Name Your Price

[Vettona]

Sorry if its already been mentioned just had inspiration. Basically the idea is a feature that allows buyers to claim a price they would want to pay for a game. This does nothing other then provide the developer info on what buyers consider would be a fair price for their game, maybe even allow this feature post purchase as well. then developers get data on where buyers sit in the price point they are willing to pay for said game. this would allow them to choose sale prices that would capture a wider audience, and allow buyers to have a voice on game value.

[MatheusPese]

Most people would just put a cheap price.

[rawWwRrr]

Originally posted by MatheusPese:

Most people would just put a cheap price.

Or no price.

The idea has merit. The gaming community does not.

Value needs to be determined by the publisher. They know what the investment is behind the development and how much to charge to earn a return on that investment. The end user can't do that.

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

Devs already have an idea from posts in their game hubs complaining about prices on/off discount. Valve already suggests regional pricing to devs/pubs in their pricing pages.

This is that variation of, "only notify me of a game going on sale for more than X%" which tends to always end with 90% in the suggestions.

[.]

It wouldn't be bad if developers could set a floor price, and AAA developers/publishers were barred from using the feature outright.

[Gwarsbane]

Originally posted by Vettona:

Sorry if its already been mentioned just had inspiration. Basically the idea is a feature that allows buyers to claim a price they would want to pay for a game. This does nothing other then provide the developer info on what buyers consider would be a fair price for their game, maybe even allow this feature post purchase as well. then developers get data on where buyers sit in the price point they are willing to pay for said game. this would allow them to choose sale prices that would capture a wider audience, and allow buyers to have a voice on game value.

No, because then all they would see is a bunch of people begging for $0.00 or $0.01 or what ever the cheapest price is and they would see it from day 1.

If you don't like the price for something, wait for a sale. If its still too much for you, wait till it goes cheaper and/or a better sales price.

[Hard Core Rikki]

Could work for devs with few sales and regions where steam sales always struggle at full asking price.
It'd be harmless issuing one non-transferable max % discount coupon per year issued to players who purchase a game in the current year, one that was released this year or after a player exceeded a total $ purchase amount that year from game purchases (say 60+ usd). Just exclude the newly released blockbusters who dont need to lower their original asking price anyway.

----

Better imo: rather than lower the money players pay, 'pay what you want' should allow players to pay EXTRA - a tip if you prefer, preferably not subject to valve tax.
Lots of underappreciated indies would benefit from valve stimulating tipping culture in the ecosystem. This would give new insight into how players from different regions are willing to pay extra without expecting to receive more stuff.

[Supafly]

I'd put 0.01

Even if I'd pay 60 I'd put 0.01 as that would hopefully drive them to lower the price, even if it goes nowhere near 0.01

[XLjedi]

The best feedback on price point is... sales

[The End]

Originally posted by Vettona:

Sorry if its already been mentioned just had inspiration. Basically the idea is a feature that allows buyers to claim a price they would want to pay for a game.

Most people would put ridiculously low amount they would pay.

That said, it's a store, the developer/publisher set a price, if you want the game you buy it or you wait for a sale.

[nullable]

Originally posted by Vettona:

Sorry if its already been mentioned just had inspiration. Basically the idea is a feature that allows buyers to claim a price they would want to pay for a game. This does nothing other then provide the developer info on what buyers consider would be a fair price for their game, maybe even allow this feature post purchase as well. then developers get data on where buyers sit in the price point they are willing to pay for said game. this would allow them to choose sale prices that would capture a wider audience, and allow buyers to have a voice on game value.

The reality is what customers say they'll do and what they'll actually do are two different things. And what customers will actually do isn't a secret where businesses are beholden to poll customers to figure out how to price games.

The current decisions aren't random guesses. There's decades of customer data about video games, pricing, sales, etc. There's a pretty good argument that the value of this sort of user poll would simply be entertainment for developers to see how wildly inaccurate users are and/or what shameless liars they are.

Finally, it's not like catering to people who say they will only pay pittance for games is as valuable as you think. Trying to average out wildly inaccurate self-reported data isn't going to yield viable results. If you use the raw data, it's junk data. If the developer throws out all the prices they believe are unreasonable, they might just end up with data that says their current pricing scheme is fine (which it is).

I get the appeal of the idea. But there's lots of reasons why it's not already done the world over in retail. And lots of reasons why it would immediately fall over.

[Nx Machina]

Originally posted by Vettona:

Sorry if its already been mentioned just had inspiration. Basically the idea is a feature that allows buyers to claim a price they would want to pay for a game. This does nothing other then provide the developer info on what buyers consider would be a fair price for their game, maybe even allow this feature post purchase as well. then developers get data on where buyers sit in the price point they are willing to pay for said game. this would allow them to choose sale prices that would capture a wider audience, and allow buyers to have a voice on game value.

And if your fellow workers got to decide what rate of pay you got per hour, or what they felt your contribution was to determine that, would you still feel your suggestion is a good idea.

