book for us.
Zachariah Granville
Ironically enough, I stopped playing games b/c of the expense. Xbox live, 50 bucks a year. Repairing RROD’s, couple hundred a year, new games 3 or 4 hundred a year, etc. etc. etc.
Noel Ang
“[Demise of the gaming industry] is only a matter of time. It happens in every industry, and while the game industry has managed to avoid it, one can’t help but wonder how long that will continue to last.”
I can’t recall a single industry in contemporary times that have ceased to exist. Your edification would be welcome.
Unlike a real rape victim who may be, in their own specific circumstances, unable to stop getting raped, much less complain about it, gamers do have a choice. This is, after all, trade, and if the conditions are not to a man’s liking, he can choose to stop spending his money on a company’s products.
The article confuses cause and effect. The DLC and DRM models are the effects of market pressures (piracy, second-hand resells, etc.), not their cause. Their persistence and continued mutation are the effects of customer tolerance – there is no greater endorsement, intended or otherwise, of these publishers’ practices than handing over your cold, hard cash. When you pay even the harder they screw you, what reasonable message may derive from it? That you liked the service and would pay again for another helping.
So, our figurative rape victim in this discussion is actually, in turns out, a slut.
Who *cares* if the industry burns down. Buildings won’t be toppling down. The craftsmen, the men and women who have the actual ability to create the real value we want, will not cease to exist. They’ll start again, from the beginning if need be. Let it burn. If you have participated in trade that you judge to be unjust, then you have been complicit in perpetuating that evil.
“[The industry] can’t [last]. Not unless things change. Not unless you change.”
An affirmative alternative is for you, the gamer, to change.
Udi
Here’s some basic math.
80% piracy you say?
Ok say there’s a game that sells 20 units per day, that would mean 80 units gets pirated every day.
80/100 = 80%
Ok now say the developer of this game decides to have a one day only “pay what you want sale” and the sales increase 15 fold to 300 (20 X 15)
Now what happens when 80 people still pirate the game on that day of the sale?
80/300 = 26.6%
and voila, there’s your magically reduced piracy rate when the amount pirated stayed exactly the same.
James Mowery
Who’s to say that those 80 people would still pirate the game on that day of the sale?
Udi
just making the point that a reduced piracy % != reduced piracy.
you can reduce piracy % by increasing sale numbers.
James Mowery
That’s true.
Either way though, increased sales are increased sales, and those are potentially sales that might not have happened, especially as time goes by and newer games are hitting the market. It means that there is vastly more demand at a different price point. Publishers are turning those people away, and that, in my opinion, is lost opportunity and lost revenue.
Eclipse
This is true, but increased sales are still a good thing (assuming you make a larger profit on those sales at the lower price point, of course.)
The point about piracy rate vs number of pirates is still a valid one though.