All those points simply refuted by one statement that doesn't even refute my argument? Even if value is relative, the R.R.P. is relatively established in relationship with costs of distribution, expected audience and percentage of audience to buy the particular product.

Simply matter of fact, if there's an established value and the product does not reach the target potential, there is devaluing due to the relative relationship to other economic factors.

Just saying it is relative doesn't cut it I'm afraid.

You mean all those *unsubstantiated* assertions you made? o.O

Yes, there is a point where lowering price stops being offset by increased sales, but that point is not static, it is constantly changing.

What you might be able to show is that too many sales diminishes the impact of a sale, but that's a different argument.

lol... unsubstantiated. Discussion ended, do some research into how marketing and sales distribution works and what factors contribute to the making of a price and the valuation of a product, then take into account the factors that affect negatively that value to which it is classified as "devaluing".

Achievement unlocked: Occupy all available page slots with sale banners
(attached screenshot)

The sales are required because that is the true value of their product. The sales don't devalue the product, it is simply a supply and demand issue. It's a digital product so supply is unlimited, therefor demand is always met. The market is over saturated with product options as it is which means the only way to stimulate demand would be to artificially limit supply (which would anger customers anyways if done long term, cause it would be very obvious that this market pressure was artificial) or to improve your value proposition, which in this case they are doing by lowering the price.

When you have unlimited supply with a multitude of options and a customer base that is relatively fixed it will always result in lower prices. If anything the sales are the true price of the product they are selling. They are using the sales solely as a method to create periods of artificial supply bottlenecks.

Their other option would be to increase their value proposition in some other way. Either by providing extras with games or by providing additional services with them, but that takes a lot more work than just cutting the price.

Aw, man! Someone beat me to it! ... Yup, that looks quite silly.

Just try to have no sale and few minutes later you will see on the forum the new topic "Where the hell is sale?" with fast growing amount of responses.

But is that so bad?
I think not. For games lovers, there is a golden age, when the wallet is only one limit, and still, you will not buy everything what is on your wishlist in one shot.
Just have fun and play :)

You can also treat the discount price as a regular price, and buy the game when it isn't on sale for full price, and call it as the "Additional Donation for Creators" ;)

You're right. When everything is low, nothing is low. The base price is actually the exception and the true one is actually between the sale one and the base price. But also: It just works. Brains are exploitable like that. In sum you earn more. So .. in sum: You know it and I know it and we can't change it anyways so.. fuck it.

What's really fcked is using debt to finanace consumer spending. Factor in compound interest, and it's straight up enslavement. The people who encourage this should be spit-roasted like pigs.

So Nintendo Games are released with their true value or at least just a little over it since even years old ports of games still cost you 40€ in a (digital) Sale.
Games published by everyone else aren´t worth to buy at launch since they all get discounts relatively quick.
With AC:Od you feel betrayed if you just bought the standard edition, since now the SP costs you 40€ and the Gold Edition (with SP) costs you 50€.

Personally I've stopped buying a ton of games on sale because I noticed that I had hundreds of unplayed games and had played probably 10% of the games I purchased. So in the end I didn't end up saving money because paying any price for something you don't use is still 100% more than it was worth. So now I buy games that are more expensive but that I will play pretty much right now and then I focus on that one game and finish it to the best of my abilities.

Buying shit you don't need or get around to play is a waste of money and time.