• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Negative reviews on Paradox Interactive games because of price increases

Stiler

Stiler

Member
ClosingADoor said:
Why wouldn't changing exchange rates have an impact on digital goods? The product is bought in a certain currency, the one making it is using another currency. So the price can change.

Supply and demand mechanics doesn't mean that once the game is digital, the demand side is taken out of the equation. At that point the demand makes pretty clear if your price is at a level the market accepts or not. If people stop buying Paradox games, their price is above a level the market accepts and they'll need to decrease again.

Why does it matter if there are other examples? I said that it is logical changing exchange rates and market circumstances have an impact on pricing. You said that is not how the market works. But it does. As others pointed out, Apple has changed App Store pricing because of exchange rates, which is also a digital good.

Prices on older items decrease, because people rather buy something new. There is no rule that says: your game is X years old, it now has to be decreased in price. If people keep buying it, the price is fine.

Of course people might disagree with in increase in price, and I get they are not used to it. But my only point you replied to was how prices can change because of certain circumstances, which it has here - at least in Paradox' view.
Click to expand...

You were saying that this (as in what Paradox has done) is how the market works. I'm trying to explain that it doesn't and it never has.

Games tend to be priced at what that market can handle in that specific region. A game in say, Russia for example, is much cheaper than that same game in the US. The longer a game is out the cheaper it goes as the attach rate for it drops over time they use the cheaper price to get more purchases as this aspect wains.

This is how the game market has worked for decades, regional pricing isn't a new thing.

What's new is a game releasing at retail and then 5 years later the price goes up, not down. It makes no sense, that's what I'm saying when I say "It's not how the market works."

You can't even give me a single example of a single game that has did this in the market, yet you're telling me it's how the market works.

This isn't an issue of supply/demand and it's not an issue of currency conversion.

People in Brazil haven't had a 100% increase in their income or "purchasing power" either.
 
C

ClosingADoor

Member
Stiler said:
You were saying that this (as in what Paradox has done) is how the market works. I'm trying to explain that it doesn't and it never has.

Games tend to be priced at what that market can handle in that specific region. A game in say, Russia for example, is much cheaper than that same game in the US. The longer a game is out the cheaper it goes as the attach rate for it drops over time they use the cheaper price to get more purchases as this aspect wains.

This is how the game market has worked for decades, regional pricing isn't a new thing.

What's new is a game releasing at retail and then 5 years later the price goes up, not down. It makes no sense, that's what I'm saying when I say "It's not how the market works."

You can't even give me a single example of a single game that has did this in the market, yet you're telling me it's how the market works.

This isn't an issue of supply/demand and it's not an issue of currency conversion.

People in Brazil haven't had a 100% increase in their income or "purchasing power" either.
Click to expand...
I think you misunderstand me. I mean that setting a certain price point is how the market works, and changing economics and exchange rates impact tat. We then find out of the market supports that price or not. If people in Brazil stop buying the game, it is clearly priced too high. If they are buying it in the same amount anyway, then the people buying it have enough money to pay the higher price.

For a lot of products, that is how the market works. We simply haven't seen any clear examples in gaming yet. But I don't see anything really wrong or unethical about it or anything. If the people in those regions don't want to pay that price, they won't and Paradox will need to change again. That is clearly the market at work then.

And changing exchange rates and other economic factors do play a role here, since Paradox is a company trying to make money in euro's. So if some currencies go down, they either eat the loss or up their price.

Is this a move to make a bit more money? Certainly, no argument there. I just don't see it as anything very wrong. These are entertainment products, not necessities, so I don't have any problem with changing prices.

I do agree that the purchasing power argument they put forward is a bit of a weak one and even if they have data about that, it's not a great PR move there.
 
R

Red Arremer

Member
ClosingADoor said:
Why wouldn't changing exchange rates have an impact on digital goods? The product is bought in a certain currency, the one making it is using another currency. So the price can change.

Supply and demand mechanics doesn't mean that once the game is digital, the demand side is taken out of the equation. At that point the demand makes pretty clear if your price is at a level the market accepts or not. If people stop buying Paradox games, their price is above a level the market accepts and they'll need to decrease again.

