Next Gen Games: $59.99

[bapenguin]

I was browsing around on the EB Games website, when I noticed they had listings for PS3 (http://www.ebgames.com/ebx/categories/products/deptpage.asp?wherefrom=search&searchword=ps3) games as well as XBox 360 (http://www.ebgames.com/ebx/categories/products/deptpage.asp?wherefrom=search&searchword=xbox%20360) games. All the games are listed at a $59.99 price point. EB does have a disclaimer saying that price and release date may change though.

What's really sweet is both systems have 30+ games listed already. Lets hope that both systems launch with close to that many titles! Unfortunately now, we won't be able to afford too many launch titles due to the higher price point.

[XxSATANxX]

I'd like to go on record as predicting the retail for XBOX 360 at $499!

[Roc Ingersol]

I'd like to go on record as predicting that I rent more games because of this.

[*Legion*]

Nintendo 64 games often cost as much as $75 in the system's early days.

Don't get too caught up on this. We see this almost every new system release, and people still act like it's new each time.

[Rommel]

I would like to go on record as saying I find snapple a refreshing and delightful beverage

[*Legion*]

http://www.rant.com/snap.gif

She's glad to hear that.

[Atorak]

I would like to go on record stating that if Bethesda can pull off even half of what they plan on implementing for Oblivion, I will happily pay $59.99. And $69.99. And $79.99. And $499.99 for XBox 360. And $8.00 for a street hooker with herpes.

[Intruder]

I would like to go on record as saying if this trend continues, I will finally have a valid excuse to stop playing video games. Where will it end. Will you all in 4-6 more years willingly pay 70-80 bucks for a freaking game??? That being said, I truely hope that it is just a rumor and pre-launch hysteria. However, the prices of video games have stedily increased over the last 10 years so it would not surprise me at all if this was true. If so, Sony or MS just lost a couple of thousands of dollars from me.

[hideouslywrinkled]

I would like to go on record as saying that this is why Gamefly.com was invented.

[Murtaug]

This is why I am leaning towards holding off on the next generation until a price drop on the systems. I've had my Xbox less then a year, by the time the 360 is released I will have only had my Xbox for a year. I've already built my collection of games for it to around fifty, mostly thanks to the fact that I can buy a ton of great older titles used (or new in some cases) for absolutely dirt cheap.

I have plenty of newer titles as well, but it was really nice to come into a system and have a huge library of games to choose from that were ten bucks to twenty.

As much as the new stuff is making me drool, my wallet has cotton mouth.

[Blue]

I don't have a tape recorder to actually record any of this with, but I have a feeling I'm going to now get to play "wait until the price drops" if this is true. I have a hard enough time trying to convince the wife when I pick up something at launch now, let alone if they jack up the price. One could always start selling their plasma though.....

[joruussuun]

I am glad I use Gamefly.

[carneconcarne]

Games are always going to go up in price, as are consoles. Prices inflate over time. Check it out, soda used to cost a nickel!

[petedog]

A. EB games is notorious for speculative listings

B. Videogames have been an inflation-free zone for over 10 years. (Virtually) Every other product in the world has increased in price over that time period. Why do we think they should be special?

[NACIONAL]

Games are always going to go up in price, as are consoles. Prices inflate over time. Check it out, soda used to cost a nickel!

Thats about right!, you made the right refference there......

i don't know how the people is whinning about this... if the price increase turns out to be true, it will be something that has being announced for years!!!

[Varsity]

After the number of fake HL2 dates retailers put out, I'm never going to believe anything they tell me that isn't confirmed from at least two other sources.

[Rafer]

Argument for higher prices:
-Increasing game budgets
-Inflation
-Consumers are willing to pay that much for AAA titles
-Narc, Beyond Good & Evil didn't sell great at $20

Argument for lower prices:
-2k5 series dropped to $20 and started selling millions. Lower prices can increase revenue.
-Movie industry used to charge around $90 for movies, when they dropped the price down to $20 sales took off.
-Only a handful of titles sell well at $50, last Chritmas a lot of mid-budget games got slaughtered.

Personally I'd like to see a trend towards shorter, cheaper games (Katamari Damacy), but it seems like there's this type of arms race with bigger budget games. I remember an interview with Cliffy B where he speculated if games where cheaper and marketed well they might sell 15 million copies of a game instead of 1 or 2 million.

