Sony Drops Platinum Title Cost

Eurogamer has the news that Sony has lowered prices on Platinum titles. Selections such as Eye Toy Play 2 and Jak 3 will now retail for about a third less, or roughly $US 34.95. From the article: "The news is set to allow retailers to enjoy a bumper summer at a time when the supply of quality new releases has all but dried up - and consumers will be able to sample a huge range of titles at prices that won't break the bank."

Comments

What's their strategy?

[r_jensen11]

Honestly, what's their strategy here? Even when the Playstation 2 was coming out, I don't recall the regular Playstation games having lower prices overall. I'm confused: what's Sony up to?

Re:What's their strategy?

[Zangief]

It is a very complicated conspiracy, that includes the freemasons, Opus Dei, Muslims, the Bush family, the mafia AND Sony, that seeks to sell more games due to lower prices!

Bank

[turtled]

"...will be able to sample a huge range of titles at prices that won't break the bank."

Yeah, breaking the bank will be when NextGen consoles come out. I know I will get bombarded with, "every generation console is high priced when they first come out..." but, this round of NextGen I feel will be hitting in between $350 and $450 for console units. That to me is breaking the bank. Hell, a new cheap yet up to date computer with no monitor hangs aound the $350 price tage.

Re:Bank

[Mike570]

Yeah, I'm concerned about the cost of the new systems too. I know I'm probably in the minority on this but I miss the days when I payed for a game system that just played games. It seems like with each new system, they get further removed from the sale of game systems and they keep inching closer to some multimedia powerhouse. I wish they'd lower the price by removing all the crap. I don't need HDTV, I don't need a DVD player, etc. Xbox concernes me the most because Microsoft has alot to gain from making their game systems miniature computers. Oh well. I suppose at some point they'll have to stop because I think they're getting close to the cost where people will wait for the cost to come down before buying a new system.

Re:Bank

[MBCook]

I agree. $300 is my limit, I'm not speding over that. I may spend UNDER that. First of all, consoles don't come with games anymore, and they want me to pay $60 a pop (minimum) to buy the games. Add to this all the other things they don't include (2nd controller, memory cards, hard drive in the case of the PS3) and that is just more cash I'll have to shell out to play a game.

I love video games, and I've been buying consoles at launch since the PS1, but this generation there is a good chance that I'll wait for price drops (except on the Revolution, I know I'll get great games there, especially with the ability to play old titles).

Backwards compatability helps though, as that means I can fence my old console to help buy the new one.

Re:Bank

[FidelCatsro]

Do as i always do , Buy the consoles about 6-12 months after they are first out , I've been doing it since the 80's (with the exceptions of my gameboys which i have bought within the first 2 days of release)and i always save a shed load.

As a rule of thumb , generally some of the best Games for a console come out around its death bed(the release of an updated console) and the games are cheaper , so you can really enjoy the best the previous generation has to offer whilst waiting for the cost of the new console to come down .Not to mention that new consoles generally launch with hardly any good games

"Platinum" == "Old"

[yotto]

So I can spend $35 on a 4-year-old game for the PS, or $20 for a 1-year-old game for the PC.

No sources, this is slashdot, but check the prices of just about every 2004 FPS.

Re:"Platinum" == "Old"

[KDR_11k]

Jak 3 was released last year but probably didn't so well because people were tired of so many sequels to the same damn game.

Re:"Platinum" == "Old"

[ZephyrXero]

The Slashdot article misquoted the actual one's prices. In the article it says that the average release price is £29.99 ($52.71) and these Platnum games are going to be selling at £14.99 ($26.34) or lower. They must have just pulled '$35' out of their ass or something...lol. I got my numbers from XE.com. More importantly though, why was the article converted to US currency anyway? It's a story about Britan on a site called EUROgamer!

Re:"Platinum" == "Old"

[SScorpio]

It sounds like Sony is just adding a few more titles to the Platinum series of games. In the US these are called Greatest Hits and retail for $20. Expect Jax 3 to hit these price. I'm not sure about Eyetoy Play 2 over here. The Eyetoy has done extremely well in Europe, but hasn't caught on in the US.

Re:"Platinum" == "Old"

[Ondo]

So I can spend $35 on a 4-year-old game for the PS, or $20 for a 1-year-old game for the PC.

Both the mentioned games are about a year old. Every console has a Greatest Hits program that sells hit games for $20 (in the U.S., this article is about the European version) about a year after they are first released.

No sources, this is slashdot, but check the prices of just about every 2004 FPS.

Unreal Tournament 2004 has hit $20, the cheapest I've seen Doom 3 is $30, and Half-Life 2 $40.

RTFA

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see any mention of the prices in the US. In fact, the article is about european prices.

What IS A Platinum Title?

