Feature in wishlist where you can set the price you're willing to pay for a game.
It would be cool if in your wishlist you could set the amount you'd be willing to pay before buying a game. This feature could be communicated to the developer as well and lead to potential pricing changes or flash sales.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 22 comments
Brian9824 11 Mar @ 1:57pm 
Developers are not going to take the price people list into consideration, it will consist of people putting extremely low numbers in. There is usually a standard price drop cycle they tend to follow with drops getting bigger as the game ages.
That's an interesting idea. It can give developers a gauge in what the sweet spot may be in regards to pricing. There's an early access game i'll buy, but not for 29.99. I'd pay 19.99 though.
Steam is not really a haggling store, though. It could be misused to sent "1 cent" as idea since paying nothing would make some happy. The devs or publishers have better things to do than follow a price recommendation set by users for a possible sale...

Besides, you can always use the forums if you want to communicate such wishes. Not trying to shoot your idea down but like, it's probably not something Steam would do. The only real place you can haggle for a game is bundle websites or the likes, if any.
RmX ☠ 11 Mar @ 2:10pm 
Yup, knowing people they would put the lowest number possible on every game.
Most of the time I don't spend more than $30 on the game, except if there's any game I'm hyped about, like GTA VI
Originally posted by xBCxRangers:
That's an interesting idea. It can give developers a gauge in what the sweet spot may be in regards to pricing. There's an early access game i'll buy, but not for 29.99. I'd pay 19.99 though.
What you say you'd be willing to pay and what you actually can end up paying are two very different things. And developers know that.

You say you'd pay 19.99, but they know they can squeeze 29.99 off you on the long game.

People saying "I'd buy that for a dollar" on their wishlist won't make the dev sell it for a dollar. It's not valid market research.
I think taking an average from what prices people set would give developers a better number. Of course dumb people would put a cent but most people willing to use the feature would probably be reasonable enough. Because like someone already said there are games I'd be willing to pay a certain amount for and if I and a ton of other can communicate that to the developers that'd be a plus.

You could probably also mitigate unreasonable settings with a percentage per game. Like not being able to go below fifty percent or something. Just ball parking, but developers are more likely to look at wish list analytics than random forum posts saying what people would rather pay.
Originally posted by Tito Shivan:
Originally posted by xBCxRangers:
That's an interesting idea. It can give developers a gauge in what the sweet spot may be in regards to pricing. There's an early access game i'll buy, but not for 29.99. I'd pay 19.99 though.
What you say you'd be willing to pay and what you actually can end up paying are two very different things. And developers know that.

You say you'd pay 19.99, but they know they can squeeze 29.99 off you on the long game.

People saying "I'd buy that for a dollar" on their wishlist won't make the dev sell it for a dollar. It's not valid market research.

The proof is in the pudding. If 1000 people say hey i'd pay 19.99 instead of 29.99 and then of that 1000 say 250 actually do that's still a quarter of everyone that said they would buy it at that price. The worst that happened is you made money you wouldn't have made otherwise and in that case you may have attracted people who didn't even have it wishlisted.

I can also assure you there are plenty of people who are hardliners on not paying a certain amount until it drops.
Originally posted by Tito Shivan:
Originally posted by xBCxRangers:
That's an interesting idea. It can give developers a gauge in what the sweet spot may be in regards to pricing. There's an early access game i'll buy, but not for 29.99. I'd pay 19.99 though.
What you say you'd be willing to pay and what you actually can end up paying are two very different things. And developers know that.

You say you'd pay 19.99, but they know they can squeeze 29.99 off you on the long game.

People saying "I'd buy that for a dollar" on their wishlist won't make the dev sell it for a dollar. It's not valid market research.

I think this would probably help more in EA, where smaller developers would welcome what they feel others would be willing to pay. It's just an aid, nothing beyond that.
Originally posted by xBCxRangers:

I think this would probably help more in EA, where smaller developers would welcome what they feel others would be willing to pay. It's just an aid, nothing beyond that.

