EA CEO Says Games Cost Too Much, Different Pricing Models Needed

Maybe if they made fewer games that were better, i.e. followed Blizzard/Valve's model, it'd work out for them.

You know what this BS leads to? Monthly fees, which over the course of a few months easily exceeds a one-time charge that "costs too much" up front. @___@

What the fuck, games were priced at $50 for 20 years, and now they're $60, and in five years they'll be what? $70? That is some shitty MATHS, friend.

Why the hell do games cost so much when movies cost way more to make and are cheaper to buy? Less content? Different medium? What's wrong with pricing video game shipments to suppliers and retailers the same way DVDs are priced (percentage-wise)?

What does he mean they give games for free in China?

How much were nintendo games? I remember them being around $50

New models are needed. And I'll tell you why. Games have gotten so expensive, not because they cost so much more to make (Which they have) but because of the secondary market. Places like Gamestop, EB, and others are making huge profit off of sale after sale of the same game, and guess how much the publishers/developers see of those repeat sales? Not one tiny penny.

This might seem like a consumer unfriendly comment, but resales of games that only profit the retail segment hurt the developer, hurt the publisher, and ultimately hurt the consumer, because it drives new prices sky up. The model that needs to change first is retail needs to start paying a percentage of the resales to the people who actually made the game, or make retail secondary market illegal. The former is preferable, but hard to control. The latter is draconian, but really the only way to fix truly fix situation. And places like Gamestop will fight hard against either of those options. They don't care that they are killing the viability of this industry. They care only about their bottom line.

Mr. Riccitiello, you are the head of the largest video game company in the world. If you were to lower prices today, the industry would have to follow. So, put your money where your mouth is....

What a hypocrite. I'd rather pay USD 50 for a non mmo game than, pay 12 x 10 USD if I want to repeat playing it throughout a year. STOP EAids

With all those in-game ads in EA games they should be cheap to begin with, right?

what a coincidence, i was just thinking CEO's cost a company too much. they should come up with alternate payment schemes for them. Release X amount of rehashed concepts and sequels in a year, you get a kick in the nuts and coal in your stocking come Christmas

Games can literally cost twice what they do in the US in the EU and Australia. It's just bullshit. Even factoring in tax, etc, there's no way they can justify such a huge premium.

EA is easily one of the ones that embraced this higher pricing with open arms. they pump ads into games for more revenue. they buy up franchises and studios, pump out sub-par sequels and expansions on existing franchises and shut down those studios when the money well dries up for that stream. video games are more popular than they ever have been, the popularity has easily kept pace with and even outpaced the cost of development of games and EA has the balls to say they think prices need to come down?

if EA ever wants to gain redemption in the eyes of a lot of scorned gamers they need to stop saying what they think and start DOING it. they've been saying a lot of things lately. consoles will die out, prices need to come down, focus on more innovative games and stories within their studios...

all they do is talk talk talk talk talk, i have never ever seen them do anything as far as taking a step forward to do something positive instead of being a cancer on video game innovation and progress.

In related news, Keith Richards says that kids should not do drugs. :-P

i remember the industry blaming piracy for high priced games. Then why are console games $60 and PC games $45

So this is in response to Madden selling half as well as last year?

Weren't they the jack asses pushing for the higher price point in the first place?

does this mean that Bank Of America presents Battfield 3 as published by Electronic Arts, additionally sponsored by McDonalds will contain some additional advertising streams within the world game experience, such as M1A1 Abrams provided to NATO forces through Geico business relationships and M1 rifles branded with Toy'R'Us trademarks?

ps, developed under guidance from Fox News Cable Network by dice

I wouldn't mind if EA quits.
I just don't want ads, subscription fees, 6 expansions, unfinished games,
downloadables that should have been included, and anything else EA

If you have 50+ to 100+ people involved in a game, getting paid anything from $1000 to $5000 (i have no idea what's the sensible upper limit) for several years games DO end up costing a few millions. Add office expenses, trips for photoreferences, motion capture machinery renting, third party concept art/voice acting/music/QA, publicity and whatnot, and you can easily increase the figure.

I don't really see an easy way to fix this while keeping the current model where games, for the most part, are not meant to make revenue by service fees or expandable/exclusive content, but act as one-time money injectors. With a 2 figure price, it takes quite some degree of success to make a profit there.