Let's talk video game pricing economics:

1. How much should they be discounted every year and why do you think so?

2. How much should games be priced at 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 15, 20, etc. years after release?

3. What other factors would influence its price/discounts for you outside of disposable income? (e.g., genres, length, reviews, indie/AA/AAA production, etc.)

Fun Steam price facts (use as proxy for GOG):

- From 2018-2023, average selling price (including discounts) has trended from $11.20 to $15.50 USD, representing a compound annual growth rate of +6%. According to J. Clement, this is forecasted to rise to $18.10 USD by 2028 - https://i.imgur.com/ZL4mrfL.png

- In 2023, the average selling price (including discounts) was $8.60 USD for indies and $21.90 USD for AA/AAA games, a difference of 61% - https://vginsights.com/insights/article/steam-game-prices-outpace-inflation-average-price-up-7

- Sports and racing games tend to be sold at the highest prices

- Action and adventure games have the highest variability in pricing

- RPGs are seeing the highest compound annual growth rate at +12%

There are many factors of course.

We start with the cost of making a game, and that does vary quite wildly.
Then there is popularity and projected return.

And then there are shareholders and or those who financed a game, and generally they are looking for a big quick return.

Then there are those who attempt to give their digital game false rarity to raise its value.

So that and more, is when the game is released. Then in the following years, it can be about recouping losses or just further profit, etc. And some get stuck on what they think their game is worth, and won't sell for any less.

But like most media (books, movies, music, etc) they often assign a regular price for all, regardless of what the cost might have been. So there is some element of a gamble involved ... not so much with well known and popular franchises.

And many providers forget that without us, their customers, their game or product is worthless, and so they abuse us, take advantage.

As much as they need to be.

Any games that are 3 years old or more, they shouldn't ever be more than $29.99 USD while on discount; and if they are indie games, then they shouldn't be more than $19.99 while on discount,

Any games that are more than 10 years old, they shouldn't ever be more than $9.99 USD while on discount, even if it's an AAA game.

I look at Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance 1's & 2's prices and laugh! The base games are 20+ years old (2001 and 2004 respectively) and they (I don't mean GOG) keep it very expensive, even in discount, just because they are ports made recently (2021 and 2022 respectively)!

As much as the developer (not the publisher) thinks it should be.

Personally I don't really think it matters what any one of us think would be ideal for the pricing of video games because our opinions are largely self-centric as to our own economic and other factors and have next to no relevance as to what the video game industry is going to charge for games.

Video game companies goals are to make profit for their shareholders, whether they're a public or privately owned company. They all have their own business models and some of them are more consumer friendly and others are less consumer friendly.

Ultimately the price they charge for their games will include what their research and development costs for it were over a given timeframe as well as any ongoing development/engineering resource costs, server hosting costs and other costs a given game may have over time, plus whatever profit margin they want to make on the game.

They will use common marketing gimmicks and tactics to get people to buy games, such as charging the original release price for a game regularly even if it's been out for 5-10 years, and then periodically discounting it by increasing percentages over time. They know full well if they charge $5 for their 5-10 year old AAA game as the regular price, that it'll enjoy some sales volume as soon as the price drops, but after that sales of the game will stagnate because most people who wanted it got it already or they know it is there whenever they want it for $5 so why bother buying it now because the regular price is now $5, and so I can wait until it goes on sale for $1.25 at 75% off.

By keeping the game at $60 or whatever, they know full well they're not going to sell many copies of the game at that price, and they don't care at all. It is intentional, because they know also the human psychology of artificial scarcity and fear of missing out (FOMO). So once every 1-6 months they put their $60 game on sale for $5-15 with a 75+% discount to create short term promotion to stimulate people into buying it for fear of missing out on the "good deal" for something that is normally "$60". Wow, what a good deal, I better buy it now so I don't miss out!

