Gaming

30566 readers

144 users here now

From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!

Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.

See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

gyrfalcon@beehaw.org

Whom@beehaw.org

The_Hunted_One@beehaw.org

chloyster@beehaw.org

remington@beehaw.org

127

The Story of Factorio, the Game that Only Increases in Price (youtu.be)

submitted 1 year ago by Deestan@beehaw.org to c/gaming@beehaw.org

94 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Noughmad@programming.dev 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

To me the issue is the inflation price increase that most recently happened. Typically when a digital good releases in a finished state, it tends to stay at a max price. 30 USD is what Factorio decided on. Then it’s up to 35. Sure its had updates since the full release but why should I have to pay more then the full release price because I waited?

Because when you buy it now for $35 right now, you get more for your money than what I got years ago for $25. Even ignoring the additional content and polishing, you're also getting the benefit of all the testing and bug reporting by early adopters, as well as the bug fixing by the developers.

Typically sales are the reward for those who wait.

This is just the wrong mindset. Why would the developer, publisher, valve, or anyone else want to reward you for not buying their product?

(yes, I know software pricing is a clusterfuck. But the common theme is that the seller wants to extract as much value from every customer as possible, so ideally they would set the price individually for each customer based on the highest amount that customer is willing to pay. Sales after a while are a mechanism for this.)

[–] Sentinian@lemmy.one 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because when you buy it now for $35 right now, you get more for your money than what I got years ago for $25. Even ignoring the additional content and polishing, you're also getting the benefit of all the testing and bug reporting by early adopters, as well as the bug fixing by the developers.

Is that not the opposite? Sure I get less buggy version, but you also have how many years to play compared to me. And you are getting the same game I am when I buy it. You eventually get that content, which one could say is added value to the 25 bucks vs the 35 I spend. You got 10 bucks of content from free essentially.

This is just the wrong mindset. Why would the developer, publisher, valve, or anyone else want to reward you for not buying their product?

It's not the publisher rewarding me. The reward comes from me waiting and getting a cheaper game then those who bought it earlier. As you state

so ideally they would set the price individually for each customer based on the highest amount that customer is willing to pay. Sales after a while are a mechanism for this.

If a game isn't worth X amount of dollars to me then I will wait till the game is Y amount of dollars. If the game never does then I never buy it, meaning the publishers lose, not me.

[–] Noughmad@programming.dev 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Is that not the opposite? Sure I get less buggy version, but you also have how many years to play compared to me. And you are getting the same game I am when I buy it. You eventually get that content, which one could say is added value to the 25 bucks vs the 35 I spend. You got 10 bucks of content from free essentially.

No, you're forgetting the fact that when I bought it, I didn't know what I'll be getting in the future. I lucked out with Factorio, but it could happen that the devs just stopped working on it, I didn't know at the time.

It's not the publisher rewarding me. The reward comes from me waiting and getting a cheaper game then those who bought it earlier. As you state

Who do you think sets the price, if not the publisher?

the publishers lose, not me.

And yet, it's not the publishers complaining about it online.

[–] Sentinian@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No, you’re forgetting the fact that when I bought it, I didn’t know what I’ll be getting in the future. I lucked out with Factorio, but it could happen that the devs just stopped working on it, I didn’t know at the time.

That's the risk you paid for. My criticism is price increase after full launch. If early access game goes up in price when it fully releases that is a different thing.

Who do you think sets the price, if not the publisher?

The publisher sets the price. They put a game on sale to make more money. I buy the game on sale. I get the game as the reward. The publisher gets money they wouldn't have otherwise.

And yet, it’s not the publishers complaining about it online.

I'm a random person who has no reputation to defend. I could just as easily start over online and nothing would hurt me. The publisher has a reputation to keep. They need to keep making money. Other then that, complaining is the way to for the consumer to get thoughts out about practices. I don't like a game going up in price due to "inflation" and a game never going on sale therefor I will communicate that.