Is the price of Dominions II a deterrent?

[licker]

Heh, I voted that they should charge more

From a "maximize your returns" point of view I really think they should, but I don't know nearly enough of the costing details from Shrapnel, nor do I know what margin they find acceptalbe.

What is strange is that many people have voted that they'd pay more, but that they think the game is priced right or is too expensive... you can't have it both ways you know

[Saber Cherry]

I think I mentioned before, I bought a Playstation ($100) just so I could play Xenogears ($40). But it took me a year to decide on that course of action, during which time the PS went from $150 to $100. And even though I "only" got 99 hours from Xenogears (as opposed to hundreds from the free Dom I demo) I don't at all regret it. So: my time is worth more that $1.40/hr .

But price is still relevant to me, so assuming I had not already played Xenogears, I would not buy it or Dominions 2 for, say, $300... even though it might be cost-effective... because I would feel gouged. In fact, that's why I haven't bought Xenosaga+PS2 - that, and the fact that it's not as good as Xenogears

-Cherry

[Saber Cherry]

Originally posted by licker:
What is strange is that many people have voted that they'd pay more, but that they think the game is priced right or is too expensive... you can't have it both ways you know

The wording of a question is very important. Consider those questions carefully, and I think you'll see why people have voted that way. I did, for example

[licker]

Let me clarify something, that has to do with Sabers request that you answer honestly

If you voted that you would pay more than $45 for Dom2 and also that it is correctly priced at $45 (or too expensive) you have not answered honestly.

If you would pay more, than it reasons that they should have charged more. Now that's got nothing to do with the intrinsic value of the game, other than to each of us individually. I would have paid $50, so Shrapnel should have charged $50 for me, of course its a bit more complicated than that if you are Shrapnel and trying to figure out how to sell the most games with the best margin, but that wasn't the question now was it?

[Saber Cherry]

A person might say the game is priced correctly because they feel the price is fair. For example, I feel that the price of flour is "fair". If I was hungry, I would pay 5 times as much as it costs now, even though I think the current price is fair.

[licker]

Originally posted by Saber Cherry:
A person might say the game is priced correctly because they feel the price is fair. For example, I feel that the price of flour is "fair". If I was hungry, I would pay 5 times as much as it costs now, even though I think the current price is fair.

Fair enough (when we're talking about survival), but we're talking about a computer game. If you *honestly* (and I stress that word since you used it the poll) think the game is worth $45 then you won't pay more than $45. Since people apparently think that the game is worth more than $45 they should also think that the price is too low (but be happy about it )

Its a question of absolutes really. Some people won't pay $45 for the game so its overpriced, some people will pay $45 so its fairly priced, some people will pay more, so its underpriced. How else can you have it?

Again, that's why I questioned the inclusion of Question #1, if you answer it honestly for yourself then you are forced into the above logic. Ahh hell, this is a pointless arguement anyway, though I can't resist squabbleing over semantics for some reason

[PvK]

licker, you are assuming a principle which not everyone shares: that everyone feels the price of a game should be what they themselves would pay for it.

I think $30-50 is about right for the current market, given the quality of the game and other prices by independent game publishers of good niche games (e.g. Shrapnel, HPS, Matrix). I give Shrapnel some credit for knowing what price point makes sense for them, and vote that it's not too expensive - it seems about right.

That isn't at all in conflict with the fact that I would (and essentially, have) paid more than that (I bought Doms I as well, and would be willing to pay more). Just because I would be willing to pay more, does not mean (to me) that Shrapnel should charge more for it. I don't hold any principle that sellers should charge as much as possible. Nor do I think that my own willingness to pay a certain amount determines what Shrapnel should set its price at.

Indeed, although I would pay more, I think perhaps Shrapnel might do well to charge $30 or less, not because it isn't worth $45, but because it might make many more sales, and earn them more money overall. But again, I don't know all the stuff they know about costs, margins, past sales, etc.

PvK

[ October 30, 2003, 22:18: Message edited by: PvK ]