Except most of us know that any game that goes on sale like this will rotate on sale again in a month or 2 or 3 anyway. But nonetheless, they'll sell more copies of the game by making it $60 all the time and periodically putting it on sale for $5 or whatever, than if they just permanently made the game $5-10. It's all marketing psychology, and it works so well that this is why all companies do it, and why they'll always do it.

As for what the actual prices are whether regular price or sale price, it is not a matter of what you or I or any individual or collective thinks the game is worth, but whether the price of the game is driving their revenue to anticipated levels or not by enough people out there actually buying it. If we see a game at a given price and it never goes down, it isn't because it isn't worth it at that price (whether we individually think this or not), but rather it is because there are enough people out there who are willing to pay that price for it that they make the profit they want to get from selling the game and they're happy with the results, so they have no incentive to lower the price.

The prices of games only go down when the collective of all mankind does not buy enough copies of the game at the asking price that they get a low revenue quarter and realize some games aren't selling as well as desired so now it is time to either lower the regular price, or put them on sale for deeper and deeper discounts.

That's just how it has always worked and always will work. Capitalism doing it's thang.

What we think a game or all games SHOULD be priced at might be a fun conversation but it really doesn't matter as we'll have no effect at all on making game prices change by our opinions. All we can do is buy games that we think are reasonably priced for the perceived value we think we'll get from them, and not buy games we think do not provide enough value for the given price. If enough people think a game is overpriced and don't buy it, then within a quarter or two the price will go down or it'll get deeper sale promo discounts. But if enough people think the game is worth the asking price and buy it, well... the price will stay the same.

'tis just how it works. Doesn't matter if a game is 1 month old or 30 years old, they'll charge whatever they think people will pay for it, and if they make enough money doing so they'll keep charging that.

1) While abstaining from making an all-encompassing declaration, I will say that some games are beyond over-valued for the minute amount of enjoyable content in which they offer. With each passing year, when on a special sale, these, in particular, should be gradually discounted until their cost is a mere tiny fraction of their initial list price.

2) Unless incredibly deep and/or possessing remarkable re-playability (perhaps, with an extremely active developer, like that of A.I. War 1 & 2), definitely by 10 years post-release, its discounted/special sale price should be approximately 25% of its original release.

3) If a game is quite short in terms of number of hours to complete (main mode, or, story), and if there is little merit in re-experiencing it, the discount should be higher.

There is no fixed number, basically just this. We aren't obligated to get discounted games after X number of years, and if the developer overvalues their game and doesn't reduce its price, people simply won't buy it.

Premise is wrong: You are not entitled to discounts just because a game is X years old.

Discounts are a tool for the seller to increase sales, when they are lacking at full price. The discount (ideally) is set so that it reaches the sweet spot for number of sales and increased revenue.

If a game is 50 years old but selling like hot cakes, there is no point in discounting.

Why would the developer care? Aren't they normally getting a fixed sum of money for the work, and the publisher makes profit or takes a hit based on how well the game sells over a longer period of time?

There isn't a one-size-fits-all answer. There are games that are discounted just months after release. Then, there are curiosities like Factorio, which has never received a discount and has only gone up in price ever since its release. Then, there are games that seem to have permanently stuck with a specific discount (Trails in the Sky).

Having said that, I still think that the price of remasters of decades-old-games should not be higher than 15 bucks, but whatever.

I wouldn't want to see my game discounted in the first 5 years anywhere! After those first five years, i could live with 50% discounts during the summer. After another 5, 80% during summer and winter sale moments.

Now, of course I don't have a game out there, so the reality might differ.

As little as they can get away with. If a game is popular and sell more, then a lower discount, if any discount. If a game isnot popular, then they need to incentivise people with a discount to make them buy. It completely depends on want and demand, there is no forumla that fits all

edit - I actually also have respect for the developers who made a very good game and then deciding to never discount their games and stick to it (e.g. Factorio). kudos to them, they deserve it

No, let's talk about why you keep putting empty quotes to your own posts in your posts. I'm sorry, I tried to ignore it as long as I could, but when you open a thread with it, I just have to finally ask.