The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Games are getting more expensive, not just in terms of price, but also in terms of the percentage of your weekly moolah they bite into.
A recent study conducted by my good self, spanning the last 8 years, compared the cost of computer games (Megadrive, Sony, Nintendo) against 3 common indices, the RPI, (Retail Prices Index), the AEI (Average Earnings Index), and a Mars Bar. You may think that the last item is strange, but in the world of statistics, the Mars Bar is actually a very good indicator of inflation, as it's usually unvarying with the difference between the AEI and the RPI.
So, whilst the humble Mars Bar will still take the same percentage of your weekly earnings today as it did 8 years ago, the games you buy for your console are actually eating an extra 17% more of your money today than they did 8 years ago. (Using average earnings statistics for 1993 showed that a Megadrive game back then would only take about 5% of your weekly wage to buy). Now a Dreamcast game can eat up 23% of your weekly wage, going on it's current RRP.
The trend is also ever upwards, unlike the RPI, the AEI and the Mars Bar. The RPI and AEI have always snaked about a bit, sometimes with the AEI graph above the RPI (everything seems cheap, good for us) and sometimes below it (everything seems expensive, bad for us). The Mars Bar is a nice gentle curve between the modal points of the AEI and RPI graphs.
But console games? Very nearly a straight line, and always going upwards from left to right. Common sense says that this should flatten out. But when? We have only had indications recently that as games are getting more sophisticated in design and content that this worrying trend will continue, and it will get to the stage where they are eating more than 50% of the average weekly wage within 4 years if the current slope of the graph is indicative of things to come.
But, statistics also predict that by the year 2004 94% of the world's population will be Elvis Presley impersonators, so don't let the numbers fool you.
Still, I don't like the look of these results.
A recent study conducted by my good self, spanning the last 8 years, compared the cost of computer games (Megadrive, Sony, Nintendo) against 3 common indices, the RPI, (Retail Prices Index), the AEI (Average Earnings Index), and a Mars Bar. You may think that the last item is strange, but in the world of statistics, the Mars Bar is actually a very good indicator of inflation, as it's usually unvarying with the difference between the AEI and the RPI.
So, whilst the humble Mars Bar will still take the same percentage of your weekly earnings today as it did 8 years ago, the games you buy for your console are actually eating an extra 17% more of your money today than they did 8 years ago. (Using average earnings statistics for 1993 showed that a Megadrive game back then would only take about 5% of your weekly wage to buy). Now a Dreamcast game can eat up 23% of your weekly wage, going on it's current RRP.
The trend is also ever upwards, unlike the RPI, the AEI and the Mars Bar. The RPI and AEI have always snaked about a bit, sometimes with the AEI graph above the RPI (everything seems cheap, good for us) and sometimes below it (everything seems expensive, bad for us). The Mars Bar is a nice gentle curve between the modal points of the AEI and RPI graphs.
But console games? Very nearly a straight line, and always going upwards from left to right. Common sense says that this should flatten out. But when? We have only had indications recently that as games are getting more sophisticated in design and content that this worrying trend will continue, and it will get to the stage where they are eating more than 50% of the average weekly wage within 4 years if the current slope of the graph is indicative of things to come.
But, statistics also predict that by the year 2004 94% of the world's population will be Elvis Presley impersonators, so don't let the numbers fool you.
Still, I don't like the look of these results.
Page:
Maybe it was the caffeine...
Insane B
Insane B
Sorry about that big rant just then, I got exceited...
Insane B
Insane B
That's a great duck azzido.
I do hereby give it the utmost respect, being a member of the Brethren of the Mallard.
Insane Bartender
I do hereby give it the utmost respect, being a member of the Brethren of the Mallard.
Insane Bartender
OK, let's have a breakdown.
Since I have worked in an IT environment.
Let's make a game:
6-12 months of market research and an investigatory project to evaluate the scope of your full project.
This will cost somewhere between £1m and £5m, mostly due to labour costs, and software licences.
If, and that's a big IF, you're research points towards your game being feasible, you start the game in earnest.
Producing the average game today comes in around 4-6 stages before testing, and will cost anywhere between another £2m and £20m, then you test, then you market, then you promote, then you tour, then, and only then does it hit the shelves.
So after shelling out what could be as much as £40-50million you think a game is overpriced at £40.
Well, I'm sure the software houses will really take that into account next time they want to make a game...
Insane Bartender
Since I have worked in an IT environment.
Let's make a game:
6-12 months of market research and an investigatory project to evaluate the scope of your full project.
This will cost somewhere between £1m and £5m, mostly due to labour costs, and software licences.
If, and that's a big IF, you're research points towards your game being feasible, you start the game in earnest.
Producing the average game today comes in around 4-6 stages before testing, and will cost anywhere between another £2m and £20m, then you test, then you market, then you promote, then you tour, then, and only then does it hit the shelves.
So after shelling out what could be as much as £40-50million you think a game is overpriced at £40.
Well, I'm sure the software houses will really take that into account next time they want to make a game...
Insane Bartender
azzido wrote:
>I've been a member since I was 5!!!!!!
So that's almost a year now then ;-p
>I've been a member since I was 5!!!!!!
So that's almost a year now then ;-p
Page: