The GC Spotlight turns its ever invading beam to the direction of Sony’s PSN store. Can the PSN store beat the largest online retailer, Amazon, when it comes to game prices?
(Industry, PS3)
PSN as more of an obligation to the publishers than Amazon, Bestbuy, Target does. All those other stores also sell other products than Video Games, so they can cut prices on certain games and merchandise.
It's the same with Marketplace and Wiiware. We don't see it as much because they don't see as many retail games on their store as we do on the PSN.
Even still, it blows my mind that developers set digital prices at full retail price with little relief. A digital copy should sell, in my opinion, for No Less then $10 Below the physical copy price. With no packaging, shipping, or retailer cuts, the cost of delivering a game digitally is much cheaper.
Maybe I don't understand the economics of it. But I would think that digital have a higher profit margin and would therefore be a more desirable way of distribution.
I would like to buy many PS3 games digitally, if they were priced closer to Steam game prices.
Try to understand the concept of utility and value-adding activity. Delivery and packaging add no value to a product because they aren't the product itself, therefore because they aren't worth anything, removing them should't change the the price. A physical game vs a digital game should have exactly the same utility because they both play exactly the same and you end up with the same enjoyment. This is exactly why Publishers have been putting in online-passes, to remove utility out of used games.
Thinking about it like that is why often digital games aren't priced any different to physical stock. If you value packaging for collection purposes, that's extrinsic value you yourself have priced as an emotional response.
"A physical game vs a digital game should have exactly the same utility because they both play exactly the same and you end up with the same enjoyment." - plmkoh
Yeah that's nice but it has nothing to do with consumers.
Most consumers think digital games should be cheaper but they are not so they don't buy digital. End of story. Any theory of economics doesn't mean anything if it doesn't match consumers purchasing habits.
"A physical game vs a digital game should have exactly the same utility because they both play exactly the same and you end up with the same enjoyment." - plmkoh
Value of a game doesnt mean anything to Publishers either, when compared to Profitability. If they can make a higher margin on digital, then they will. And probably are with charging full price for the digital version. But until pricing for those games becomes more reasonable, I don't see digital taking over.
If you use psn cards to buy stuff , you can put in an address from a state that doesn't charge tax, so you can avoid the sales tax if you are not using a credit card.
Amazon routinely has sales. They also have release-date shipping. Kind of a no-contest thing. Like comparing Origin to Steam. Sure, you can try to compare the two, but why bother?
Those are PC versions of those games and yes its cheap(as with most pc games after a certain time period)...PSN/XBL is just different, publishers and developers have more control over pricing just accept it.
Now - Calling all Marvel fans. Come celebrate the release of Captain America: The Winter Soldier with us as we give away a cool prize for fans of Cap plu... | Promoted post
10°
0°
10°
10°
Ad 
10°
It's the same with Marketplace and Wiiware. We don't see it as much because they don't see as many retail games on their store as we do on the PSN.
This is opinion, not fact. As least I think so.
Maybe I don't understand the economics of it. But I would think that digital have a higher profit margin and would therefore be a more desirable way of distribution.
I would like to buy many PS3 games digitally, if they were priced closer to Steam game prices.
Most don't, but this is why:
Try to understand the concept of utility and value-adding activity. Delivery and packaging add no value to a product because they aren't the product itself, therefore because they aren't worth anything, removing them should't change the the price. A physical game vs a digital game should have exactly the same utility because they both play exactly the same and you end up with the same enjoyment. This is exactly why Publishers have been putting in online-passes, to remove utility out of used games.
Thinking about it like that is why often digital games aren't priced any different to physical stock. If you value packaging for collection purposes, that's extrinsic value you yourself have priced as an emotional response.
- plmkoh
Yeah that's nice but it has nothing to do with consumers.
Most consumers think digital games should be cheaper but they are not so they don't buy digital. End of story. Any theory of economics doesn't mean anything if it doesn't match consumers purchasing habits.
- plmkoh
Value of a game doesnt mean anything to Publishers either, when compared to Profitability. If they can make a higher margin on digital, then they will. And probably are with charging full price for the digital version. But until pricing for those games becomes more reasonable, I don't see digital taking over.
They also have release-date shipping.
Kind of a no-contest thing. Like comparing Origin to Steam. Sure, you can try to compare the two, but why bother?
S.T.A.L.K.E.R: Shadow of Chernobyl
Warhammer: Space Marine
Red Faction: Armageddon
Red Faction: Guerrilla
Homefront
Metro 2033
when has PSN ever have deals like that?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/pr...