How much should Vintage Story cost?

[Tyron]

I've been wanting to raise the price for almost half a year now but it's hard to say what the true value of a game is. So perhaps you can help me decide :-)

Some of my arguments for raising the price

• Adjust USD price to the new EUR<=>USD exchange rate (where I live in need EUR). It's gone up 10-15% since the day I introduced the game
• Compared to the first purchasable version of the game there is now a fully playable survival mode that offers a decent amount of hours of interesting game play and a well working  multiplayer mode (and tons of other new features)
• I'd like the price to also reflect that this is a high quality craft and not a cheap rip-off

Please let me know what you think! Thank you!

[MarcAFK]

At this early stage theres an argument it should be worth $15-20, I've paid more for early access games that are less engrossing either due to bugs, or unworking but promised multiplayer features.  Some have better graphics, most have far more 'stuff' or 'features'. But don't hold particularly much longevity due to either new features being a long time apart or just because there just isn't really much to do.  Certain types of survival sandbox like minecraft have longevity because of the alterable environment, and communal features. That said most of Vintage Story's value right now is the as yet virtually unexplored modding and multiplayer potential.

I don't know if the game price tag is even funding development right now, many small independent games don't pay the bills untill they're at least 90% towards release, so raising the price considerably might not make economic sense anyway. 

That said small indie open world sandboxes I tend to by when on sale for around 10 bucks, play for a day or 2 then ignore while waiting for actually engrossing features. VS is a superbly atmospheric experience and I eagerly await a time when it's ready for hosting a large persistent online community.

Edited February 17, 2018 by MarcAFK

[Tyron]

Oh, thanks for the feedback marc, that is quite humbling. I did not expect the poll to start out like that

It's not even funding 10% of the development/running costs right now, but every purchase makes our lives a little easier and is funding our motivation centers to keep working on it harder :-)

[copygirl]

Quote

• I'd like the price to also reflect that this is a high quality craft and not a cheap rip-off

On one hand, the game is certainly polished enough to be "worth more" but I'm not sure there's ever a good middle. There's bad games that are more expensive, there's good games that are cheap. I would certainly pay more, but people who've not heard of the game could dismiss it because of it. Keeping the price low would lower the barrier of entry, would allow people to buy the game for friends easily to join in. Minecraft's likely benefited from its price early on, and only raised it after it reached a decent popularity.

So I'm a little torn on this. A way to mediate one of the issues would be to offer a discounted price for buying the games multiple times for friends (and yourself). Then again I almost feel like by keeping the price low you might show more commitment to improving the game and attracting more players, rather than cashing out early.

edit: With @Stroam chiming in as well I guess my vote will be for don't raise it, but obviously with a big "not yet". Thanks for laying out some of the data for Minecraft's rise to popularity and when the price was raised!

Edited February 17, 2018 by copygirl

[Stroam]

When Minecraft came out of alpha it went up to 10 euros back in June 2010. It had the overworld, biomes, the basic mobs, custom skins, minecarts, crafting, dungeons, creative multiplayer, and passed 20,000 in sales. When it jumped to 15 euros in December 2010, it had added redstone, boats, survival multiplayer, more mobs, more building blocks, sneaking, compasses, and the nether.

One of the stunts Minecraft pulled was to make the game free to play when the authentication server went down for a weekend which made the news and pulled in a lot of new players who bought it when the servers came back online. I would say definitely not at the 15 euro mark yet. However, 8 years have passed since that release of Minecraft, inflation, and everything I could see 10 euros. I do like copygirls' idea of early adopters being able to buy copies at the origonal purchase price for friends and family. I think a couple free trial weekends at key times when kids get out of school for the summer or go on break would help bring in fresh players.

I am still going to vote don't raise it because it seems like the intelligent way to go. The barrier to entry needs to be low enough that the game can build momentum. A player base that will attract more players. I joined very recently and did so because of the youtube videos, seeing some people I was familiar with in discord, it's comparison to TFC, but mostly because I was looking for a project. I was already looking into various Minecraft clones to see what was out there. Something I could contribute to and help shape and I feel that is the state VS is currently in. 

Tangent: Because I'm tired.

Spoiler

I am reminded of a project I did about 9 years ago when I bought some mahogany and made some really nice go boards out of it. I cut the wood, rounded the edges and corners, hand painted perfectly straight lines, and put three layers of Lacquer on it, took some cloth and made custom bags to hold the stones. In order to recoup the costs, I had to sell the two extra boards for 35 dollars each. I figured 15 dollars shipping and handling so posted them for 50 dollars on a couple sites. To this day I still have those spare go boards and I do not regret never being able to sell them. In fact, at this point they have become priceless, more fit as precious gifts then to be sold.

 

[redram]

I think it's worth the $12.50 and that's what I voted for, though I can also see logic in trying to keep it low to attract more players.  I think the game still has a ways to go to demand more than this.  There's no armor system, no animal husbandry, crops are pretty unrewarding, biomes are patchwork.  It looks at first glance like it's on par with TFC but it's really not there yet.  I'd say once feature parity with TFC is reach maybe 15.  Then beyond 20?  I don't buy games hardly at all anymore though, so I don't exactly have a lot to compare with.

