On RPG's and Pricing

[Valamir]

If I buy a trowel, I do not attribute the beauty of my garden to the trowel, but to the work I did with the trowel.

This is getting way philosophical, but it basically comes down to opportunity costs.  If you gain X amount of enjoyment from the beauty of your garden, and you could not have accomplished that without the trowel, than you should be willing to pay a sum total (for all of your gardening equipment, including that trowel) that equals how much it would cost to achieve X worth of enjoyment elsewhere.

Or, in otherwords, you should be willing to pay a sum of money for an RPG equal to the sum of money you'd pay to achieve an equivelent amount of utility elsewhere, accounting for the law of diminishing returns.

[Gordon C. Landis]

If I buy a trowel, I do not attribute the beauty of my garden to the trowel, but to the work I did with the trowel.

To expand on an analogy: The game should be the seeds as well.

And the soil, and the fertilizer, and - most directly - the "how to" gardening book.  Multiple "how to" gardening books, each often costing much more than a RPG book, if the gardener's I know are a representitive sample.

None of which actually create and manage the beauty of the garden.  But they are important parts.  And I think I just said both "sides" of this little sub-debate are right . . .

Gordon

[Ron Edwards]

Gentlemen,

I'd like to take the opportunity to focus the discussion, as it's getting sort of strange, at least to my eyes.

What is the question at hand? Ralph has proposed that game publishers raise their MSRP. He is not the first to suggest this; in fact, such a proposal is very popular among most publishers that you folks know of. The sales success of both Godlike and Nobilis seems to bear this out.

I don't see much room for debate on this issue aside from individual publisher's judgments regarding what to do. There is no "policy" to discuss (MSRPs are not set by politics or by committee, but by individual publishers). There is no issue surrounding the origin of "value" (that is negotiated via the market).

So, again, what is the question at hand?

Best,
Ron

[Mike Holmes]

My ski's cost $400. They will not ski themselves either, requiring so much effort that I once ended up in the hospital. Still, I would not have any fun trying to ski without them. Neither would I have any fun trying to play Inspectres without the rules. OTOH, I cannot think of what I'd use either for except for their intended activity. The price of the "tool" or "toy" is influenced by the fun it produces. RPGs are toys (as has been frequently pointed out) and are worth to me only what fun they particularly provide.

Matt, I suggest using an average happiness in your calculations of the particular game's worth that takes into acount that occasionally your players will not be up to snuff. I'm not saying that players are unimportant, but the system does not change in it's ability to help provide fun. That contribution of the system is what we're looking at as far as value. I cannot account for your players in my assessment of the value. I have to assume the average.

Mike

[Gordon C. Landis]

So, again, what is the question at hand?

As far as I can tell, the question actually being adressed is "How do you feel about prices for RPGs - in particular, shouldn't they be higher?"  Whether that's a good/productive line of inquiry/discussion is . . . another question.

Ignoring that question, attempting a direct answer (instead of leaping into the side deabtes), and stripped of attempting to support my explanations as to "why" (wherein lie several hundred side debates), my thought is: "RPG prices?  As far as I can tell, they ought to be a decent bit higher in order to support a healthy micro-industry.  I like the specialized textbook cost comparison.  But it's hard to justify that when the basic quality in terms of editing and etc. is so low."

Hope that counts as focusing things a bit,

Gordon

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Gordon,

It does help a bit, although I think that "What do you feel about ...", as a topic, is about as unsuitable as I can imagine.

Ralph, can you help? Your basic point was made in your first post. Is there anything else to ask, inquire, present for debate, or anything beyond "Share what you feel"?

Best,
Ron

[Valamir]

My purposes for this thread was basically this.

1) Prices are abnormally low compared with other prices and rates of inflation.

2) Gamers have come to expect these low prices and somehow think that they are entitled to $20, $25 game books

3) Publishers in my mind, are fearful of 2 things.  First that if they raise their prices too much they'll run into #2 above.  Second I think a lot of game designers themselves just don't think their product is WORTH more than current prices...because as gamers themselves, they also hold the irrational beliefs of #2.

4) The low prices make it so difficult to make money in this business, that we as gamers are robbed of seeing many promising games that never get published and see many cherished companies go under, and have to suffer through many ridiculous marketing schemes which companies try in an effort to get into the black.  In other words, the low prices may benefit our pocket books in the short run, but are fundamentally damageing in the long.


So ultimately I was hoping to, at least for the small group of both gamers and publishers here, put the issue of RPG prices into hard numbers to try and present an alternative way of thinking about how much an RPG game is worth rather than people just expecting every book to cost between X and Y because they've always cost between X and Y.


If enough people start to realize that its OK to pay $40 or $50 for an RPG book that they'll get many hours of enjoyment from, and that they aren't being ripped off, and if enough publishers (indie crowd included) starts to believe that its OK to charge what the product is actually worth rather than some artificially depressed price out of fear for lack of sales...than maybe some progress can be made on this issue.

The RPG gaming industry is the only one I can think of where the producers themselves willfully resist signals from consumers that they're willing to pay more.  Its boggling.

[Misguided Games]

Well, as the co-creator of a $39.95 product that starts hitting shelves tomorrow, my feeelings on this are probably easily guessed.  Truthfully, even in the current market, I think the book might be underpriced (well, that or some other things may be over-priced) as crazy as that sounds.  Having said that, I think pricing the book higher than 40 would have crossed one mental barrier too many and possibly done a lot of harm.

