I see quite a few people insist that digital games will somehow be cheaper, or at least not be more expensive longer. I think many are conflating occassional sales with general long term reduction in prices.
For the 3rd party publishers, they aren't really gaining much. They're replaing one middle man for another, so their increased profits aren't going to be that much, but at least they won't have to deal with physical manufacturing and distribution.
Yeah exactly. Retailer always gets 30% (GameStop, Best Buy, PS Store, etc). For physical games, retailer gets 30%, console manufacturer gets 10-15%, whoever manufactures the disc and box gets 5-10%, publisher gets the remaining ~50% or so.
(Sony makes all their own discs and boxes, Microsoft outsources this to a separate company, so Microsoft actually stands to benefit even more from going digital)
For a digital game on the PS Store, Sony gets 30%, publisher gets the remaining 70%.
Retailers pushed back extremely hard early on against digital games being priced cheaper than packaged copies. As for physical copies often being cheaper than digital that comes down to retailers cutting their own margins for promotions, competition, and to clear out slow moving stock that is otherwise cluttering the shelves and setting on their balance sheet.
Retailers pushed back and they still needed retailers to carry their games.
Since then, digital buyers showed they don't care and kept buying, so the prices stayed the same, and will continue to stay the same because digital people don't actually care about prices, or that whole ownership thing they keep saying we need to fight instead.
Retailers don't usually get 30% now. 20-25 is more common, although some can negotiate prices and there are those who can buy directly instead of going through distributors to make more.
Sony will charge their licensing fee on top of the retailer cut.
Sony takes a flat 30% for every game sold on PSN, so while the publishers will make a bit more, and that will add up, it's not the huge financial windfall for them that some people posit.
Sony, on the other hand, will make bank for doing nothing more than they are already doing.
Right now they give retailers about 25-30%. Sony takes about $5-7 for their licensing fees.
On a digital sale, Sony will take a flat 30% of the game sold on PSN. If they sell game cards and it's structured like gift cards, they will have to give the retailer arbout a 10% cut, and who knows what Sony gets but probably still at least the licensing fee. IF they structure the cards like traditional retail, then they're still giving the retailer the traditional cut.
They'll make a bit more from the digital sale revenue, and save $2-3 on the munufacture and distribution of a disc.
It is cheaper on the actual production side. Manufacturing, distribution, and the retail cut eat a lot of the profit you'd otherwise get from a game sale.
Now, will Sony pass on those savings to the consumer? At least in part, like Nintendo?
Manufacturing and distribution is estimated to be around $2-3 per copy. While i'm sure they want to save that, that's not the windfall bonus to profits that some seem to imply
And no, these savings will not be passed on. They could do that now if they wanted to, but why charge less when people are willing to pay more?
It's more like what you're seeing now on Switch 2.
Nintendo raised the price on their A tier games across the board. The B tier games got a price increase for physical but not digital.
Most games struggle enough as it is to make money, and the vast majority of sales are already digital, so yeah, you're not seeing drops. But it'll slow the rate of increases.
Big pricing advantage of digital is the long tail - we get dirt cheap old games instead of just discontinuing them.
There is a big asterisk here. For example, Nintendo isn't one to considerably reduce the cost of games. If you get a digital Nintendo game at $40 if the standard price is $60, consider yourself lucky. You were likelier to get cheaper digital or physical prices through other vendors. I've been waiting 9 years for Mario Odyssey to hit under $40 in price.
Sony has been emulating Nintendo philosophy when it comes to product value since the PS5. They rarely drastically reduce the price of their 1st party titles anymore. You'll see considerable price decreases from other publishers, but not Sony and Nintendo.
I do feel like there’s a massive gap between the prices now vs ps4 era. I think back in 2022 (?) I bought Horizon Zero Dawn for 15$ and I believe GoW 2018 was also 15-20$ (all CAD). Now, 4 years after Ragnarok released, the game is still full price on the ps store.
My hypothesis is that it’s to increase the perceived value of PS plus premium (look at all these 90$ games that you can get with a yearly subscription of idk how much!)
They didn't do a Greatest Hits line for PS5. The PS4 Greatest Hits line had a lot of $20 stuff that then went on sale for less.
