THQ’s Farrell Sees Game Prices Dropping

September 24, 2010 -

While THQ CEO Brian Farrell believes that the future could bring lower costs for console games, that seemingly bright prospect contains a bit of a catch for consumers.

Speaking at a recent Goldman Sachs conference, Farrell, as reported by CVG, sees console games eventually selling for between $29 to $39 at retail, but those would be basic or stripped down versions of games, with—of course—extra content available from paid downloadable content.

THQ will experiment with just this kind of concept on its upcoming MX vs ATV title. As Farrell noted, “In the past, we've seen that we bring the game out at $59.99 and it does reasonably well - around one million, or one million-and-a-half units.”

He continued, “When we lower the price to a mass market price the thing really jumps... So what we're doing this time is we're coming out initially with a smaller game at a lower price point - the $29 to $39 range.”

Then owners can spend money on DLC to their heart’s content. Farrell added that, “…a person that wants to spend $100 on the product can do so as well.”

The prospect of DLC is so attractive that Farrell even mentioned game makers possibly adapting a twist on the free-to-play model, where a base game itself would cost nothing for consumers.


Comments

Re: THQ’s Farrell Sees Game Prices Dropping

I would rather the game be on the disc to be frank memory for dlc costs money too.

that said I dont want to pay for multiplayer on the disc that Im never going to play.

Re: THQ’s Farrell Sees Game Prices Dropping

I think the addition of a lower price point at retail will be a good thing overall- for every existing game that winds up toothless to work within the lower price, there will be another, slightly smaller game from a slightly smaller developer that would otherwise have been relegated to digital-only because it couldn't command current retail prices brought to retail, where it will reach a wider audience.

Long-term, this will only be a good thing.

/b

Re: THQ’s Farrell Sees Game Prices Dropping

Just as long as Final Fantasy VII "new" is brought down in price from $119+ to something more reasonable, like $10-$20, I'll be happy.  And that's for the Playstation version.  The PC version is over $200.

Nightwng2000

NW2K Software

http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000

Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

Nightwng2000 NW2K Software http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

Re: THQ’s Farrell Sees Game Prices Dropping

Last i checked, FFVII was available for PSN for only like $10

Does make me wonder why the price for the PS versions have not dropped when their is such a cheap alternative

 now xenogears on the otherhand is worth bitching about... need to get that on psn in north america

Re: THQ’s Farrell Sees Game Prices Dropping

Yes, but that involves having a PS3 and/or a PSP (a PSP that your child hasn't broken in one fashion or another at any given opportunity).  Neither of which I'm buying for the sole reason to get him a copy of Final Fantasy VII, which he has expressed interest in.  :)

Nightwng2000

NW2K Software

http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000

Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

Nightwng2000 NW2K Software http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

Re: THQ’s Farrell Sees Game Prices Dropping

Because they are originals and not rereleases.

E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma

Re: THQ’s Farrell Sees Game Prices Dropping

Somehow I don't trust THq doing this sort of thing. Good ideal on paper but this sort of thing get get bad real quickly for gamers.

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

Re: THQ’s Farrell See Game Prices Dropping

I see no problem with this. As long as the base game has enough content to be worth $30-40 I wouldn't complain.

E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma

Re: THQ’s Farrell See Game Prices Dropping

Call me cynical if you like but I don't see THQ or any other company doing anything more than taking the same game you and I pay $60 for today and chopping it up into pieces that will end up totaling $100.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: THQ’s Farrell See Game Prices Dropping

If that is the case, then yes it would be a bum deal.

I have previously made the case that if companies like EA and THQ are going to sell their online componant seperately for used game buyers, they should do the same for new game buyers.

E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma

Re: THQ’s Farrell See Game Prices Dropping

The problem I have with selling online separate from single-player is that, well, for one, many games now are sold purely on their online, multi-player component. And, let's face, it online play is basically standard now, which is why these efforts to screw over the used game market are an insult.

Re: THQ’s Farrell See Game Prices Dropping

But all the users who are only intersted in the singleplayer can get a cheaper gaming experience this way.  Not everyone has interest in the online component.

