To be fair, I dont think that. Not directly anway, but you can see the analogy (low "value", meant for a large mainstream audience etc). My point is that a single value does not really tell the reality of the product.
Agreed. As a dev looking to go full-time indie at the end of the year, I am not pleased with this development at all. However, as I said before, the key to success is to produce games that the portals don't have. As long as they are original and fun, they don't have to compete with the portal pricing. Customers will look at portals and think "cheap" games. They'll be excited for awhile, but they'll quickly realize nothing has changed - it's the same few games replicated hundreds of times over, just cheaper now. I've said it before, and I'll say it again - casual customers want something DIFFERENT. That's what many of my Fashion Cents customers tell me when they write to me praising me for the game. For something new, original, and fun, they'll pay more than the $10 price point because there is value in it. And of course, niche markets won't be affected by this price point change at all.
Am I the only one that thinks in dollars / hour of entertainment terms? For example, a 2 hour movie that costs me around $10 is $5 per hour whereas a short casual game that sells for $20 and I play for around 4 hours is also $5 per hour. So in this case, I feel that both experiences are worth about the same thing. However, when you are talking about a game with more depth that gamers play, for example, for 20 hours and still only costs $20, you are now talking about $1 per hour. This already seems really cheap for the customer (at least compared to movies).
You don't actually have to have the lowest price for a game on your website. Some customers will hunt for the best bargains. Not all will. Sales for a game continue to happen even if the same game is being given away free somewhere else. Before automatically adjusting your prices, hang on and see if your sales drop because of the price change elsewhere, or if the people visiting YOUR site have any idea that it's cheaper somewhere else or not.
So the question becomes, do you feel that you are more likely to end up being an "independant" player with your own customers, or a "portal" player with the hope that the portals will achieve a greater reach at the new lower price point. Basically, you either buy into the portal model, or you dont. Its become harder to have both, which is bloody fine by me. Now the smart money is on working harder to find your audience rather than letting someone else find it and charge you for it OR buy into the mass market and hope to get a "hit" that will make the development worthwhile.
Sorry to reply to myself, but I just thought of something. Maybe we need to figure out a way to have "lite" versions of the games we make. So more like the "paperback" version being cheaper than the hardback. So you create a "lite" portal version, which is almost like an upsell. Then you sell the "deluxe" version yourself from your own site. Essentially, selling across two different markets by creating two different products from the same effort. Using the higher traffic lower revenue product to upsell the higher revenue low traffic version. Bah, like I care.
Trlala land it is because you have 5 years experience, you have all your eggs in one basket and are dependent on one title to make or break it, and you're supporting the lower price point praying that it's going to maybe increase units by what ? 5 times for it to be worth while ? Then again, I don't know what successful is for you, it could be just selling 10 units for all I know. so, essentially you ground for being pro is what could be rather than what is ? which is fair enough, though you'd probably be better playing stocks
You think portals are going to go for that ? bearing in mind, don't most forbid adding links to your own site ?
.... having actually *had* a non-portal Deluxe version available from my own site, no portal ever yelled at me for it. The portal copies didn't link back to my site, but sufficiently interested customers found it anyway. Especially if your game is one likely to generate a set of fans discussing strategies and otherwise talking about the game enough for someone to notice the other version and mention it.
Not really, it's possible to do both ... it's all about small income streams and the occasional licensing deal coming together to make a living. My plan is to alternate between casual & indie games as I enjoy both. The question is, what am I going to do about all my unexpected $6.99 games!? : ) Off topic, Zoombapup ... it's that kittens game I told you about coming out next ... I don't think you're going to like it ; )
Bit off-topic, but check out this thread from year 2005: princec: Well, there you go. Happy now? svero: (looks like it took 4 years to get in this point... ) emmanuel:
This is so great to see that Reflexive are still in such a great conditions. And I'm really sorry that most of the developers working on them are in paranoia now. But this was predictable long time ago.
If you don't like comparing to the price of games from other platforms then how about comparing to the price of romance novels, digital album download, movie theater tickets, movie downloads or DVDs. It's not like people are deciding between buying EITHER a digital casual game download OR or Wii ware game. And they are not deciding between EITHER a casual game OR a digital album download. They don't directly compete in that way. But it is all about how much people are used to paying for a small piece of entertaining media whether its an album, movie, book or game casual game.
You got that quote all wrong. I have no issue with people being upset about the price cut. I happen to think it is a good thing and others do not. This is a matter of opinion. Everyone's options will differ and the dramatic change will cause a lot of uncertainty. That is all expected. Most of this thread is a healthy debate about that uncertainty. The paranoia I was referring to had NOTHING to do with the price drop. It was two unrated rumors or fears that were totally unfounded and not backup up by any facts. Those unfounded rumors about royalty rates is what I was referring to as "just paranoia". I do not believe that peoples concerns about the pricing change are "just paranoia". Those are vary valid concerns about real facts.
The problem there is "small". It takes x man-months to develop a title and therefore requires a return of $y to make it profitable. If you can more than double sales at $9.95 you're on to a winner. The trouble is, you don't double sales, it's some smaller fraction like 50% more sales. And the worst bit is, the extra sales are to tightwads. You won't subsequently be able to write a game that took twice as long to make and sell it to the buggers for $19.95. One thing I've discovered is that people who really want your game will pretty much pay anything reasonable for it where reasonable is any number between $0 and $30. Each game has its own sweet spot. Bunging them all in at $9.95 is a) missing the sweet spot for most of the games b) making less money and c) making it harder to make better (or even more) titles Cas
James. I don't like to sound offensive. I don't post too often here. So next time don't start teaching me how to get yours or any other posts. Please.. Please get and point my conclusions as exclusions if this works better for you and your business. Sincerely,