Well, /v/?
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /v/ - Video Games
You are currently reading a thread in /v/ - Video Games
Well, /v/?
>>324049941
Preferable to whom?
>>324049941
I pirate all games and bring back the profit to 0
>>324049941
>games costs $1m+ to make
>games rake in $100-$110
>companies bankrupt
Sounds like neither scenario was successful
>>324049941
>fist scenario
>3/5 like the game and suggest to friends
>realistic case 3 people each, can easily be more
>9 new people are interested in the game(might buy or pirate)
>second scenario
>best case the one person likes it
>3 new people are interested BEST CASE
So second scenario has a really slow spread
>5 people that might have fun
vs
>1 people that might have fun
This is not a hard choice.
>>324049941
One person buying a $110 game is preferable.
Realistically, though, only the wealthiest and/or craziest people will buy the $110 game, where as significantly more people will buy the game at $20, turning a substantially higher profit.
But you already knew that, OP.
>>324049941
A million people get a $110 game for $0.
>>324049941
Is there even a situation where selling one game at a higher price is preferable?
Depends on whatever the game is shit or not
>>324049941
5 people because they will get more from the DLCs.
>>324050258
This.
>5 people enjoy the game and share their experience with friends who then buy the game too
>a lonely friendless loser goes on to fap to his chinese porn game he bought for 110 bucks
Gee, I wonder.
le pepe wins cuz le green meme face
trips speak le truth
can't argue with chanspeech
le green face : 3
>>324049941
Are you talking in a business scenario? Like, I'm the game publisher?
Because if you're offering me the promise that 5 times more people will buy a game at less than 1/5th the price, obviously the $110 is better.
But in reality, I dont think the exchange rate is that promising. I think a game will sell more if it's cheaper, and if lots of people buys it, more people will buy it just because there friends have it.
if trips the thread gets deleted
>>324050759
Also, first scenario has more people playing the game which means a longer lifespan for it if it depends on online play or user creations. And longer lifespan always means better sales, just imagine how much more something like Titanfall had sold in the long run if it had 5x more players.
the first, because more people play the game and it encourages companies to not rip future customers off.
>>324052596
>just imagine how much more something like Titanfall had sold in the long run if it had 5x more players.
it would have sold like 5x times more.
People pay 110 bucks for a videogame?
>>324052758
Australians. They deserve it.
The former, assuming that the game is worth a damn.
5 people spreading word of mouth means more potential sales than 1 person.
>>324052717
Holy shit, that's a huge profit increase. Why don't all companies just make more people play their games? Easy money.
>>324052846
Not to mention that the one person is probably some shut-in weeb who nobody would take a game rec from seriously.
DOES THIS MEAN THAT IF YOU SELL A GAME FOR ONE OR TWO BACKS IT WILL MAKE TRILLIONS? DON'T BE NAIVES
>>324053085
This.
Cheaper game price doesnt mean more people buy it.
Heck, if Nintendo showed anything, it shows people think cheaper priced games are of lower-quality.
>It's a $30 game so it's probably half as good as a $60 game, why bother?
>>324049941
On steam that is:
>(20 x 0.70) x 5 = 70 dollars
>110 x 0.70 = 77 dollars
The 20 dollar game will outsell the 110 dollar game over time however as more people will be drawn to buying it due to it's lower cost.
>>324053085
Yes
One at $110 maximizes NPV assuming that these are the only sales.
>>324053243
when has that ever been shown?
3ds games regularly sell better than wii u
>>324049941
>preferable
Define your terms. Preferable to who? What is the desired outcome?
>>324053243
>tfw i keep falling for this meme and keep paying full price for nintendo games
>>324053045
Who is that laughing girl on the second row between ritsu and mollusk? She's fuggin cute.
>>324050759
Your math sucks. The original group of buyers was a 5:1 ratio. If you are doing an "all else being equal" comparison, why shouldn't the same ratio persist with the friends of the buyers?
> 5 buyers spread the game to 5*X of their friends
> Of these new potential customers, 5*X*r of them like it enough to buy it
> income from new buyers is 20 times this == 100*X*r
> 1 buyer spreads the game to 1*X of their friends
> Of these new potential customers, 1*X*r of them like it enough to buy it
> income from new buyers is 110 times this == 110*X*r
as a business grad student
Former, always
I wouldn't mind paying premium for games if it meant devs could make actually good games and use the price point as a casual barrier.
>>324049941
the case cost 5$
>>324053449
Maybe I should've been more specific.
When I say $30, I mean a WiiU game. Meaning it's half the price of a typical full MSRP WiiU game.
3DS, $40 is the typical full MSRP.