[Ventura_DK]

I talked to an EA pr guy during E3, and he pointed out that games are MUCH cheaper in the US than in Europe. We actually pay up to $100 for top games in some countries. So if there's a price adjustment (he said that EA has by no means decided the price policy, yet) it's likely to affect the US market only. He couldn't see how European gamers could be made to pay more than they already do. Sorry - this is just a European's perspective ;)

[fitbabits]

Given that prices for games have remained largely unchanged for so long, is it any surprise that a price hike is in the pipeline? We (the consumers) have already shown our willingness to throw $60 at a game with the advent of 'exclusive limited edition' versions of popular franchises (Madden 2005 on PS2, Halo 2 on Xbox, etc.).

[Pumped'Up]

Thats about right!, you made the right refference there......

i don't know how the people is whinning about this... if the price increase turns out to be true, it will be something that has being announced for years!!!
yep, absolutely right. same old.

But the twist here is that the price of 360 games will remain constant at $60. why? Microsoft knows it's fan base is loyal, and since this base is relatively small, they have to charge $60 to make up the losses that normal games priced lower but sell in larger volume come out on top. Simple.

[danhoo]

Beyond Good & Evil didn't sell great at $20

IMHO, BG&E wouldn't have sold well at any price, because Ubisoft decided not to do any actual marketing for the game.

Production costs for games keeps going up, so it would stand to reason that prices will go up, except for "budget" titles. Were games over-priced to begin with? Maybe.

[Heretic Machine]

I would like to go on record stating that if Bethesda can pull off even half of what they plan on implementing for Oblivion, I will happily pay $59.99. And $69.99. And $79.99. And $499.99 for XBox 360. And $8.00 for a street hooker with herpes.

I'd like to go on record by saying that buying a TES game on a console you miss half the game.

[Metal Jesus]

An extra $10 for a game is not going to break me.

[bapenguin]

yep, absolutely right. same old.

But the twist here is that the price of 360 games will remain constant at $60. why? Microsoft knows it's fan base is loyal, and since this base is relatively small, they have to charge $60 to make up the losses that normal games priced lower but sell in larger volume come out on top. Simple.

Silly Troll...PS3 games are 60 bucks too.

[agentgray]

An extra $10 for a game is not going to break me.
...and the next year and the next year and the next year....

As if the publishers are not making enough money as it is. We're talking about the number one money making entertainment industry in the world.

This is all bull. The games are coming on the same media, cost the same to stamp, and probably have the same dev time.

The only reason I can think of this (in the case of Electronic Arts) is because the programmers will be paid more...of which I doubt.

Bottom line: all the console makers are coming out with new systems and this was a perfect excuse to jack up the prices.

I want to know where the $10 is actually going.

[MosBen]

It's all economics guys. The gaming market has been growing extremely fast for a long time now and continues to grow at a rapid pace. This has offset the fact that games cost more to make now than in the past but the retail price hasn't changed in a long time. Actually, I'd guess that the increased sales have outpaced the increasing budgets, but that's speculation since I don't pay that much attention to how much the companies are earning. Anyhow, if sales slow a bit or if budgets balloon out of control then prices will adjust upward to compensate. If it happens it happens, if not, then great.

[Phades]

I already have trouble paying $50 for a game when there's so many great games that are cheaper. I'll probably just stop buying new releases and wait until they're available used or have had a price drop.

[lowlevel]

Is it just me or is this PGR3 listing (http://www.ebgames.com/ebx/product/520714.asp) the first sighting of final or "near-final" X360 boxart?

I like it!

[see colon]

movie budgets have gone up in the last 10 years but dvd prices have dropped, and they basicaly give VHS away (i've seen new movies for $6-10). the videogame industry is broken, but the customers are paying for it.

[agentgray]

I agree with Phades. There's just too many. If you wait long enough, they drop.

I don't know if the inflation arguments stand, though. I mean I remember working in retail about ten years back and some games were $75 (think Zelda and Mario RPG)

Of course, people drolled all over it and never once thought about the price, so...

[Tricky Thumb]

I seem to remember speculations about the PS2 and the Xbox games being 59.99 when those systems came out as well. I don't think you should all be jumping to conclusions already, but whatever.

[Taco]

Games cost more to make now, I'd imagine they will eventually go up on all platforms to cover costs. I'm rather suprised we haven't been seeing a $60 norm for the past couple years.

