Atari in History of Console Prices

[Dolt]

I've been off the forums for a few weeks, so for all I know, this has already been posted but someone's compiled a pair of charts listing the introduction costs of the various systems over the years and their comparative costs today in 2006 dollars. I would have thought Atari would place higher in the comparative costs, but no...

 

 

http://curmudgeongamer.com/2006/05/history...r-500-aint.html

[Philflound]

With the inflation kicked in, Atari is listed as the 5th highest system out of the 26 there. Seems pretty high to me.

 

Phil

[Room 34]

Something else I saw recently said the inflation-adjusted release price for the 2600 was $801. Guess you can't really trust the "adjusted for inflation" argument.

 

Honestly, I still think of it in real dollars. We bought our 2600 for $150 in 1982 and it doesn't seem like the value of $150 has really changed that much. And I remember distinctly that new games were coming out at $35 (Pac-Man) to $40 (Defender) at the time. Today's prices haven't really gone up that much -- in real dollars.

 

Bottom line is, I still think anything over $200-$250 is too much for a console. After all, I bought my GameCube for $100 and my XBOX for $150!

 

(Well, OK, technically my parents bought them for me, for Christmas in 2003 and 2005, respectively. How old am I???)

Edited June 17, 2006 by Room 34

[NovaXpress]

Inflation-adjusted prices are complete bullshit. I'm surprized that more people haven't realized it. Those numbers are thrown out by modern-day companies to make you think that today's consoles are a better value. It's all a lie. Wages and prices should be adjusted hand-in-hand, which means that the burder of paying $200 in 1980 is pretty much exactly the same as the burden of paying $200 in 2006.

[Zonie]

The inflation adjust index doesn't really work with electronics. Prices have actually dropped, relatively speaking. Houses, cars, etc. now that stuff it works on.

 

A $500 TV in 1975 was a major purchase. that same size-tech tv today is around $80. Mfg and labor costs have dropped to contribute to this.

 

Still, I'd rather pay $500 for a TV made in the US (as opposed to china) and less than $100K for my house Like i did in 1993.

[the 5th ghost]

Here's the original pricetag still attached to my Sears heavy sixer box...$169.99!

[JagFan422]

thats bull crap about the TV. You have to look at the technology. A 25" tv might've been $900 15 years ago, but look now at what a 25" plasma tv cost today, You can't compare the same technology to each other. Thats why the inflation thing should apply easily to the video game market, the 2600 is like the 50's black and white and the PS3 is a plasma, they both cost about the same at their respective launches in terms of inflation.

Edited June 17, 2006 by JagFan422

[Philflound]

Inflation means everything. A comic book in 1982 was 60 cents. A pack of baseball cards I believe was 35 cents. Now look at the two prices.

 

Phil

[+RandomPerson]

From that chart the Big N has almost always been the cheapest system to buy. And about the inflation thing, I bought 2600 games (well they where bought for me) at about 20 (Zellers games) to 30 (parker titles) dollars MAX threw the early to mid 80's. Then in the mid to late 80's I started to buy NES games from $40 (Mario,ect) to $80 (Dragon Warrior 1) and I agree money has not changed that much, the price of the games sure did from 2600 to NES, my wallet felt it first hand. You know how many God damn lawns you gotta mow to get $80 bucks?? lol If anything I think the *average* price of a console has gone up, but the price of the games has come down for the most part.

[Dusk2600]

and the 3do leads the way. just sad, even higher then neo geo

[NovaXpress]

Inflation means everything. A comic book in 1982 was 60 cents. A pack of baseball cards I believe was 35 cents. Now look at the two prices.

You guys are forgetting the other issues: comic books and baseball cards are great examples of items whose cost rose, but not due to inflation. What raised the cost? Adult collectors. At one time, comics are cards were disposable items for children. As soon as we saw adults willing to pay five bucks an issue for the special foil-covered Spidey series, there was no return. In both comics and cards, the perceived value of these items has skyrocketed over time because the audience changed.

 

Video games systems have always run about 200 at launch, games have always run 40-50 when new. All' "adjusted for inflation" numbers are bullshit. A family who bought a 2600 in 1977 did not FEEL like they were spending seven hundred bucks. The percieved value of video games has barely budged over the decades.

 

Who the hell do you think it is that puts out these "a.f.i." numbers for classic game systems? The makers of modern game systems. They want to fool you into thinking that paying $400 for an XBox is no big deal. In fact, it is a big deal and only a deceptive asshole would compare modern prices to classic prices. Your heads are being screwed with by marketers, don't let them do it.

[iguana]

prices are lower today then back then. You must think of it as a percent of your income. The average income in 78 was much lower than today. so $200 as a percent of that lower amount is a higher percent then 600 as a percent of the average salary today.

[bcprs1]

It still shocks me to see the Neo Geo prices. I remember when that system game out and the games were $200 each. For that money, I could buy me about 6 NES games

[homerwannabee]

and the 3do leads the way. just sad, even higher then neo geo

I think the 3DO is the most expensive because they tried to pull a fast one on the American Public. I can still remember those 3DO infommericals braging about how there system was more than a system. It was going to revolutionize the way your whole entire life was runned. Of course this was not the case, but they sure got a few suckers to actualy believe their load of horse manuar.

