Thanks for coming to the forums. Can you explain the differences in discount for the collection on Steam vs. GOG?

Wow, thanks for the long explanation, Chris. I can see where you're coming from, but it still doesn't quite taste right to me (the pricing setup, not your explanation). I tend to grab lots of stuff to shove into my backlog to play later, and this is no exception. But that doesn't mean I won't be buying it, just not right now, I guess. I'm just going to park this in my wishlist for the nonce and revisit it later on.

Again, thanks for popping in. It's good to at least see you guys care enough to address us whiners instead of saying 'screw you' and remaining silent.

The last bit of Chris' post got cut off, so here's the rest:

https://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,18132.msg194845.html#msg194845

Gah, it won't let me post more from the original post I was trying to make. Hopefully someone from the Arcen forums or staff can post that for me. Not sure if even this post will go through.

The difference in pricing on the collection between Steam and _everywhere_ else was a bug in their system. The discount was set to 50% for the collection, and the discount for the new expansion was set to 10%. When the expansion went live, the collection did also... and it applied BOTH discounts to the collection, rather than just the higher one. Facepalm. Our main contacts at Valve happened to be out of the office at the time... and so it's taking a couple of hours for them to get into the office and then correct it. Definitely not something that was intended -- we never give preferred pricing on launches to ANY partner. That's totally not cool.

(maybe it will let me post this now? final bit)

14. THAT said, if we are trying to get new customers in, and get them to buy the collection rather than the base game alone, having a 50% discount on the base game and a 42% (let's round) discount on the collection is going to be a serious deterrent to buying the collection. I'm really sorry that this feels like an f-you to our existing loyal supporters (or just people who liked the game and have no clue about who we are). It's not meant to be. But remember back when I was talking about how our expansions are not profitable on their own, but instead rely on pushing more of the base game and collections? Collections are by far the largest piece of income out of that group, and the launch of a collection is the time we make the most income off it, because then we at least get some modicum of press attention thanks to the expansion. Not having the collection discounted competitively at that timing would drastically cut down income during the release period of the expansion, in turn making the expansion itself way less profitable, in turn making future expansions less likely and the further validating "string of sequels at full price" model that personally I don't care in circumstances like this.

15. Are there problems with the above argument? Sure. It's a gray area in a lot of respects. You can see the math, though, and the thought that goes into this sort of thing. We try to strike a balance between doing right by all customers new and old, and remaining profitable. If you're interested in this expansion, presumably you might have some interest in future work from Arcen, and thus that 8.24% difference in the launch discount on the collection is hopefully not a dealbreaker on that. If it makes a really big deal to you in terms of not feeling like the expansion is worth the money it costs now, then I imagine you have enough other games to occupy yourself until the expansion goes on a discount that you find more favorable. It will eventually, of course. As I outlined above, it's something we have to do in order to stay in business at the scale of staff we have in the niche market we're in, so it's no use me pretending like "will there be a discount? whooo knooows?"

16. When it comes to early adopters who buy in early and/or feel compelled that they absolutely must have this now, all I can say is: THANK you! Yes, you piece-for-piece bear a larger part of the load in terms of financially supporting us. As much as I've pointed out how we couldn't do without discount promotions during the long tail periods, I also can't stress enough how much we couldn't do without you, the early adopters -- and you, the other folks who buy at full price during non-discount periods. My hope is that we're providing you a great value at any of those price points, and that your choice to buy it at a given time is a mark of either your enthusiasm or support or both.

I'll end this rambling mess by saying that I do apologize for the feeling of f-you that the discounting has given some of you. And I recognize and respect the fact that some of you will not accept my reasoning above, which makes sense given that it's a gray area where a judgement call has to be made one way or the other. I respect the fact that some of you would make a different call than what I have. Hopefully at the very least, even if you are still dissatisfied with the choice I made on the discounts there, you come away from this with a feeling that this was not a move made out of disrespect toward you, or nefarious intent.

I try to do my best to balance my obligations to my customers, my staff, my contractors, and my own family (there are no investors or other owners), and it's a tricky thing. Usually I feel like I do a pretty good job of balancing all that, but sometimes I royally f it up, which is not a great feeling. Personally I don't believe this is one of those times, but I understand you may feel differently. If that's the case, my suggestion would be to simply wishlist the expansion for now if you still want it, and buy it when it's on the discount of your choice sometime in the future.

It frustrates me that I can't think of anything else to say, because I know some of you will still be upset. But the above is all I have.

Very best,
Chris

+1 for taking the time to write that long-ass explanation. ;) This game isn't my genre so I'm not worried about the pricing so I didn't read most of the explanation, but still... +1

Agreed in full. A shame about the mixup. Thank you kindly for your response. Wishlisted!