It's an idea that would be nice if everyone was honest about it. The reality is that most people won't be. People will still put in the lowest price possible, some may even put an absurdly high price too. Either way, there's no benefit to anyone
Originally posted by datCookie:
Originally posted by xBCxRangers:

I think this would probably help more in EA, where smaller developers would welcome what they feel others would be willing to pay. It's just an aid, nothing beyond that.

It's an idea that would be nice if everyone was honest about it. The reality is that most people won't be. People will still put in the lowest price possible, some may even put an absurdly high price too. Either way, there's no benefit to anyone

You're ignoring the overall point of averages. The developers don't care if 100 out of 1000 people put two cents. What they'd theoretically receive on their end is an analytic graph showing what wishlist averages are. Amounting to yes there are 100 people delusional or bad faith saying they'd pay two cents but the overall overage wishlist requested price is say 19.99.
Originally posted by xBCxRangers:
Originally posted by Tito Shivan:
What you say you'd be willing to pay and what you actually can end up paying are two very different things. And developers know that.

You say you'd pay 19.99, but they know they can squeeze 29.99 off you on the long game.

People saying "I'd buy that for a dollar" on their wishlist won't make the dev sell it for a dollar. It's not valid market research.

I think this would probably help more in EA, where smaller developers would welcome what they feel others would be willing to pay. It's just an aid, nothing beyond that.

Precisely this. It's just a tool that can be used or ignored depending on the developer. It wouldn't hurt or hinder anything to have it.
Originally posted by Biomass Liquidator Client NT:
Originally posted by xBCxRangers:

I think this would probably help more in EA, where smaller developers would welcome what they feel others would be willing to pay. It's just an aid, nothing beyond that.

Precisely this. It's just a tool that can be used or ignored depending on the developer. It wouldn't hurt or hinder anything to have it.

And not only that, we can have discussions how it can be implemented.

If a small developer can have a "scale" say from 9.99 to 199. 99 and can even get those player logs of those who have bought the game, and how much time invested (say like the reviews show), i can say i bought the game for 19.99, and put that on the scale as a fair price.

But if they see i put 200 hours into a recent 19.99 game, they can decide to even raise the price if that is the concensus. Its just a tool for newer developers.
Tito Shivan 11 Mar @ 3:31pm 
Originally posted by xBCxRangers:
I think this would probably help more in EA, where smaller developers would welcome what they feel others would be willing to pay. It's just an aid, nothing beyond that.
Steam already offers them that info. And based in more grounded data than "Timmy said he'd pay 9.99 tops"

Originally posted by Biomass Liquidator Client NT:
Precisely this. It's just a tool that can be used or ignored depending on the developer. It wouldn't hurt or hinder anything to have it.
"I wishlisted MW2 at 5.99... Why isn't the dev discounting it?"

Originally posted by datCookie:
It's an idea that would be nice if everyone was honest about it. The reality is that most people won't be.
Valve has the previous lesson of Greenlight in regards the disconnect between what people say they would do and what they actually go and do.
Last edited by Tito Shivan; 11 Mar @ 3:32pm
Originally posted by Biomass Liquidator Client NT:
most people willing to use the feature would probably be reasonable enough.

Have you met people? They aren't reasonable at all
datCookie 11 Mar @ 3:41pm 
Originally posted by Biomass Liquidator Client NT:

You're ignoring the overall point of averages. The developers don't care if 100 out of 1000 people put two cents. What they'd theoretically receive on their end is an analytic graph showing what wishlist averages are. Amounting to yes there are 100 people delusional or bad faith saying they'd pay two cents but the overall overage wishlist requested price is say 19.99.

Not really ignoring that point, but how many people would actually use this function to where it could be considered representative of the target audience? If a game has 1 million interested players and 1000 of them used this function and of the average price turned out to be something like $80 (where the devs were initially thinking a nice price of $30), how many of those 1 million players would actually pay that?

What would stop developers from abusing this system? They could just point to it and say "This is the average price that people said they'd be willing to pay, so we chose that".

Sorry, this system isn't a good thing, it benefits no one and I can't see it being implemented anyway.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 22 comments
Per page: 1530 50