So, I've been talking to a friend a while ago about the Steam Sale. We had a debate about Steam's now inexistent flash sales. He tells me that flash sales are very anti-consumer, and that he got this opinion fromTBand that he's absolutely right.
I told him, seriously? When has a sale been anti-consumer? Ever?
Where do you side in this debate, /v/? Do you agree, or disagree on flash sales?
He says it's anti consumer because you have to check Steam all the time if there's a flash sale going on. That's pants on head retarded. You do that with ANY kind of sale.
He then tells me it's bad how one hour you buy something, the next hour it was on flash sale, so you actually lost money from the transaction. Well, of course I told him, that's how fucking sales work. Sales are sudden most of the time.
I don't understand this kind of logic.
There's simply no need for a flash sale as a developer could simply sell the game at the flash-sale price for the entire sale.
However, the real issue with Steam sales these days is that the game prices are being kept high between sales just so they are brought in line with the discount. Compare what a game costs on Amazon without discount and then look at the Steam sale - often only the discount on Steam brings the game down to what it costs on Amazon (or other retail sites) throughout the year. If Amazon then ever has a discount on the game it's much cheaper than it would ever be on Steam during sales.
The whole issue here is mostly that Steam is considered by uninformed consumers to be the go-to place to buy games when in reality many other sources offer better deals.
It sucks because devs will never put the game for 75-80% due to the fact they are FORCED to have one discount for 2 weeks
Who in his right mind will do that?
So yeah, I miss old sales
>>343054089
That may be true, but the argument that it is "anti consumer" is ludicrous. It's irrational, with flash sales and without flash sales could be the same price, but they are not bad for the consumer in any way.
We don't even know if that really is the case, it could be lesser, or could be equal in discount given.
>>343054125
Absolutely agree, this change has made discounts worse and and the whole sale thing less interesting. I don't even check if there is anything on sale I want anymore.
Flash sales/daily sales didn't even matter, because on the last day on the sale, everything featured became their flash sale price.
>>343054428
Yeah, the sale these days are 80-90% off.
>>343054247
Well, a flash-sale is somewhat dishonest towards the consumer as those who buy the game without the flash sale would pay a higher price than those who buy it during it and there's no technical reason for it. It's not like the dev doesn't make a profit either way. Why should someone get the same product cheaper than someone else just because he bought a minute too early or too late? A game on Steam is a digitally, endlessly (re)producable set of data - there's no shortage in supply that would warrant a higher price.
Would you approve of a shop selling a product cheaper to your neighbours because they came 5 minutes earlier while you now have to pay higher prices for the same product? You'd probably just walk out and go somewhere else but that's pretty hard with video games as there aren't too many games of a certain type at any given time you could fall back on to saturate your demand.
This becomes even more problematic when games are only sold via Steam and as such there can't be any competition in pricing - it's a monopoly for a certain individual product and you probably realize how easily any form of monopoly can be abused.
Flash sales are a pretty obvious attempt to push people into buying shit they don't really want. If a sale lasts two weeks you have time to think about if you want games or not. If a sale lasts 24 hours and you only get around to checking it when it's half over you might not have time to properly consider if you actually want the game since you're kinda rushed.
I wouldn't go so far as to call them anti consumer though. I mean, it's a sale. Sales are nice.
>>343054659
As I have said, I do not understand your logic. That is how sales work. You cannot say they are being dishonest about flash sales, because either with or without it, they'll sell it at either the same price, or maybe even less than that. I don't even know if flash sales are random in nature.
It's like saying "Hey, I bought this game when it wasn't on sale (because I do not know the exact time when the Steam Summer Sale will happen), but the next day, it was on sale, so in conclusion, I lost money and it is therefore anti-consumer.
No. That's not how it works.
>>343053593
>sell games for 50% off.
>haha, no, that makes too much sense! They're 40% off, but we'll sell them for 50% off if you keep an eye on steam every fucking day for the next two weeks.
>enjoy the flash sale minigame!
So now they have everything available like a real story. Dropping flash sales was almost as good as them finally allowing refunds, and by good I mean 'less retarded than they were a decade ago.'
I mean, hey, it took them like 11 years, but they finally made it.
>>343055184
>40%
>50%
Stop making shitty analogy. Flash and dailies often were 75-80% off. Take a look at Dishonored, it just 50% off. 2 years ago it was -75% on GOTY
Take a look at which games are now 80-90% off? Shitty indied nobody cares about.