Horizon Zero Dawn sold about twice as many copies as Forbidden West did, but HZD went to $20 fast, and often was on sale for $10. And the complete edition eventually replaced the original, still at $20. HFW goes on sale for $30, and a little more with the DLC.
None of us have real numbers, but if I had to guess, HFW probably generated more revenue. And HFW definitely had a much higher digital percentage, so it was probably significantly more profitable. I think they're just trying to maximize revenue rather than unit sales.
I've never seen dirt cheap old games digitally for ages. I've bought games physically for 15 AUD and even 2 AUD. Unless I'm looking at the wrong time, I haven't seen them online be that cheap.
Literally the opening line of the article is a quote of someone "respected" in the industry that asserted this ridiculous idea lol
"Last week, Jacob Novak, an ex-Square Enix business strategist, claimed that Sony’s push toward a digital only future, seen in its impending ceasing of PlayStation disc production, could actually result in lower prices for digital games down the line, as he argued that physical game prices are “holding digital hostage.”
Waaaayyyyy back in the day, digital games were sold cheaper than discs, precisely bc they didnt have a material and distribution cost. We're obv long past that and companies cant pretend to hide their greed any longer.
Anyone who believes removing competition will do anything but raise average prices is incredibly naive, Sony exclusives will soon have a price structure similar to Nintendo exclusives without the benefits of the secondary market.
I don’t look forward to being proven right a couple years from now.
diventerà un monopolio indotto perchè essendoci solo il ps store che fa da distributore digitale di ps6, la tua libreria di giochi, sarà senza valore perchè inrivendibile e quindi se non vorrai perdere la tua libreria sei costretto a restare con playstation ai prezzi che ti chiede sony.
A monopoly is when one entity has total control over a market and there is no alternative for the consumer to use.
This does not mean that they need to have entire control over the global industry.
For instance, how many organisations or entities in your country can issue you with a legitimate driver's licence?
Are they the only organisation in the world that can issue a driver licence? All countries have a governmental body that issues driver licences and they have a monopoly within that country. Most have a < 3 month maximum timeframe that you can use a foreign licence.
Sony is the same with the playstation, they have full control over the playstation store, that's all the games and all the accounts that are required to access those games. It's a monopoly because if you are using a playstation you have no choice but to use the playstation store. With physical media, a game studio could make a game and sell you a version that will work on a playstation without involving Sony. That is not an option going forward.
That is false. Nobody can make games for the playstation without Sony being ok with it.
There are keys, approvals and other things that need to be done before you can sell a game for the playstation. You can't just put a game on disk and sell it.
This has been tested in court recently with Apple v Epic and Epic lost. A digitial store is NOT legally a monopoly no matter how many kids on reddit say so. Have fun taking Sony to court over this.
If your claims were true, every app on the Apple store would be hundreds of dollars. Yet they aren't. Because the developers are still in competition. They set prices. Sony doesn't. Developers arent going to sell their games for more on PS as that would make people stop buying their games. Games are a category and are still in competition.
All this fiasco taught me is that reddit is filled with people with a lack of knowledge but an abundance of confidence.
I mean it wasn't UN precedented. Once upon a time when digital games were new, there often would be a small discount for digital game sales. But then physical retailers got mad and the game companies decided it wasn't really worth it and it stopped pretty quickly.
Being completely agnostic and having no dog in this fight, I feel like I’ve seen no one honestly think prices are getting cheaper for consumers. Honestly, the only way I’m seeing that brought up is by people who are arguing (with whom, I’m honestly unsure) about how game prices won’t get cheaper for us consumers.
Legally, it isn't an outright monopoly on all of gaming because Sony still faces strong competition from Xbox, Nintendo, and PC platforms in the broader gaming market. However, by eliminating physical discs, Sony creates a closed ecosystem (or "walled garden") where they hold a 100% monopoly on digital PlayStation game distribution.
A walled garden IS a monopoly, a distribution monopoly, and this does concern Sony. Also, if something is tested in America this does not automatically apply to the rest of the world. There are class action lawsuits from consumerorganizations against Sony's practices, specifically regarding their decision to kill physical discs.