At the same time, I wonder how broad the audience is?  There's just started to be some lets-play videos, and its caused a spike in interest for sure.  I'd hate to see most of the 'natural' player base buy it too early on the cheap.  But maybe that base is much broader than I think...

Edited February 17, 2018 by redram

[HelDM]

I've voted on 10 Euro's. (I think in Euro's not dollars, sorry).

I don't think 10 Euro's will scare off enough people and when you want to raise it later on, you don't have to pass the magic '10 bucks' barrier. It's easier to price up from 10 then from 8. 

That been said, I strongly believe that the opinions of Stroam and Copygirl are valid. I'm no marketing expert, and I believe this game is worth more then 10 Euro's, but keeping it very accessible early on might be the right way to go. 

[Soloquendi]

A modest price increase to 10E for now, with stepped increases to 16E for each large increase in content.  When finished, to me it would be worth 20E easily.  The fact that it is moddable makes it worth more, in my opinion than a lot of games by big studios. 

[tony Liberatto]

I also voted for the 10E, mainly because I think the game even though is playable lacks some basic features. I like the game, I believe in the project enough to buy it and support it.

I just think the comparisons are inevitable and most of the player base already own Minecraft, so in their mind, the question is: "Why should I pay money for a Minecraft like game, if I can just download a mod for free?"

Like I said, not my question, but I believe it would be for many people.

[Noel Bennett]

I'm happy with spending the 8.00 EUR to purchase the game in its current state, and another 10.00 EUR ($22 and change in USD, total) to fund its development, taking a chance on where it goes from here.

Count me in as another TFC player who was dissatisfied with the issues inherent in using Minecraft 1.7.10 as its base, and really unhappy with the direction that TF2 is taking. I'm happy to be able to vote with my wallet and fund the development of Vintage Story instead. 

[Daniel Gardner]

Minecraft is still the 800-pound gorilla of the voxel sandbox genre for one reason: community. People don't play Minecraft for its inefficient engine or difficult mod support, they play it despite these things because it's what everyone is already playing and there's a large enough fan base to motivate a few talented modders to overcome the barrier and produce impressive mods. Minecraft has a huge financial advantage as the game that popularized the genre. They could get away with the prices they asked because they had no competition to speak of. If you hope to have any chance whatsoever of surviving where so many others have failed, I strongly suspect that raising the barrier of entry and thereby stunting the growth of your fledgling community is not the correct decision for long-term growth. I am of the opinion that the barrier of entry should be reduced, if not removed entirely, while providing a way for users who have both the means and the motivation to donate more to do so. The more users who are willing to take a risk on your entry price (and to be honest, even $9 is too big a risk for me; I've been burned too many times), the more friends and family they will want to share the game with, assuming they find it worth sharing.

[Tyron]

4 hours ago, Daniel Gardner said:

(and to be honest, even $9 is too big a risk for me; I've been burned too many times)

Maybe we can also lower the average players risk evaluation somehow?  
And please do tell me of your bad experiences. Perhaps I can learn something from it.

[Daniel Gardner]

16 minutes ago, Tyron said:

Maybe we can also lower the average players risk evaluation somehow?  
And please do tell me of your bad experiences. Perhaps I can learn something from it.

Two somewhat related games I've bought on impulse then wound up regretting are TUG and GRAV. TUG seduced me with amazing concept art and Kickstarter promises that I should have known better than to believe, but I bought in anyhow on the slim ray of hope that they would somehow deliver. They didn't. Something about the music and visuals of the first GRAV promo I watched grabbed me hard and refused to let go (same with No Man's Sky, but I thankfully dodged that bullet), but where I'm the the kid in the sandbox actually building a castle, most of the people playing GRAV seem to be the kids who come over and kick it down. Toxic community aside, it was also too much grind without enough creative options to hold my interest.

[Tyron]

14 hours ago, Daniel Gardner said:

Two somewhat related games I've bought on impulse then wound up regretting are TUG and GRAV. TUG seduced me with amazing concept art and Kickstarter promises that I should have known better than to believe, but I bought in anyhow on the slim ray of hope that they would somehow deliver. They didn't. Something about the music and visuals of the first GRAV promo I watched grabbed me hard and refused to let go (same with No Man's Sky, but I thankfully dodged that bullet), but where I'm the the kid in the sandbox actually building a castle, most of the people playing GRAV seem to be the kids who come over and kick it down. Toxic community aside, it was also too much grind without enough creative options to hold my interest.

Looked at the TUG kickstarter, some lets play videos and their forum and kickstarter updates. That original kickstarter video they seemed to be promising a dozen of very vaguely described mechanics and they "only" delievered a decent survival game with multiplayer and mod support. Was that the issue?

[Daniel Gardner]

On 3/6/2018 at 8:59 AM, Tyron said:

Looked at the TUG kickstarter, some lets play videos and their forum and kickstarter updates. That original kickstarter video they seemed to be promising a dozen of very vaguely described mechanics and they "only" delievered a decent survival game with multiplayer and mod support. Was that the issue?

