YianGaruga
Banned
Some parts of the internet are just.. smh
-_-
-_-
Limited Run Games - Putting digital games into your hands
- Thread starter dallow_bg
- Start date
- Status
goldenpp72
Member
If they don't have the money, then they don't get to use the service which is how the world works. They would continue to do it the way we all do it right now. Myself, I'd happily throw 300 bucks at getting 1 vita game delivered to me a month. Again, they could approach this many ways, monthly sub or whatever. The main issue we all have is that it's impossible for LRG to determine just how many people want a certain game, this would give them a minimum baseline if nothing else to work from, as I doubt I'd be the only one keen on it.
LRG isn't something designed for the budget tight person working a job while going to school, it's a collectors concept which requires an already extensive premium just to own a physical copy. If the intent is only to play, there is a much cheaper means to do so. People tight on cash shouldn't be that worried about collecting, I say this from experience. If their funds are so limited that they can't scrape up a flat few hundred bucks for a year, I'd question why they are going for a full set of physical games in the first place. For those who just want a few then obviously you just keep doing as we do now.
On this we agree. I would love the option. It isn't forcing you to join, but it gives you an option to remove the anxiety if you want. Close enough to preordering for me. $30 is nothing if it saves you from hitting ebay for even one missed title.
The12thGripper
Member
I don't plan on purchasing a lot of LRG titles so I probably won't purchase a membership should it ever become a thing but I don't think it's a bad idea, as long as it doesn't take away from the total run count.
Adding me to the column in favor of it. I don't get why people have a problem with more options. If you don't want to join, don't. It doesn't sound like it would be the only way to buy.
bmcphail2008
Member
They have explained many, many times why this isn't a viable business model for what they are doing.
Well, this idea seems to have overwhelmingly positive support on their message boards, so I hope it happens.
I'm having a very hard time seeing a downside. These are smart people, they understand that in the wonderful event where they get literally thousands of people signing up, they will adjust print runs accordingly.
I'm having a very hard time seeing a downside. These are smart people, they understand that in the wonderful event where they get literally thousands of people signing up, they will adjust print runs accordingly.
YianGaruga
Banned
I think we're relatively close to a consensus, while not everyone is in favor, few are vehemently against it.
I still think the shirt thing isn't ideal, but overall it's fine.
I still think the shirt thing isn't ideal, but overall it's fine.
Yeah I don't wear tshirts so it's not a great deal for me but it's the last important part of the whole thing.
Mass_Pincup
Banned
As of now the idea doesn't seem to be bad even though I personally won't subscribe on principle, but I'll wait and see what happens after the first implementation regarding non subscriber potentially getting screwed over.
YianGaruga
Banned
Subscribers being limited to 1 copy by default bugs me a bit though. If I want to have 2 of a game that allows it I'd have to order twice and since they can't combine shipping it would get very expensive very fast.
Subscribers should have the same limits as everyone else and print run sizes should account for that.
Or find a system the lets me combine multiple orders that have been placed in a ~1 day period.
Subscribers should have the same limits as everyone else and print run sizes should account for that.
Or find a system the lets me combine multiple orders that have been placed in a ~1 day period.
zenosparadox
Member
Is the membership idea good or bad? It depends.
If LRG allocates the same amount of copies (or more) as the number of memberships, then that means each subscriber has the opportunity to nab a release early, but the member can ignore the release entirely if desired. This means, for members, there is no longer a mad dash to the finish line.
If, however, the number of memberships exceeds the number of copies allocated for pre-release, then there the chance that some people are left behind. This will create another mad dash to the finish line. So, then you potentially have two tiers where people are clamoring for a release (pre-release and the "normal" sell times). Yes, having more chances increases the likelihood of getting the game you want, but I am sure there would be gnashing of teeth when people who paid $30 are not able to get the game(s) they want during pre-release. So, does LRG up the cost and have separate Premium and Standard memberships tiers? How many iterations will they need to go through?
I think that it is a fair point that this helps make scalping even easier. They have to decide if they can make back the $30, of course, and I am sure more than a few will be up to the challenge.
Personally, I do not think this is a good solution, but it really depends on how LRG would execute it. I do agree that it would be nice to help LRG's most dedicated fans, but I am not sure how to separate the fans from the scalpers.
