Sliding price scale game buying

[FAST6191]

Never seen it done though frankly I have not looked.

The idea.
"I will wait a year and buy the GOTY release"
"I will wait until it comes out as part of a deal"

Similar phrases get floated around a lot.

What if instead you said
Pay ?? or more and get it as soon as/at beta and everything afterwards.
Pay less than ?? and get it a bit further down the line or just the launch game plus the usual free updates.
Sliding scale all the way down to tiny margins after bandwidth costs. Maybe choose locked or unlocked.

Devs/pubs would be able to shake things around (less, more, alternative offers, combo deals) if they want.

In general marketing there is a term along the lines of "something is only worth what someone is willing to pay", as the one doing the selling you want the most from everybody but people will bitch, piss and moan if they think they are getting a different deal to someone else. However if people are enjoying the silly investments that are kickstarters, paying coffee places so they can pay by phone and other such things I could see it working. Naturally you would want to have incentives for certain behaviours, I am not quite sure people would deal with it right away for some games to trickle in down the line so you would probably frontload it somehow.
It might also be a reasonable way to do something like libraries from a developer.

Being a cynical bastard when it comes to money everything I am really not inclined to put my money someone I am not earning interest for it.... though interest of a sort (virtual service coins) could be an idea. However many others either have money to burn or are slightly less discerning with their money.

If people are willing to wait then maybe you could do something like. I would probably do something like a escrow for the game.

Would it work do you reckon? Service profits would be made either by charges (either way), interest on investment pool or something along those lines.

Going a bit more long term then user investment pool, auctions,"make an offer" and other things could be considered.

 

[Taleweaver]

Erm...sorry, but I've read this thread twice and I honestly do not understand what you're trying to say. This isn't the first time I've noticed this, but I usually manage to make sense out of it. But this time...

It has something to do with games becoming cheaper as they grow old (and in this day and age, video games tend to grow old FAST). And some ideas for publishers...I think. But beyond that...

Look, I'm honestly trying to make sense of it, but I have no idea what it is you're proposing.

 

[FAST6191]

Look, I'm honestly trying to make sense of it, but I have no idea what it is you're proposing.

The very short version
I am a game publisher, I have "brand new shiny game 4 - the reckoning" just finished or about to be.
I stick it up on a service like the one proposed starting at say $100 USD.
You decide 100 is too much but would part with 10 for the game. 10 USD goes out of your account there and then.
Whining would ensue if the 100USD crowd got wind of someone getting something for less at the same time so you do not get the game until such a time as either the initial equation reduces the price of the game to $10 USD (it may be some time) or the game publisher decide to manually drop the price below 10 USD (or you decide to add some more to the pile and bring it above the rate of the day).

I agree they grow old fast but they do not go towards nothing.

 

[EyeZ]

So you pay $10, but don't get the game until it's market price has been reduced to $10?

If think that is what you're saying

If that is indeed what you are implying, then gamers would probably have a long wait for the game, when they could of been happier waiting for a price cut & paying that price which maybe above $10.

 

[Qtis]

On the idea, I kinda like it. I could see something working in regards to a slider for "pay what you want for X features". Humble Bundle, GoG, Steam and the likes succeed in an interesting way for old games (and even new ones in some cases) with sales or bundles with regular game for X, pay over Y for more features (DLC).

There are games I would have paid more to have early access. Then again, there are games, that I liked, but would not have paid more than the price I paid for them (mostly due to limited gameplay in single player/co-op. Online multiplayer usually requires too much time to enjoy, time, which I don't have). A huge backlog does magic for wanting new games. If CoD/BF/etc multiplayer isn't counted into the equation, there are rarely games that are instant must-haves apart from the "Yay GTAV!"-factor.

 

[Taleweaver]

The very short version
I am a game publisher, I have "brand new shiny game 4 - the reckoning" just finished or about to be.
I stick it up on a service like the one proposed starting at say $100 USD.
You decide 100 is too much but would part with 10 for the game. 10 USD goes out of your account there and then.
Whining would ensue if the 100USD crowd got wind of someone getting something for less at the same time so you do not get the game until such a time as either the initial equation reduces the price of the game to $10 USD (it may be some time) or the game publisher decide to manually drop the price below 10 USD (or you decide to add some more to the pile and bring it above the rate of the day).

I agree they grow old fast but they do not go towards nothing.

Okay...now I get ya.

It certainly has good parts. Plenty of gamers who are interested in new games but "not at that price", so this sort of deal (delayed pre-ordering? A year after launch reservation?) would certainly increase some revenue.


The major disadvantage is that it will force publishers to give a time the delayed game will be avail...redeemable. It's not right and possibly even illegal to say "you'll pay this amount now and we'll give you the game when we feel like it". And that may take the incentive away to buy the game at release date. Why would you pay full price now if you know in advance that it'll be half-price a year from now?
Also...prices are usually slashed because they don't sell anymore at full price. Knowing in advance when the price is going to drop is going to diminish the demand for it. I doubt many people are going to buy the game 11 months after release if a quick google shows that it'll drop in price a month later.

This isn't to say it's a bad idea. It just needs some careful tweaks and planning. Especially if this becomes popular or even the norm. I think it'll draw many people away from buying at launch (it will start with "I'll just play through my backlog", and end with "hey...<other game> is about to be given since I paid for it a year ago. I'll just buy a delayed version and play that previous game in the mean time!"), and that isn't the intention. To be honest, I think it's the launch day buyers who have to be rewarded for their effort. After all, the delayed buyers already pay less and have all the bugfixes since then. They shouldn't get ALL the benefits.

 

[FAST6191]

Oh yeah there would be some form of equation governing it so the "latest possible delivery for X amount" would be part of the system, likewise it would probably be held in escrow as well against dev/pub bankruptcy or asset sale.

It seems like you and I think somewhat alike when it comes to money Taleweaver (cynical and largely risk averse), however I already see people both pay for things way in advance (stuff like kickstarters, especially into the crazy money and utterly pointless perks side of things, and the coffee thing) and delay purchase for the inevitable game of the year editions, "wait for second hand" or the heavily discounted versions of the initial releases that appear around the same time as GOTY. To that end I reckon there could be a niche.

"11 months after release if a quick google shows that it'll drop in price a month later"
Does it not already happen that way? I can already search for reprints, "platinum hits" and the like as well as the GOTY/gold stuff. Similarly prices alone seem to follow a fairly predictable curve as it is.

If that is indeed what you are implying, then gamers would probably have a long wait for the game, when they could of been happier waiting for a price cut & paying that price which maybe above $10.

$10 was just an example number and you could probably pick any number you liked. Happier... it sounds like you are as cynical as I am with regards to this and yeah the lag between first investment and ultimate release would be hard. Spin it with some nonsense like supporting the game company (I figure that is how the season passes, some instances of preorders and odd backlash against second hand games came to pass), add in a gambling element (we have 30000 people at the $10 mark, the game is still $20 if you buy in new but the oldest/random 1000 of the $10 will get it fulfilled), add in offers (chuck in an extra $5 and where you would have got the base game you will also get this expansion pack), loyalty type things (you have already had 90% of our previous titles, for such dedication your offer will be increased by $? over what you put in) and frontload the initial deal (we will give you one of the prequels to this game and the game when it releases at the price you want) and you will hopefully take the sting out of it.