Log in

View Full Version : '[Corporate] Fixed pricing not optimal pricing strategy' admits developer



IcarusAngel
21st October 2009, 06:58
"I do get a sense ... that there is a lot of room for improvement in how games, and in fact, all digital products, are priced," he said in an email. "I think the optimal pricing strategy for any digital product is one in which every person pays what they feel is a fair price that they can afford, based on their economic situation, their perception of the value of the product, the balance of their bank account on that particular day, etc."

(Haven't musicians and other set up pricing schemes like this.)

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=25715

http://2dboy.com/games.php

How come these experiments never confirm market economists' claim that if consumers set the prices themselves they'd always vote for the lowest price? True, most people did pay in the lowest price range. However, the second highest category was in the 1.00 to 2.00 mark. Keep in mind that this is just one experiment during a recession in an economy where the cost of things are going up but the wages are going down.

The 'Pay what you want' game plan was so successful that they've reset the deadline to October 25th (I already got my copy of the game - three copies actually, one for Linux, Mac, and Windows).

The solution to the problem of markets keeping prices artificially high is to democratize the pricing schemes to allow lower income people to have a voice as well, and this should be favored even over the mass profits of the CEOs.

This is great for games and I'm glad game developers and the 'little guys' are the ones being creative here. However, I'd like to see a pricing strategy like this enforced on food so poor people could have better access to healthier foods which are more expensive, until, of course, the 'price system' is abolished altogether.

Havet
21st October 2009, 16:17
Yeah, UK band radiohead already did this (http://www.internetdj.com/article/radiohead-releases-new-album-in-rainbows-for-free-934)and it was a MASSIVE success.

Copyright laws (plus some privileged positions) are pretty harmful for creative art and the consumers which take advantage of it. Radiohead pretty much proved how an artist can make more money (if its motive is profit), by letting consumers decide what their album is worth.

When Radiohead's campaign was out, I got the album for free (in pay what i want, i selected $0,00), but they will certainly profit from me, because whenever they come to my country, i'm sure as hell not missing them. Even if i have to pay 10x the price of a CD.

EDIT: Many many times its more advantagefull for the artist to give away some of his work for free in order to gain reputation, so that his next works have a higher demand.