Game Pricing

[R.X.DIEM]

I is a Bad Monkey!

 

[Ashtal]

Nix the smarmy comments, boys.

 

[Thorin Stoutfoot]

I'm disappointed

Here I am, trying to get you folks to talk about what would be worth $100 in a gaming product (I've already talked about what would tickle my fancy), and nobody chimes in. Instead, it's all about building the RPG market (a nice topic in itself, but irrelevant to product pricing), and caps lock keys.

So... What product would be worth $100 to you?

 

[King_Stannis]

Re: I'm disappointed

Here I am, trying to get you folks to talk about what would be worth $100 in a gaming product .....

So... What product would be worth $100 to you?

to answer your question, currently no SINGLE rpg product would be worth that much to me.

maybe a mega adventure with a soundtrack and miniatures of every beast encountered in the scenario? even then i'd balk at the price, most likely. triple digits would cause sticker shock to me.

 

[reiella]

Hmm I did actually see a few D&D products in some toy stores.

It has even become common place stock at EB now too.

A few notes though, expanding the customer base requires advertisement outside of the rpg community, unless you suggest that the goal is to try to kill off the other competiting rpg developers . That costs money, and as mentioned Wizards is probably in the best position for that from their breadth of market. But before pushing too much on Hasbro, do realize that they suffered a big finacial lose recently due to overinvestment in Ep1 toy stock. With ep2 currently, very likly to see the company as a whole become very frugal in their spending.

Another problem is that is a group game. Advertising to individuals etc doesn't help all that much if they don't know anyone who plays. How many people remember the single player adventure in the old red box (I think it was red) of OD&D? Is there a viable form of single player D&D currently? I don't really think so, and I also don't think it'd do well enough to warrant any company deciding to do it. It's a small market appeal within an already small market. The only real boon it provides is making it easier to expand the hobby.

The expanded market games typically are the crossover ones. Diablo, Everquest, the movie based genres... They just don't tend to do that well.

If anything though, the CRPGs based on games probably have the best effect in terms of getting people to start the hobby.

 

[kenjib]

Re: I'm disappointed

So... What product would be worth $100 to you?

Myself? I'd stick with the $45 or less (much preferrably under $30 at that) product and do the rest myself. No gaming product is worth $100 to me. I just can't drop down such a large a chunk of money on something like that. At that point I'd be getting into the money-toward-guitar/computer/photography class/savings etc. range. If I did break down and spend it, that would be the point that I realize that I've got a compulsive problem and go cold turkey on gaming purchases.

 

[War Golem]

It's a shame that someone else can't do it with the D&D logo, but imagine a board game with plastic figures simplified to the point where you only have armor class, magic resistance (i.e. saving throws), and hit points. That's it. Weapons and spells do fixed damage (ala dagger does 1 points, longsword does 2 points, greatsword does 3 points) and characters have a pool of chits to track their hit points. Simplify the movement rules even further. Each turn you can either move 5 squares, attack, or cast a spell - that's it.

There are maybe 6 simple characters, all clerics, wizards, and fighters. Wizards and clerics have a predetermined list of very simple spells and no spell-per-day limit. Nobody advances levels. This is all to make things as simple as possible.

Now there is no math involved beyond counting chits and knowing that 18 is higher than 12 - not even any addition/subtraction - in the game and it becomes simple. Roll d20 and if you beat the armor class with your longsword you remove 2 chits from the monster's chit pool. When someone's chit pool is empty they are dead. Something this simple is required for my cousin to play without adult intervention.

Sure it sounds kind of boring to us but I don't think it would be boring to young kids.

Hi kenjib,

I quite agree with your thinking here. The boardgame you describe reminds me a bit of Talisman, a game I played often back in the mid-80s but haven't seen in a store for years so I'm not even sure it exists any more. But a lot of your other game criteria sound very similar to what WizKids is doing with Mage Knight, and in particular, MK Dungeon. I played that once, briefly, and I think even that may be a bit too complex for 6 year olds to figure out on their own, though.

But something along those lines.... I really agree that for substantial new blood to enter the hobby, the target kids need to be able to teach themselves. It's great when an available adult gamer can teach some kids, but I don't see that realistically increasing the numbers of gamers in any significant way. Kids need to get interested in it on their own, which means there must be some targeted marketing directed at this age group, and then the entry level game must be simple enough for young kids to learn and play on their own.

sorry, this post is a slightly off-topic for this thread.

-War Golem

 

[RyanD]

But do you see D&D in toy stores?

The D&D intro boxed set is widely distributed, including Toys R Us. Wal*Mart and Target refuse to carry it because it is D&D; I believe that issue could be addressed with a dedicated strategic effort to change their minds (but WotC's sales team didn't have the time or resources to try while I was there).

Pokemon Jr Adventure Game was sold in all the mass market outlets (TRU, Target, Wal*Mart, KB Toys, etc.) This game, designed for six to eight year olds, featured roleplaying, combat (including hit points), and a "DM" (parent) who controlled the action. It was built from a very strategic foundation that included an analysis of the learning potential for the target market prepared for us by a practicing child psychologist, and tested in one-way mirrored rooms so that the designers could observe kids trying to learn how to play it and make changes to improve the product.

It sold more than 500,000 units in just over a year of availability (and was nominated for an Origins Award).

(PS: Re the question about Haryy Potter. WotC secured the rights to do Harry Potter RPGs (and had designs in progress) when it did the license with Warner Bros. for the TCG rights. Shortly thereafter, Warner came to us and admitted that they did not have the rights to license RPGs - they were retained by Rawlings in the original movie deal. Rawlings, for her part, does not want other people "putting words in her character's mouths", and will not agree to an RPG license. So, despite the best opportunity in a generation to introduce 10 and 11 year old girls to the RPG hobby, we had to sit on the sidelines and watch. Trust me: Everyone involved knows what a colossal missed opportunity it is and nobody would like to have had a Harry Potter RPG line more than WotC.)

 

[Thorin Stoutfoot]

products worth $100

to answer your question, currently no SINGLE rpg product would be worth that much to me.

That's interesting to hear. Here's the deal. If you bought all 5 splatbooks, that's $100 retail, right? How much use did you really get out of it?

A mega-campaign with all the bells and whistles, if you played it straight through, you'd get use out of it every game session for a year! Not just you, but every player in your group. The props, illustrations, maps, "voice-description CD", and soundtrack alone would save you hours of prep time.

I know people are irrational about money, but if you've already spent $100 on the splat books, it seems strange to hear that a $100 product of extremely high quality would be a big shock.

For your information, I don't own any of the splatbooks (or the 3rd party types). The value to dollar ratio is just way too low for those.

 

[King_Stannis]

....(PS: Re the question about Haryy Potter. WotC secured the rights to do Harry Potter RPGs (and had designs in progress) when it did the license with Warner Bros. for the TCG rights. Shortly thereafter, Warner came to us and admitted that they did not have the rights to license RPGs - they were retained by Rawlings in the original movie deal. Rawlings, for her part, does not want other people "putting words in her character's mouths", and will not agree to an RPG license. So, despite the best opportunity in a generation to introduce 10 and 11 year old girls to the RPG hobby, we had to sit on the sidelines and watch. Trust me: Everyone involved knows what a colossal missed opportunity it is and nobody would like to have had a Harry Potter RPG line more than WotC.)

wow. i had no idea that rawlings was that self-important. good lord, she didn't write "crime and punishment"! it's a series of kids' books! good ones, granted, but they won't exactly be required reading 50 years from now.

and you're right, ryan, what a huge opportunity that was missed.