[spacecadet]

Inflation-adjusted prices are complete bullshit. I'm surprized that more people haven't realized it. Those numbers are thrown out by modern-day companies to make you think that today's consoles are a better value. It's all a lie. Wages and prices should be adjusted hand-in-hand, which means that the burder of paying $200 in 1980 is pretty much exactly the same as the burden of paying $200 in 2006.

 

Huh? That makes NO sense.

 

Yes, wages and prices are adjusted hand in hand. That is called inflation. So if you made $20,000 a year in 1977, you'd be making around $60,000 a year doing the same job today. And, at the same time, something you bought for $200 in 1977 would similarly cost close to 3 times as much now - or around $600.

 

Wages and prices go up over time. That's inflation. For the economy to grow, wages have to grow by a little bit more than prices over a given length of time, and they have. So wages and prices don't correlate exactly; if they did, our economy would be stagnant. But you're talking a 3-4% difference per year between wages and prices. So, $200 today is still vastly different than $200 in 1977.

 

I mean how far are you willing to go with your argument? Do you still pay a nickel for your movie tickets and a penny for a candy bar, like they did a hundred years ago? You're basically arguing that inflation doesn't exist if you're saying that the burden of paying $200 now is the same as it was in 1980.

[Zonie]

thats bull crap about the TV. You have to look at the technology. A 25" tv might've been $900 15 years ago, but look now at what a 25" plasma tv cost today, You can't compare the same technology to each other. Thats why the inflation thing should apply easily to the video game market, the 2600 is like the 50's black and white and the PS3 is a plasma, they both cost about the same at their respective launches in terms of inflation.

 

OK dude, can the hostility. I posted "same-tech." That doesn't mean a plasma or LCD TV. It means same old CRT type. You can go into Walmart, someplace I WILL NOT SHOP, and buy a plain jane CRT 20-27" TV for about 80-200 bucks. The manufacturing is actually lest costly as it is cheaper to FAB a few IC's with the tuner circuits, etc than it is to mfg a board with discrete devices, or worse, a mechanical tuner.

[Zonie]

From that chart the Big N has almost always been the cheapest system to buy. And about the inflation thing, I bought 2600 games (well they where bought for me) at about 20 (Zellers games) to 30 (parker titles) dollars MAX threw the early to mid 80's. Then in the mid to late 80's I started to buy NES games from $40 (Mario,ect) to $80 (Dragon Warrior 1) and I agree money has not changed that much, the price of the games sure did from 2600 to NES, my wallet felt it first hand. You know how many God damn lawns you gotta mow to get $80 bucks?? lol If anything I think the *average* price of a console has gone up, but the price of the games has come down for the most part.

 

In 1980, I got $5-10 to mow a lawn. Today, Kids want $20-$30. Same amount of lawns.

Edited June 18, 2006 by Zonie

[NovaXpress]

Do you people even see what you are doing?

 

Some of us are saying that $200 in 1980 is a comparable burden to spending $200 today. You refute this by saying that the price of comic books and lawn care has gone up. What the hell does one have to do with the other?

 

The price for comic books, baseball cards and labor has skyrocketed over time while video game prices have remained at a fairly stable level until the current generation. You people are confusing inflation with pricing.

[8th lutz]

and the 3do leads the way. just sad, even higher then neo geo

What happened with the 3do was the system was not just for videogames, it was a multimedia system. 3do had stuff that made it multimedia first came on the market or were a couple years before that. It was able to play Audio cd's, CDplus G and photo cd's. It also was able to play vcd's with a mpeg attachment.

 

Comparing a 3do to a neo Geo is off. A new geo was not made to be multimedia a first place. It was a gaming system.

 

It was the ps 3 of its day by being multimedia and the 3do wasn't the only failed system in the early 90's that was multimedia. Multimedia back then was different then now. Most cd based systems didn't allow the number stuff for use like the 3do was. Cd systems can play Audio cd's and nothing else.

 

Anything that Claims to be multimedia will be high in price.

[Zonie]

Do you people even see what you are doing?

 

Some of us are saying that $200 in 1980 is a comparable burden to spending $200 today. You refute this by saying that the price of comic books and lawn care has gone up. What the hell does one have to do with the other?

 

The price for comic books, baseball cards and labor has skyrocketed over time while video game prices have remained at a fairly stable level until the current generation. You people are confusing inflation with pricing.

 

As someone else posted, the comic/baseball card stuff went up because of the collectors. This is partially true. Also, games have become more high volume, where the cards, comics, etc are losing ground. Volume equates to lower prices. I hardly even see comic books anymore. I don't see many kids reading anything much these days either. "too boring" for them.

 

I don't equate $200 today to 1980. My point is that many things cost less than they did in 1980, even in 1980's dollars. We as a whole value things differently today than we did 26 years ago... Today we throw shit out. Back then we repaired things, as it cost less to repair than replace. It is the opposite now. I still would rather fix something than throw it out. If it can be fixed, it is a waste to replace it, in my opinion. And no I'm not cheap or poor either. Part of it is fiscal responsibility to my own retirement, the rest is environmental. We bury too much in landfills.

