Has Matrix ever considered releasing old games at competitive prices?

[jaxpac]

I think if a game is still selling at a reasonable rate then of course keep the price high. But of all the games on this site, there are surely many of them that are no longer selling. I just can't imagine that are many people still paying top prices for some of these old games. I understand it's a niche market but after 5-10 years all of those niche fans have either bought the game, or have considered buying it. I think matrix would be better off getting some value for these games while increasing their fanbase, rather than just having them sit on the "shelf" forever. Also, consider the fact that uncompetitively high prices can also promote piracy.

[histgamer]

Also for what its worth the prices might be somewhat up to the developers of the older games. Slow but steddy sales might have a longer life span than ultra discounts that then end any life cycle even 10 year old games have. A 10 year old game might get 1 or 2 purchases per month. Lower the price to $5 and you might see 100 purchases and then never another purchase again since everyone interested in the game already bought it so that the slow and steady makes more money over 2-4 years.

Also for what its worth Matrix's recent releases have been more reasonable. Today's game started at 14.95 DD and 24.95 for a hard copy, Panzer Corps Afrika Corps was 19.95 DD and 29.95 hard copy. Both very reasonable for new releases.

Games like WiTP and WiTE are very niche. People might not want to admit it but sell it for $1 and it's never going to sell 100,000 copies and if it does, only 1,000 people will play it regularly.

[budd]

Games i'm mostly sure i'll like i'd be more willing to pay full price. Lower prices on older games of a different genre or time period would defiantly make me consider giving them a go to try something new. But i also already have more games than i have time to play, so i take my chances on games during the holiday sale, if the price is right.

[pelle75]

ORIGINAL: TonyE

ORIGINAL: pellen
I don't buy the niche argument. Not all wargamers are interested in all wargames. There are a few games I would pay $100 for, many more I would pay $30 for, many wargames I would happily buy for $10, and a few I would only buy if they sold for $1.

That makes the assumption that everyone thinks the same game is worth $100. I may be willing to pay $100 for game A but only $20 for game B even on day 1. One difficulty with wargamers is that we're not all the same

That was exactly my point. Obviously I was not clear enough. The problem for Matrix of course is how to make me pay $100 for the game I want to pay that for, but still get my $30 for the game I do only want to pay that for, while at the same time make someone else pay $100 for the second game and only $30 for the first one. Seems to me that other companies have solved that by decreasing prices over time, assuming that people that are ready to pay more will also buy it as soon as possible? If someone still has not bought a game in 10 or 15 years, I can't see how it could hurt to drastically lower the price to try to at least get a few $ from him?

[bairdlander2]

A good example is Paradox.Arsenal of Democracy is based on HOI2 an old title,but fully patched and developed by modders currently sells for $9.95.I paid $20 when it was released 3 years ago.Same thing with many of their other titles.Why cant Matrix do the same?

[Flaviusx]

I mostly am ok with Matrix prices, but they seriously need to bundle together all the Distant Worlds games and reduce the price of same on a permanent basis. Barrier to entry for this game is getting very high at this point and it's costing them sales. It's not quite as much of a niche market as wargames.

Indie companies out there are putting out strong 4x turn based space strategy games for as little as $30. (Endless Space says hi.) This is DW's competition, and they are way overpriced compared to it.

[Nebogipfel]

Just look at some forums, which are nearby death.

Those games could profit from lower prices.
Most of us sure will pay a lot for our "babies", but for just giving a try 40$(+Vat) for years old games, protects me from instant buying.

[histgamer]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I mostly am ok with Matrix prices, but they seriously need to bundle together all the Distant Worlds games and reduce the price of same on a permanent basis. Barrier to entry for this game is getting very high at this point and it's costing them sales. It's not quite as much of a niche market as wargames.

Indie companies out there are putting out strong 4x turn based space strategy games for as little as $30. (Endless Space says hi.) This is DW's competition, and they are way overpriced compared to it.

Some game bundles might definitely be a good strategy.

[Zap]

I think. How many times Matrix staff must have discussed price planning on their games. since their exsistence. Must be over 200 times. And they did'nt have to be motivated by a forum thread. This is Not a reprimand to the original poster. They just won't be discusing that in this forum.
But go at it! They do look at the General Discussions thread.

[htuna]

It's funny.. I've bought tons of games during Steam Sales.. that I haven't even touched.. Just shows you what that type of pricing does.. get's people who aren't even interested in the software to buy your games. Warhammer Space Marine, Brothers in Arms series, Commandos series, Indian Trading Company, GTA4, Men of War Red Tide, Pacific Storms series, Rage, Star Wars Empire at War, Theatre of War Canaan, Afrika, and a few others..

[bairdlander2]

Battles In Normandy
Release Date: 15 SEP 2004 download for $52?How do they justify that?[&:]Was that the price 8 years ago?

[doomtrader]

ORIGINAL: bairdlander

A good example is Paradox.Arsenal of Democracy is based on HOI2 an old title,but fully patched and developed by modders currently sells for $9.95.I paid $20 when it was released 3 years ago.Same thing with many of their other titles.Why cant Matrix do the same?

