9
Steam's regional price hikes of up to 4298% could spur exodus from Argentina and Turkey gamers
(www.tomshardware.com)
this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
9 points (62.9% liked)
Games
16751 readers
551 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't think there is an easy way to fix this. Basically it boils down to weighing the amount of legitimate purchases from these countries vs. the amount of illegitimate or resale keys bought, and then deciding which one costs the developers more money. I'm sure it fucking sucks to be from one of the countries and have to deal with this shit, but it sucks for developers who make a $60 game (that's actually worth $60) and lose money on sales because some asshat third party key seller bought 10,000 keys at $17.49 and is reselling them for $45, making more money off of your own product than you are.
A message to people who use shady resellers: Just pirate the fucking game. You'll hurt less people that way.
It sounds like the change was motivated more by the instability of those currencies, the price increases may just be a temporary thing until developers update their prices. At least that's what I'm hoping.
This oversimplification ruins all the reasoning. There is no clear single "worth" of the game for a global market. 32527 people are willing to pay $60 for it (loyal fanbase + rich), 23886 more if it's $50, 42110 more if it's $40, 12280 if it's $30 etc. would be a better model.
Right... worth is subjective. Not gonna argue that. What I'm talking about is the effort put into the game and the value presented to the customer base. Madden 24 vs. Baldur's Gate 3. One is from a company who is copy-pasting the previous year's game and updating the roster. The other is a years long effort and labor of love in a feature complete package. Both are priced at $60. Only one is "worth" $60 if we go by the effort and work put into it. That's what I mean when I talk about a game being actually worth $60.
Baldur's Gate 3 isn't worth $60 to someone who loves sports games, and the opposite is true for those who don't. A lot of the target demographic is sports fans who like playing with friends sometimes, and having an accurate roster is a huge part of the experience. Games like Madden pay a ton in royalties to license those names because that's what players want.
If you're going to get hundreds if not thousands of hours in a game, $60 is a pretty good deal. I pay far more than that for Paradox strategy games, and I think it's a pretty good deal. But your average gamer wouldn't and complains about DLC prices and whatnot.
That said, I don't think a game like Madden should be in the running for Game of the Year awards but a game like Baldur's Gate 3 absolutely should, and that's based on objective impact of the game on its genre. But that's completely independent of sale price and value.
You are confusing subjective and objective. I'm comparing the objective prices of two games based on the quality of work put into them, you are talking about the subjective value on a per-customer basis. There is no accounting for taste, so I won't argue the subjective nature of perceived worth. What I'm arguing is the actual worth of the game based on the effort put into it. You can microwave a steak, or you can grill it, in both examples the meal is cooked. Either one can be priced at $25, but only one is worth it for the work that went into the meal. Regardless of how much the NFL license costs, the value of the work put into the yearly Madden release pales in comparison to most games, let alone BG3, or most 4x/strategy games. The cost to produce Madden is much lower than other games, and so when it gets resold, it's rarely resold at a loss. Granted, volume should also be taken into consideration, but I don't want to overcomplicate things further.
Value is always subjective and generally has nothing to do with effort, but supply and demand. The NFL IP is a lot more valuable than the Baldur's Gate IP, so having a monopoly on that IP drives up price.
When you buy a product, you're not paying for the labor to create it, you're paying for its utility to you. The cost of labor and materials are waste that should be reduced and has little to do with the attractiveness of the product. If cook A can make one steak at a time and cook B can do two, that doesn't make A's steak more valuable, it just means the labor cost is higher. If B's steak tastes better, B can command a higher price than A.
EA pays ~$50M per year for exclusive use of their IP and probably some amount to the Madden estate as well. When you buy a Madden game, you're paying for that exclusively, and that's the utility that series provides. It just so happens that the NFL and Madden IPs are more valuable than the a Baldur's Gate IPs, so Larian needs to put a lot more effort in to sell their games than EA with Madden despite also having exclusivity over their own IPs.
So yes, BG3 costs more to make than Madden, but that doesn't mean it has higher value, it just means it costs more. Just like that steak from cook A, more effort doesn't increase value, it just increases costs, value is a subjective evaluation by the customer about utility.