[sH4RD]

I live over here in North America, and I've heard of Greatest Hits games (they have red bars on the boxes), and they come in at $20. I've never seen a Platinum title, nor do I know what it is. I would assume it was equivalent to the Greatest Hits collection here in North America, but, the fact that after a LOWERING of the price they still cost more than Greatest Hits kinda throws me off. What gives?

Re:What IS A Platinum Title?

[Dizzle]

Prices for games are higher in PAL regions and to a lesser extent Japan. We see the same prices in Canada that you do in the USA (after the conversion) but Europe sees close to double what we pay. This goes for the actual consoles as well.

Re:What IS A Platinum Title?

[Fred Or Alive]

Greatest Hits is the US equivelant of Platinum games.

The price is wrong IMO ($35 is nearer the existing £20 price point), I'd say $25 is nearer £15.

Video games in Europe / UK cost more. The RRP of nerw games is usually £40 (~$70), but it is getting nearer £30 ($50), at least if you buy online, or from specialist shops. I guess some of the extra cost is tax, but I think some of it is just the companies extracting money becuase they can. The recent price changes do at least move the prices nearer to US ones, with the strong Pound at the moment it has been getting ridiculous.

Re:What IS A Platinum Title?

[ZephyrXero]

According to the article, no...they don't pay much more than we do, at least not for new releases. I've already made a post about it here.

Convert to Euro

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

Great, now I can look forward to €45 titles instead of €60 ones. This despite the favourable US/Euro exchange rate.
So instead of paying ~$71 for my games, I'll now be paying ~$53 dollars, which is still more than the $50 that is paid for games in the States!!!
Arrgghh!!

Thank you Sony. Thanks for nothing!!

Re:Convert to Euro

[KDR_11k]

45 is still much better than 60 and knowing Mediamarkt most will probably be priced 40 at retail. Unfortunately they didn't seem to lower the standard prices, just that of the "Platinum" budget line.

Just for reference...

[Fred Or Alive]

The article assumes you know about UK games prices, ranges etc., so if you don't know, here's some information other people have probably already posted whilst I dither over this message:

PlayStation Platinum is the European equivelant of PlayStation 2 Greatest Hits. They used to retail for £19.99ish (~$35) in the UK. (Xbox has Xbox Classics, GameCube has Player's Choice for their budget ranges, all usually at £20ish).

Full games usually have an RRP of £40 (~$70), but as the article states, are often found cheaper nowadays, although they're usually slightly above £30 (~$50).

£15 is nearer $25 than $35, but exchange rates fluctuate.

There are of course various offers and stuff, budget priced games (whever in a budget range or not) are often in 2 for £30 offers and stuff.

Yes, living in Europe sucks if you like videogames. We usually have to wait until last to pay the most for them.

Re:Just for reference...

[nick_davison]

As an English gamer who moved to the U.S., I figured I'd share just how badly overcharged you guys are:

UK:
Before: £19.99 (~$35)
Now: £14.99 (~$25)

US:
Regular retail since the Platinum line has existed: $19.99
Price if you shop around for which store has a sale this week: $14.99 ($9.99 if you're lucky)

DVDs are equally bad: I rarely pay over $14.99 (~£9), often pay $9.99 (~£6) if I wait a month or two, and, if I'm willing to wait, older titles (like Hunt For Red October - at Circuit City this weekend) are $4.99 (~£3). Plus, because all the large stores price match, you check the online ads for all stores - then go to your nearest one and ask them to match.

To be fair, in the UK, 17.5% VAT is added within those prices whereas, in the US, sales tax is added on on top. Then again, as that rarely clears 8% anywhere, it doesn't come close to making the difference.

Re:Just for reference...

[Anonymous Coward]

We pay even more in New Zealand, so consider yourself lucky.

New Zealand is just wonderful that way - one of the worst cost-of-living to average wage ratios in the developed world.

All technology ends up costing us much more than it sells for overseas, even though our discretionary income is only a fraction of a foreigner's.

Oh, and our only real broadband supplier (other companies have to buy the broadband from then to on-sell) has just lowered upload rates from 192kbps to 128...
That's right! New Zealand is so behind-the-times our broadband offerings are actually moving backwards!!

I just wish I could live in Europe to get better deals :)

$35, cheap?

[duncanbojangles]

Seriously, who considers $35 to be cheap? The game better be damned good for me to pay $35 when there are tons of $20 and $15 titles that would be just as much fun. And if these are games that have already sold enough to reach "platinum", I'd expect a drop in price at least this much.

But I should quit complaining, considering the next generation conosoles' games are going to cost an arm and a leg.

Re:$35, cheap?

[KDR_11k]

Seriously, who considers $35 to be cheap?

Europeans because the only games you can pick up for 10 are either ancient or commercial failures and often deservedly. Platinum is just the name of the PS2's budget line here.