[DeadPixel]

I would pay $100 for good games, just let me try them first. No demo, no purchase.

It's like buying clothes, will you order something new based on a picture in a catalog or after you try at the store?

[mkelehan]

Don't get up in arms just yet. EB has to err on the side of pricy with pre-release listings; if they put them up at $50 and they ended up at $60, those that preordered would get them for $10 less. If they put them up like this and they end up $50, everyone just pays the $50, and they lose nothing. Follow?

$60 games in the next generation are very likely, especially early on, since the causal gamers won't come in for a year or two. Still, $50 is still very possible, and eventually, we'll start seeing $20-40 games all over the place once again.

[MosBen]

Well sure, this has been a rumor for a long time and it may very well not happen this next generation, but it will happen eventually. As has been pointed out, prices for games have stayed constant for a long time, but it can't last forever. Prices *will* increase at some point, it's just a matter of when.

seecolon: Movie budgets haven't increased nearly as much as game budgets in the last ten years and while DVDs have gotten cheaper, it has a lot to do with the increased market for DVDs, that is, you don't have to charge as much if a million people buy your product as opposed to if a thousand buy it. Also, keep in mind that movies get two releases, one in theaters and then again on DVD, whereas games just get one release which might have something to do with the increased cost.

And yeah, I think as games get more expensive, both to produce and to buy, we're going to see more and more budget games.

[Goronmon]

I don't know if the inflation arguments stand, though. I mean I remember working in retail about ten years back and some games were $75 (think Zelda and Mario RPG)

Yeah, I think people forget about stuff like that. I remember looking for Chrono Trigger back in the day for SNES. Cheapest you could find it was $75 new and it wasn't even worth it to try to locate a used copy.

[MosBen]

Well, if I remember correctly, N64 carts were expensive to produce and thus broke the $50 standard.

[dr_wily]

phantasy star (master system) was 90$
shadows of the empire (n64) was a good 80-85$

if it is good we will pay, period.

[Kelegacy]

An extra $10 for a game is not going to break me.

I'd like to go on record saying that those 10 dollar bills add up. I'd also like to add that while I could easily afford spending that money, I wont.

and in the next gen people will say "an extra 10 dollars will not break me", so they'd be fine with paying 70 bucks for a game. The next gen after that, another 10 bucks...people being all too happy to pay more money for games will basically allow publishers to set the price to whatever they want, because people will pay the dough.

I think games should stay at the same price they are today. Developer costs may be increasing, but the amount of people playing videogames is too. So it all balances out. Make a great game, sell it for 50 bucks, and millions of people will buy it. Rewarding the consumer rewards the developer/publisher.

[bobbler]

I'm pretty sure EA and such has announced or hinted at (at least), quite a while ago, that the triple A titles will be ~60 instead of 50 now. You'll still find your 20-40 dollar games. Not every game will be 60.

Increased cost of development, inflation, etc are all pretty likely and acceptable causes for this. It's not that big of a surprise, game prices have stayed pretty constant over the last 10-12 years, meanwhile the USD is not nearly as strong as it used to be and development costs have skyrocketed.

[eatme]

EBGames: the source for reliable gaming news! Man, their release dates are also always dead-on.

[Atorak]

If a game is going to provide you with countless hours of entertainment, what the hell is $10.00 more? I never understood that. You people do realize that you do not NEED video games to survive, correct? Water? Check. Food? Check. Video Games? Trust me, you'll live without them.

So the simple fact that you would be willing to pay $50.00 for entertainment makes an extra $10.00 on top of the purchase negligible. Since you consider $50.00 for entertainment acceptable, but you complain about $60.00, it probably means that you don't pick up many titles over the year, but the ones that you do, you put massive amounts of time into. A number of gamers out there do just the opposite, and often pick up games on a whim. They obviously don't put as much time into a single title as you do, since you plan on getting the most "bang for your buck" when you make a purchase. So like I said, if a game that obviously means enough to you to warrant a $50.00 deduction from your savings account, which appears to be limited in nature, then how is $60.00 that much different? It is entertainment!

Frankly, I think you'll just end up playing an extra $10.00 worth over the life of the title.

