-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
archangelmorph
Member
Yes.
The real con is not the 30% commission, it's the artificially maintained high prices of games on the digital store when you can buy the same title in disc form at retail for 50% cheaper.
Horizon: Forbidden West -> PSN £70, JohnLewis|Argos|etc £35
Ratchet & Clank: Rifts Apart -> PSN £70, JohnLewis|Argos|etc £35
Selling direct & digital supposed to cut out the cost of intermediated distribution as well as cost of physical media manufacturing. There is no economic reason why the digital version should not be cheaper. It's purely predatory anti-consumer B2B cartel-like behavior.
Sybrix
Member
Way back when publishers had to pay 14 or 15 bucks per disc made on the older consoles on 50 dollar titles. That was 30%. The console or device creator takes all of the risk. You take away their profits, no one will want to put out products. PC store fronts are a bit different, they can be cheaper as there are less costs involved.
Last edited:
phil_t98
#SonyToo
how does the consumer lose?
ever year I buy Cod my mate buys the other bigger hitter what ever that is, we game share and we can play each other on the same game with game sharing so how do we loose? I spend 60 he spends 60 and we get 2 games for that , which we can each play at the same time
Last edited:
Nitty_Grimes
Made a crappy phPBB forum once ... once.
By going halves with his brother probably.Agreed, but how doesBanjo64 get these prices:
Last edited:
Ass of Can Whooping
Member
Last edited:
Portugeezer
Member
Doesn't matter what it cost you in some roundabout way; the game was never on sale for £30 on the store.
Bragr
Banned
You don't think Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft are taking a risk?
Banjo64
cumsessed
Cool.
Robb
Gold Member
Ms. Neill is coming for them all. First she’ll sue the platform holders, when there’s no change in consumer prices she’ll sue the publishers and then finally the developers. It’s time to clean house #proconsumer
bitbydeath
Member
I’ve never seen that before, got any links for digital Nintendo Games on Amazon?
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
Why they have digital ps5 or how they can get it for that price?
The latter is because of game share.
You get two copies for the price of one.
Me and my Gf does the same. We have to only pay one copy for us both to play.
Tiago Rodrigues
Member
This is going nowhere, lmao
Sybrix
Member
Your arrangement isn't common and not an argument in defence of Sony's practices. The games still cost $10+ over physical and thats the point.
About time someone highlighted this type of practice when it comes to digital games, Xbox & Nintendo are just as bad.
Last edited:
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
Search for Mario Party Super Stars, Metroid Dread, Super Smash Bros Ultimate, Crash 4 on Amazon
Negotiator101
Member
Calverz
Member
Mario Kart 8 Deluxe [Switch Download Code] : Amazon.co.uk: PC & Video Games
Buy Mario Kart 8 Deluxe [Switch Download Code] from Amazon.co.uk. Download and play now.
www.amazon.co.uk
Sybrix
Member
Yeah let Sony make more money and us the consumer pay moreway to go Einstein
Does Sony have some sort of hold over the users of NeoGAF?!?! LOL
I've never seen so much rushing to defend corporate greed.... has Sony become a God i didnt know about?
You can see why companies like Sony invest billions in consumer psychology marketing, they create armies of defenders to practices that are particularly shady lol
Last edited:
lyan
Member
itch.io charges 10% by default to add to this.
Sybrix
Member
You can sort of understand it, customers have loyalty to a brand they love, i get it.
But when your defending obvious price inflation practices that appear shady and unethical, you as the customer have to step back and say to yourself do i really support this?
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
I guess the idea is that Sony’s games should be sold for less money since they don’t have to pay themselves a 30% cut of each sale, the way third parties do.
SenaxxNL
Member
Still not a reason to keep it that way.... Something can be wrong although a lot of company's are doing it.
Sybrix
Member
Can you both play the game at the same time?
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
You’re not getting two copies of the game.
Only one account “owns” the game.
If you and your girlfriend break up, only one of you will have the game.
Swipeyowifelike
Member
Only if one of them is vindictive and goes out of there way to deactivate the other account.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
I seriously doubt most people will keep an account going with an ex, for years. They’re going to move on with their lives, not concern themselves with a dead game sharing partnership.
I Master l
Banned
Sony "also Nintendo and MS" commission of physical price is less than 20% and they make the console and sell it at
loss sometimes, 30% commission of digital price is fair cut IMO, Valve on the other hand are charging too much for
what they offer
loss sometimes, 30% commission of digital price is fair cut IMO, Valve on the other hand are charging too much for
what they offer
Last edited:
crackajack
Member
What about VAT? The state adds to the "ripoff" and "abuses" their position. I can't even import a console from Germany without increasing its cost since their vat differs from ours. In the free market EU where everything needs to be equal unless it doesn't!
air, water, food, housing, those are areas where capitalism should not have free reign, but luxury and overall still cheap electronnics and entertainment definitily no regulation needed.
