2 Question Regarding AGEOD Leaving Paradox

[keeveek]

It reminds Infinite Interactive (back independant), who can only do alimentary Puzzle Quest games now, hoping doing again Warlords strategy games.
I hope Ageod won't be compelled to such too, if consumers want to wait for their games selling for 1$.

There are people willing to pay 30, and there are only people willing (or being able to) pay 5. The real question is when and how make sales not to hurt overall income, not IF make them.

But if you don't understand a basic principle of doing business, then well... There is nothing I can tell to convience you that demanding 20 EUR for an 5 year old game is not the best idea.

If wargaming is targeted only at wealthy men after their 40s, you shouldn't be surprised you are the underdog...

And if you think that people unable or unwilling to pay $30 will just save some money and buy it for the full price (because it never goes on sale), then you are a dreamer.

[Narwhal]

There are people willing to pay 30, and there are only people willing (or being able to) pay 5. The real question is when and how make sales not to hurt overall income, not IF make them.

But if you don't understand a basic principle of doing business, then well... There is nothing I can tell to convience you that demanding 20 EUR for an 5 year old game is not the best idea.

If wargaming is targeted only at wealthy men after their 40s, you shouldn't be surprised you are the underdog...

And if you think that people unable or unwilling to pay $30 will just save some money and buy it for the full price (because it never goes on sale), then you are a dreamer.

I quite agree with this.

The idea is to capture the willingness to pay of customers.

Suppose there is 1 customer ready to pay for every price from 1 € to 40 € for your game (so 1 for 40€, 1 for 39€ but the guy for 40 € would also buy, ...). The ideal would be each customer to pay to "full maximum" price he is ready to pay.

Unfortunately, you cannot do that, so the best proxy is to set a first price, catch everyone above it, and then slowly lessen the price.

Of course, there are 2 issues with this :
- Customers might increase their perceived value of the game, for instance if they play another AGEOD games. But then it means you have interest in bringing them to value your products by having at least 1 product with an entry price. Also note that as a time got older, the "perceived value" of a game tends to decrease (not as fast for a niche game like AGEOD than for a FPS, but still)
- Some customers might anticipate the lessening of the price and thus, even though they are ready to pay 30 €, wait for the price to drop because they know it will happen. But MOST of those are actually people that "really" value the game 20 €, not people who would pay 30 € in most cases, and as for the rest of them, you can just make sure they are only a complete minority by delaying significantely the time before the price lowers, and making sure you stick to that.

I don't see why AAA publishers with no problem of notoriety, a huge marketing department and no competition on their niche (say the Total War dudes, or Il-2, or Silent Hunter) actually lower their prices, while you could not. The economy, albeit smaller, is the same, + you have the advantage attracting newcomers who would not know your games.

Addendum : I am pretty sure I saw RoP at 2,49 € on Steam, so your 3,XX something might be inaccurate.

[keeveek]

I
I don't see why AAA publishers with no problem of notoriety, a huge marketing department and no competition on their niche (say the Total War dudes, or Il-2, or Silent Hunter) actually lower their prices, while you could not. The economy, albeit smaller, is the same, + you have the advantage attracting newcomers who would not know your games.

Low prices are fighting piracy. I am dead serious now. For example, people in Poland or Russia, earning 400 EUR a month are not going to give 60 EUR for a new Total War game.

With steep discounts, you can reach global markets. People living in regions of the world where spending full 60 on a Total War game is impossible. So they have a choice - keep high price and be 100% sure hardly anybody buys their game after certain period of time, or lower the price, each time more than before, to catch as many people as you can, earning as much dough as you can.

If you do it right, people willing to pay the full price will not wait for sale - because they want to play the game now, not after a year or two when it hits a major discount.

I never said newest AGEOD games should cost less than they do now. But games that are no longer updated, with legacy patches, why not? I don't have much money, but I would patiently wait for a Christmas sale or something like that to buy a new one. Without them, I would rather play something else. And many people will just pirate your games - sad but true...

[Pocus]

A website that shows you historical prices is disrespectful to you? Every market has something like it, do you live under a rock?

I'm sorry if you believe I 'lie in purpose'. I was quoting from memory and I believe it was part of a bundle. Perhaps it was 1.99$ and not 0.99$ (10$ for 5 games perhaps, again I'm quoting from memory and if I get it wrong, this is not me doing some vicious ploy...), so does it changes something to the approach, no I don't think so, it is still a super discounted price.