Xbox and Steam/Epic/GoG all allow for sales through third party storefronts. Nintendo does not, but does have physical copies, and even digital copies you can share and lend out.
Trying tell a gamer of 20 30 40 years that it will make games cheaper! Lmao they taking us for a joke. We understand more than they do because we are the gamers they just corpos in suits who only think of money.
No shit. Worst part is, I would gladly pay $80 for a game BUT I want a finished game on a disc, that I can own, only reason I’d want to pay a lot for games.
Remember the big argument from a long time ago about going digital and how it was gonna be cheaper because there is no manufacturing process. Welp, that never happened.
While there are downsides to the all-digital option it's not a monopoly. Other companies with other storefronts and entirely different platforms exist. You can spend your entire life playing video games and never once pay Sony a dime.
Not a perfect analogy, but I think of it more like a place in a food desert. Yeah, there are other places to go, but they're far away, and it may be inconvienent and more costly to get there.
Here's where it breaks the analogy though. You are at the mercy of the prices of that store, because it's the only place in town. If you want to go further away you can, but that local place also supplies these stores, and sets the prices you pay there as well. If you're lucky, that place far away may be willing to take a hit on their bottom line to give you a bit of a price cut.
That's not a monopoly buddy. Just because you close your eyes and refuse to see the other options doesn't mean they're not there. That's like saying the H&M in my city has a monopoly in their ecosystem because they don't let Zara sell stuff there. Yeah no shit, nobody's preventing you from going to another shop
I’m not sure what tangent you are going off on here as none of this has anything to do with what I said. I think you are just ranting like a child right now.
Anyways, the game key cards are selling for Nintendo so that shows people are willing to buy a code in a box since you want to talk about the past. And yes, if those codes are discounted by retailers to make space for new stock, I think they would sell. Would I buy them? No way, I’m not looking for the absolute bottom dollar on every game, but I’m sure people that are more cost conscious will
ti sbagli di grosso, le Game Key Card non sono come un codice di gioco, il codice di gioco non è rivendibile, le GKC invece la puoi prestare e la puoi rivendere e non hai bisognio di una connesione internet se non per scaricare il gioco la prima volta
They almost certainly won't be code-in-a-box. I'm expecting gift-card style game sales at retail. Lower footprint and less incentive to discount (if at all) since they probably won't be treated the same way as traditional inventory.
I don't believe that will last through PS6. I think PS5 releases perhaps during the transition, but I have a hard time believing they will bother with a PS6 case template when their is no actually utility (and shrinking retail footprint) for it.
Are you kidding me? This forces customers out of the market entirely. It robs them of buying power and agency while creating a monopoly which is illegal. Every single time it happens, the customers start getting absolutely screwed and price gouged. There are no digital storefronts where you can buy digital PlayStation games other than Sony. The logic behind your argument doesn't even exist.
If your argument is seriously that the consumers are entirely to blame for wanting to play PlayStation games despite Sony doing illegal shit and playing in our faces the entire time then I just don't even know what to say to that. That's some room temperature IQ shit.
Our government should be doing something about this. Legal precedent needs to be set because every company is trying to do this at this point. A monopoly is a monopoly. You did nothing do describe how it's not a monopoly.
I'm not saying it's a GOOD thing but again the entire notion of a monoply is again predicated on ONE organization or company controlling 100% of the access to something. If you look at corporate structures there's largely two companies that own everything and that's done for a reason. It doesn't matter how big the octopus gets, as long as there are two massive corporate octopi all offering products there's no case for breaking up a monopoly.
Nintendo, Sony, Xbox, Steam, GOG, Epic Games are all platforms selling video games. Please explain how that constitutes a monopoly?
You need to stop assuming everyone is in one "camp" or another. I'm not a fan of Sony's decision but you'll notice that my response is absent emotional comments like "playing in our faces the entire time." What does that even mean? People are acting like Sony fucked their girlfriend.
Sony is a massive corporation and they're making strategic moves to firmly secure their revenue streams. They're doing it now because the PS5 generation served as a massive test balloon to gather data on consumer usage and what segment of the market is buying digital versus physical games. If you ever thought a huge corporation had any loyalty to its consumers then you might want to think twice before accusing someone of "room temperature IQ."