Why does it matter if there are other examples? I said that it is logical changing exchange rates and market circumstances have an impact on pricing. You said that is not how the market works. But it does. As others pointed out, Apple has changed App Store pricing because of exchange rates, which is also a digital good.

Prices on older items decrease, because people rather buy something new. There is no rule that says: your game is X years old, it now has to be decreased in price. If people keep buying it, the price is fine.

Of course people might disagree with in increase in price, and I get they are not used to it. But my only point you replied to was how prices can change because of certain circumstances, which it has here - at least in Paradox' view.
Click to expand...

But if prices were adjusted for "purchasing power", then why did the price for countries in recessions go up? And even IF this was an adjustment for currency exchange rates, do you really think the exchange rate has gone up by nearly 100%?

This argument is completely silly. The exchange rate for the Real, Rupee and Rubel definitely did not go up by 100%, and neither did the "purchasing power" of these countries using them. That excuse is utter bullshit.

As for digital storefronts, of course there's no "unwritten rule" that games have to stay at the same price tag or go down in cost, but that is the practice in the industry. I've never seen ANY publisher increase the price of their old games in certain regions, especially not to the extent Paradox is doing. If publishers adjust for increased economic power of a region, the generally simply release their future games for an increased price.

And in Paradox's situation, while yes they don't release full games very often, it's not like they are only patching their games for free and add content for no cost. Why didn't they just adjust the prices of their future DLC, then? That would've been much more widely accepted, and while there still would've likely been backlash, I doubt it would've gone this far.
 
A

Aselith

Member
Rolf NB said:
Steam reviews are embedded near the bottom of the product page. How can you even get there while still missing the part of the page, further up, with color highlights, where the price is displayed?
Click to expand...

I dunno that was kind of silly strawman in the first place so I didn't really take it seriously tbh
 
T

TheVoidDragon

Member
ClosingADoor said:
I think you misunderstand me. I mean that setting a certain price point is how the market works, and changing economics and exchange rates impact tat. We then find out of the market supports that price or not. If people in Brazil stop buying the game, it is clearly priced too high. If they are buying it in the same amount anyway, then the people buying it have enough money to pay the higher price.

For a lot of products, that is how the market works. We simply haven't seen any clear examples in gaming yet. But I don't see anything really wrong or unethical about it or anything. If the people in those regions don't want to pay that price, they won't and Paradox will need to change again. That is clearly the market at work then.

And changing exchange rates and other economic factors do play a role here, since Paradox is a company trying to make money in euro's. So if some currencies go down, they either eat the loss or up their price.

Is this a move to make a bit more money? Certainly, no argument there. I just don't see it as anything very wrong. These are entertainment products, not necessities, so I don't have any problem with changing prices.

I do agree that the purchasing power argument they put forward is a bit of a weak one and even if they have data about that, it's not a great PR move there.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is really arguing that the exchange rate and such shouldn't factor into the price of games, but retroactively updating your prices just so you aren't missing out on a bit of money seems unprecedented when it comes to games already released. The issue here is that they've decided to do something that goes against what other developers typically do, with their excuse not adding up as both countries with more purchasing power and less purchasing power have had the price increased.

Currency changes value all the time, but changing game prices to match that seems absurd. If they were physical goods that had manufacturing, delivery etc to factor in then it wouldn't be as much of a problem, but there is no difference between the game in one region or the next. If this had been a new game that they'd decided to increase price on, that wouldn't be so bad, but they're retroactively increased the prices of their older games suddenly which certainly isn't how it usually works for video games. They certainly aren't going to do the opposite of this and decrease the prices because of currency changes, either.

As well as that they claim it's to create a "more equal price point" despite there being huge differences in the $ equivalent for these games, they aren't any more equal at all.
 
K

KiraFA37

Member
See guys complaining does work, Paradox will be reverting the price increases after major community outcry. After the steam sales the prices will be reverted, no conspiracy here, they just can't change the price while the sale is ongoing without removing the games from sale, additionally if people bought the game they are eligable for a refund.