I don't think the textbook analogy holds up well.  Most people don't buy 100 dollar textbooks because they want to do a bit of light reading.  The counter-argument, of course, is that RPGs are a luxury item and many consumers are willing to pay a premium.

I'm happy with the cost to print Children of the Sun relative to the retail cost and I think we are providing a good value to customers.  Naturally, any assessment of value is subjective, and what I consider a good value may be viewed quite differently by others.

As for Laurel's comments, I doubt that publisher's raising prices is bad for small press.  On the one hand, I do see your point.  On the other, I think there are many people who equate value with inexpensive.  If many publishers start pushing prices upward, it leaves more room to slip products into the niches that have been vacated.  Then again, I suppose Gareth might argue that this isn't necessarily the case.  I'm not speaking from a position of fact, merely conjecture.

[Paul Czege]

Hey,

Gamers have come to expect these low prices and somehow think that they are entitled to $20, $25 game books...

The cynical response is that most $20-$25 game books are little more than the second rate fiction of frustrated authors, and provide purchasers, the vast majority of whom probably never actually play the game, with about the same amount of reading entertainment and wistful daydreaming as a hardcover novel. It's not a surprise the prices of game books and hardcover novels are in accord.

Being an indie designer and trying to price based on play value is like owning the nicest home in a run down neighborhood. If you put it on the market for what it would be worth in a good neighborhood, you won't sell it.

Paul

[Mike Holmes]

Being an indie designer and trying to price based on play value is like owning the nicest home in a run down neighborhood. If you put it on the market for what it would be worth in a good neighborhood, you won't sell it.

So now The Forge is a ghetto? Indie games are somehow less valuable simply because they are indie?

If there are that many crappy games out there, then surely you will not be upset if they are squeezed out by an increase in prices causing consumers to think twice. OTOH, as the author of Children of the Sun points out, if prices do go up, the garage sale price also goes up. In any case, the market improves for those making good games.

Believing that this is bad for the Indie game designer isn't cynical, it's self-loathing.

Mike

[Paul Czege]

Mike,

So now The Forge is a ghetto? Indie games are somehow less valuable simply because they are indie?

You are criminally misinterpreting what the cynic was saying. The cynic didn't say anything about "less valuable because they are indie." And he didn't say anything about prices going up being bad for the indie guy.

It's common knowledge in real estate that owning a run down house in an hot neighborhood is good for the value of the house. And certainly an overall increase in the price of games at large is good for the indie guy, regardless of how good his games are. But that wasn't what the cynic was talking about.

The actual issue for the indie guy is that he's selling into a neighborhood dominated by the run down AEG, Pinnacle, and White Wolf game books that consumers won't pay more for than $20-$29. The indie guy has a nice house for sale in a run down neighborhood.

Does Paul completely believe the cynic? No. He thinks it's possible for some premium products to sell at prices greater than those of the surrounding market landscape. But he also thinks there will be many excellent products produced that fail to do so.

Paul

[Valamir]

The actual issue for the indie guy is that he's selling into a neighborhood dominated by the run down AEG, Pinnacle, and White Wolf game books that consumers won't pay more for than $20-$29. The indie guy has a nice house for sale in a run down neighborhood.

Heh...well maybe if ABC Construction company starts building nice houses in that neighborhood, developers will come it bulldoze all the dilapadated ones and build a nice upscale neighborhood...;-)

On the other hand Hasbro might just put up another strip mall :-)

[Mike Holmes]

Ah, I see. We're talking about whether or not there's a potential in the RPG market for gentrification. No, not Mike, the other kind.

I think it can be done, personally.

Mike

[pigames]

The way I see it is that indie games serve an important purpose:

1. a direct competition to big business. Not with money, but with quality of writing and orginality of ideas. If someone spends a lot of time and money on design, layout, and publishing then it is worth more. Materials and labor costs can be high. If an indie publisher provides a game with comparable labor and appearance involved then it is worth the same amount as the big business version. Ideas do not change price labels-demand does. If a game concept is "fantastic" and becomes popular then it is worth more than something released by big business. But, because big business can spend more on marketing, and demand is lower on the indie game, it cannot have an equal value. So, basically, indie's have the potential to act as competition, but probably never will.

2. Indie games serve as an outlet for creativity. Rehashing D20 campaigns do nothing for most rpgers. But, new systems, simplification of systems, new themes, etc. are handled by big business only if there is a strong enough demand or enough money. It is the indie who often comes up with terrific new ideas or breathes new life into old concepts. Flash versus substance.


As far as changing MSRPs, go tell someone who buys one novel per week to pay $20 for them.

I know this seems like a rant --- it is. I just had to get it off my chest. Why does everything have to be a long winded debate? Nothing is ever as complicated as people make out.


Brett Bernstein
www.pigames.net

[pigames]

Sorry. I forgot something:


Q. How do you put worth on something as intangible as an idea?


A. By what people are willing to pay for it.


No offense to anyone here, but, I am not interested in paying $40 for a game. When I first saw the quality of WOTC's D&D, I would have probably paid $30 (I did for the White Wolf hardbacks). But, maybe I'm just getting old and need to face facts that phone calls are no longer a dime.