Multiple people would be better. I mean say only 3/5 like it and those three recomended it to 5 of their own friends. Where as one person might not like it an then no one gets recommended. also even if that one dude liked it and recommended it how many fucking people would be willing to drop 110 bucks on a game just because their friend said "it was good"?
>>324053667
But the cheaper wii u games are usually worse than full price games.
>>324053674
No it doesn't work like that, it's the same as the original scenario, see
>>324053552
A $20 game with $90 divided in to multiple cheap DLCs.
>>324049941
considering how expensive advertisement is, I would consider the first one the best option, since that is 5 people who will talk about your game, also that's 5 costumers who may later buy the same dlc (you won't sell the same dlc 5 times to the same person), or 5 expansion packs. etc.
>>324053539
Her name is also Rin, which I believe is the point. She's the lead female character of Bunny Drop.
Watch the anime. Don't read the manga.
>>324053243
>Cheaper game price doesnt mean more people buy it.
actually...thats exacly what i means
>>324049941
Depends on running costs, whether there are network effects, and so on. Many stores always take a minimum cut and then a percentage for example (like with credit cards), so selling fewer units at a higher price has fundamentally lower overhead. On the other hand, in a multiplayer gamer often playerbase itself is key to attracting new customers down the road. So the more people who get their hands on it the better. A larger playerbase might also be more suitable for trying to get more money out of via future expansion packs, add-ons, DLC, etc. The right strategy will vary depending on game type, expected audience, and so on.
Lots of niche JP stuff does very well at a high unit price for example, because they have fundamental ceilings on interest. Most people aren't going to be interested at any price, period, it's not an economic curve, and conversely those who love that niche are willing to pay higher prices for it. So it makes a lot more sense to sell fewer, top quality fancy packages at premium prices.
On the complete total opposite extreme of course is F2P stuff, which has zero cost of entry, tries to build as gigantic a playerbase as possible, and then hook in some percent.
>>324053815
>Worse
I wouldnt say worse. Also, Amiibo Festival is $60
They just offer less content
Captain Toad for example is a great game. But it's also short.
Fuck nintendo and let's go the hypothetical route. Would Halo 3: ODST sell 3X more if it was only the ODST expansion (no Halo 3 MP) at $20 instead of $60?I dont think so cause halo was at it's peak in popularity then so everyone bought it anyways
>>324053904
Yes and no. The first option does indeed have the game "spreading" to more people, but the people the game spreads to is worth fewer dollars. See >>324053552
shitpost sHitp౦st thats a shitpost rightthere rightthere if i do ƽaү so my self i say so thats what im talking about right there right there (chorus: ʳᶦᵍʰᵗ ᵗʰᵉʳᵉ) mMMMMᎷM HO0OଠOOOOOOଠଠOoooᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒ Shitpost
>>324049941
first option.
you now have 5 potential DLC customers.
>>324049941
>five cancer casuals buy some shitty budget game
>incentivise more publishers to shit out bad games
>industry gets worse
versus
>one dedicated fan buys the premium edition of his eagerly await niche game
>niche dev significantly rewarded
>casuals move on to movies/music and leave videogames alone
Second scenario is the best.
>>324053552
the "r" of the 110$ game is gonna be less than the "r" of the 20$ game because less percentage of people will be willing to pay a more expensive game
therefore there's a point after which you can't go more profitable by increasing the price
Five people, because there's a better chance of people talking about the game and spreading its exposure than just the one. I'll take a larger potential audience over a slightly larger profit margin, as that's probably better in the long run.
>>324053953
>>324049941
one person buying the game at 110 and then the other 5 buying it once it goes on sale
>>324054231
>niche dev sells one copy
>goes bankrupt
>only the one fan cries
>5 casuals don't even notice
>>324054247
Fair point!
only retards buy games for 100 dollars.
>>324049941
Short term as in just those people, the one guy buying for 110$. Long term? The 5 people as you've got 4 more people that are potential buyers for your sequel, DLC or any other paid content you could think of.
>>324049941
The first. It has a far higher chance of both building a larger audience, allowing future games more chance at selling, and also a lower price point lowers expectations, this increasing chances at the customer being more satisfied.
This is of course under the assumption both games are the same, with the same money model ala buy the game and you get everything.
>>324049941
Depends on how much DLC the first fuve people buy.
There should be a product made, priced and marketed towards Ultra Rich people. At least a paywall or barrier of entry to keep people in that lucrative demographic separate from the common masses. It should be a console that uses the most expensive components available and it should have a annual subscription fee in the ten digits. I'm telling you, it would be very successful. There are care manufacturers that only make less than half a dozen units annually. Why would a game console be any different?
>>324055206
Because nobody is impressed by an expensive console.
>>324055206
>It should be a console that uses the most expensive components available
To run the modern shit currently on the vidya market?