Face it, games are going to cost a LOT more money in the future to produce. You are talking about years and years of programming, design, marketing, etc., which costs millions and millions of dollars. Back in the day, you could have three people developing a GOTY title during their spare time on the weekends. Now, you have thirty to fifty people working on titles at one time, if not more. Everything else in this world has increased in price, why are games not part of this trend. How much has your house appreciated over the past 10 years? *shrugs* Not being a dick man, I'm just saying, put things in perspective. You are already willing to spend X amount of dollars for entertainment....Is X + $10 really going to kill you?

[Phades]

If a game is going to provide you with countless hours of entertainment, what the hell is $10.00 more? I never understood that. You people do realize that you do not NEED video games to survive, correct? Water? Check. Food? Check. Video Games? Trust me, you'll live without them.

So the simple fact that you would be willing to pay $50.00 for entertainment makes an extra $10.00 on top of the purchase negligible. Since you consider $50.00 for entertainment acceptable, but you complain about $60.00, it probably means that you don't pick up many titles over the year, but the ones that you do, you put massive amounts of time into. A number of gamers out there do just the opposite, and often pick up games on a whim. They obviously don't put as much time into a single title as you do, since you plan on getting the most "bang for your buck" when you make a purchase. So like I said, if a game that obviously means enough to you to warrant a $50.00 deduction from your savings account, which appears to be limited in nature, then how is $60.00 that much different? It is entertainment!


I agree with your argument 100%! I think that all entertainment items (ie. Movies, Restaurants, Games, Fast Food, etc.) should jack their prices up by at least $10. After all, I'm currently willing to pay $8-$9 for a movie. Why not $19? After all, it's just entertainment!! And DVD movies should have their prices jacked up too. It should be $100-$200 per DVD movie so studios can better recover the costs of making movies. After all, it's just entertainment and there's no price cap you can place on that! It should be mandatory (we need a law here) that amusement parks charge at least $200/person. I mean, it doesn't get much more frivilous than that! You don't even have something to show for it at the end of the day. If you're willing to pay for that kind of entertainment you shouldn't complain about paying more.

So like I said, if a game that obviously means enough to you to warrant a $50.00 deduction from your savings account, which appears to be limited in nature, then how is $60.00 that much different?

Again, you're so right. These silly people that have limited funds. Personally, I always pay for stuff from my unlimited savings account.

Edit: By the way, I'm not really against them raising game prices. Go for it. I just personally won't be buying new releases any more. I just thought his argument was..... flawed.

[baz]

On international standards that still pretty damn cheap. I used to live in New Zealand, and a lot of the bigger games sell for $85 US Dollars (http://www.gpstore.co.nz/Games/1457762.htm) .
If you were to adjust that for the difference in salaries between the two countries, that becomes more like charging $140 US dollars for you guys. It pissed me off chronically at the time.

[bobbler]

Phades thats ridiculous... You don't use extremes to discredit someones opinion, it just makes you look silly.

Over the last 10-12 years we've seen games stay at a pretty constant ~50 mark (increasing in the SNES and N64 era and being a little lower on PS1). However, many other forms of entertainment have increased quite a bit in price... For example, going to a movie has increased 2-4 dollars depending on where you live (and what theatre). From $4.00-4.50 to $8.00-8.50, just as many people (if not far more) are seeing movies in theatres now. You can't expect publishers to just eat the cost of production and expect them not to try and make the same income as they used to.

Heres some info for you guys. PS1 era sold over 110million consoles (n64 sold about 30mil, ps1 sold 70mil, saturn sold who knows how many -- lets say 15 mil). Game production cost that era was 1/3-1/4 what it will be this generation. The PS2 generation comes along and theres roughly ~120 consoles sold by the three competitors. Game production cost between 5-15mil for the average console game. The dollar starts to lose its value. PS3/Xbox2 generation comes along, games will cost 10-25mil to make, probably 120-140mil consoles will be sold. Who the hell is going to eat the cost? If you do the math, they'd have to get many many more sales per console than they used to make up for the weak dollar and increased production. The cost gets passed to the consumer on some titles (triple A, that cost stupid amounts of money to make and sell stupid amounts of copies regardless of their prices). I repeat, there will be the 20-40 dollar games still -- So stop freakin out people.

If you want your EA SportsCrap 2006, you're going to pay 60 instead of 50 next generation. Big deal, the silly people buying those games probably won't notice the difference anyways -- Its 2 less trips to McDonalds, they should be thanking Publishers for increasing costs and reducing their ability to shovel fast food in them.

