Game Piracy Results in Lower Prices?

meejahor writes "The BBC reports that Sony will soon launch the PlayStation 2 in China, following Nintendo's lead with the GameCube. Most interesting about the story is the news that, because of widespread piracy in China, PS2 games 'will cost far less than they do in the US or the UK, but still be slightly more than pirated discs.' We've always been told that pirate games push prices up, but doesn't this news suggest that piracy in China has in fact pushed prices down? The story also notes that 'only two or three games will be available at launch' which seems crazy considering the likelihood that people will pirate imported games instead of waiting for them to be released officially." While the Chinese launch of PS2 has been known for a while, the pricing of Chinese games is pretty interesting, given their long history of piracy. I imagine this sort of thing would be considered in the U.S. and other countries were pirated games as widespread as they are in China.

Comments

It is not about piracy!

[segmond]

DUH!
What next, Sony reduces the price of PS2 games in Africa by a factor of 100 compared with US! If a the average household income of a country in Africa and China is say $1000. How the heck do you think they are going to buy a $50 game? Be realistic. People pay rent in those countries for say $10-$15 a month. What in the world will justify them to pay $40-$50 for a game? It is not fair to charge them $50 and deprive them, at the same time, yall will feel it is not fair to charge you $50 and charge them $5.

This is all about what the market can afford. Even if there was no piracy, the prices will be far more cheaper, else they will only be selling 100 games a month. China has population, imagine if they can get to sell to 250,000,000 people at only $2. That's some major money right there!

Re:Lower prices

[GigsVT]

Some gamers might jizz their pants over the eye candy, but I think a lot of people would much rather good gameplay to life-like graphics. I know most of the people at LAN parties turn down the graphics options to get smoother gameplay, even the ones with high end video cards.

The graphics might be what sells a game, but it's not what keeps people playing it.

Re:Yeah right. The matrix revolutions, $8

[Fnkmaster]

That's absurd. The market for movies is huge, compared to the market for PC games. Game development shops, for the most part, run small, low margin businesses. Your calculation is absurd, because the game that sells a million copies returns about 2 million to the developer, 3-4 million to the publisher, 3 million to retailers, and the rest to assorted other folks. In short, you just released a huge new game, got a publishing deal, worked for 2 years developing it, it was a pretty big success, sold a million copies, and you lost a million dollars on the deal.

As for whether publishers and distributers take a bigger cut in the gaming business than the movie business, that's a toughie - I don't know enough to say for sure. But a successful movie might take in 50-100 million dollars so there is more to go around. However, retail chains get much more favorable terms for PC games than for DVD movies, simply because return rates and compatibility issues are massive. Publishers have to deal with support issues, which are also massive.

Try writing a 3D game, which has to run on EVERYBODY'S PC and compare to doing some animations in Maya, which just have to look good from one angle and get rendered once. Not dissing on the Matrix or other heavy-FX movies, but it's really a hell of a lot of work to support and distribute a modern 3D PC game.

This, of course, is why nobody really wants to develop for the flooded PC market and why the console market exists, if you are well capitalized and can afford to hire the right people, get all the SDKs and negotiate good terms.