Platinum/Greatest Hits List

[Winterblink]

Here's a link to Sony's Greatest Hits games... I don't know if it's the same as the UK Platinum games, but I doubt they're too dissimilar.

Slashdot:

[Jukashi]

Advertising for Nerds. Stuff that sells.

Meteos - $30

[richman555]

I spent $30 on the brand new Meteos game on the Nintendo DS. Great value!

Re:Meteos - $30

[KDR_11k]

Except DS games cost 40EUR in Europe (like GBA games), the same price as most PC games.

Forget videogames

[Saiyine]

What about paying 489€ for the MacMini? (about $100 dollars more)

Strategy: Get killed by Microsoft.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sony are fighting for their lives. They're already losing to the Nintendo DS on the handheld front with PSP sales in freefall (it's simply too expensive with the economy not in fighting shape). They also just got fined $41 million for tax evasion in Japan - their overseas profits were incorrectly reported.

When the Playstation 2 came out Sony didn't really have to worry about competition. There were Playstation 1 games in development even after the Playstation 2 launched. The Dreamcast had stalled, the Xbox was an unknown quantity and Nintendo was dead in the water.

The Xbox is currently the top dog of the console world - it's now proven to be more capable than the Playstation 2. Gamers that have both platforms are buying Xbox versions of titles (ie: the Grand Theft Auto series) instead of Playstation 2 ones. While the Xbox may not have won on total number of units sold, it has won the mindset of being the more advanced, more desirable gaming machine.

But now we have the Xbox 360, The Destroyer Of Sony's Worlds (due to the number of developers that have defected from Sony's platform) due to launch this year, months before the Playstation 3. Anything that comes out for the Playstation 2 this christmas will be directly compared to games on the significantly superior Xbox 1 - AND the vastly superior 360. They'll be two generations behind. Sony and their developers do not want to compete against that.

So Sony does the only thing that they can do - push all serious games in development to the Playstation 3 and drop the price of their existing games. Although I thought marketing 101 went something like this: When you have to compete on price, you've already lost to your competitors. Serious gamers have already begun to save money for the 360 - and they won't bite.

I predict, with anonymous authority (heh), that the Playstation 2 is dead, and the 360 will be the dominant competitor in the next round of videogame consoles. It'll be interesting to see how much headway the PS3 can make against the 360 - although gamers started distrusting the Sony hype machine when the Playstation 2 completely failed to deliver on Sony's promises (some "emotion engine" that was).

Re:Strategy: Get killed by Microsoft.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sony are fighting for their lives

I see you found its always good to start with troll bullshit?

Re:Strategy: Get killed by Microsoft.

[SetupWeasel]

As a Nintendo fan, I've made a lot of predictions about their return to dominance. None of them came true.

Right now the XBOX is definately not the top dog in the console world. They are barely beating the GameCube in the worldwide home console market, but that one victory needs some perspective. First, the PS2 is outselling it 4:1. Second, the XBOX is not a factor in Japan. Third, Microsoft has lost more than 2 billion dollars on the XBOX.

If you are talking about Home Consoles, the top dog is clearly Sony in both profits and sales. If you are talking all current systems, Nintendo is clearly the victor in both profits and sales.

Even if Microsoft were to turn their video game division profitable right now and achieve Nintendo levels of profitability, it would take more than 3 years for Microsoft to earn their investment back.

I'm not going to say Nintendo is going to lead this next generation. I know how many broken Sony systems consumers are willing to replace. I will, however, predict their sales and profits will remain healthy.

On the other hand, I predict that Microsoft will fall short of breaking even with the 360 no matter how many units they sell, but I'm sure they will be able to handle it.

Sony will probably lead the home console sales again, as long as they maintain their profits.

Re:Strategy: Get killed by Microsoft.

[ZephyrXero]

You're kind of right...but not completely. Yes, most people who own an Xbox and a PS2 go for the Xbox version if it's multiplatform. Unfortunately, there's still alot of games that are PS2 exclusive. MS might be making great strides here in America but it's only doing moderately well in Europe and HORRIBLY in Japan. I'd go as far to say that MS views the Xbox as a failure, and that's why their so eager to jump ahead into the next generation.

I too believe MS has put the Xbox360 in a very competitive position. They'll be the first out the gate, and unlike Sega before them...actually have the money to over market/advertise Sony. From what we've seen of the PS3 and Xbox360 so far they look to be on fairly equal footing. PS3 might have a little more graphical horsepower, but it's starting to look like the 360's triple core processor might allow for better gameplay and physics than the much overhyped Cell. The fact that the first couple sweeps of the Xbox will only be available with a harddrive will ensure a large enough base, so that developers actually care as where the PS3 will probably not be as fortunate. I think Sony was way too cocky last gen, and they gave MS the chance to gain some serious ground on them...if they keep up their ways of the past they may very well find MS getting a larger portion of the pie this go round.