Re: THQ’s Farrell See Game Prices Dropping

I'm not following your logic.  How is that an insult and who is it insulting?  Instead of complaining about the used market (something that annoyed many of us to no end) several publishers are actually doing something about it.  Namely, making buying new a more attractive prospect for consumers than buying used.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: THQ’s Farrell See Game Prices Dropping

>if companies like EA and THQ are going to sell their online componant seperately for used game buyers, they should do the same for new game buyers.

They do- it's just that they also offer a bundle deal for buying both the online and offline at the same time, sort of the same way pizza takeaways sometimes offer free garlic bread with a large pizza.

/b

 

Re: THQ’s Farrell See Game Prices Dropping

No they don't. If I buy Madden NFL new, I am buying both the local and online together. There is no option for me to buy just the local option on its own and still buy new.

E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma

Re: THQ’s Farrell See Game Prices Dropping

That would be nice for those of us who are strictly single-player gamers but those companies are doing that to make buying new a more attractive prospect for consumers.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: THQ’s Farrell See Game Prices Dropping

Re: THQ’s Farrell See Game Prices Dropping

 I thought knowing was half the battle.

Re: THQ’s Farrell See Game Prices Dropping

This must be the other half.

 

Andrew Eisen

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
E. Zachary KnightGot that same recommendation on Twitter. So I guess that is a good sign.09/15/2014 - 8:39pm
prh99Portlandia, though I don't watch a lot of sitcoms. Heard it was good though.09/15/2014 - 8:02pm
E. Zachary KnightSitcom recommendations for someone who like Parks and Rec but hates The Office: Go.09/15/2014 - 6:08pm
NeenekoEven if they do change their policy, they can only do it moving forward and I could see the mod/pack community simply branching.09/15/2014 - 12:50pm
Michael ChandraAs for take the money and run, the guy must have a networth of 8~9 digits already.09/15/2014 - 10:33am
Michael ChandraMe, I'm more betting on some form of mod API where servers must run donations/payments through them and they take a cut.09/15/2014 - 10:32am
Michael ChandraEspecially since they want it for promoting their phones. Killing user interest is the dumbest move to make.09/15/2014 - 10:32am
Michael ChandraGiven how the EULA actively allows for LPs, I'm not sure Microsoft is ready for the backlash of disallowing that.09/15/2014 - 10:31am
Matthew Wilsonthey wont do that, the backlash would be too big.09/15/2014 - 10:25am
ConsterSleaker: how is that a flipside? Sounds to me like that's basically what Notch himself said, except rudely.09/15/2014 - 10:18am
MaskedPixelanteOn the plus side, no more lazy Minecraft LPs, since iirc Microsoft has a strict "no monetization period" policy when it comes to their stuff.09/15/2014 - 10:13am
james_fudgeBut it continues to sell on every platform it is on, so there's that09/15/2014 - 10:09am
james_fudgeOh, well that's another matter :)09/15/2014 - 10:08am
E. Zachary KnightNothing against Notch here. I think it is great that he made something so cool. I just can't understand how it is worth $2.5 bil09/15/2014 - 9:59am
InfophileWhat a world we live in: Becoming a billionaire was the easy way out for Notch.09/15/2014 - 9:42am
james_fudgelots of hate for Notch here. I don't get it. Sorry he made a game everyone loved. What a monster he is!09/15/2014 - 9:37am
SleakerOn the flipside, Notch has been a horrible CEO for Mojang, and the company has grown on sheer inertia, DESPITE being mishandled over and over.09/15/2014 - 9:33am
SleakerI can understand Notch's statements he made to Kotaku about growing bigger than he intended, and getting hate for EULA changes he didn't enact.09/15/2014 - 9:32am
MaskedPixelantehttp://pastebin.com/n1qTeikM Notch's statement about the MS acquisition. He wanted out for a long time and this was the easiest way.09/15/2014 - 9:08am
ConsterEh, I can't blame him.09/15/2014 - 9:01am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician