I backed PP back in the day paying through XSolla for 30 USD (27 euros).
Now, on Epic Games Store, for the Epic Mega Sale, it is on sale in pre-purchased at 22 euros.
That’s 18% less!
I think Snapshot Games should somehow treat its original backers, who are even willing to use the Epic Games Store, a bit better than it does.
I don’t want money, I’m just saying they should somehow “upgrade” or add some in-game stuff for those who believed in it way back before it got on the radar and were willing to SUPPORT the team and understand that the cut Steam takes is too much these days.
A stupid additional in-game code for a special gun or armor or even an in-game “badge” or whatever would suffice. Just to show they care.
We appreciate what you’re saying. It is only a temporary sale, though. With the additional $10/£10/€10 that Epic are offering, it does make the price slightly lower at the moment. However, that’s not the actual sale price - which is still higher than it was during Fig/Xsolla. It’s the application of the €10 credit from Epic making it look cheaper.
I have to protect Snapshot Games and the others here, these discount come from Epic Games and will be payed from EG and not SG! There is no reason for SG to balance this for everyone else (even more than they do yet).
If you want to be pissed off by it, you can be pissed of at Epic Games (again).
Just to be clear… yes Steam takes money, they need money to pay their employees, infrastructure, e.g. maybe 30% is too much, but you still get a well running platform with many features.
Epic Games takes at 33€ 12%, so rounded 4€, now they give you 10€ so they make 6€ loss. No company that has to make money can afford it in the long run. I don’t think EG is such a good-natured company, someone has to pay for it and in many cases it is not the executives (that have the money)!
Just think about it.
The thing with sales is that they do set a perception of a game’s value in the minds of its customers.
If a game has been on sale at price x once, then it’s going to hit that same price x again, and everybody knows it. Whether that sale price was set by the dev or the retailer is by the by, you’ve still set a precedent.
Speaking personally, I don’t really care what price Phoenix Point sells at, I’m happy with what I originally paid. But I do worry that putting PP on sale before it’s even launched will hurt its future selling power, and it worries me a bit if I consider why it was necessary to put it on sale so soon.
The thing is, Phoenix Point isn’t really on sale. What is technically happening is that the game is still full price and Epic are giving you a $10/£10 credit.
I know to many people that makes no difference - as far as they are concerned, it’s a sale and they’re getting the game $10 lower than the marked price - but the game isn’t actually reduced in cost. Someone is giving you a tenner towards it.
@pid Did you back Phoenix Point to support the project, or to get as good of a deal as possible? If the second one, then waiting for a sale a wee bit after release might have been a better option. On a flip side, you do get DLC and an extra key, so it is still a better deal, no?
Though I feel ya. This is one idea, why current generous Epic Store sale might not be such a win/win as it might have seen.
As UV mentioned, none of the games on Epic are actually discounted: devs and publishers still get the full price. Just this time Epic is throwing its money toward customers, selling them games at a loss.
Frankly, I didn’t expect the backlash from some of the big boys (Bloodlines, Ubi, Gearbox), though I heard a suggestion the devaluing games before the even release might be quite harmful for long term sales.
They just can’t seem to get a good PR, no matter how they try. I am sure they did get some people to instal an Epic Store , which was ultimately the point.
But that’s a distinction without a difference. “It’s not on sale even though you pay less” IS a sale for the consumer. At which point what SpiteAndMalice very much comes into play. There’s going to be a section of consumers that WILL wait for it to go back on sale since it’s already been on sale once. The fact that YOU (SG) weren’t the ones to put it on sale won’t matter to them. The precedent for it being on sale has already been set.
First off, thank you for your answer. I wan’t aware about the year 1 DLC, this obviously levels everything and makes my initial post totally irrelevant!
Actually, I am more than pleased by this good news!
Let’s say “pissed off” is kind of harsh and it wasn’t my wording in the first place.
Still, as Satoru cleared up, it’s a non-problem because SG already took care of us backers!
Thank you, too, and thanks to everyone contributing to clearing up this misunderstanding I had!
Actually, I backed the project to back it up and not to get a better deal. This is because of the big name behind PP and me having played all prior titles on Amiga as a kid.
But a genuine intention of seeing a project like this coming to fruition does not mean that I’m completely uninterested in all these other aspects.
Even in history, patrons of artists were primarily interested in art, but still wouldn’t ignore economic/political aspects.
I don’t think this changes today. Saying “I wanted to back it up” doesn’t at all exclude all the rest…
The actual counter-argument here is the “Year 1 DLC” I wasn’t aware of.
Saying that “it is only a temporary sale” or “it’s not sale, it’s Epic’s money” has not much leverage, really.
Customers don’t know and don’t care about “internal logic”, they are interested in the final outcome.
But as a moderator You get the final word here.
And again, I’m very pleased by what SG is doing!
Thank you for the answer.
The 1 Year DLC was something they gave because of how they went back on their word on how the game would be distributed at launch. Epic came along and gave them more money than all of the backers combined so that Snapshot would make their game a timed-exclusive on the Epic Game Store. This in turn upset a lot of people have we have no desire to use EGS among other things, and as such Snapshot threw in the first year of DLC along with a second game key (one for EGS and the second for either Steam or GoG, your choice). This is only for backers who bought in prior to the EGS-exclusive announcement.
So I wouldn’t call the 1 year DLC as the counter-argument here as it was thrown in for a completely different reason. Not that I think SG owes anyone anything just because of Epic already putting the game on sale. Well except maybe Epic who should get a talking to. Given how this “not really a sale” is merely a distinction without a difference, I know I wouldn’t be overly happy about such a move without first being consulted.
I wouldn’t call it pathetic, I would call it a misunderstanding. I would say it’s understandable to be upset about backing a game at X price, only for that price to suddenly go down before the game is released (even if only temporary). This price drop isn’t the doing of SG but is a price drop nonetheless so it shouldn’t be a surprise that some people would be upset about it (and imo would be a reason for SG to talk to Epic about it as the sale doesn’t really help SG’s PR).
And while this is still a sale no matter how SG tries to spin it, it is still useful for people to understand that it’s a sale not of SG’s doing. As such SG doesn’t really owe people who paid more any compensation, much like if one were to buy a game on sale via Amazon, GMG, etc vs full price at some other vendor. I would say that the sale doesn’t help with the PR of backers given how people are already upset over the switch to EGS, and the sale creates a potential optics problem given that the game hasn’t released and some people will wait to buy a game if they know it’s already been on sale once before. But I wouldn’t call the people who feel jilted pathetic, just that they don’t fully understand the situation.
I…do not know of the LUX-sales. But possibly. I mean I know I had a hard time buying a game for console (back when I still did that) if I knew the game had seen a reasonable sale for PC. Likewise there have been plenty of games that I’ve put off on buying when I know I’ve missed a decent sale on said game. Though that is kind of key, one has to know that there was a sale.
I also remember reading an article awhile back where a developer talked about sales and how one has to be careful with them. They then used their own game to show how one of the sales actually lost them money because while there was an initial increase in sales (enough to make up for the lower profit margin), by the end of the sale traffic had dropped to a point where they made less during said sale than what they made before/after the sale for the same number of days.