What will game cost on release?

[Ink Blot]

I can't find a link, but I thought the Obs guys said they were looking at a price point of 30 or 35 dollars for the game on release.

 

And seriously, pirating this game, which is made without publisher interference by a game company that just wants to put out a game that's a nod to all the old IE style games so us niche fans can finally get something we really want: that's about as low as you can get.

 

Actually, no, it's even lower to post your intention to do so on the developer's forums. The mind boggles.

[Bryy]

Telling them you are going to steal their work if it's above a certain price point is not constructive criticism.

 

I honestly do not see how someone could think it is. 

 

It's treating Obsidian like they are stupid.

 

I can assure you that if that is the case, they probably don't care for you as a fan.

[Sir Chaox]

You guys will be surprised that Obsidian may end up turning a higher profit during sales. But regardless, hardcore fans will buy it on Day1

 

If hardcore fans will buy on day 1, then what are we?

[GrayAngel]

You will have to sell your kidney to buy this game it will cost that much;)

[Lephys]

You will have to sell your kidney to buy this game it will cost that much;)

Psst... *leans in close*... He's saying you have cheap kidneys! o_o

[Bryy]

That's a logical fallacy. Kidneys are not cheap.

[Hassat Hunter]

 

Saying that, the game have already been paid for and will not be shipped to stores, only purchased digitally. So the price to be honest shouldn't been more than 10-15$. But it probably will be higher, because you know, everybody wants to earn money.

 

Yes, those pesky concerns like rent and food.

 

There's also the whole "we will finance the x-pack from the profit of PoE". If it's next to none, we will get the worst x-pack ever. It might even be as bad as DLC then.

Who wants that? I don't.

You do?

You guys will be surprised that Obsidian may end up turning a higher profit during sales. But regardless, hardcore fans will buy it on Day1

Hardcore fans bought it on day -500 (give or take)

[Silent Winter]

 

You guys will be surprised that Obsidian may end up turning a higher profit during sales. But regardless, hardcore fans will buy it on Day1

 

If hardcore fans will buy on day 1, then what are we?

 

*coins new phrase for when hardcore just isn't hard enough*

'Diamondcore'

or possibly 'Nailcore' (as in 'hard as nails')

 

Hardcore fans bought it on day -500 (give or take)

Ok, so those are 'diamond core'

Those of us who missed the 'K' due to blissless obliviousness but backed it early are now 'IgneousRockcore'.

Day one  buyers are 'hardcore'.

Those who wait for a sale are 'Marshmallowcore'

 

...I'm getting a T-shirt made up

Edited February 28, 2014 by Silent Winter

[Bryy]

My last words on the subject: telling any worker that you wouldn't pay X or Y is incredibly offensive just on the fact that you, as the customer, most likely have no clue about market realities, and you especially have no clue about what it took to make the thing. 

 

You can't afford it? Don't buy it. But don't complain like your one singular opinion is going to influence their entire selling strategy. Believe it or not, companies will not cater to one lone individuals needs over every other customers. This isn't a hotel where they need to fill every room. They make video games where the end product costs a certain amount due to a variety of factors, one of which is, yes, the dreaded Making Money.

 

There's also another term for Making Monkey. It's called Making a Profit.

 

You think this dev cycle should be different? Why? Because we were the publishers instead of a giant umbrella company? All that means is that we have different expectations. I am sick to death of reading Kickstarter comments where they say "we don't care when the game comes out". You know who DOES care when it comes out? Obsidian. I'm sick of seeing posts that go "we paid their salaries, so they should not be worried about money". Yes, we did pay their salaries, but employees also worry about JOB SAFETY. 

 

This is why companies cannot and never will be funded completely by crowdfunding. Because, at the end of the day, while crowdfunding does allow for freedom in side projects, you will always need to make the big bucks to keep your doors open, your lights on, and your workforce.

 

But look.

The bottom line is that Obsidian pays people to tell them what we should pay.

These people went to school for finance, or studied it elsewhere.

These people know what they are talking about, and you don't.

 

But even bottomer than that?

If you can't afford it, you can't buy it. And you shouldn't be trying to find other ways to get it, because that just shows how entitled you are. It does not matter how much you like RPGs. Is that supposed to mean something? They are games. Toys.

 

You're really so pissed off that you are going to steal a toy?

[Hiro]

hate to NECRO this thread, but its pretty much whats on my mind.  I am on the fence about whether to grab this now for $35 (and risk it potentially not living up to its promise) or wait till it releases and gets stellar reviews (and risk paying $49) 

 

do you think it will hit steam for more than $35 ?  Obviously wont be less, as that would short-change the backers

[Sad Panda]

I don't really see any reason why it wouldn't debut at the same price as any premium title, meaning minimum of $40 and perhaps as high as $60, though I imagine the price will eventually drop.