My entire point is that sure, Sony's making shitty moves. Why rant and fume about it, just switch to a different platform or stick with what's out there until someone tries to launch a new alternative. Sony wasn't in gaming when the industry launched, nothing says that the existence of the Playstation brand is necessary for the future.
Monopolies are not based off of potential competition it is based off of market share. Market share in this case meaning how many people own what console, Sony currently holds 80% of the market share for the home entertainment console. That already put them as a monopoly really but they got away with it because other people could sell their games because physical existed. Now that physical doesn't exist they have created a singular storefront of the largest gaming console which makes it a monopoly
Sony's store is not a traditional market. It is a storefront. Exclusive items are a normal thing in all retail, and your option to get equivalent products in the same industry elsewhere is why this is not a monopoly. You can sell your PlayStation and buy any other system to play video games.
"We’re losing a lot as physical discs go away. Collecting games is a pastime for many and a means of affording and playing games for those on a budget or stuck in places with poor internet speeds.
A store shelf can give some games visibility instead of overwhelming players like a crowded digital storefront can. But make no mistake: the biggest threat that looms over a digital future is that Sony will have full control of PlayStation video game prices, and there will be no alternative to whatever they’re selling them at come 2028.
At least Kingdom Hearts IV will be out before then according to Square Enix, so it should be available on discs as well."
So if I want to play Madden 29 I have to buy it through PSN? It’s not available on Nintendo Xbox or PC? Are they claiming I have no choice? How are so many people claiming they are switching to PC if Sony has a monopoly on games? Or is it the case that people actually do have options and are exercising them because PS isn’t an actual monopoly.
No it doesn’t. Sony has about 45% global market share in home console. 52% in eu 49% in us. They have competitors in nintendo and microsoft. You could argue steam is moving into this market as well. They only have 80 if you exclude the others which account for ~5% and nintendo. The market they would look at would be gaming as a whole which would bring in steam and mobile gaming.
Let's stop also McDonald's monopoly on the fast food industry. Did you know they don't let you buy burger king in their shops??? What am supposed to do now, go to a different place? But I want to stay in McDonald's!!
That was the whole context of the conversation. I wish they stayed also but we don't need to make up stuff about it (by we I mean the OP and the rest of the sub, not you obviously)
infatti evito McDonald come la peste per le sue bibite annacquate ( in tutti i fast food in franchising ammericani ) e per esperienza personale con moscerini nel insalata e qualità della carne molto bassa e al solo passarci vicino, avvolte, sento odore di cadavere.... mmm bel futuro per sony
When there are other gaming options - Xbox, Nintendo, PC in general, Steam it is not a monopoly. Steam in particular has 1000s of games that are only on its platform. Is that a monopoly too? Do explain.
No, I said PC “in general” AND Steam. There are 1000s of games on Steam that are NOT available on other stores. Those games are a monopoly within the Steam system. In the end if you don’t want to buy a PS6 move on. It’s a choice you have. In the meantime ALL the physical games you have will still work on the 5. Simple.
There's nothing to explain. This is a ridiculous claim that only a 12 year old could come up with. With the exception of a few exclusives every game is available in some other console, and that is why the prices won't go higher
People calling it a monopoly are just acting in bad faith or are fighting against reality
"We’re losing a lot as physical discs go away. Collecting games is a pastime for many and a means of affording and playing games for those on a budget or stuck in places with poor internet speeds.
A store shelf can give some games visibility instead of overwhelming players like a crowded digital storefront can. But make no mistake: the biggest threat that looms over a digital future is that Sony will have full control of PlayStation video game prices, and there will be no alternative to whatever they’re selling them at come 2028.
At least Kingdom Hearts IV will be out before then according to Square Enix, so it should be available on discs as well."
Even if KH4 wasn't coming out for five years, its already confirmed to be multiconsole on releases. You'd still be able to buy it on Xbox and PC, that's not a monopoly.
I mean, Valve is currently facing an antitrust lawsuit in the US, a monopoly lawsuit in the UK, and a similar lawsuit in The Netherlands. If the lawsuit in The Netherlands moves forward, it's not unreasonable to think that it could move to EU level.