[Bruit Bleu]

On the other hand, when Paradox Interactive gave up a free copy of WIA to everyone who had suscribed to their newsletter a few years ago, did it bring out hordes of new player discovering this wonderful gem of a strategy game ? It didn't. Giving away free games or selling them out for a couple of bucks is not an efficient solution for very small and specialized markets, even if you're aiming its "niche" public like PI did with their free gift. So the "niche" public will have to buy the "niche" game whatever the cost (Matrix or Shrapnel's strategies), and poor gamers should save up money - like we did (and still do) when we were young wargamers buying old-school boardgame boxes...

The case here is not about gaming industry - we're talking of 2 regulars and a few freelances here at Ageod - but "game-smithing" (or "game-crafting", you know what I mean).
Quality has a cost !

[ERISS]

There is nothing I can tell to convience you that demanding 20 EUR for an 5 year old game is not the best idea.
And if you think that people unable or unwilling to pay $30 will just save some money and buy it for the full price (because it never goes on sale), then you are a dreamer.

Where did I said all that? Your frustration is blinding you.

If wargaming is targeted only at wealthy men after their 40s,

Lol, actually I'm less rich than when 30s. But I earn just the minimum french wage so I'm part of the half richest people of the world, yes. Maybe my Malagasy wife at first thought like you that I was wealthy lol, before I invited her in my small rathole. I'm 'planning' even becoming less rich in my 50s, for my family will expand again.

Low prices are fighting piracy.

Yes. When I was young I paid only some prefered games (1 or 2 per year?), fullprice, and hacked the others. Now I can pay 10 times more games (1 or 2 fullprice per month), and for the others non-prefered I wait for a sale, for I have more money. I didn't 'hack' since 20 years long.

[Honorable Pawn]

This is an interesting discussion.

I was a big Civilization IV fan. Once I found out that Civ V was dumbed down I refused to buy it and started looking for different games. Well, one of the threads I stumbled across on the Civ IV boards led me to the Paradox forums. I did some research but I definitely wasn't about to pull the trigger on a company that I never heard of before so I didn't buy. Subsequently, paradox dropped from my mind.

A few months later I finally dropped my opposition to Steam and downloaded the Steam software. I was a little tight on money at the time so I was looking through the bargain bins. I came across BOA for $9.99. I figured for about the same price as a lunch at McDonalds I might as well give it a shot.

The game was fairly simplistic but well-balanced. I enjoyed it. Once, I beat the first mission on the very last turn--talk about dramatic. It was a nice challenge but it was not a really deep game. Definitely not worth $50. But for $10...it was a good 20-30 hours of fun.

A couple of weeks later I found another game for $10. I was thinking I'll play it for a week beat it and move on. But the game I found was PON. That game was definitely worth more than $10. I'd say I'd spend $25-$30 for it. Regardless of its age.

Now, I have heard of Paradox and Ageod. Now, I am more than willing to give this franchise the benefit of the doubt for a $50-$60 title. That would never have happened without a Steam bargain bin sale. Ageod is, now, on my radar. Now, I am actively seeking Ageod titles. I have a pretty good job so I can drop a little cash on a game. But just because I can afford to buy a game doesn't mean that I spend my money willy-nilly either. It's not about the money to me...it's about the disappointment after titles like Sid Meyers Railroads and Civilization V. That is why I am careful.

Anyhoo...starting to ramble on. My point is that Steam selling your old titles for $10 has me actively pursuing your games. I have heard of Ageod now.

Right now, though, the next big purchase will be EU 4 (Paradox) when it comes out. In the meantime, I'm going to browse your forum and see what else Ageod has to offer.

Thanks for PON.

[Pocus]

Thanks for your interest and support

There is no question that Steam, with its ubiquitous visibility allows developers to be known to the public. That said, pricing policy done tends to be 'fire and forget' sometime, PON was down for a very low price on Steam, I think it was 1.5$ during a day or a week-end.
As someone said also, you often only value what costs you something. Getting PON for 1.5$, given it needs time to be appreciated means most of people bought it, fired it for 10 mn and found it too slow or deep for their taste and did not stick to the game. Paradoxically, if they bought it at 25$, perhaps they would have tried harder and many would probably have enjoyed it much more, past the initial learning curve.

Publisher logic is only to maximize profit. Developers tend to have the weakness, sometime, to also want their game to be appreciated, not only bought

[Honorable Pawn]

So you know...it is much appreciated.

If a game is too cheap then people may assume it's junk. Even though it was cheap I checked out the critics, the forums, etc. I knew it would be solid. Me? I could care less about disco balls and whistles. The meat of the game is of complete importance. That's why people still play Sim City 4 more than 10 years later. So, I think it is definitely important to drop prices to reach a wider audience but you have to be careful.

