RE: Pricing Suggestion

RE: Pricing Suggestion (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

JeffroK -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/28/2013 11:56:54 PM)
I dont see AUD$100 as being too expensive for a finished, quality game. It is too much for a Beta+ offering which "is still being worked on" Which category does this fit? However, Matrix should start permanently dropping prices on some of its 5+ year old titles, to the ?? $20 ?? bracket. It may bring more to the shop, and they may then buy more of the premium titles. Currently they buy nothing.

Maesphil74 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 12:00:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian Took a guick look over at the steel beast forum. Don't see anyone complaining about the price. Or saying "But we can buy Microprose's M1 Tank Platoon for x.xx" Or comparing it to a console or app store game. never go for a quickie [:-] http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=10974&highlight=price&page=2 Ok. And did they lower the price any? Off course not. Why should they? They are setting the price to maximise their (short?) term profits. The people who advocate the lower prices are convinced that profits will benefit in the long run. We all know economics isn't "excactly" an exact science, so who knows? Time will tell, I guess. You really think these companies are in business so they can entertain you. [:D] Nope; they're making money. And their prices are not based on the wishes of the customer. They're based on analysis of their market. And that analysis can be either right or wrong. Who cares really? I don't have any matrix stocks in my portofolio. I just happen to like some of their games. I won't loose any sleep if their analysis is wrong. I just hope for them, it's correct. It is a problem however if you charge for a Ferrari and then deliver a skoda. I paid once for a testarossa on this site(aka Command Ops BftB) and was delivered an Octavia. Nice car and all, but that was a bit pricey for what I got compared to what I was promised. But hey, my fault; I decided to click that 'buy' button. I was on the fence regarding Command. I must say I'm no longer convinced of the hype. Too much performance problems, weird UI decisions, and too community dependant in the scenario dep. Off course, this is all from reading the forums as I don't have a demo to base my opinion on. Oh, well; the lesson learned from BftB has teached me. Good for me Maybe I'll pick it up when it goes on sale (for 75 euro [:D])

thewood1 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 12:01:40 AM)
Funny...I noticed a couple of the loudest complainers now posting in the Command forum asking questions about how to play.

Aurelian -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 12:15:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian Took a guick look over at the steel beast forum. Don't see anyone complaining about the price. Or saying "But we can buy Microprose's M1 Tank Platoon for x.xx" Or comparing it to a console or app store game. never go for a quickie [:-] http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=10974&highlight=price&page=2 Ok. And did they lower the price any? Off course not. Why should they? Exactly. Which shows how effective threads like this are :) The people who advocate the lower prices are convinced that profits will benefit in the long run, have come up with nothing to show that. How can they after all? They haven't provided the market research data. They haven't provided any data on the profit margin of this company. They are however, free to put their money where their mouth is and prove that they are right.

Maesphil74 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 12:15:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thewood1 Funny...I noticed a couple of the loudest complainers now posting in the Command forum asking questions about how to play. You're confused because you think these people are 'complaining' (and watch it; i'm not complaining about the price [:D]) because they cannot afford the game. While in fact, it's just a psychologial effect of having to pay a lot more for something when normally you pay a lot less (going from 40 euro for a game to 80+ euro). The fact that even some of the 'complainers' deciced to buy, Is a proof that even when a consumer initially perceives the price as 'too damn high', they still can be lured into a transaction. That and their conviction the high prices keep the market small. Which isn't necessarly a bad thing for matrix btw.

Maesphil74 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 12:20:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian Took a guick look over at the steel beast forum. Don't see anyone complaining about the price. Or saying "But we can buy Microprose's M1 Tank Platoon for x.xx" Or comparing it to a console or app store game. never go for a quickie [:-] http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=10974&highlight=price&page=2 Ok. And did they lower the price any? Off course not. Why should they? Exactly. Which shows how effective threads like this are :) Well, that's not entirely true. Matrix probably pays a lot for market analysis and customer polls, etc. These threads can be a signal that there is a problem in your market and can lead to a more detailed analysis of the problem. So, it would be foolish to ignore this. And I'm sure they are investigating (or probably allready have). So, in fact these threads can be effective. Just not in the short term. But maybe for future experiments with price differentiation. Oh, and btw; care to address the rest of my post? [;)]

Aurelian -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 12:26:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: thewood1 Funny...I noticed a couple of the loudest complainers now posting in the Command forum asking questions about how to play. You're confused because you think these people are 'complaining' (and watch it; i'm not complaining about the price [:D]) because they cannot afford the game. While in fact, it's just a psychologial effect of having to pay a lot more for something when normally you pay a lot less (going from 40 euro for a game to 80+ euro). But where is this 40 euro game that is the same thing as the 80 euro game?

Maesphil74 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 12:32:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian Exactly. Which shows how effective threads like this are :) The people who advocate the lower prices are convinced that profits will benefit in the long run, have come up with nothing to show that. How can they after all? They haven't provided the market research data. They haven't provided any data on the profit margin of this company. They are however, free to put their money where their mouth is and prove that they are right. Not convinced. At least that's not what I understood from some of their posts. However, it is widely known in economics that lowering (or increasing) prices can lead to higher sales volumes and bigger profit. But I'm sure you know that too. It aldepends if your strategy is getting a little money out of each member of a large group. Or a lot of money from the members of the little group. http://www.marketingmo.com/how-to-articles/pricing/will-lowering-your-prices-increase-profits/

Aurelian -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 12:37:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian Took a guick look over at the steel beast forum. Don't see anyone complaining about the price. Or saying "But we can buy Microprose's M1 Tank Platoon for x.xx" Or comparing it to a console or app store game. never go for a quickie [:-] http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=10974&highlight=price&page=2 Ok. And did they lower the price any? Off course not. Why should they? Exactly. Which shows how effective threads like this are :) Well, that's not entirely true. Matrix probably pays a lot for market analysis and customer polls, etc. These threads can be a signal that there is a problem in your market and can lead to a more detailed analysis of the problem. So, it would be foolish to ignore this. And I'm sure they are investigating (or probably allready have). So, in fact these threads can be effective. Just not in the short term. But maybe for future experiments with price differentiation. Oh, and btw; care to address the rest of my post? [;)] No need to address the rest. The only signal this thread send is that there are people who think this game should be the same price as something like Pride of Nations. Now if they buy Pride of Nations tomorrow for $80 instead of buying it today for $25, they would be on to something. If they offer something concrete, like market research, profit/loss statements, profit margins, then it would be worthwhile. But no one I ever knew runs their business based on threads like this.

Maesphil74 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 12:39:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: thewood1 Funny...I noticed a couple of the loudest complainers now posting in the Command forum asking questions about how to play. You're confused because you think these people are 'complaining' (and watch it; i'm not complaining about the price [:D]) because they cannot afford the game. While in fact, it's just a psychologial effect of having to pay a lot more for something when normally you pay a lot less (going from 40 euro for a game to 80+ euro). But where is this 40 euro game that is the same thing as the 80 euro game? You misunderstood. One of the tools of maximum profit is attracting new customers. If a new gamer comes to this site for the first time, he might be 'shocked' by the high prices. When you're used paying 40 euro for a game and then you discover a site where they ask 80 euro, you're probably scratching your head. How can a new customer know what the difference is between his usual 40 euro game (take EU4) and the 80 euro game? He cannot. It's matrix business model that this new customer will perceive the 80 euro game as far superior to his 40 euro game ("Sure, a Ferrari is better than a skoda, so It costs more"). Good for matrix. I respect their business model. But again, the problem arises when the Ferrari turns out to be a Skoda. You gained 1 sale but perhaps lost 5 potential future sales. But hey, they did the research and they concluded that this way of working would create maximum profit for them.

Aurelian -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 12:39:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian Exactly. Which shows how effective threads like this are :) The people who advocate the lower prices are convinced that profits will benefit in the long run, have come up with nothing to show that. How can they after all? They haven't provided the market research data. They haven't provided any data on the profit margin of this company. They are however, free to put their money where their mouth is and prove that they are right. Not convinced. At least that's not what I understood from some of their posts. However, it is widely known in economics that lowering (or increasing) prices can lead to higher sales volumes and bigger profit. But I'm sure you know that too. It aldepends if your strategy is getting a little money out of each member of a large group. Or a lot of money from the members of the little group. http://www.marketingmo.com/how-to-articles/pricing/will-lowering-your-prices-increase-profits/ Well I don't expect you to be convinced. :) But I do expect them to show me that this company is on the wrong path. And it has yet to happen.

Maesphil74 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 12:43:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian Exactly. Which shows how effective threads like this are :) The people who advocate the lower prices are convinced that profits will benefit in the long run, have come up with nothing to show that. How can they after all? They haven't provided the market research data. They haven't provided any data on the profit margin of this company. They are however, free to put their money where their mouth is and prove that they are right. Not convinced. At least that's not what I understood from some of their posts. However, it is widely known in economics that lowering (or increasing) prices can lead to higher sales volumes and bigger profit. But I'm sure you know that too. It aldepends if your strategy is getting a little money out of each member of a large group. Or a lot of money from the members of the little group. http://www.marketingmo.com/how-to-articles/pricing/will-lowering-your-prices-increase-profits/ Well I don't expect you to be convinced. :) But I do expect them to show me that this company is on the wrong path. And it has yet to happen. Only the market can do that. And we're all the market [:D] Both views are perfectly reasonable and legitimate from an economic viewpoint. You will find experts who will say Matrix is right and you will have experts that will 'proof' the low prices is the way to go. Just don't forget that economics is not excact science: it's subjective and potentially wrong data fed into mathematical formulae.... Not so good [;)]

Maesphil74 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 12:53:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian Took a guick look over at the steel beast forum. Don't see anyone complaining about the price. Or saying "But we can buy Microprose's M1 Tank Platoon for x.xx" Or comparing it to a console or app store game. never go for a quickie [:-] http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=10974&highlight=price&page=2 Ok. And did they lower the price any? Off course not. Why should they? Exactly. Which shows how effective threads like this are :) Well, that's not entirely true. Matrix probably pays a lot for market analysis and customer polls, etc. These threads can be a signal that there is a problem in your market and can lead to a more detailed analysis of the problem. So, it would be foolish to ignore this. And I'm sure they are investigating (or probably allready have). So, in fact these threads can be effective. Just not in the short term. But maybe for future experiments with price differentiation. Oh, and btw; care to address the rest of my post? [;)] No need to address the rest. The only signal this thread send is that there are people who think this game should be the same price as something like Pride of Nations. Now if they buy Pride of Nations tomorrow for $80 instead of buying it today for $25, they would be on to something. If they offer something concrete, like market research, profit/loss statements, profit margins, then it would be worthwhile. But no one I ever knew runs their business based on threads like this. You seem to forget that price must reflect value and that value is subjective. There are people willing to pay 250 euro for animal farm. And then you will have people who wouldn't buy GTA V for 2.5 euro. It all boils down to which marketing strategy you use. And I never said they're running their business on threads like this. That's a simplification. But I'm sure they use their forum (this thread included) to look for trends/worries/desires/opportunities in their market.

Aurelian -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 1:08:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: thewood1 Funny...I noticed a couple of the loudest complainers now posting in the Command forum asking questions about how to play. You're confused because you think these people are 'complaining' (and watch it; i'm not complaining about the price [:D]) because they cannot afford the game. While in fact, it's just a psychologial effect of having to pay a lot more for something when normally you pay a lot less (going from 40 euro for a game to 80+ euro). But where is this 40 euro game that is the same thing as the 80 euro game? You misunderstood. One of the tools of maximum profit is attracting new customers. If a new gamer comes to this site for the first time, he might be 'shocked' by the high prices. When you're used paying 40 euro for a game and then you discover a site where they ask 80 euro, you're probably scratching your head. How can a new customer know what the difference is between his usual 40 euro game (take EU4) and the 80 euro game? He cannot. It's matrix business model that this new customer will perceive the 80 euro game as far superior to his 40 euro game ("Sure, a Ferrari is better than a skoda, so It costs more"). Good for matrix. I respect their business model. But again, the problem arises when the Ferrari turns out to be a Skoda. You gained 1 sale but perhaps lost 5 potential future sales. But hey, they did the research and they concluded that this way of working would create maximum profit for them. I didn't misunderstand. People who buy the 40 euro Chevy should not be shocked when the Caddy goes for 80 euro. How can a customer know the difference between the two? Use the internet. You'll be buried under all the details you would find. As for MG's business model, it worked/s for them. They did all the stuff necessary. They don't just wake up one day and say "We'll charge this." When McNamara was head of the Ford Division, he had a conversation with Iacocca. "You're very successful at selling to people face to face. But if you can't put it on paper and lay it all out, you haven't thought it out." Or something to that effect. That's a problem with forums such as this. There are people who are trying to sell something that says this company doesn't know what it's doing. (face to face part.) But they are not putting it on paper and laying it all out. (The laying it out, which means facts and data.)

Aurelian -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 1:14:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian Took a guick look over at the steel beast forum. Don't see anyone complaining about the price. Or saying "But we can buy Microprose's M1 Tank Platoon for x.xx" Or comparing it to a console or app store game. never go for a quickie [:-] http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=10974&highlight=price&page=2 Ok. And did they lower the price any? Off course not. Why should they? Exactly. Which shows how effective threads like this are :) Well, that's not entirely true. Matrix probably pays a lot for market analysis and customer polls, etc. These threads can be a signal that there is a problem in your market and can lead to a more detailed analysis of the problem. So, it would be foolish to ignore this. And I'm sure they are investigating (or probably allready have). So, in fact these threads can be effective. Just not in the short term. But maybe for future experiments with price differentiation. Oh, and btw; care to address the rest of my post? [;)] No need to address the rest. The only signal this thread send is that there are people who think this game should be the same price as something like Pride of Nations. Now if they buy Pride of Nations tomorrow for $80 instead of buying it today for $25, they would be on to something. If they offer something concrete, like market research, profit/loss statements, profit margins, then it would be worthwhile. But no one I ever knew runs their business based on threads like this. You seem to forget that price must reflect value and that value is subjective. There are people willing to pay 250 euro for animal farm. And then you will have people who wouldn't buy GTA V for 2.5 euro. It all boils down to which marketing strategy you use. And I never said they're running their business on threads like this. That's a simplification. But I'm sure they use their forum (this thread included) to look for trends/worries/desires/opportunities in their market. Never said you did. Nor have I forgot market value. This particular game sells for what the company determines it's worth. As for GTA V, doesn't matter to me what they sell it for. Put it a $2.00, I won't buy it as I have no interest in it. If I did, I would buy it now. Just as I bought Madden 25 when it showed up. Have yet to play it yet. (Or WiTP-AE, which I bought the day it came out. Or Rome II. or Shogun II. An no)

Maesphil74 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 1:18:39 AM)
quote: I didn't misunderstand. People who buy the 40 euro Chevy should not be shocked when the Caddy goes for 80 euro. But what if your Caddy drives like a Chevy? quote: How can a customer know the difference between the two? Use the internet. You'll be buried under all the details you would find. Be carefull with the 'internets' http://www.forbes.com/sites/suwcharmananderson/2012/08/28/fake-reviews-amazons-rotten-core/ The faking of reviews, both positive and negative, is a serious issue. At the core of the problem is the fact that there are huge benefits to behaving unethically but very little cost for those caught doing so quote: As for MG's business model, it worked/s for them. They did all the stuff necessary. They don't just wake up one day and say "We'll charge this." Correct 100%. But a business must remain reactive to changing parameters. quote: That's a problem with forums such as this. There are people who are trying to sell something that says this company doesn't know what it's doing. (face to face part.) But they are not putting it on paper and laying it all out. (The laying it out, which means facts and data.) Mmm, maybe. I'm not convinced. Remember that for each poster, there are several lurkers agreeing (positive and negative). It's not uncommon for businesses to adapt their strategies after consumer feedback. The problem is that it often only happens when they start losing money, at which time it's often too late. (And no, I'm not implying this will happen to Matrix in particular) http://www.infoentrepreneurs.org/en/guides/review-your-business-performance/ Asking your customers for feedback on your business' performance will help to identify where improvements can be made to your products or services, your staffing levels or your business procedures.

Chickenboy -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 2:05:45 AM)
Hi Guys! I'm late to the conversation telling Matrix how to run their business. What'd I miss? [:)]

aaatoysandmore -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 2:35:12 AM)
quote: telling Matrix how to run their business Just that! hahaha

aaatoysandmore -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 2:47:42 AM)
Considering it's opera I can understand going out of business has nothing to do with the old audience it's just old like old classical music or old silent movies nobody but the very old care about it. It's a dying breed wargames and old wargames are not. Do you not still play chess? You must understand just because you see something that needs to be discounted the whole world doesn't. Just because your youngest wargaming friend is 42 doesn't mean the whole worlds wargamers are 42 and above. And to top it off just because you think Matrixgames and Slitherine should lower their prices to YOUR expectations doesn't mean the whole world does. Goes back to that selfish attitude you have you want it your way all the time NOW. lol Ain't gonna happen that way. I'm thankful to say. As for proof of what I say, I was a kid once and I know how I thought and my friends thought about wargaming. Wargaming is a niche market it's not like thier games go flying off the shelves or digital space. My kids and grandkids don't care for them as much as shooters and clicky fest games but a small interest is there because dad and grandad likes them. You can take it for what it's worth I don't care I know I'm right and you're just being selfish. Learn to pay for what you get and if you don't want to pay it treat it like you would any store you go in that you don't agree with the pricing...keep your mouth shut because even though I can't see you 24 hours a day I know you don't tell the store owner how to run his business. :_) If you do then you must not have much of a mouth by now. lol

Aurelian -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 2:57:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy Hi Guys! I'm late to the conversation telling Matrix how to run their business. What'd I miss? [:)] Nothing.

bretg80 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 3:17:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus quote: ORIGINAL: bretg80 Swept under the carpet. No problem. The message is out there. And the message is WAAAAH! WAAAAH! WAAAAH! I've dealt with Terminus before... and this is no surprise coming from him. But let's get one thing clear, I can afford to buy any game on this site. I choose not to buy an expensive game because I'm tired of paying full price for not-ready-for-prime-time releases. I was a big proponent of Command Ops and was a cheerleader and then bought the game at full price and was totally embarrassed by the lack of support and the bugs. And I gave Dave at Panther a piece of my mind as a result along with many others. The cool thing about Dave is he listened to what we had to say and I believe his next go at a new product will be much better. So, does Matrix and Sliterine listen, NO. And so we have this thread that appears to still be very alive even after the move off the main board where it belongs. I have WitP and WitPAE and paid full price for games that are not bad, but are not the great pieces of software the fanboys make them out to be. I even wrote CombatReporter for WitPAE to help improve the game because it is so difficult to find information. There are several other addons that have been created as well. My point here is that premium titles are extremely rare and I highly doubt that CMANO is a premium title given the comments I've already seen on the boards. Some of the comments about CMANO recently are that the UI is cluttered and it is difficult to find information. How many more add-ons do we need before the game is usable? So where is the justification for this price? Oh, and I really was done commenting on this issue until you moved this to the General board and Terminus made the stupid comment. Now I have plenty more to say [:@]

mjk428 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 3:39:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffK I dont see AUD$100 as being too expensive for a finished, quality game. It is too much for a Beta+ offering which "is still being worked on" Which category does this fit? I don't regret the purchase (yet) but it's definitely rough around the edges. Beta+ is a fair characterization IMO. The Devs and fanboys will heartily disagree. I'm confident enough that the rough spots will be patched up that I'm spending today making my own scenarios. The devs are responding to the complaints and they seem like good & capable folks. There's a lot to like about what they've done. The database being the most impressive. However, the clunky unintuitive interface, sluggish performance on high-end rigs, and suicidal pilots, make the game hard for me to love as it stands. Today it's worth $40. In short order I expect it will be worth $60. For those of us that can't resist the subject matter it's worth an extra $20. :)

dutchman55555 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 5:59:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fleming Both views are perfectly reasonable and legitimate from an economic viewpoint. You will find experts who will say Matrix is right and you will have experts that will 'proof' the low prices is the way to go. Actually, not for Matrix. No expert would dare analyze the situation because there is no hard data. Matrix has no shareholders, just owners. There is no prospectus, no annual report. So anyone who claims the Matrix model is the winning one cannot (literally) be factually correct, as there are no facts to back their argument. Just as they can't demand that people worried about the future of the hobby "show them the proof"...that's in Matrix's hands, and we all know that's never, ever going to happen. We're expected to accept platitudes about strong sales, and meeting expectations. The True Believers drink the Kool-Aid, and can't understand why we decline their cups. Again, if this was just about the future of Matrix it would matter not. But a business model that appears to be primarily "Fewer customers so we now need to charge more to make the same money; whoops, now there's even fewer customers so we now need to charge even more to make the same money; oh boy, now there's even fewer customers so we now need to charge even more to make the same money..." seems to be in a dangerous spiral. Eventually it will be only the True Believers, and as they die off, or move on, or are priced out of the market then there is a very real chance the hobby will die, especially with Matrix buying up and closing off every PC wargame studio they can get their hands on.

histgamer -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 6:16:55 AM)
Dutch matrix doesn't control what happens to the wargaming genre. If I want to make a game and I have the talent I can do so and self publish or publish with someone else. Even if Matrix drives their titles into the ground and ashes as long as some people want to play games like these they will continue to get made, just elsewhere. The thing that most people don't' realize, is my impression of many game developers who are indie developers is these guys largely do it part time. Unless they hit it big the vast majority of game devs (definitely on mobile anyway) are part time developers who do this for fun. I could be wrong there but that's my impression. So it's not like if suddenly they don't sell 10,000 copies at $50 they will go broke, I mean I'm sure that's the case for some developers but many make games as a labor of love, sure lack of compensation could cause them to do something else but I doubt any of them have an illusion that they are going to get rich.

dutchman55555 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 6:23:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bretg80 But let's get one thing clear, I can afford to buy any game on this site. I choose not to buy an expensive game because I'm tired of paying full price for not-ready-for-prime-time releases. I was a big proponent of Command Ops and was a cheerleader and then bought the game at full price and was totally embarrassed by the lack of support and the bugs. You've pretty much distilled the conclusion I've come to. I can afford Matrix prices, but I'm given so many reasons not to buy that pretty much every game I've bought here is many years in age, and as a result is at a price point (9/10 times due to a sale) that I can justify them. In the same way that True Believers show blind obedience, my scepticism lingers at every game description, at every review that is "Well it's nice overall, but a), b) and c) prevent it from being truly remarkable", or mention of a glitch that I would hope would be fixed after 5 years but which I sometimes learn (to my horror) hasn't been. In fact I'm pretty sure the only games I bought at full price were Unity of Command and Time of Fury. I truly regret the latter purchase. I had to make the decision based on 6 screen shots and the typical review of many Matrix games, There are a few annoying issues that hint toward a slightly premature release but these seem to be known and the developers are working hard to fix them, and shouldn't stop anyone interested in the game from buying it. Every other game was purchased at a sale price. And because of this it means the games were 4-6 years old before I had a kick at them. And that's my conundrum. Do I drop $90 on a game that might be so buggy, so half-baked that I stroke out from the anger of being sold such a thing? Or do I wait for 4-6 years for a "reasonable" price drop to $60 or $70? Or do I pass entirely? It truly disappoints me to admit I'm slowly and surely being nudged to the final category with pretty much every Matrix product released.

histgamer -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 6:30:31 AM)
To be fair not EVERY game is priced incredibly high. The SOW games are pretty reasonable ($29.99) for the stand alones, especially if you get the bundle which is $20 cheaper than the combined price of all the titles, CW2 is what? $39.99 at release for digital and while the Panzer Corps games are lighter they are also reasonably priced imho.

dutchman55555 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 6:45:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: flanyboy Dutch matrix doesn't control what happens to the wargaming genre. If I want to make a game and I have the talent I can do so and self publish or publish with someone else. Except that more and more studios/developers are being acquired by Matrix. Outright bought. And every time this happens another company finds its distribution cut to only Matrix/Slitherine and their own websites (sometimes not even that). Do they control the genre? No. But every time someone hears about a game, and comes to Matrix only to find it priced beyond what they are willing to pay, they are being nudged away not only from Matrix but also the hobby. Enough nudges and that's it, one more customer (and hobby supporter) gone. Look, I'll date myself and say I was around for the SPI/AH days of board wargaming. AH was always more expensive than SPI, but were (often) quality products. SPI games were flawed, but cheaper. But even though AH games were more expensive, they didn't price themselves out of the market, and they were good. Matrix can't be SPI quality with AH prices. And that seems to be a situation that is repeating itself more and more. And if they continue to follow the EA model, gobbling up competitors and squeezing out work before it is ready, or simply a bare bones sequel to a previously successful product, then they will in effect become the genre, and you'll find that while you can make products, the market may become so sparse (due to supporters walking away, and newbies being scared off) that you will be doing it at a loss. I've got a friend like that, in his 50s and working minimum wage jobs so he can put on the occasional theatre production...always at a loss, and always coming out of his pocket. I'm thinking Matrix won't buy into that particular business model.

histgamer -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 6:51:49 AM)
I suppose. I guess the next however many years will tell the story Dutch. Hopefully you're wrong.

dutchman55555 -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 6:56:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: flanyboy I suppose. I guess the next however many years will tell the story Dutch. Hopefully you're wrong. I hope I'm wrong, also. At present all I have to allay my fears are platitudes from Matrix, and angry, petulant stares from the Kool-Aid drinkers.

Aurelian -> RE: Pricing Suggestion (9/29/2013 7:26:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dutchman55555 quote: ORIGINAL: flanyboy Dutch matrix doesn't control what happens to the wargaming genre. If I want to make a game and I have the talent I can do so and self publish or publish with someone else. Except that more and more studios/developers are being acquired by Matrix. Outright bought. And every time this happens another company finds its distribution cut to only Matrix/Slitherine and their own websites (sometimes not even that). So what? Why didn't anyone else acquired them? Ageod went to Paradox. Why isn't it still there? I'd guess because it was a bad fit. According to Paradox, there isn't a market for turn based games, IIRC. So why did they even buy them? And so what if another company finds it distribution cut? Did Ageod benefit from the massive discounts that Paradox ran? I hate to break it to you, but in all likelihood, these studio/developers that you have a problem with them being bought, (I'd like to introduce you to a concept called capitalism.), would of gone under. Maybe, no, scratch that, it has escaped you that thanks to Matrix, these companies have a home. A place to thrive. If that comes at a price that is not acceptable to you, well, I cam live with that

Page: << < prev 21 22 [23] 24 25 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

6.125