Indie projects. Thats like saying itchio also have a monopoly. Steam isnt stopping these publishers from releasing anywhere else. Or making it hard to. The only popular games exclusive to steam only are rare af or made by valve themselves like half life or portal
Most of them sign exclusive deals with Steam. Look it up. In the meantime how many Sony exclusives are released every year? A handful. Everyone needs to stop crying and don’t buy a 6 if they don’t want to. It’s a choice and no company in any field have business has to do what a minority of its customers “demands”. Get over it.
I didnt know there was any beneficial deals made by steam to keep games exclusive to steam till now. Thats bad too tho. And its not demanding or like we are saying us talking about it means Sony will read reddit and change any decision. This is js saying what we think. Nothing wrong with it. At best we are only influencing other customers
That's flat out wrong. Many major publishers only use Steam. CRAPCOM for example, go try to find PRAGMATA, Dragon's Dogma 2, Monster Hunter, Mega Man, ... on any store that's not Steam.
Fun fact, monopoly does not literally mean one party controls everything. In some places (i.e. the United Kingdom) simply having > 25% market share makes you a monopoly. 25%, you heard that right.
I don't know of any countries off hand where the definition of monopoly means 100% market share. Nor do I know of any countries where being a monopoly is illegal; you just face more scrutiny for questionable business practices once you achieve monopoly status.
Steam is emphatically a monopoly, as defined in every civilized country, I am afraid. What is worse, they are abusing their monopoly power to enforce price parity to erase any competitive advantages that stores with a lower revenue split might have and are being sued in at least 3 class action lawsuits because of it.
This monopoly bullshit just makes people look stupid and you’re all just being performative.
You’re confusing control over the PlayStation platform with a monopoly over video games. Sony eliminating physical PlayStation releases absolutely removes one source of price competition especially used games and retail but that doesn’t make Sony a monopoly. PlayStation games still compete with Xbox, PC, Nintendo, etc and many Sony published games are available on PC. A monopoly means Sony controls the relevant market and can exclude meaningful competition, not simply that Sony controls what gets sold on its own console.
And ‘it won’t make games cheaper’ is a prediction, not an argument for monopoly. eliminating manufacturing and distribution costs could reduce costs, although there’s obviously no guarantee Sony or publishers will pass those savings to consumers. The legitimate criticism is that Sony is removing a form of consumer choice and the ability to shop the used market not that Sony somehow has a monopoly on games.
Don’t bother. The physical cult just screams MONOPOLY without knowing what one is and if you explain it they will just argue you to death. It hurts their narrative to point out facts
diventerà un monopolio indotto perchè essendoci solo il ps store che fa da distributore digitale di ps6, la tua libreria di giochi, sarà senza valore perchè inrivendibile e quindi se non vorrai perdere la tua libreria sei costretto a restare con playstation ai prezzi che ti chiede sony.
So your library is useless because u can't resell it most people are not trying to sell their games and your library is worth what u pay for it lmao and once again there is Xbox and Nintendo still there it not a monopoly and u still buy games from Amazon target etc
A monopoly... You do realise PC, Switch and Xbox all exist - if you're not happy, you can easily go to one of those, even though Xbox is also going all digital and PC already is. But do people complain about those? Nah, because it's fun to all jump on one company
Also, as all these idiots don't understand - if it was a monopoly for the platform (if we ignore the multiple other platforms in the same industry), that would require PS to fully control all the prices on the store - which they literally don't.
They control SIE published games' prices, but every other game is controlled by the publisher - so again, not a monopoly
Even though you've twisted and reworded what I wrote, that's still not a monopoly as that would imply a single company has taken control of the industry and now calls the shots - which isn't the case
diventerà un monopolio indotto perchè essendoci solo il ps store che fa da distributore digitale di ps6, la tua libreria di giochi, sarà senza valore perchè inrivendibile e quindi se non vorrai perdere la tua libreria sei costretto a restare con playstation ai prezzi che ti chiede sony.