Source: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...cing-discussions.1031121/page-4#post-23000490

Hello all and thanks for your feedback, Following up from yesterday, this will sound a bit schizophrenic but I have really appreciated the reactions from this forum. I have spent the last 24 hours reading your comments and feedback and replying to email (fredrik.wester@paradoxplaza.com for all of you who didn't know it); during this time I came to a couple of conclusions:

1. In regards to the price changes you are absolutely right. You deserve more transparency and better communication from Paradox when it comes to changing of our prices and pricing policy. Therefore I have decided to roll back all price changes made; any price changes will have to be for future products well communicated in advance. I just came off the phone with Steam and they say we can't do the roll-back before the Summer Sale is over (otherwise it would mean we have to take all Paradox products off the summer sale) but it will be done right after. For anyone who bought any of the games during this time (including during the summer sale) we will try to refund (if possible in the Steam platform) or reimburse with games of a value exceeding the difference. If none of this is possible (I do not in detail know the limits to the Steam platform) we will internally calculate the difference in revenue before and after the price change, double the value, and donate the money to the UNHCR.

2. Some of the frustration has been expressed due to our DLC policy and how we handle additional content for our games. Since the release of Crusader Kings 2 (Feb 14, 2012) we have adopted a policy where we release paid content and at the same time content for free even if you do not want to pay for the DLC. This means that if you only paid for the original game, you still have a completely different game today with thousands of additions, upgrades and changes. This doesn't mean you should stop giving us feedback on how we conduct our business but if you straight out just hate our DLC policy I respectfully say that we have to agree to disagree.

3. I have promised myself never to give in to mob mentality; it's one of the worst things I know and a terrible way to convince me. In fact, being a pig-headed CEO of a company that has grown from 7 people to 225 during time I have had the privilege to run it, I have probably from time to time been more prone to say "no" than "yes" when people gang up on me/us to make us change our minds - I guess partly by principle not to cave in due to pressure. In this case, my change of stance has been made from communicating with people who have been active in our community for 10+ years, people who spent thousands of hours in our games and coming to the conclusions you find above.

Finally - as much as I love a good conspiracy theory; to be frank, the whole "Tencent bought 5% of Paradox and now they're all greedy" and "They're now a publicly traded company and therefore do things the market wish for" is below the level of intelligence of this community. I still hold 33.3% in Paradox, I am still CEO, board member and avid gamer. All you need to know is that the buck stops here. All problems/feedback can easily be sent my way, I will not always agree but I promise to listen.

Best
Fred
Click to expand...
 
M

m_dorian

Member
They will postpone their changes and try to find a way to soften the blow next time but the are not giving up on their decision.
They will rise their product's prices some time after the roll back, if i understand correctly their CEO's statement, the questions are when and how.

They insist on their current DLC bussiness strategy but they will "listen" to the complains. As far as i am concerned their DLC's were often overpriced and lacked content but it is true when the CEO said they usually offer free patches.
This, however, does not change the fact that their products are launched unfinished and they slowly take shape while DLCs roll.
 
T

Tertullian

Member
Good. Publisher behavior is 100% relevant to how good a game is as a product. If customers can expect (based on past behavior) that a publisher will treat them like shit, leave them stuck with broken or buggy games, nickel and dime them, treat them like guinea pigs for some executive's latest addle-brained money-making scheme, and so forth, then that publisher's games are worse products and a worse value proposition, and that fact should be refected in reviews.

I only wish factors like that were considered in all reviews, including initial reviews from major outlets. If a publisher has a solid history of scumbag behavior, their games are worse products right out of the gate, and they deserve worse review scores right out of the gate.
 
X

xealo

Member
This is why steam user reviews working the way they do is important, it gives the community a tool that the developer or publisher actually has a reason to care about, even if doing mass review bombing is a bit blunt in method.
 
T

TheVoidDragon

Member
Very pleased to see they're going to reverse the price change...but the comment about the DLC just seems to make that part of the situation even worse. Releasing free updates to fix a game that is unfinished or isn't really in a good state at release should not be something that justifies their absurd DLC policy of DLC that locks some important features behind paywalls, contains most of the actual content additions, is extremely overpriced for what you get and there's so much of it the game costs hundreds in the end.
 