If LRG allocates the same amount of copies (or more) as the number of memberships, then that means each subscriber has the opportunity to nab a release early, but the member can ignore the release entirely if desired. This means, for members, there is no longer a mad dash to the finish line.
If, however, the number of memberships exceeds the number of copies allocated for pre-release, then there the chance that some people are left behind. This will create another mad dash to the finish line. So, then you potentially have two tiers where people are clamoring for a release (pre-release and the "normal" sell times). Yes, having more chances increases the likelihood of getting the game you want, but I am sure there would be gnashing of teeth when people who paid $30 are not able to get the game(s) they want during pre-release. So, does LRG up the cost and have separate Premium and Standard memberships tiers? How many iterations will they need to go through?
I think that it is a fair point that this helps make scalping even easier. They have to decide if they can make back the $30, of course, and I am sure more than a few will be up to the challenge.
Personally, I do not think this is a good solution, but it really depends on how LRG would execute it. I do agree that it would be nice to help LRG's most dedicated fans, but I am not sure how to separate the fans from the scalpers.
hmm, I believe buying second copies should be strictly relegated to games that fail to sell out within 24 hours in the first place, so I can't say I agree there 
But you are right that since it helps them adjust print runs in the first place, eventually they might be able to relax that restriction and let people buy two copies.
More money to them, more customers happy, makes sense to me.
This *could* happen with maybe a couple of releases that they have already printed -- too many subscribers, not enough copies printed.
For games that don't yet have set print run sizes, though... If they are extremely lucky and by some miracle they get 10,000 subscribers that always wants to buy everything, both LRG and the devs would be ecstatic to increase their print sizes to 13,000. Everyone's happy.
But you are right that since it helps them adjust print runs in the first place, eventually they might be able to relax that restriction and let people buy two copies.
More money to them, more customers happy, makes sense to me.
This *could* happen with maybe a couple of releases that they have already printed -- too many subscribers, not enough copies printed.
For games that don't yet have set print run sizes, though... If they are extremely lucky and by some miracle they get 10,000 subscribers that always wants to buy everything, both LRG and the devs would be ecstatic to increase their print sizes to 13,000. Everyone's happy.
YianGaruga
Banned
hmm, I believe buying second copies should be strictly relegated to games that fail to sell out within 24 hours in the first place, so I can't say I agree there
But you are right that since it helps them adjust print runs in the first place, eventually they might be able to relax that restriction and let people buy two copies.
More money to them, more customers happy, makes sense to me.
The 2 copy restriction was fine for plenty of games, I don't see a problem with it generally.
It's not about there being a 1 or 2 copy limit, but IF there is a 2 copy limit in place, subscribers shouldn't be limited to 1. That's unfair.
There isn't a small pre-sale allocation, subscribers could ""potentially"" buy the whole run (won't happen because there aren't enough subscribers, guaranteed)
Also there is no need to combat scalpers. They are part of the plan as LRG explained above. A necessary evil.
Squarehard
Member
If members were allowed to purchase up to 2 copies of any title released (regardless of limit for non-members), that might actually be a nice perk that I'd actually be interested in. 
I see your point, but think about framing it a little differently:
You are paying to be a part of a club that can get one copy early. You can still get another copy afterwards along with everyone else. Subscribers won't be limited to 1 copy, they just don't get the privilege of buying multiple ahead of time.
Like I said though, I agree that if the accuracy of the surveys is tight enough that people can signal they want two copies, adding that possibility shouldn't be too much of a hassle. I will gladly support your idea of increasing the limit to 2 copies for subscribers
I'm just really worried at this point that as people try to tweak the idea in different ways they might just change their minds and give up on it altogether
YianGaruga
Banned
You have to consider that shipping to Europe is $15. A second copy would cost me an additional $15 because they can't combine shipping. If they could combine shipping i would have no problem with "fighting" for a second copy.
just trying to work out the details. You got what you wanted, now let me get what I wantI'm just really worried at this point that as people try to tweak the idea in different ways they might just change their minds and give up on it altogether
You have to consider that shipping to Europe is $15. A second copy would cost me an additional $15 because they can't combine shipping. If they could combine shipping i would have no problem with "fighting" for a second copy.
just trying to work out the details. You got what you wanted, now let me get what I want
Aaaahh, good point. You are totally right, I skimmed over the shipping issue and didn't give it much attention. Sorry!