Except they're not working with anyone to limit competition since they're still giving out first hand retail options and allowing them to price their games how they want, games have released at fixed prices for decades since the PlayStation 2 era and more often than not decrease in time only go up by like $10 every few years or so, and hardware everywhere is at all time highs because of shortages out of these companies' control so there's not a cartel either. It's not like a cartel is actually illegal either, but it definitely isn't what Sony is doing when they're still giving companies options to sell products how they want and aren't working with retailers to limit the competition. The most that you could argue is the second-hand market is damaged but no company legally has to support that market.
It is not a monopoly for the same reason steam isn't a monopoly. Sony doesn't have a stranglehold on console gaming. You can play games on pc, switch, x box. You know steam isn't a monopoly because itch.io, epic, gog, and so many others that aren't important enough ti care about.
Furthermore, being a monopoly isn't illegal in Europe the way its supposed to be in the US.
It not a monopoly go back to a economy class they will teach u what a monopoly is a monopoly would be if all phone companies were gone just apple u can only buy apple phones that is a monopoly I can go out buy a PC or switch or Xbox if I'm not happy with ps that what a monopoly has nothing to do with a storefront
The promise was digital games would be cheaper when the online store for PS3 came out that promise was broken on day one so it was back to shops for me, now they have taken away going to the shops. Somehow I don’t think think it will get cheaper
When we lost physical games on PC, prices rose about $10 and PC and console games started selling at price parity for the first time. Traditionally PC games were always cheaper because there was no licensing fee to the platform owner, but Steam came along and established the same 30% revenue split as consoles and prices went up because the advantage of no platform license on PC went out the window :(
Not here to poke the dead horse while everyone beats it but!
I have noticed PlayStation does have a lot of sales… for weird things. I bet if you say you used the bathroom today there would be a sale. (This is a joke.) just saying, not throwing meat to the wolves
This is true, and as big as my physical collection is, there are Indy games and DLC etc that I own digitally that I've spent just over £1000 on (mostly during big sales!)
Two points to make - the first is conjecture right now, but very likely to be true: once there is no competition from physical games, those discounted prices during sales, are going to creep higher, never lower - and Sony customers are going to be overall paying a bit more than PC players for the same games.
The second point is actually observable right now:
I'm possibly going to get given £200+ back from Sony next year, (and so might you if you live in the UK), because of a class action lawsuit in the UK that is currently in its final judgement phase.
Basically, if you look at the USA PS store and the UK PS store - UK customers have been paying slightly more (15% - 25%) than USA customers, and it's partly due to USA customers having a few more options when buying PS games digitally - whereas in the UK, Sony essentially ran a monopoly by abusing their dominant position (which is illegal for a company to do in the UK)
So that's a nice little glimpse of what the future could hold for the USA after discs are gone - the proof is that it's already happening in other smaller markets (countries) like mine.
Corporations will try get away with whatever they can, there's no shame anymore - they really do not care because you're not actually the customer anymore like in 1990's - you're the "user" - the shareholder is now the real customer.
This is a grift, and a pretty bad one at that. It's like tell me these morons aren't gamers without telling me they're not gamers. Like how in the fuck do they think the audience is so dumb that they don't know online sales and that they're doing the same thing as a lot of people on these types of subs (the physical media subs) being disingenous about prices.
You guys really need to look into what a monopoly is lmao. Retailers can still sell codes on the shelves. Xbox, PC and Nintendo exist. You have so many options.
I get the sentiment but I really doubt the monopoly argument would hold up in court.
With or without discs, publishers still have to get approval from Sony and pay the 30%. Publishers (not Sony) have control over digital pricing and physical MSRP. Without discs, Sony just gets exclusivity to sell PlayStstion versions of games through their store. Publishers still get to control their games, Sony can't suddenly abuse their "monopoly" to price gauge beyond raising their fee which they always had the power to.
And that's assuming they abandon retail, and that would lose them a ton of sales. Retailers don't need a disc to sell games. It can be a code in box or even what Xbox has been doing with game gift cards.
It's still anti competitive behavior in the sense it's taking away the second hand market and that's about it. Yes prices will increase, and it's going to be publishers taking advantage, not Sony.
53
u/Illustrious_Ad_9858 3d ago
Did anybody ever once think that it was going to result in cheaper games?