>>343055249
I bought Warband 80% off. It was a pretty good deal.
Also Civ V at 95% off.
>>343055249
The games I've wanted to buy are all 70-90% off right now.
I don't know what you're bitching about, anon. Maybe you should go buy steam keys from a better store if Valve is refusing to give you a deal that you're willing to grab?
>>343053593
>Michlan
Huh, that used to be one of my usernames on some site.
I just miss flash sales because it added a level of entertainment to the whole thing. I haven't participated in the steam sale at all since it went away.
>>343055303
Warband was 90% last summer.
>Also Civ V at 95% off.
It is not a sale discount, it is a bundle discount, new addition by VOLVO
You can't buy bundle as a gift it is personalized
>>343055360
>The games I've wanted to buy are all 70-90% off right now.
List them
>>343055303
Warband came out over SIX FUCKING YEARS AGO and Civ hits that point in 2 months
Older steam sales had 80% sales on games that had only been out two years
>>343054939
>You cannot say they are being dishonest about flash sales, because either with or without it, they'll sell it at either the same price
But that is precisely not how it works. Back in the days of flash sales a game would be on standard-discount at say 50% during a sale and then be sold at 75% discount during the few hours of the flash sale. Why is that? There's nothing that changes supply/demand from one moment to another during the sale. Then why change the price?
I'd argue that most actual sales in those days happend from the flash sales discount. Why not just put the game on a sale-long 75% discount then and be done with it? Either there's demand for a game of this type at that price or there isn't.
We also know that consumers are easily tricked into buying something they don't need/want because it's "extremely cheap for a short time, buy while supplies last" - not that supply matters for software but the whole idea of pressure makes people buy impulsively (with a lot of regret). I'm sure you heard of people who bought games because they were on sale and regretted it and never played them. It's not like that's great for consumers.
>I lost money and it is therefore anti-consumer.
Again, this precisely what happens. It's related to how our finance system works at its core. When you can spend 5$ to get something (done) that would usually cost you 10$ it means you can put the remainder of 5$ to other use - at the very least accumulating interest in your bank account or saving up for another 10$ purchase in the future. Now if you buy the same product for 10$ those potentially remaning 5$ are gone. If this happens from one minute to another it does turn in fact into an economic loss.
You'd be right when we didn't have interest and interest on interest but that's just not how our finance system works - and as such how we validate the legitimacy of a financial investment (including a purchase).
>>343055446
There's not a lot, because I don't sit around for 3 years and wait for that one flash sale that makes the game as cheap as I feel it deserves. I just go buy shit on other sites.
But games like KOF 13, director's cut deus ex human revolution, metal gear revengeance, and skullgirls were all at a price I thought reasonable, so I bought them.
>>343055650
>There's not a lot, because I don't sit around for 3 years and wait for that one flash sale that makes the game as cheap as I feel it deserves. I just go buy shit on other sites.
>that backpedaling
>>343055441
>Huh, that used to be one of my usernames on some site
Well, that very interesting, because there are some sites where I can't use it.
I never thought it was a common username.
>>343054927
You can use the same logic with any kind of sale, bottomline, it is still a sale, therefore, good for the consumer.
>>343054927
>>343054927
IRRELEVANT NOW because refund system exist
>>343055716
I understand that you're really upset that I don't take you or your butthurt that there are no flashsales seriously, but to me, flashsales were year long.
I didn't spend full steam retail on street fighter 4. I got it from a key site for like 5 bucks. Same with all other games that pop up that I think look good.
But now that steam has real sales and real refunds, I'm not opposed to buying games from Gaben directly. Do you understand what I'm saying?
I'm sorry whatever game you wanted isn't sold by people who are interested in selling their shit, but the games I wanted are. Again, go look outside of steam. Don't fucking sit and wait for a sale if you actually want a particular game, you idiot.
>>343055834
Flash sales don't exist anymore either. We're obviously talking about the past.
>>343056016
That's my point. FLASH sales right now wouldn't be "anti consumer". If they bought something on a whim they can refund it anytime. Your point no longer stands
>>343055518
>But that is precisely not how it works. Back in the days of flash sales a game would be on standard-discount at say 50% during a sale and then be sold at 75% discount during the few hours of the flash sale. Why is that? There's nothing that changes supply/demand from one moment to another during the sale. Then why change the price?
