Is the price of Dominions II a deterrent?

[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 ]

[licker]

Actually what hung me up on these questions was the answer honestly part, though most people would assume that's a part of any question they are asked, when its stated explicetly it tends to signify something else.

I still stand by my reasoning. The question is not perhaps clear enough though, my interpretation is that the game is too cheap for me, since I am willing to spend more on it. There is no mention of what *Shrapnel* should charge, only, is the game too expensive, cheap, just right.

If you are willing to spend more the game is too cheap. That is as absolute a statement as you can get, if you don't like the absoluteness of it, don't blame me, blame the question, which I have twice... oooops now its three times

Anyway, PvK, I agree that the fair price is in some spread, but there is no 'universal' fair price, each of us will have their own break point. And I think by definition the 'fair' price is that personal break point, any higher and you feel the game is unfairly priced. Any lower and the game is again unfairly priced, just that in this case you don't care because you are getting a better deal. This boils down to the 'fair' price being a fixed point, not a spread. If you disagree with that assumption then of course we won't agree on anything else.

Its like buying a used car (which I just did actually) you can figure out what the 'fair' price of the car is, Kelly and a zillion other sites will tell you. However, when you go to negotiate the price you'll go lower than that 'fair' price, the seller will go higher (usually). That mental process doesn't change the fact that there is still a single fair price out there.

Nothing against the poll Saber, like I said, I get all hung up on semantics... especially when I'm board at work

[Watchdog]

Whoa.. my god.. I can't believe the results of this poll. That is crazy.

Actually, upon reflection perhaps it's normal. Generally the people that post on game forums are fans of the game. That being the case they have probably already bought it or pre-ordered it.

I just want to take this to a sheer economic level. I'm average joe strat gamer and I've never heard of this company or their games. I find out because one of my nerd cohorts pass's the word around. He says, "try the demo man,"

So, I download it. Great game I'm thinking. It's really unpolished, quirky, and the interface is like it was designed by a computer and not a person. But, in the guts of the game there is definitely some real quality. Something about the way it balances simplicity with complexity is very addictive.

This makes me think about buying it. I go and check out the ordering page and BAM. I don't IW gets a lot of advetising. Their best hook is their demo. To make money on this game they need to convert from demo to purchasing customer quickly.

If I think twice about it, I'm going to think about other games I want too. Games that my friends might actually buy.

I would really like to buy this game and support this emerging company. I know they got it in them to produce some awesome stuff. But the current price of investment is to rich for my blood. I'm just average joe strat gamer.

[NTJedi]

Sorry for the silly question but I must ask.... How can someone vote on these polls ?? I don't see the polls even listed .

[Saber Cherry]

Go down to the very Last post on the thread (actually the first post, cuz these forums are backwards). Then, you can click on the little vote icon.

[Edi]

I'd pay up to €55 or thereabouts for Dominions II, because I've set that figure as the cap that I'm willing to pay for *any* game I think warrants buying because of quality, but I won't pay more. Of course, if I can get things cheaper, I'll take advantage of it, but price does not matter to me all that much when good games are concerned.

I think the €45 is about the right price, IW deserves every penny it can get from this, and at that price and given the quality of the game, it will be very attractive to fantasy TBS gamers (especially since the market offerings are so paltry these days).

Edi

[apoger]

The current price is too steep.

My best suggestion (still) is for IW to offer the game as a download and sell for $30. They can email a product key to the buyer. Many companies have done this and it works just fine. This would cut the production costs dramatically, while probably offering the same or better profit per unit. The low price and ability to "impulse buy" would increase sales greatly.

That's it, I've said my piece. I won't mention it again. And apologies to Shrapnel for suggesting that IW dodge the middleman.