X

xealo

Member
TheVoidDragon said:
Very pleased to see they're going to reverse the price change...but the comment about the DLC just seems to make that part of the situation even worse. Releasing free updates to fix a game that is unfinished or isn't really in a good state at release should not be something that justifies their absurd DLC policy of DLC that locks some important features behind paywalls, contains most of the actual content additions, is extremely overpriced for what you get and there's so much of it the game costs hundreds in the end.
Click to expand...

Part of the problem with this is that paradox really has no real competitor in their niche for more hardcore strategy games.

It can take hundreds of hours to even get to a point of being "decent" in EU4, but when you do there's little else available that offers that same long term depth seeing how a campaign can easily take players several dozen hours, bar other paradox games.

They're in a position where the community will support them doing just that as long as they don't try to rip them off too much, as proven by this outrage.
 
F

faridmon

Member
Lister said:
This makes no fucking sense. By that logic, all games should be free? Are you seriously positing that?

Dota is also a single map multiplayer game, not a rich, complex, single player strategy game.
Click to expand...
What the fuck am i reading?

Dota design spec is way more complex and rich than any Paradox game to date
 
StereoVsn

StereoVsn

Member
Phrozenflame500 said:
Yeah that really stimulated my neurons.

Still, alls well that ends well I guess.
Click to expand...
It sounds like a convenient excuse that he decided to pull prices just as the Steam sale started. Sure, I believe him.... Well at least this has proven to all the defenders in this thread that yeah, Steam review based messaging can work.
 
B

Budi

Member
xealo said:
This is why steam user reviews working the way they do is important, it gives the community a tool that the developer or publisher actually has a reason to care about, even if doing mass review bombing is a bit blunt in method.
Click to expand...
Not sure we should credit solely Steam bombing for it, rather consumer feedback overall. And let's see how these negative reviews turn into positive again now that they have shown that they listen to consumer feedback.
Not gonna happen.

Edit:
I have promised myself never to give in to mob mentality; it's one of the worst things I know and a terrible way to convince me. In fact, being a pig-headed CEO of a company that has grown from 7 people to 225 during time I have had the privilege to run it, I have probably from time to time been more prone to say "no" than "yes" when people gang up on me/us to make us change our minds - I guess partly by principle not to cave in due to pressure. In this case, my change of stance has been made from communicating with people who have been active in our community for 10+ years, people who spent thousands of hours in our games and coming to the conclusions you find above.

Finally - as much as I love a good conspiracy theory; to be frank, the whole "Tencent bought 5% of Paradox and now they're all greedy" and "They're now a publicly traded company and therefore do things the market wish for" is below the level of intelligence of this community. I still hold 33.3% in Paradox, I am still CEO, board member and avid gamer. All you need to know is that the buck stops here. All problems/feedback can easily be sent my way, I will not always agree but I promise to listen.
Click to expand...
Let's see if Rockstar and Sony are big enough to listen too.
 
W

Walshicus

Member
m_dorian said:
This, however, does not change the fact that their products are launched unfinished
Click to expand...

Does this really *mean* anything? I mean make a judgement on the game at launch if you want and decide if it fits your criteria for purchase... but I find the idea of a "finished" PDX game a little bit laughable to be honest given their support strategy.
 
H

HashtagLapsed

Member
I sort of see Paradox games like modern board games. The game is there and playable but usually a little wish for somethibg more here and there that expansions often address.
 
Lanrutcon

Lanrutcon

Member
Fred, I'm still waiting for you to share your "Purchasing Power" revelations with my country's government. You obviously know something our financial sector does not.
 
T

ThoseDeafMutes

Member
Walshicus said:
Does this really *mean* anything? I mean make a judgement on the game at launch if you want and decide if it fits your criteria for purchase... but I find the idea of a "finished" PDX game a little bit laughable to be honest given their support strategy.
Click to expand...