[Goronmon]

I think games should stay at the same price they are today.
Of course you do, but its completely unrealistic to expect that gaming prices will never go up.

If its a game I want I'll pay $60 for it. I'm not saying I'll buy as many games as I do now, but I don't really care if they raise prices. I mean, I'll spend what I can afford either way. Publishers will charge the most amount they feel they can expect people to pay, its what happens with our type of economy.

I mean, if they publishers raise prices too high, they'll just lose money in the end and prices will come down, so I am not worried about it.

[pomeroy]

Phades thats ridiculous... You don't use extremes to discredit someones opinion, it just makes you look silly.

...If you want your EA SportsCrap 2006, you're going to pay 60 instead of 50 next generation. Big deal, the silly people buying those games probably won't notice the difference anyways -- Its 2 less trips to McDonalds, they should be thanking Publishers for increasing costs and reducing their ability to shovel fast food in them.

Take your own advice about using extremes. It's ridiculous to say that every person who enjoys an EA sports title loves McDonald's. Also, is it really crap? Because I'd have to say EA's sports games (especially their football games) are the top of the heap. I know that EvilAvatar has this whole "WE HATE EA!" reputation to maintain, but I think throwing out this whole "Their games are teh shitty!!!11" every five seconds has gotten old. Bottom line: their games aren't crap. They may not be the most innovative, but they are not bad.

However, many other forms of entertainment have increased quite a bit in price... For example, going to a movie has increased 2-4 dollars depending on where you live (and what theatre). From $4.00-4.50 to $8.00-8.50, just as many people (if not far more) are seeing movies in theatres now.

Actually, fewer and fewer people are going to the movies (with the Internet and DVD to blame, really). Hence the prices going up. Gone With The Wind grossed $189 million in 1939; the average ticket price was $.75 (give or take)...that means that 252,000,000 tickets were sold. Compare that to Titanic's $600 million gross divided by $6.00 gives us 100,000,000 tickets sold...significantly less. Basically, fewer and fewer people go to the movies now.

[bobbler]

Take your own advice about using extremes. It's ridiculous to say that every person who enjoys an EA sports title loves McDonald's. Also, is it really crap? Because I'd have to say EA's sports games (especially their football games) are the top of the heap. I know that EvilAvatar has this whole "WE HATE EA!" reputation to maintain, but I think throwing out this whole "Their games are teh shitty!!!11" every five seconds has gotten old. Bottom line: their games aren't crap. They may not be the most innovative, but they are not bad.

I'm sorry, but what I did and what he did are two different things. What part of that is inaccurate? So I put SportsCrap as a placeholder for any 2006 EA sports title, thats an opinion on my part -- seperated from the facts I gave above in a seperate paragraph. I didn't say that every person buying EA games is a fat slob and eats at McDonalds every day either, I just said thats the equivalent of 2 McDonalds meals and its probably better that that money couldn't be spent on McDonalds, not because they eat it every day, but because McDonalds is evil. Don't get mad at me for taking my words the wrong way. That last sentence wasn't where I made my points anyways, so it doesn't matter what is held there.


Actually, fewer and fewer people are going to the movies (with the Internet and DVD to blame, really). Hence the prices going up. Gone With The Wind grossed $189 million in 1939; the average ticket price was $.75 (give or take)...that means that 252,000,000 tickets were sold. Compare that to Titanic's $600 million gross divided by $6.00 gives us 100,000,000 tickets sold...significantly less. Basically, fewer and fewer people go to the movies now.

Touche.

Theres far more movies out now than there were in 1939, though. If you look at total box office gross sales per year, adjusted, I think you'd see a different picture (maybe not, I couldn't find the data I was lookin for). Each movie may make less, but theres far more movies out now at any given time. I think. Maybe that was a bad example on my part though, but I have a feeling just as many movies are seen now (on average) as there was 10-12 years ago. Using an example from 1939, that's arguably a fluke, that beats everything else is another example of using extremes (if you wan't to get technical).

[Tyrant]

Given that the EB pricing is speculative/an overshot, I'd take it with a grain of salt. Besides, it wouldn't make much sense for them to under price it, or possibly lose money if it turns out that publishers want to charge $60US for a game they priced at $50.

Anyway, we've payed more in the past due to the cost of cartridges and we may very well pay more in the future due to the cost of Blu Ray discs. Now if X360 games cost $60 as well, then that's just dirty.