[G.Whiz]

Do you people even see what you are doing?

 

Some of us are saying that $200 in 1980 is a comparable burden to spending $200 today. You refute this by saying that the price of comic books and lawn care has gone up. What the hell does one have to do with the other?

 

The price for comic books, baseball cards and labor has skyrocketed over time while video game prices have remained at a fairly stable level until the current generation. You people are confusing inflation with pricing.

 

...

 

I don't equate $200 today to 1980. My point is that many things cost less than they did in 1980, even in 1980's dollars. We as a whole value things differently today than we did 26 years ago... Today we throw shit out. Back then we repaired things, as it cost less to repair than replace. It is the opposite now. I still would rather fix something than throw it out. If it can be fixed, it is a waste to replace it, in my opinion. And no I'm not cheap or poor either. Part of it is fiscal responsibility to my own retirement, the rest is environmental. We bury too much in landfills.

 

Okay, I think we are all comparing apples with oranges with kiwis. Straight up, $200 took longer to make on average in 1980 than it does now, but also bought a lot more. I don't think anyone is going to argue with that. (And if you do, stop reading now 'cuz there's just no point...)

 

I think a better comparison in the relative value of gaming consoles is the good ol' computer. For a good many years now (6 or 7?), you could buy a cheap computer at my local Future Shop for about $500, a decent one for about $800, and a gaming workhorse for about $1,200. Laptops range from about $900 to about $3,300. The prices haven't really changed, but the technology has. $1,200 seven years ago got you a brand new Pentium II with Windows 98, and now it gets you a Dual Core with XP Media Edition. In a sense, this is marketing -- the companies have found the prices that their customers are willing to pay, and then put together the packages at today's tech that meet those price points and allow for profit.

 

A similar thing is happening in consoles, just every couple of years instead of every week. Sony figures they can get $X amount and by selling Y amount of consoles, will end up with $Z amount in sales. And yes, that is marketing too.

 

But what the "History of Console Prices" is saying is that in 1977 it cost you $200 to buy an Atari, which in today's dollars would be the equivalent of $600 (or whatever). That is more than PS2, but less than NeoGeo (whatever the hell game that was). It is not saying the Atari is "worth" more, or that the technology is equivalent, it is just one simple way of putting it all into perspective.

 

Frankly, I would have thought the Atari would be the highest. From here on out, it doesn't matter how lifelike the graphics get to be, how interactive the gameplay is, how deafening the sound is, nothing will ever beat the enraptured facination I had when I first played Combat Tank at Sears. It's a feeling that inflation will never catch up to...

 

~G

[Gabriel]

Here in the US, inflation has increased and earnings have increased, but they have not increased at the same rate. Inflation has outpaced earnings. So, relatively speaking, modern Americans make less money and have less income than their parents did. People have a lower percentage of their overall income available for "disposable income" purchases like a game system.

 

Percentage of incomewise, an Atari 2600 cost as much in 1977 as a PS3 will cost in 2006. Except, that during that time the percentage of income the standard family has for that kind of purchase has gone down.

 

Aside from that, did anyone notice the skewing of the numbers for the Atari 5200 and Colecovision? Didn't the 5200 launch at $250? And didn't the Colecovision launch at about the same price?

[Zonie]

nothing will ever beat the enraptured facination I had when I first played Combat Tank at Sears. It's a feeling that inflation will never catch up to...

 

~G

AMEN.

Edited June 20, 2006 by Zonie

[jpfalcon2003]

Something else I saw recently said the inflation-adjusted release price for the 2600 was $801. Guess you can't really trust the "adjusted for inflation" argument.

 

Honestly, I still think of it in real dollars. We bought our 2600 for $150 in 1982 and it doesn't seem like the value of $150 has really changed that much. And I remember distinctly that new games were coming out at $35 (Pac-Man) to $40 (Defender) at the time. Today's prices haven't really gone up that much -- in real dollars.

 

Bottom line is, I still think anything over $200-$250 is too much for a console. After all, I bought my GameCube for $100 and my XBOX for $150!

 

(Well, OK, technically my parents bought them for me, for Christmas in 2003 and 2005, respectively. How old am I???)

I agree with you on that. Got my Gamecube for Xmas for $99.99 also. Anything over $200.00 is too high I'd say. I myself would rather wait till the system drops to that price range before purchasing.

[Jeff Lodoen]

New comic book prices took off starting in the '70s.. because of paper prices. The raises were pennies at a time but huge as a % each time.

 

Looking through Fantastic Four covers, I find:

 

1961, 0.10

1962, 0.12

1969, 0.15

1972, 0.20 (they tried 0.25 for one month but relented)

1974, 0.25

1976, 0.30

1977, 0.35

1979, 0.40

1980, 0.50

1982, 0.60

1985, 0.65

1986, 0.75

1989, 1.00

 

I think newsprint comics petered out at this point, so price raises after '89 at least gave you a better looking product. Comics are 2.50 now, 2.95 maybe soon.