Crowd-sourcing is a way to disrupt the natural order of things and get paid by the general public for work you haven't yet done. It works by making promises and building trust that you will get the work done and deliver on said promises. Making games is hard; believe me when I say I understand that. Normally, making a decent survival game with multiplayer and mod support would be a praiseworthy achievement.

I'm not here to be negative or disruptive. I'm here because this project has my interest and I wish to see it succeed. I'm offering my opinion as someone who hasn't yet bought the game and can't afford to buy every game of interest, which I suspect can be said of most of your potential market.

[Tyron]

23 minutes ago, Daniel Gardner said:

Crowd-sourcing is a way to disrupt the natural order of things and get paid by the general public for work you haven't yet done. It works by making promises and building trust that you will get the work done and deliver on said promises. Making games is hard; believe me when I say I understand that. Normally, making a decent survival game with multiplayer and mod support would be a praiseworthy achievement.

I'm not here to be negative or disruptive. I'm here because this project has my interest and I wish to see it succeed. I'm offering my opinion as someone who hasn't yet bought the game and can't afford to buy every game of interest, which I suspect can be said of most of your potential market.

I didn't mean to be negative either. I'm just genuinely interested in what counts as the "failure state" for some of these flopped kickstarter games, so that I can learn from it :-)
Just wanted to hear your personal opinion on what was it that made TUG a disappointment for you.
 

[Daniel Gardner]

5 minutes ago, Tyron said:

I didn't mean to be negative either. I'm just genuinely interested in what counts as the "failure state" for some of these flopped kickstarter games, so that I can learn from it :-)
Just wanted to hear your personal opinion on what was it that made TUG a disappointment for you.
 

Fair enough.

Ultimately, the main problem is that TUG the promise captured my imagination, my heart, and my wallet, while TUG the game inherited my cash, but has yet to earn the other two. The visual appeal of the game has, in my opinion, fallen well short of the concept art. The game engine struggles far more than I feel it should to deliver the quality of visuals that it does (one of my primary complaints about Minecraft). The in-world crafting system feels awkward and unreliable (from what I've seen, by the way, I approve of Vintage Story's use of templates to strike a balance between immersion and user-friendliness). I'd be far more patient in waiting for the promised content to be delivered if I felt the game was a solid foundation upon which to build it, but at this point I sadly don't.

[Tyron]

23 hours ago, Daniel Gardner said:

Fair enough.

Ultimately, the main problem is that TUG the promise captured my imagination, my heart, and my wallet, while TUG the game inherited my cash, but has yet to earn the other two. The visual appeal of the game has, in my opinion, fallen well short of the concept art. The game engine struggles far more than I feel it should to deliver the quality of visuals that it does (one of my primary complaints about Minecraft). The in-world crafting system feels awkward and unreliable (from what I've seen, by the way, I approve of Vintage Story's use of templates to strike a balance between immersion and user-friendliness). I'd be far more patient in waiting for the promised content to be delivered if I felt the game was a solid foundation upon which to build it, but at this point I sadly don't.

Ok I see, thanks for the feedback. I suppose then it's a good thing that I spent a notable amount of time in building a solid foundation  
There's not gonna be an engine rewrite in the foreseeable future. All the planned features should work within the existing engine. Anyhow. I welcome you to stay and see how VS progresses. No harm done in waiting.

[Lincoln]

Quote

 

 

[Peter Siederer]

15 € is a good price for a game in developing!!

[Torondor the Builder]

While I realize that this thread is old, I paid $17 USD in Sept. 2020 for the game.  Given that it appears to be regularly updated and the modding community (which I have not yet even bothered exploring), I would easily have paid $25 for it.  That said, I am someone who rarely takes on a new game so I can see how keeping it a bit lower makes it more appealing and accessible to people who are more varying in their gameplay and may not immerse themselves in every game they get.  I can certainly say that I have already easily gotten my money’s worth out of it and am likely to donate via Patron once my move is complete and the new year begins.  Thanks again!

[Lesdmark]

Just from watching McJty's playthrough so far I decided to purchase the game. Even if I end up not liking it that much I still believe in the concept enough to contribute to it financially.

[marc saunders]

Hi All

I've just bought the game and was happy to pay the $25 for the title. At that price it was within my budget to give the extra funds for the supporter addon. I may not have chosen to do that if the game were higher in price though. Perhaps that 's a consideration for this topic.

[Kioku]

While I feel the game looks like it would be worth $15, that would be if and only if several of my friends also got it, which they won't.  The $17 it would cost me right now isn't worth it for only the single player experience (which is all I'd be getting since no friends having it means no multiplayer), it would need to have a sale bringing it down to $10 for that, or some sort of bundle discount for far fewer than twenty copies at a time - more like three or four copies - so that I could convince said friends to give it a chance.

[Jeremy McArthur]

I don’t know a good price but I DO feel it’s definitely worth more than $18! I would pay 25$ maybe even 30$ if there were more content (mostly story/adventure/fighting)