Pastract: Noone said Price = Quality, I don’t put nonsense in your mouth, so please avoid that tactics yourself as well. Or if you use such underhanded tactics to bash others, maybe you would get a similar response, then all we would hear about would be your hurt feelings. In this thread I seen quite a few of the people who doesn’t want to read, but want to bash others. And using personal attacks, underhanded tactics. I don’t have to tell what I have to think about you after this, you know that for yourself.
I said it was simple as this: “They sell this game I heard about for $8… What an unusual price”. Checked and seen they expected more sales this way… And things happened differently from their expectations. It raised the question: Is the game judging my strategy based on expectations of the developer? Of course the answer was different: It is a Tycoon game without much business decisions. And a lot of simulation was left out. At $4.99 or $9.99 or even $19.99 I wouldn’t have reached this conclusion.
And it pointed out: The game is bad as simulation because the game developers are nice indie programmers who never thought much about several business decisions, and it shows.
GDT and if it happens GDT II will be a game about selling games, it wants to simulate a market. It wants to simulate a market where certain strategies exist and those strategies are used by companies who grow a lot. To make it a good simulation of the market it should handle most such strategies accurately. Including the strategies behind collectible editions, merchandise, multiple smaller payments instead of bigger ones, etc. Different editions, etc.
And that these options should be in the game and to make sure the game simulates them they should be extensively discussed and researched. Noone said developers should sell DLCs. I told them they should understand why price does matter, how it affects the success of the game and the company AND try to simulate it.
Why price shows the game isn’t good? Because a tycoon game is a business simulation, and it is all about business decisions and the game simulates a market where the game developers doesn’t understand key strategies. And pricing is one of the key strategies.
The price of $8 was unusual and didn’t make sense, so I checked how the game handles budget, pricing, etc. so looked at the screenshot. Look at this screenshot from their own page:
What aren’t on the screenshot?
Say: compare a $60 AAA Tycoon game. And a small business simulation game you can get with subscription to portals, etc. (stuff from Big Fish games) that are easy and cheap to make, etc? Your whole development effort would be different. Compare Sims 3 for PC and Sims 3 for cellphones, you see a very different game of very different complexity and very different price. Pricing and complexity influences income.
It isn’t the only aspect missing: You see an option at Better Dialogues, etc. But you don’t see various side missions, more explanation, etc. If you would be able to select various researched ideas there, and see how much time it takes to develop the game in addition to a budget, you would face an interesting problem: The more features you put, the more outdated your engine, etc. will be when you would release a game. Again complexity and budget can influence release date, etc. But you can delegate features to expansions and DLCs.
You claim DLCs wouldn’t add new experience. Strange. It is quite easy to release a DLC about selling merchandise, about mobile games acting as companion to main game. Also one about books (like Dragon Age and Mass Effect novels), and how your IP (intellectual property) can be monetized in other ways (movie adaptations) and how buying IPs can work. A DLC about stock content and when you don’t need all the assets you made releasing them as stock content can be another topic.
As you see, developer of the game asked why shouldn’t they make money before they make the game perfect. Now I ask the question: Why shouldn’t they improve the game? And why shouldn’t they make money with that?
Between buying a game for $10, and buying a “complete edition” for $10, there is no extra expense for the players, so when you speak about paying extra for nothing new, but the “nothing new” and the “paying extra” could be quite far from the truth.
And I haven’t said that they should sell DLCs. I said they should consider these strategies and implement them as options in the game. Which wouldn’t change costs and would be a new experience. After all, they can decide to use a $19.99 flat price. Or a $9.99 + $9.99