It's especially unclear what a "finished" game means when they're comparing say, EU4 1.0 to EU3 with 4x 20 dollar expansion packs, or HoI4 to HoI3 with 3x 20 dollar expansion packs. If they ship CK3 ever there's no way in hell it can have everything from CK2 at launch, or even "most of it". They're painting themselves into a corner with their pseudo games-as-a-service model because they are creating so much content over so many years any successor will look feature stripped unless they treble their dev team size and spend twice as long making and polishing it before release. Or just recreate the exact same game already bloated with several extraneous mechanics and just update the graphics engine.

Each new game is a fresh start to try a new crack at the same basic game idea with better tech. But while making sequels to their long running games has been challenging-but-feasible in the past, future titles will be nightmarish.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
ThoseDeafMutes said:
It's especially unclear what a "finished" game means when they're comparing say, EU4 1.0 to EU3 with 4x 20 dollar expansion packs, or HoI4 to HoI3 with 3x 20 dollar expansion packs. If they ship CK3 ever there's no way in hell it can have everything from CK2 at launch, or even "most of it". They're painting themselves into a corner with their pseudo games-as-a-service model because they are creating so much content over so many years any successor will look feature stripped unless they treble their dev team size and spend twice as long making and polishing it before release. Or just recreate the exact same game already bloated with several extraneous mechanics and just update the graphics engine.

Each new game is a fresh start to try a new crack at the same basic game idea with better tech. But while making sequels to their long running games has been challenging-but-feasible in the past, future titles will be nightmarish.
Click to expand...

I agree. In fact, never mind the next game, the marginal gains from any additional DLC now are so minor that it's very hard for them to look attractive. They really need to move on to the next cycle at this point before either the standard is just not surpassable or before their games reach that horrid bloatware stage that affects long-running service titles. I'm about ready for CK3 and EU5; I don't have any interest in any more expansions.
 
T

ThoseDeafMutes

Member
Crab said:
I agree. In fact, never mind the next game, the marginal gains from any additional DLC now are so minor that it's very hard for them to look attractive. They really need to move on to the next cycle at this point before either the standard is just not surpassable or before their games reach that horrid bloatware stage that affects long-running service titles. I'm about ready for CK3 and EU5; I don't have any interest in any more expansions.
Click to expand...

I think three years of support is probably the ideal amount, maybe four at a stretch. We would miss the reaper's due which was well recieved and monks and mystics which was less so, but wouldn't disease mechanics and secret cults with a basic inventory have been great bullet points for CK3?

I don't think it's entirely accurate to say the dlc is all uniformly bad later and clearly better early, eu4 was a bit woeful until art of war. But they need to get better at figuring out when enough is enough. If they find the breaking point where people don't want any more ck2 expansions, then they've probably burned out and or alienated people from wanting to buy CK3. Basic rule - leave them wanting more.
 
T

TheVoidDragon

Member
I realized that what he said is an entire non-apology. There's no mention of how the "purchasing power" reason doesn't add up, or how retroactively increasing prices of games is unprecedented (even though they claim otherwise), or how poor countries are now paying more than the USD equivalent, his entire 'apology' about the price increase focuses on how they just suddenly changed them and the lack of communication, as if that's the reason why everyone was against it.
 
K

kinoki

Illness is the doctor to whom we pay most heed; to kindness, to knowledge, we make promise only; pain we obey.
I remember a time when Steam only had Euro which made it a lot cheaper than anywhere else here in Sweden. Of course Valve closed that loophole once publishers realised how much money they could have made. Also, this is perfectly normal for a company to do. Their purpose is to make money and offering a product cheaper in one region isn't exactly in their best interest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Phil Spencer "Game Pass price increase is inevitable in the Future"
2 3 4 5 6
281
16K
Mr Reasonable replied
Phil Spencer on Price Increases: “We hold on as long as we can”
Game Dev Platform
26
3K
AngelMuffin replied
Capcom suggests it could release more $70 games after Dragon’s Dogma 2
Business
39
2K
SmokedMeat replied
Sony has significantly increased PlayStation game prices on Steam in some countries including Canada and Japan.
News 2 3 4
168
9K
kvltus lvlzvs replied
  • Poll
Game "sales" and other on-going scams
2
60
3K
Klosshufvud replied
Top Bottom