On the other hand it is hard to compete with Paradox policy, they have put Warlock on 50% sale a month after initial release. This is just killing smaller developers.

[Jamm]

I dug out my old Close combat A Bridge too Far about a month ago and got it up and running on my Win7 rig.

Now would I buy this for 40 or 50 bucks?
Ummm,... no..

[histgamer]

To me it seems the topic is mis-named. The topic has shifted from Matrix releases games a prices that are not competitive to... Paradox releases games and NEVER lowers their prices even after the game is 10 years old!

[Silent Hunte]

I think this would be a good idea - I'd be unable to get the games otherwise.

[jaxpac]

ORIGINAL: Zap

I think. How many times Matrix staff must have discussed price planning on their games. since their exsistence. Must be over 200 times. And they did'nt have to be motivated by a forum thread. This is Not a reprimand to the original poster. They just won't be discusing that in this forum.
But go at it! They do look at the General Discussions thread.

I would love to hear their reasoning if they have discussed the issue and determined they are better off keeping high prices. If they have a good reason for it I'm sure lots of people would understand.

[Sarge]

just so I have this straight,
we’re campaigning to matrix to be more like paradox ‘n steam ?

[Fallschirmjager]

ORIGINAL: Sarge

just so I have this straight,
we’re campaigning to matrix to be more like paradox ‘n steam ?

I have purchased probably 20 Paradox games over the last two years. I have purchased maybe 3-5 Matrix games in the same span.

Probably 2-3 of those Paradox games I would consider classics. Maybe 6-7 of them I would consider good. The rest were pretty forgettable.

But I paid probably 60% of what I paid for the Matrix games.

My point here is that if I see a Paradox game for $5-$10 during a Steam or Gamers Gate sale I often times say 'what the hell' and purchase it.
At that price it is worth a chance.

There are several older Matrix titles that I would love to play but I hold off on them because I am unsure about them and I don't want to dump $30-$50 into them and have them not be all that great.

Paradox's and other companies aggressive pricing model gets me to buy a whole lot more titles than I would otherwise buy.

I can understand both sides of this argument. Matrix is a small company with a revenue stream to protect. But at the same time I have to question some of the business decisions about pricing.

If it was me making the decision I would take 4-6 titles and put them on a deep discount say for 30 days and advertise it here on the forums and the main website. Then see how many sales they get compared to normal sales. Then calculate profits.

If it doesn't work then they will know it doesn't work. But if it does work, then they have discovered a new revenue stream.

[histgamer]

I think part of the consistency is due to revenue stream as you say. They probably don't make much on 1 really old title but when you add 5-10 titles in while small compared to new stuff its a reliable revenue stream. Start introducing deep discount sales and you may quickly sell through all your potential customer base for the games and perhaps more negatively while generating larger revenue for 3-4 months you kill long term revenue making your revenue stream less dependable.

Think of cash for clunkers. It sold tons of cars and got a lot of "junkers" off the road but cannibalized used car sales for months, if not a few years. Could matrix suffer similar losses as people buy a ton then stop buying and matrix struggles for several months to replace the lost reliable revenue stream? Without actually knowing matrix's finances I think this could be a genuine concern. I have to imagine a small company would find it easier to survive and plan with revenues of 10,000 per month as opposed to 50,000 one month and 2,000 for the next four months. The boom is great, the potential bust after the sale could be catastrophic to long term planning.

We're all saying what matrix should do but without actually looking at their finances I don't think its fair for people here to make such a conclusive statement when its not possible for anyone to really know what matrix is doing sales wise unless you're on the inside.

[budd]

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager

ORIGINAL: Sarge

just so I have this straight,
we’re campaigning to matrix to be more like paradox ‘n steam ?

I have purchased probably 20 Paradox games over the last two years. I have purchased maybe 3-5 Matrix games in the same span.

Probably 2-3 of those Paradox games I would consider classics. Maybe 6-7 of them I would consider good. The rest were pretty forgettable.

But I paid probably 60% of what I paid for the Matrix games.

My point here is that if I see a Paradox game for $5-$10 during a Steam or Gamers Gate sale I often times say 'what the hell' and purchase it.
At that price it is worth a chance.

There are several older Matrix titles that I would love to play but I hold off on them because I am unsure about them and I don't want to dump $30-$50 into them and have them not be all that great.

Paradox's and other companies aggressive pricing model gets me to buy a whole lot more titles than I would otherwise buy.

I can understand both sides of this argument. Matrix is a small company with a revenue stream to protect. But at the same time I have to question some of the business decisions about pricing.

If it was me making the decision I would take 4-6 titles and put them on a deep discount say for 30 days and advertise it here on the forums and the main website. Then see how many sales they get compared to normal sales. Then calculate profits.

If it doesn't work then they will know it doesn't work. But if it does work, then they have discovered a new revenue stream.

I agree with the highlighted above, I'd go one better. There are just over 30 titles that are 5 years old or older, i'd put them up for 50% off for 30 days digital download only. test the waters and see how it works out, you could always not do it again[;)] if it doesn't work out.