As for Nintendo, they're always a wild card...there's a chance they could suprise everyone and take first place this next generation. It's not likely...but you never know. Being that the Revolution will probably come out at least $100 less than the 360 (and I guess $200 less than the PS3?) they can aim for a different audience than MS and Sony will be battling for...so I don't even bother comparing them with the other two usually...

Re:Strategy: Get killed by Microsoft.

[Anonymous Coward]

As a Nintendo fan, I've made a lot of predictions about their return to dominance. None of them came true.

Okay, but you were obviously wrong about Nintendo first time around. So why does that now give weight to your opinion that Sony is going to continue to dominate?

Right now the XBOX is definately not the top dog in the console world.

So why to people prefer Xbox versions of games? I'm not talking about absolute sales figures (I do not question the PS2 selling more units than the Xbox), I'm saying that the Xbox has won the crown as "most desirable console". If you ask people who own all three consoles "which is the best", they will answer "Xbox". The specific example I tried to use was Grand Theft Auto: several hardcore gamer friends of mine have traded in their PS2 version in exchange for the Xbox version. It is better, they prefer it. They are buying Xbox not PS2. If both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 were out tomorrow, they would choose the 360.

Second, the XBOX is not a factor in Japan.

That's partly because of Japan's xenophobic attitude towards American products, and because Microsoft didn't know how to succeed in Japan. They got their asses kicked. Having learned their lesson, they have now gone to Japanese talent for 360 games rather than trying to import titles that didn't work for the market (just like the Japanese companies like Sony have development studios in the US).

However, the Japanese market is tiny compared to the American market. Titans live and die here - not in Japan.

Third, Microsoft has lost more than 2 billion dollars on the XBOX.

Microsoft never cared about making the Xbox profitable. They're in it for the long-haul, their gameplan was never to make money on the Xbox 1. They have more than $40 billion dollars - cash - just sitting in the bank. They do not care if the Xbox lost them $2 billion - they aren't going to pay that full value anyway. Large companies get massive tax advantages if they have a "struggling" business unit that made a loss (oh look our poor division lost money so we have to pay $2 billion less taxes - boo hoo).

MSFT made $8 billion profit last year vs SNE's $0.8 billion - I don't think MSFT is hurting. Losing money won't hurt Sony in the short-term either, but I see Microsoft on the up while Sony is stalling out (Sony made less money in 2004 than in 2003).

Sony will probably lead the home console sales again, as long as they maintain their profits.

I agree that they're in a better position than Nintendo - but - Microsoft can afford to lose with the 360. Sony can't afford to lose with the PS3 as it'll be a turning point for them. This is a war of attrition measured in decades, the individual battles are of less consequence.

Re:Strategy: Get killed by Microsoft.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd go as far to say that MS views the Xbox as a failure, and that's why their so eager to jump ahead into the next generation.

But in some respects, Microsoft did far better with the Xbox than they were expecting. Several pieces of the Xbox empire (like Xbox Live) have done tremendously. Launching the first global online console gaming platform is no small feat. Microsoft knew that they were in for a tough fight. Their worst-case scenario would have been "get eaten alive by Sony" - and that didn't happen (although it came close in Japan - Japan is a tiny market).

As for Nintendo, they're always a wild card

True, but that means they don't have a focus. Nintendo's street image is "handhelds for kids". Their Gameboy and DS are doing too well to allow them to win on the console front. Companies can only push one type of product at a time - otherwise their products compete against each other, the marketing message turns muddy and people stop listening.

(This muddying of the message is partly how the Nintendo 64 came unseated by it's own Gameboy - and is now Sony's problem. For Sony fans, the PSP is far more exciting than the PS2 - yet true fans of handhelds are more interested in Nintendo's DS as they already had a Gameboy.)

(And this is also why car manufacturers often have several brands to help them sell different products to different markets. Even Toyota's done it with their Scion and Lexus brands that have laser focus on markets (in this case: gen-Y'ers and luxury) that would normally exclude Toyota).

The only way I can forsee myself buying another Nintendo product is if it really is light years ahead of anything else.

Still, it'll be interesting to see what happens next.

Re:Strategy: Get killed by Microsoft.

[Anonymous Coward]

Gamers that have both platforms are buying Xbox versions of titles (ie: the Grand Theft Auto series) instead of Playstation 2 ones.

Despite the PS2's (minimum) 8 month lead time for that series? I smell a troll...

$35?

[toddhunter]

No I don't think so. They are retailing at $29.95 in Australia (normal platinum is $50 and new games $100), which would be something like $15 US.
Which for a game like jak 3 is a pretty darn good deal