[mister_slim]

Silly Troll...PS3 games are 60 bucks too.
Actually, Sony-published games would be $50, since they keep their titles at $40.
I seem to remember speculations about the PS2 and the Xbox games being 59.99 when those systems came out as well. I don't think you should all be jumping to conclusions already, but whatever.
Activision and EA have both talked about this, Doom 3 launched at $55 and several publishers have been experimenting with collector's editions.

I wonder how the MS, Sony, and Nintendo titles will be priced.

[Kelegacy]

I understand the cost associated with BR discs and other high density media. Also, developer costs and whatnot. Still, I remember being a young child with my new NES system and games costing 50 bucks. That was...oh maybe when i was 6 or 7. Now, nearly 20 years later (give or take) games are still retailing for the 50 buck mark. Developer costs MUST have skyrocketed over the decades...so why havent games gone up? Is this due to changing from expensive cartridges to cheaper cd media? I'm freakin' glad cartridges still dont rule the day; I was appalled when I bought Royal Rumble for SNES all those years ago and spent 70 bucks on the thing. Never again will I pay that much for a game...at least not any year soon. I dont care if i get 100 hours of enjoyment out of it--I'll just buy used or after the game has gone done in price a year or so later. Companies wont profit off me if they raise their prices right away. Maybe it's because I'm older now and I've found patience to be a virtue. Games no longer call out to me and make me buy them the day they are released, not like years ago. I'm still a hardcore gamer but I've learned my lessons over the years.

Once again, it isnt about whether or not I can afford it--heck, I'm a college grad with a firm job--but it's all about practicality. I just cant rationalize a 60-70 dollar game right now. Not with game lengths dropping well below the 10 hour mark and quality becoming marred by publishers.

I'll wait it out. I'm good at that. :)

[Atorak]

I don't buy as many games as I used to, and even the ones I do, I normally don't have the time to finish. Nevertheless, if a AAA title like Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion is listing for $59.99, you bet your ass I'll be paying that price, and happily. Games like that, can give me several hundred hours of entertainment. You are talking about fractions of a dollar per hour of enjoyment. Where the hell ELSE can you get that kind of deal?

Honestly, don't buy that extra beer or two at a bar, or forget the Super Sizing on your Number 6's from McDonalds, and you can easily find a couple of extra bucks here and there.

Or, keep your current priorities in life exactly the same, and don't buy the game. Believe me, the masses will be out in full force the day these new games hit the shelves anyway. They'll get their money eventually. But if the game turns out to be one of those GOTY gems, isn't that worth the new price of admission?

People talk about "life-like physics model" this, "pixel shaders" that, "1 terabyte of processing power", and "ultra-photorealistic" as if that stuff takes an extra day or two to implement properly. Everyone wants a more realistic game, one with better gameplay, better physics, better graphics, better storyline, longer completion times, and tons of replayability. We aren't talking about Pong or Pitfall here folks. Gamers are now starting to reap what they sew. You asked for it, you got it. Hell, I asked for the same damn thing! I cannot WAIT to see what the next generation brings. But if the price has to go up a bit, so I can get a better quality purchase, and get all the features I want.....so friggin be it.

End of story.

[Kagger]

I would like to go on record saying that I went on record...

I'll live. But 60 will be tops, if it gets higher, its not production costs, its greed.

[koopy]

It's common to complain whenever prices go up. Its called inflation.
Prices for gas, cigarettes, movie tickets, and music (going from tape to CD) have all increased in the past 10-20 years. Some, more than doubled.
I'd welcome a new price range. A range that would differentiate the AAA titles ($59 and up) and the budget bargain bin games (under $29).

[TRiLoGY]

On international standards that still pretty damn cheap. I used to live in New Zealand, and a lot of the bigger games sell for $85 US Dollars (http://www.gpstore.co.nz/Games/1457762.htm) .
If you were to adjust that for the difference in salaries between the two countries, that becomes more like charging $140 US dollars for you guys. It pissed me off chronically at the time.

Yeah, I agree..

Here in the UK $60 USD would be around £35-£40 GBP (Based on the current Exchange Rate) which is the price we currently pay for PS2 games..

However, the Exchange rate doesnt usually apply for Electronic goods prices when compared to the US. If Prices are gonna be $60 USD in the US, they will probably be £60 GBP in the UK, which is $110 USD approx..