Again I do not get your logic, the reason why they lessen the price is to increase demand. That's the use of flash sales. Hell, that is how sales in general work. There is no plausible way this reason can be anti consumer. It's like saying, if supply is unlimited, then why make a sale in the first place and not just sell it at the discounted price as the standard price?
>I'd argue that most actual sales in those days happened from the flash sales discount.
The thing is, we don't really know that. They could either sell it at 20% off either with or without the flash sale. Probably not more, but you get the idea.
>Again, this precisely what happens.
Explaining the meaning of economic loss to me, yet you do not tell me why it is anti-consumer. That's like saying, all sales are anti-consumer. In fact, if we follow your logic, it's a loss beyond your foresight, beyond your control and of your own decision, of course you lose money but it is not Steam's fault.
It's like speculation. So, if you lose in speculation does that mean the system cheated you? No. It does not.
NEETs will defend the idea of flash sales because sitting on your ass all day starring at your computer screen obsessively is fairly standard faire to them.
Normal, succesful people will hate it because they have shit to do and prefer the new system where you can just check in once at the start of the sale and then easily gauge the best deals.
It isn't any deeper than that, what system you prefer depends entirely on you being another shit-eating loser or not, end of discussion.
>>343056486
>Normal, succesful people will hate it because they have shit to do and prefer the new system where you can just check in once at the start of the sale and then easily gauge the best deals.
But you are fucking retarded moron nigger.
FLASH sales had great deals for a limited time but outside of FLASH sales the game had normal discount that was the same as of right now.
WHAT the fucking difference?
>2014 sale
>Dishonored during whole sale is 50% off, FLASH is 75% off
>2016 sale
>Dishonored during whole sale is 50%
FUCKING RETARD
>>343056486
Some games that were -75% on flashsales before in current sale are around -65%. Defend this.
>>343053593
The flash sales are gone because they have a return policy now.
>>343056768
Yes, I see this as the biggest reason.
I could see the argument in favor of removal of flash sales if games were actually significantly discounted through the whole sale.
But as it is, most of games are priced similarly to last sale without flash or daily deals. Isn't current situation significantly worse for consumer?
flash sales were stupid and frustrating
with the new system you know exactly how much something will cost for the entirety of the event
>>343056768
>>343056814
Wasn't one of the features of return policy that was highlighted being able to return a game if it got a significant discount soon after purchase?
>>343056954
yeah and after glancing ats hitty 40-50% off you put your wallet back and go away
Before that you could assume that youcan expect -75-80% at some point
it is not hard to get your tablet or smartphone and check store every x hours for a deal you want
>>343056995
all it did was clog up their customer service
>>343057051
can't clogwhat does not exist
>>343054089
You've clearly never heard of an impulse buy. The only reason flash sales are no longer viable is because honoring returns during the sale and having flash sales have any meaning became mutually exclusive.
>>343054659
the digital format makes checking the sale price easy enough and the windows that flash sales had were large enough that it was never an issue of being too early or late.
all you needed to do was not be impatient if you were cheap enough to always want the absolute best price.
>never buy the game you want unless it's on flash sale, daily deal, or it's the last day of the sale.
that was the golden rule, and checking the shop over and over was exciting in it's own way.
The system we have now isn't as exciting but it forgoes the waiting entirely. You want a game during the sale? buy any time you like. You have until the end of the whole sale to decide if you want it without fear that you'll miss it's best price and whenever you do make the decision you're rewarded with instant game
The point of a sale is to attract customers, to make people spend money when they otherwise would not have.
help me out guys, am i right in thinking that steam sales are so shit now because developers got mad at valve for selling their games at less than $5
>>343057331
Definitely not. Games kept getting heavy discounts through multiple sales.
It's not like Valve decides what prices they give to games, devs themself submit discounts.
Even with heavy flash sales, some people did buy games with featured, regular discounts. The reason we don't have as steep discounts now is that devs figured that people would buy the games regardless, and heavier discounts would loose money for them. And since nobody else would be putting 80% discounts, why sould they?
>>343057331
No, it went to shit because developers largely don't want to offer their games at over 50% off the entire sale, which is now what they're forced to do.
They used to be very proactive in offering those daily and flash sales to ensure that there were days with amazing deals. Now they can't, due to the return policy.
>>343056486
>checking Steam 3 times a day somehow equates to sitting on your computer all day
You retards are really grasping at straws to try to prove that getting rid of flash sales was a good thing
