So what price would Superhot be sold at? (The price hasn't shown up yet on Steam page and I wasn't sure if they haven't fixed one yet or if it wasn't decided for India in particular)

Problem with pricing an indie game is that, these days, you basically have to think along the lines of "So, when it drops 75% off, can we make profit anyway?" I feel like today's marketplace forces you to overestimate price of your game in order for it to feel "like a bargain" when it goes on sale - even for a $5 game, people will wait for a sale or bundle.

As for Price:Length ratio, every person is free to decide what's worth their money to them and what is not. That being said, I will never forget majority of Firewatch or Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons, whereas most of my 120 hours of Heroes of Might and Magic III are long gone from my memory and I would definitely not want developers to artificially pad their games just to be "worth" their asking price. Depends on who you ask ;-) Loved the ending. I feel like people who complain about it wanted a different story than what Firewatch actually is.

1. Don't like the price? Wait for a sale.
2. Don't like that players refund your game? Make a game people won't want to refund, or don't sell it in a store which allows refunds at will.
3. Free on Kong, upwards of PWYW on itch.io depending on success.
4. Dunno, probably. Sounds like Ronin (which is great) except it's FPP 3d so it'll probably cost me my lunch if it runs at all.
5. If they're cheaper than regular meatballs.

The problem with that argument is that it's no argument at all. So they spent a long time making a product, so what? If they want to get paid hourly wages, they should get a 9 to 5 job.

There are three relevant sums of money connected to a product:
A) What people are willing to pay for it.
B) The number of people willing to pay for it.
C) The amount of money it cost to produce it.

If A * B > C, you have a business. Otherwise, you don't. You can't demand that other people make your business model viable.

This is absolutely not what happened in the thread. The potential customer started a thread asking that the price be decreased then, 13 days later, doubled down on it: You can't demand that other people kill their business model.

Best post right here. End of thread.

Damn, I can't find that bloody "Close Thread" button. I'll send a ticket to GOG support ^o^

You completely and utterly missed my point.

They can charge whatever they want for their game. If it works for them, well, good. What they can't do is use what it cost them to make it as a pricing argument towards their customers. When you buy a product (as opposed to when you buy labour), you don't pay by the hour. The price of a product has to reflect the quality of the product, nothing else. What it cost to make the product is utterly irrelevant.

I'm not arguing that their game is overpriced. I don't know the game in question, and have no opinion on the price. For all I know, it could be worth three times as much as they charge for it. That however, is irrelevant to my point. Whether it took them 5 years or 1 year to make it, the game is what the game is, and the customers get what they get. If what they get is worth what they paid for it, compared to similar products on the market, fine, but it absolutely does not matter what it cost to make it.

Less than $20, better $15. No (if you are looking for something to play longer). Yes.

Indie prices are going up here and on Kickstarter (gone are then times of $15/game). GOG is also supporting that, e.g. with the weekly (indie) sale. The issue for me is that very few new games appeal to me and I picked some up when still in doubt about them and regretted it. So nowadays, I purchase these in bundles or not. The ones where I was/am convinced that I will like them is a single digit number. So providing a demo is a good step in the right direction, less artsy more gripping content would be a second.

Both of the responses from those developers are amazing. But it's sad to see that the first game (Brigador) has only sold about 2,400 copies on Steam, according to SteamSpy.

in my opinion, if it's a pretty decent game, and solid in all major areas or exceptional in enough ones to make up for any deficits in any, you can make no hostile argument against any price lower than $37

In my opinion, arguing about prices is worthless. Because for each and every person, the "right" price can be different. You either like a game or not. You have a lot of money, or no money. Or maybe you have a lot of money, but you would rather spend it on something else than games. You could have such a huge backlog of games that you can never play through them in your lifetime. Then how much can another title on that queue be worth? There are so many factors. So many personal choices and preferences.

A developer cannot tell how much his game is worth to some (potential) player. And even that player player might not be able to judge the "worth" of a game in advance. In fact the value of a good game might only come clear years after. That is why I've recently spent more money on old games from 10-15 years ago than on fresh new indie titles (which I'll likely never play anyway)... Interestingly enough, this money on the old games doesn't end in the games' developers hands as I have to buy second hand or leftover stock.

Yes, the market is saturated. And that is one reason as to why I'm not making my own game (though I would love to make one).

That might be partially related to it being in Early Access. People tend to wait until release.

My main takeaway - it is dumbfounding to me that consumers * need this level of exposition - "speaking from the heart" (TM), minute details of price comparisons (TM) - to understand the foundational moral value of free markets.

The realities of valuing objects should IMO be obvious, and only the utmost respect strikes me as ethical - respect for the seller to ask whatever price they deem fit ** and for the buyer to pay whatever price they deem fit. If the two shall meet, hurrah, if not... well, life goes on without any entitlement in either direction!

Still... progress I guess? It's uplifting to see this kind of engagement by devs and consumers that are capable of being earnest in expressing their desires achieve something positive. It's IMO both a braver, and more healthy alternative to the emotional defensiveness and the postmodern sarcasm and irony that are IMO is so corrosive to common understanding.

So that's my main takeaway. Hopeful signs of returning to more mature levels of socialization - and no, I did not read further on, where I'm sure the flames started going strong.


* I single consumers here because there are just many more of them than creators and I defend creator entitlement to do whatever they deems fit to their output - up to destroying it. It's an asymmetric relation where the power over the product originates on one side exclusively and might be transferred in varying degrees
.
** Whether that sales price comes from their valuation of labor/production costs, their valuation of final product quality, or even their speculative adjustment to market demand
When did it come out? Steamspy has a certain lag... still if correct I would not be surprised, just sad. There is oversupply and a glut in the market. Anyway, from the stuff the dev posted Brigador is now on my radar.

Well, if you take at least 2 years to make your game, it's quite possible the indie market will have crashed by then so you would have less competitors :o)