 

On the issue of Steam sales, which seem to draw some ire on the thread, I think people should appreciate that by the time the games go on sale, everyone who's willing to pay the full price for them is likely to already have done so, and everything after that is money the developers wouldn't have gotten at all if they weren't willing to lower the price. It's value assessment on the part of the consumer ("How much am I willing to pay for this game?") versus risk assessment on the part of the developer ("How much can I ask for this game and expect people to pay?").

 

The argument could be made that deflation does work as a self-fulfilling prophecy: The knowledge that the price may eventually drop may prompt the consumer to hold off the purchase, leading the price to indeed drop as the developer becomes increasingly desperate to sell in order to at least recoup their development and overhead costs. It should be recognised that the consumer has no obligation to buy the game, however; the above considerations still apply. This is even more true for a crowd-funded game that should by all regards have its development costs covered beforehand. If the developer of a project fully funded by a third party ends up in the red before the game is even released, then that's either poor budget management or a calculated risk on their part -- in either case, certainly no fault of the consumers.

Edited July 10, 2014 by Sad Panda

[nipsen]

 

The argument could be made that deflation does work as a self-fulfilling prophecy: The knowledge that the price may eventually drop may prompt the consumer to hold off the purchase, leading the price to indeed drop as the developer becomes increasingly desperate to sell in order to at least recoup their development and overhead costs. It should be recognised that the consumer has no obligation to buy the game, however; the above considerations still apply. This is even more true for a crowd-funded game that should by all regards have its development costs covered beforehand. If the developer of a project fully funded by a third party ends up in the red before the game is even released, then that's either poor budget management or a calculated risk on their part -- in either case, certainly no fault of the consumers.

Mm. I have to admit I do love capitalism. So very much.

 

Seriously, though - if people don't respect it if others could never, in a million years, think it's anything but absolute insanity to give a developer money for a product they don't have any idea what will look like when, or if, it's finished. Then please keep it to yourself. If people don't think they should sponsor Obsidian to make games no publisher will touch -- so be it. Their choice. Capitalism. If only this sober consumer attitude extended to the products offered by major publishers as well, that would be great.

 

Moving on - we know the budget is locked now. Additional funding will not go towards developing the game further. So it's really about which alternative will leave Obsidian with the most money per purchase. 

 

And odds are that even if Steam ends up selling the game for a higher price than the "digital" tier you still can purchase on this site - which they probably will - Obsidian will be left with more money per purchase in the end if you buy it through their pre-order portal. And that buying it after release, in their release-channel, will be marginally less expensive for them as well.

 

So it's probably a completely moot point. Steam rarely differentiates between digital and physical releases, selling them all for an as high price as it will go for. (And likely Obsidian will resist lowering the price initially unless they want to gamble on getting a billion-selling hit by dominating the hit-lists initially, etc.).

 

In other words, if you want the cheapest digital release, you buy it from Obsidian now or after release (which likely still makes Obsidian earn the most money off anyway). If you want the discs after release, you buy the paradox-made thing in the shop..

[anameforobsidian]

Moving on - we know the budget is locked now. Additional funding will not go towards developing the game further. So it's really about which alternative will leave Obsidian with the most money per purchase. 

 

Additional funding goes to bug squashing, so it does go to development.  

[Karkarov]

You think this dev cycle should be different? Why? Because we were the publishers instead of a giant umbrella company? All that means is that we have different expectations. I am sick to death of reading Kickstarter comments where they say "we don't care when the game comes out". You know who DOES care when it comes out? Obsidian. I'm sick of seeing posts that go "we paid their salaries, so they should not be worried about money". Yes, we did pay their salaries, but employees also worry about JOB SAFETY.

I wonder how I missed like 50% of this thread earlier?

 

Either way, yeah, this.  When a dev says I need XYZ time to make a video game and then suddenly needs 6 months more it is never, ever, a good sign.  It is stressful for them as a developer, cost ineffective, indicates either something is mismanaged, there are game breaking bugs, or the game just isn't that good.  You don't want any of those things happening and unless we are willing to scrounge up another 4 mil telling them they can delay to 2016 and it is okay is well... not actually okay.  Not only is it a professionalism thing to release on time, but they need to make money too and they aren't making a dime until the game releases.

 

With the recent release of Original Sin at 39 bucks I will reiterate my earlier point though.  This game will be 30-40 bucks on steam.  So invest accordingly.

[anameforobsidian]

I wonder how I missed like 50% of this thread earlier?

Either way, yeah, this.  When a dev says I need XYZ time to make a video game and then suddenly needs 6 months more it is never, ever, a good sign.  It is stressful for them as a developer, cost ineffective, indicates either something is mismanaged, there are game breaking bugs, or the game just isn't that good.  

 

That's not quite true.  Plenty of devs have had massively successful campaigns and then assumed that everyone knew the launch date was getting pushed back because of stretch goals / general expansion, and then had to come out and say it officially later.  Obsidian almost certainly knew it was going to have to change the delivery date before the campaign ended, and that was probably less stressful.  That's just the nature of kickstarter.