Last edited:
bitbydeath
Member
Bummer, must be a regional thing, doesn’t seem to be available in Australia.
JimboJones
Member
Yep, we still had FFVII release at £70 on that store.
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
Yes of course.
We wouldn't be able to do it with a physical copy.
If our 3 year old kid scratches my discs with her toys then neither of us are able to play it.
fermcr
Member
... and yet Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft are making record profits, and more and more publishers and developers are closing or selling out.
Not even going to mention the profits of Apple or Steam...
Last edited:
Swipeyowifelike
Member
You say this like the console makers are the only ones racking in record profits from this setup. It's no different than the relationship between movie studios and theaters. You should be grateful the big three still have the relevance they do or we'd be stuck with lord knows how many subscriptions popping up constantly.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
That has nothing to do with game sharing.
Goalus
Member
Patches are sent to the customer on physical discs then? Sounds inconvenient and wasteful.
What exactly is here to be gained except for companies making more dollars?
Technically, it all stays the same but the distribution would be different. Remember how Epic said that the cut would benefit better quality games, payment/deals for developers and lower prices? I don't see any of this; first, quality is hard to quantify and second, what there is to quantify I can tell you it doesn't make the cut as of now. I don't see games on release cheaper on EGS than on other platforms. Same goes for the Windows Store that supposedly takes 10% IIRC., e.g. Outer Worlds cost regular 59,99 EUR still.
I mean, this happens all the time. Like a decade ago the kerosene taxes for air lines which then increased their ticket prices? Increasing tenure cost for stores and restaurants who then increases their prices? Money, if imagined on a scale, usually flows into one direction since the world's first inflation in the 16th century when the Spanish brought 300 tons of silver per year into Europe. Companies want (to keep) their cut and they will simply increase prices. What will perhaps never happen is that they lower them, especially long established and accepted prices. So taking the cut from one company will only give it to another. The end-consumer will always pay the same unless companies try to undersell for acceptance, usually to gain market entry (EGS does this sort of with giving away games for free or vouchers all the time to get people use that platform, which gives Epic more leverage in negotiations when they say how many users they have).
Technically, it all stays the same but the distribution would be different. Remember how Epic said that the cut would benefit better quality games, payment/deals for developers and lower prices? I don't see any of this; first, quality is hard to quantify and second, what there is to quantify I can tell you it doesn't make the cut as of now. I don't see games on release cheaper on EGS than on other platforms. Same goes for the Windows Store that supposedly takes 10% IIRC., e.g. Outer Worlds cost regular 59,99 EUR still.
I mean, this happens all the time. Like a decade ago the kerosene taxes for air lines which then increased their ticket prices? Increasing tenure cost for stores and restaurants who then increases their prices? Money, if imagined on a scale, usually flows into one direction since the world's first inflation in the 16th century when the Spanish brought 300 tons of silver per year into Europe. Companies want (to keep) their cut and they will simply increase prices. What will perhaps never happen is that they lower them, especially long established and accepted prices. So taking the cut from one company will only give it to another. The end-consumer will always pay the same unless companies try to undersell for acceptance, usually to gain market entry (EGS does this sort of with giving away games for free or vouchers all the time to get people use that platform, which gives Epic more leverage in negotiations when they say how many users they have).
Last edited:
lostinblue
Banned
of course the consumer doesn't really get anything from this. But any digital storefront owner getting 30% is unfair.
That's sensible at least.
I don't have an issue with them getting 30% out of GTA5 or something.
Last edited:
Robb
Gold Member
I mean sure you can make bank, but it’s not like that’s always the case at all. Nintendo have had loads of failures over the years, Sony were in the red and bleeding money for the entire PS3 generation, people constantly complain MS isn’t profitable.. Prior savings or being able to inject cash from other business sectors have likely saved all three several times over.
If there were as many console manufacturers as there are developers/publishers currently I’m certain the default rates for console manufacturers would be a lot higher comparatively.
Bragr
Banned
The profits are because of the 30% and subscription services, and you can't just base it on right now, all these companies have struggled at times, and the 30% is what kept them alive.
Topher
Gold Member
Yep. Anyone pretending lower commission rates mean games will be cheaper for consumers are kidding themselves. "Consumer rights champion"......my ass.
reinking
Gold Member
Out of curiosity I googled "what precent attorney keep class action." Here is an answer that popped up.
edit -it can get much worse than that if this site is true....
http://www.triallawyermoney.org/attorneys-fees-in-class-action-lawsuits/
Not sure if that is the same in Europe but I agree with this attorney, 30% is way too high.
edit -it can get much worse than that if this site is true....
http://www.triallawyermoney.org/attorneys-fees-in-class-action-lawsuits/
Last edited: