Real Arcade Gamepass

[Fost]

We aren't currently using RA, but someone was recently inquiring on our forum about it since we ran a beta with them a long time ago, and it prompted me to look into something that I found intriguing:

The Real Arcade Gamepass costs $6.95 for a month, during which time you get one free game a month and $5 off each additional game that month. You can cancel this at any time.

Sooo, why would anyone ever purchase a game full price? Just sign up that month and get the game for $6.95. Also, is the gamepass even considered as part of your royalties? or is it considered part of RN's running costs?

I'm not trying to imply either way - I don't know, but I'm sure you can see why this raised an eyebrow.

[svero]

You get paid for gamepass titles but you get less royalties as the price is lower. The idea is basically that gamepass members will buy 1 or more games every month so that overall you'll consistently make more money even though the price is cheaper. From the customers point of view they get a deal but the price they pay for that is that they have to choose a game every month or forfeit their 6.95. The only thing I would say is that there are doubtless many people that dont choose a game every month because they forgot etc... and that part of the monthly gamepass revenue is not shared with developers.

[Fost]

I'd guess not many people even realise they can do that too and still pay full price.

The trouble for me with this kind of thing, is the cheaper the publisher sells something, the less likely the developer is to make any money. It's like the whole retail bundling scam that many offline publshers do - the publisher sells more and earns more because they get a cut of the whole package, but the developer gets a paltry amount because the royalty is split between everyone else in the bundle. I know a couple of people who got burned by bundles :(

Oh well, it's none of my business really...

[svero]

The trouble for me with this kind of thing, is the cheaper the publisher sells something, the less likely the developer is to make any money.


This is wrong. The concept behind a monthly system you join is that the publisher makes more money and so do you. The idea is that more games than would normally have been sold are sold. Enough to overcome the discount. Of course the publisher's system might fail and it may lose money, but generally speaking when Real or whomever sets up a system like this they're hoping that they will make more money overall. From what I've heard this is a success too. So I don't think it's accurate to say the developer makes less because gamepass members pay less. Its like this sample calculation using fake numbers...

Without gamepass
==============
100 games sold at full price - 2500$ - developer gets 10% - 250$

With gamepass
===========
80 games sold at full price - 2000$ - developer gets 10% - 200$
100 games sold at gamepass price - 695$ - developer gets 10% - 269.50

So you see how in scenario two - with gamepass - it's possible to make more money even though from a customers point of view they're paying less per title if they're on the system. The savings is per title - not overall. When the system works that same customer spends more over the course of one year (6.95x12 months == 83.40) than a customer that buys 2 games over 1 year (25$ x 2 = 50$) - In a way its a win win scenario. The publisher and the customer both get more.

[cliffski]

to be honest I think the gamepass system works more for the publisher than the developer. When i see how cheaply people get StarLines INC with a gamepass, i think it kind of devalues the game. I'd be very keen on having a minimum price set with publishers if at all possible.

[Fost]

This is wrong.
I'd have to disagree, but I can't back that up with anything other than the bundling comparison, a little insider retail publishing knowledge (which may not apply here) and gut feeling. Note: I've currently not entered such a deal so it's probably best to ignore anything I'm saying.
:)

Generally (I think), when someone is publishing lots of products at an extremely low price, their percentage stays the same and the individual developer's royalty drops hard.
There'll be a hidden trick to it: a set cost removed first from the royalty as a 'servicing charge', or they make a lot of money from recurring subscriptions, and selling your product at a massive discount is just an incentive to get them in the door.

I am aware of how much money quite a few people are making from real, and taking the one who earned the most, and multiplying that by the 40-the number of proucts that seem to really be pushed on the main page (yes-this might be a bad assumption - I may be misinformed, and I may not have gotten the picture from people who are doing really well ) it doesn't come anywhere close to 10 percent of what Real recently paid for gamehouse. So it looks like they are doing pretty well out of the whole deal.

Like, I say though, that's based on no hard facts, and I don't see real as particularly worse than anyone else. Usually there's some little 'trick' to all publishing deals that favours the publisher, and I just find it interesting to work out what's going on.

[Fost]

I'd be very keen on having a minimum price set with publishers if at all possible.
There's quite a lot of laws against this in most countries to do with price fiixing, but the way round that is to ask for a set amount per sales, as opposed to a percentage - then it becomes the publisher's problem. Of course, it's rare you can get such a deal, but I have seen it happen.

I quite agree with the comment about 'devaluing' the game - I wouldn't consider $6.95 to be the correct price point for a game like Starlines as it's quite a 'deep' game from what I've seen and having a higher price point can focus a user on that and make them invest more time in it.

[cliffski]

Surely having a minimum resale price for your game isn't illegal? It would seem strange if that was the case, although I guess you are right, all you need really is a fixed minimum royalty.
My long term strategy is do complex, deep games that dont appeal to the puzzle game crowd, and which i can price at $19.95 as a minimum, and ideally $24.95 or more. I aim to sell to retail and directly online, maybe some select affiliates, but certainly not through the big portals with their insultingly low rates.
I wouldn't drop the shareware price of Starship Tycoon below $15.00 under any circumstances, even in 3-4 years time. With any game thats under $15, it becomes a case of do you want it or not, rather than the price. I can honestly say that with games from $1-$15, the price just isnt an issue. If I wont pay $15 for it, I'm not really going to spend any time playing it.

[Fost]

Surely having a minimum resale price for your game isn't illegal?
Interestingly, I've only ever been told that by publishers, but I think it may be true. That's partly the reason for 'suggested' or 'recommended' retail prices.

With mainstream games, it's the stores that screw the publishers first, and only then do the developers get their screwing
;)

Regarding sales price: there's a chance that the market you are looking at could actually be turned off by the price being too low. I've actually thought before that it probably isn't worth getting my credit card out if it's only for a few dollars. It's always difficult to base any decision on what a developer says though, because we don't usually represent the masses. Then again, I did buy 4 indie games so far this year, so maybe I'm part of the target audience.

[svero]

Like, I say though, that's based on no hard facts, and I don't see real as particularly worse than anyone else. Usually there's some little 'trick' to all publishing deals that favours the publisher, and I just find it interesting to work out what's going on.

Well publishers are going to look out for their own business interests. There's no guarantee that any particular system is going to be good for you. Maybe developers do in practice make less with gamepass. The point I was making wasn't that any particular system is good for developers, but rather that a system like gamepass could theoretically be beneficial to both parties.

[Jack Norton]

Indeed, selling niche titles like Starship for low prices doesn't mean more sales. I think price drop work only with casual games, and I'm not sure works well even in those cases :)

[ggambett]

We aren't currently using RA, [...]
I think you mean RA isn't currently using you :)

I wish I could think about RA the same way you do...

[Jack Norton]

I wish I could think about RA the same way you do...
Heh, Gabriel, come on... a bit of self-esteem... ;)
stop being a publishers-slave!!! :D
you'll make betty 2 and you won't publish it with anyone, unless THEY supply you! :)