 

Although feature creep brings for projects already well underway by the time of their kickstarter can bring on all kinds of problems.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

1 million dollars.

[Karkarov]

Although feature creep brings for projects already well underway by the time of their kickstarter can bring on all kinds of problems.

Except the game is feature locked and they already amended their original release date like a year ago.

[Bryy]

they aren't making a dime until the game releases.

A horrific truth of Kickstarter is that each of your backers that pledged to a reward tier equals a sales loss.

 

Double Fine, it appears, is in the middle of that reality.

 

And yet. People comment with "we don't care if you don't make any money". 

Edited July 13, 2014 by Bryy

[ManifestedISO]

A lot of us are getting two backer copies, a digital key and retail box. So really, sort of a double loss. I've decided I'll actually buy a third copy of PoE, if I approve of Obsidian's next unannounced project ... just to see what it feels like to be an entitled gamer.   

[PrimeJunta]

Feargus has indicated that there's gonna be another Kickstarter sooner rather than later. I'm kinda hoping it'll be Hmmm Hmm Hmmmm Hm Hmmm Josh Sawyer's Personal Dream RPG Experience. I'd back that for sure, if only to see what would happen.

[Jotra]

A lot of us are getting two backer copies, a digital key and retail box. So really, sort of a double loss. I've decided I'll actually buy a third copy of PoE, if I approve of Obsidian's next unannounced project ... just to see what it feels like to be an entitled gamer.   

 

It's only double loss if you give your second key away to someone who might have otherwise bought the game themselfs!

[Greensleeve]

Feargus has indicated that there's gonna be another Kickstarter sooner rather than later. I'm kinda hoping it'll be Hmmm Hmm Hmmmm Hm Hmmm Josh Sawyer's Personal Dream RPG Experience. I'd back that for sure, if only to see what would happen.

 

I'd totally back that. I'd also back Chris Avellone's Hatemance with Elf Genocide RPG Experience. Either one would be acceptable projects. 

[Sensuki]

I'm gonna guess forty dorra

[teknoman2]

 

If you want it just get on release stop waiting for steam sales they are hurting the industry as a whole.

 

There's no evidence of this.  Yes, if everyone bought a game payed higher prices it would be better for people who make the games, but there is no evidence that everyone who buys at steam sale price would buy it at full price.

 

there are many games that i got on steam sale that i would never buy at full price... ie RAGE

there are also games that i would buy full price but i could not afford them at the time, so i got them on sale. ie Arkham series

but if i really want a game and have the money for it, i buy it day 1. ie Deus Ex: HR

i think most people do it like this

[anameforobsidian]

 

they aren't making a dime until the game releases.

A horrific truth of Kickstarter is that each of your backers that pledged to a reward tier equals a sales loss.

 

There's a bunch of problems with a statement that absolute.

 

1.  A kickstarter pledge is a sale.  Furthermore, for digital goods it's a sale with a 10% store cut, which is better than many digital stores.  A $45 kickstarter pledge makes the devs more money than a $60 day one sale.

2.  Many of the reward tiers have goods that are significantly cheaper to produce than a final copy of the game would be.  It's asinine to assume that Obsidian "lost money" over traditional game development for tiers over $65.  

3.  The money was given two years before the project will be sold, which makes it an interest free loan.  They've have gained as much as (some caveats) $129,811 in purchasing power just from having that much money for two years.  If the game is sold at $60, that's 2100 day one sales from their site; it's equivalent to 25,000 purchases from moderately interested steam sale buyers.

4.  Each backer has a vested financial interest in the game, which means that they had a major incentive to act as free advertising during the campaign, and a minor incentive to act as free advertising during development.

5.  The size of the kickstarter itself made the news frequently, which again means free advertising.  Bear in mind that advertising is so important to Obsidian that they gave away a portion of the profits to Paradox to pay for advertising.

6.  It's hardly horrific because the number of kickstarter backers on even a successful campaign is relatively low compared to the total number of sales for a good product.  Divinity Original Sin has had more concurrent users than backers.  Wasteland 2's early access sales gave it double the budget.  The Expedition Conquistador team told me that that kickstarter pledges weren't a significant proportion of their sales.  

This is even more comforting if you have a kickstarter for a game that turns out to be bad.  It means that you lost far less of your budget, and were far closer to breaking even than without the kickstarter; your backers took the risk and lost.

 

As to your other point, there are two counters.  One is that Obsidian doesn't care that much about the profit on this game.  They repeatedly said having their own IP is more important to them than money.  

 

The second is a hypothetical.  Let's say Obsidian makes games for the next twenty years through a series of kickstarter campaigns, they never make a profit, but they never lose money either, and they are constantly producing.  All their employees are regularly and fully paid.  Why should we care that they don't make a profit?

Edited July 13, 2014 by anameforobsidian