Strategic Management--typically a required senior year cap-stone course in the college of business covers the strategy of pricing and marketing for niche markets. Lowering price is not considered one of the most effective strategies in a low-supply low-demand market. Droppping price is best suited for high-supply high-demand markets. In a niche-maket it is of most importance to demonstrate to your customer why they need your product. They will pay whatever they can afford if they see value. Those customers will pay top-dollar, regardless, because they know that they can't get the product elsewhere. The pricing methodology of niche-markets tend to be fairly inelastic. The last strategy a company focusing on a niche-market wants to employ is to condition their customer-base to wait until the price drops.

The customer needs to learn that the price will barely drop for a long time so they better get the game now! Keep the price high for as long as possible. Once sales are maximized then unload (years later) the product at a great price all at once. Followed by suspending support. If sales for the new version are good then give away the older version for free in order to attract new customers. The true customers (your bread and butter) won't care because they love the product and they want to support you--in the hope that you will contunie to make the products that they want.

Personally, I have no problem hooking-up designers at full-boat. One of my favorite games is OOTP and I buy every version at release. I tend to reward the good gaming companies. I do this because it best serves my interests but also because a good designer deserves a proper payment in return.

I can see that you put out a quality product so I'll be lurking around these parts.

BTW...nice to meet you.

[vaalen]

Thanks for your interest and support

There is no question that Steam, with its ubiquitous visibility allows developers to be known to the public. That said, pricing policy done tends to be 'fire and forget' sometime, PON was down for a very low price on Steam, I think it was 1.5$ during a day or a week-end.
As someone said also, you often only value what costs you something. Getting PON for 1.5$, given it needs time to be appreciated means most of people bought it, fired it for 10 mn and found it too slow or deep for their taste and did not stick to the game. Paradoxically, if they bought it at 25$, perhaps they would have tried harder and many would probably have enjoyed it much more, past the initial learning curve.

Publisher logic is only to maximize profit. Developers tend to have the weakness, sometime, to also want their game to be appreciated, not only bought

Dear Pocus, I cannot express to you how much I appreciate this game. Nobody who has not learned to play it can possibly appreciate its depth, historical feel, and genius. Yes, genius. My biggest regret about this game is that the price was too low. I desperately want you guys to make enough money so you can keep making and improving these peerless games, and I am willing to pay for it, gratefully.

[Vadim]

Dear Pocus, I cannot express to you how much I appreciate this game. Nobody who has not learned to play it can possibly appreciate its depth, historical feel, and genius. Yes, genius. My biggest regret about this game is that the price was too low. I desperately want you guys to make enough money so you can keep making and improving these peerless games, and I am willing to pay for it, gratefully.

If so, then just buy the other games ! they are very good too. I started with one, then the second two months later, now I own 4 and I will get PON soon ! And I dont spend all of my spare time on my computer + I do have a job. Just that I like to possess such games, they are actually the only one I bother to buy in many years~ and PBEM is great. I dont play solo anymore, that s why I will purchase PON because it looks like a good solo game.

[vaalen]

If so, then just buy the other games ! they are very good too. I started with one, then the second two months later, now I own 4 and I will get PON soon ! And I dont spend all of my spare time on my computer + I do have a job. Just that I like to possess such games, they are actually the only one I bother to buy in many years~ and PBEM is great. I dont play solo anymore, that s why I will purchase PON because it looks like a good solo game.

Vadim, I did buy the other games. Every one of them. Starting with BOA, when Ageod began. And everyone of them was worth more than I paid for it. Much more.

[SonOfAGhost]

The trick to marketing is not to figure out how much you loyal customers will pay for new product/services. Nor even how much new customers will pay for the same. Rather it's how to convince them to spend as much of that budget as possible on your wares, rather than your competitor's, all while your competitors are doing the same.

It's not a simple matter of whether PoN, on it's merits, is competitive with Total War or Civilization, but also how can AGEOD compete in a practical manner with Sega and 2K. I'm sure their small size in the market was a big factor in choosing to work with Paradox. Not a huge brand themselves, but certainly bigger.

Apparently they weren't the right partner. Is Matrix the right partner? Well, I've never heard of them, and the only titles I recognize in their store are AGEOD games so I don't think they're going to help AGEOD turn into the next Blizzard or EA. Then again, I knew some of the titles, but not AGEOD the company prior to the Paradox deal, so at worst they'll get some more exposure. Incremental growth is better than none. There may or may not be a right partner, there's a lot more to companies working together than can be determined from spreadsheets and the usual corporate-babble mission statements etc.

I believe there is such a thing as inherent value. I also believe that it is always trumped by market value when actually trying to buy or sell something.