Secondly you add a game to the cart when it is a price you are willing to pay as no one is forcing you to click confirm at checkout.

[Vettona]

the main reason for the idea was for sales, if they are already thinking of doing 30% off but there's a large jump in name your price submissions at 35% it gives them enough info to decide if they would capture enough extra buyers to make it worth that extra 5%.

Personally I wait for at roughly a 50% sale on everything unless i'm super excited for the game, took 2+ years to get RDD2 but I wont pay more then $30 for a game normally.

Originally posted by Garbage:

It wouldn't be bad if developers could set a floor price, and AAA developers/publishers were barred from using the feature outright.

Its not a feature to let you actually buy at that price only a statement of what you would be willing to pay

Originally posted by Supafly:

I'd put 0.01

Even if I'd pay 60 I'd put 0.01 as that would hopefully drive them to lower the price, even if it goes nowhere near 0.01

If everyone did this the idea is a clear failure and would be scraped, devs would logically ignore any price suggestions that were unreasonable.

Originally posted by nullable:

Originally posted by Vettona:

Sorry if its already been mentioned just had inspiration. Basically the idea is a feature that allows buyers to claim a price they would want to pay for a game. This does nothing other then provide the developer info on what buyers consider would be a fair price for their game, maybe even allow this feature post purchase as well. then developers get data on where buyers sit in the price point they are willing to pay for said game. this would allow them to choose sale prices that would capture a wider audience, and allow buyers to have a voice on game value.

The reality is what customers say they'll do and what they'll actually do are two different things. And what customers will actually do isn't a secret where businesses are beholden to poll customers to figure out how to price games.

The current decisions aren't random guesses. There's decades of customer data about video games, pricing, sales, etc. There's a pretty good argument that the value of this sort of user poll would simply be entertainment for developers to see how wildly inaccurate users are and/or what shameless liars they are.

Finally, it's not like catering to people who say they will only pay pittance for games is as valuable as you think. Trying to average out wildly inaccurate self-reported data isn't going to yield viable results. If you use the raw data, it's junk data. If the developer throws out all the prices they believe are unreasonable, they might just end up with data that says their current pricing scheme is fine (which it is).

I get the appeal of the idea. But there's lots of reasons why it's not already done the world over in retail. And lots of reasons why it would immediately fall over.

I agree and understand this, however an extension of my example above if buyer are claiming they would pay $30 the devs can easily conclude that those same people would probably pay $35 they aren't stupid, the idea is completely a system to provide devs with data of where buyers are at and not at all giving the buyers control to actually set a price. The idea is simply a way to communicate to the devs what you think the game is worth. maybe the idea manifests as something you can do AFTER you've already purchased maybe not but more communications between devs and players cant hurt.

Originally posted by Nx Machina:

Originally posted by Vettona:

Sorry if its already been mentioned just had inspiration. Basically the idea is a feature that allows buyers to claim a price they would want to pay for a game. This does nothing other then provide the developer info on what buyers consider would be a fair price for their game, maybe even allow this feature post purchase as well. then developers get data on where buyers sit in the price point they are willing to pay for said game. this would allow them to choose sale prices that would capture a wider audience, and allow buyers to have a voice on game value.

And if your fellow workers got to decide what rate of pay you got per hour, or what they felt your contribution was to determine that, would you still feel your suggestion is a good idea.

Secondly you add a game to the cart when it is a price you are willing to pay as no one is forcing you to click confirm at checkout.

yes i would, as long as their suggestion was limited to a suggestion and did not effect what my actual pay was. i'm not trying to go into detail about how something that is outside my suggestion but obviously your idea would require the employer not having access to the data as in the event the suggestion was low obviously the company would ding you where as with my idea the company it self is taking the hit and it has a more balanced cost to benefit)

bottom line my idea is for buyers to simply have a voice which if there enough honest data only helps the devs understand their player base, i think its absurd to think that if buyers stated a ridiculous price they would mindlessly go "Oh GuEsS oUr GaMe IsNt WoRtH aNyThInG" they can filter out the trolls easy and then we at least get to state our claim even if were lying. it creates something similar to a stock market the buyers are trying to get the devs to go lower and the devs are pricing their IP just over where they are calculating people will actually buy.

maybe devs already have this data, but i know personally my enjoyment of a game would drive me to post-purchase give a truthful evaluation of what i think it was worth.

[Pierce Dalton]

Well, I guess a lot of people here never heard of Bandcamp.

https://karlcasey.bandcamp.com/album/white-bat-i

[.]

Originally posted by Pierce Dalton:

Well, I guess a lot of people here never heard of Bandcamp.

https://karlcasey.bandcamp.com/album/white-bat-i

I stopped using Bandcamp up until recently, when Epic relinquished their iron hand over them.

I hope they recover from Tim Sweeney's horrible mismanagement of the platform.