The fact that you can still buy them separately and at a non-proportional discount is somewhat of a blunder, but the only situation when that will matter is if you have only the base game and want to buy only the first expansion, but not the second one. Otherwise there is no practical reason to consider purchasing anything but the collection/final expansion. Still, a blunder, I agree.

My rationale for the way I play with math is that GOG often has "catch up" sales, when earlier games from the series are discounted to incentivize potential purchasers to invest in the whole series when a new item comes up. This way the barrier for entry is lowered, resulting in more sales/better product exposure and I don't remember people complaining about that, except for the couple of unlucky souls who always happen to buy the games a day before the discount is announced.

This situation, to my mind, is a sale of exactly such a kind - a "catch up" sale.

I could've and that would've made no sense from a business perspective. They intend to sell the new product. They don't want to give it away for free. They are ready to give an aggressive discount on the base game and the first expansion, because they have already made their money from that source. Revenues from those sales are but a trickle anyway now and the huge discount won't hurt so long as the new product sells well.

They are not paying anyone. They are easing new people into buying the latest product. So you can buy it alone for $6.29 or for $12.49 with the rest of the series attached. That's it.

Cheers, and I totally respect that point of view. The rest of my post finally went live (above), so I actually addressed your points a bit more. Not to try to change your mind, but rather to say "yep, that sounds like the right course of action for you, and thanks for being okay with that as an option."

I'd also like to say that I don't see you guys as "whiners." Talking with people who are angry with me for reasons I can't fully control (I can somewhat, but I also have to balance the needs of multiple partiers -- thankfully not investors), is super duper stressful. Any ignoring is not "f those guys" but "I'm not sure I can deal." But if you really need me, always feel free to email, and I'll be around.

I'm mostly going to check out of this thread now for the above reasons, but like I said -- if someone needs me, holler. arcengames at gmail dot com.

That is probably the most in-depth explanation I've ever seen a developer take the time to give here.

Agree or disagree, that level of candor is very much appreciated.

Spectacular explanation of the economic and particularly marketing side of development. Thanks for stopping by and explaining!

And I was ninja'ed by someone with actual live math on his hands, not theorycraft.

Thank you for taking the time to write the explanation, Chris.

By the way, you may still look into the issue with the discount on the separate base game and first expansion. They really make no sense with the way the collection is priced.

Exactly what I thought!

Thanks guys. :)

In terms of the "buying the base game plus first expansion is pricier than buying the collection" thing, that's right. The best choice there is to buy the collection, which is what we want in the first place.

My favorite example from economics class a decade and a half ago was about the Wall Street Journal. When they first started having an online version, they offered a monthly subscription to physical for $120 (I believe that was the number), and online plus physical for... $120. (edit: actually it might have been $80 for a limited time.)

WTF, right? But what they were trying to do was get people used to the idea of online content like that (way back in the late 90s), and it was actually smart business for them. They later changed their business around.

Another fun one: how jewelry is sold. They put the piece they want you to buy between something that is expensive and something else that is ugly. According to a friend who used to work in the business, anyhow. The idea is that the customer is moving along, sees the piece that the store is intending to sell, and goes "how pretty!" compared to the ugly piece, and "what a good value!" compared to the expensive piece. The anchoring effect.

I'm a lot less sophisticated when it comes to the discounts here, but it unwittingly does create an anchoring effect for the collection. We're simply doing an across-the-board discount for the non-new-thing of 50%, and that works out the way described above. In the main that makes for a nonsensical discount... but one that does happen to create an anchoring effect like in the jewelry store. Woo...hoo? I guess? I'm not trying to mess with your minds here.

More practically speaking, someone may just want that first expansion and that's it. So at the moment, they can get that at the lowest possible price that isn't discounted below the overall ceiling that we set for the group. If we didn't discount it that highly for them, we'd be basically forcing them to buy something pricier that they might not want. If we discounted it more, then that's great for them, but messes with the math on OUR side. So when you look at that product in isolation for those sort of customers, then that's the most equitable thing. For anyone who doesn't already have the base game, the collection is the clear best value and that's no problem for me (and seems to be economically sound if other businesses are to be believed).

I only have one question: if you have the base game + the fist DLC, and you buy the second one, the Collection is going to be marked as owned in the website or it is considered a separate game? Somebody knows?

That makes sense if the collection was available when the base game was released here. Since this is a game without a season pass (THANK GOD) how would I, as an unsuspecting customer, know about your DLC plans? I can not and the best package is not available to me until much later.
I still see your point though, it just puts me off a little.