As always, major props to LRG for the communication and for always looking for a way to navigate a runaway success that makes sense to them and to us. I can't say that enough, so I'll keep saying it, even when I'm whining about having missed out on a game
As long as it helps LRG grow and have less problems it's fine although I'm not the person who likes the most the idea.
But obv if two/three games release the same day I should at least be able to get all three on the same order, if we get august 19 as an example (rm vita,rm ps4 and shadow complex)
But obv if two/three games release the same day I should at least be able to get all three on the same order, if we get august 19 as an example (rm vita,rm ps4 and shadow complex)
Think about it, we're about to get Shadow Complex (a big game) and two versions of Rainbow Moon in one day.
If demand somehow comes close to matching Soldner's and any of us makes the wrong decision of clicking the wrong link, we're SOL.
What's the best strategy? Rainbow Moon Vita first, then Shadow Complex, then check out? Don't waste time trying to keep all three in the same shipment?
Try to get all three and check out fast? This would have failed for Soldner this week, so you're left either guaranteeing the super-in-demand game and paying twice for shipping just to be safe.
...Or we can pay $30 for a whole year's worth of peace of mind with releases
Hell, I imagine I'll save $30 in a year JUST from not fucking up with shipping decisions!
If demand somehow comes close to matching Soldner's and any of us makes the wrong decision of clicking the wrong link, we're SOL.
What's the best strategy? Rainbow Moon Vita first, then Shadow Complex, then check out? Don't waste time trying to keep all three in the same shipment?
Try to get all three and check out fast? This would have failed for Soldner this week, so you're left either guaranteeing the super-in-demand game and paying twice for shipping just to be safe.
...Or we can pay $30 for a whole year's worth of peace of mind with releases
Hell, I imagine I'll save $30 in a year JUST from not fucking up with shipping decisions!
LimitedRunGames
Member
If the membership thing happens, it likely won't be a very widely marketed thing. It seems like too many people would take it the wrong way.
If you're interested, I'd suggest signing up in our forums as we may just make this a thing there. That way this would have relatively little or no impact on the overall flow of things and would still satisfy folks who really like the idea.
Again, this is gestational so no commitment that it will ever happen. If it does, though, it is clear that it can't be something we advertise heavily as the only route to get our releases. Our intention is to give people peace of mind - not extort them, but it seems people will feel it is the latter no matter how we message the program.
If you're interested, I'd suggest signing up in our forums as we may just make this a thing there. That way this would have relatively little or no impact on the overall flow of things and would still satisfy folks who really like the idea.
Again, this is gestational so no commitment that it will ever happen. If it does, though, it is clear that it can't be something we advertise heavily as the only route to get our releases. Our intention is to give people peace of mind - not extort them, but it seems people will feel it is the latter no matter how we message the program.
Ok, thanks for clearing that up. Didn't expect the item to sell out in seconds, that's insane.
foobarry81
Member
If many people take it the wrong way, as you say, that may be because there's actually something wrong with it. And just to be clear: I'm not saying there is.
The reason why people may perceive it as "extortion" is because they are essentially not interested in such a service and they are not convinced it holds a whole lot of value per se. But in the end they might still sign up, reluctantly, for the wrong reasons.
As you stated it: people pay to get peace of mind. To not have to pay even more for the same product afterwards.
None of those are a healthy reasons to agree to a contract. It's not a positive story: it's a story about damage control: preventing having to pony up even more in the future. It's like paying for car insurance essentially. People pay for that too but nobody particularly likes their car insurance agent, because the chances of ever having to make use of that service you pay for are fairly slim.
There may of course be a couple of people out there who are true fans of your company, and who would pay for anything that could potentially support you.
But the majority of people will see any form of subscription as a "necessary evil". As that word says: it's EVIL. So naturally people won't like it.
Anyone who thinks that is an idiot or lying. There is nothing evil about offering a subscriber service.
foobarry81
Member
That is not what I said.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessary_Evil
There is also nothing evil about paying for car insurance.
YianGaruga
Banned
This might be unpopular, but the best way to make sure this remains an option only for a very small number of people is to make it more expensive
With $30 and a shirt there's almost no reason not to subscribe and I see demand being quite high, either because people want to or because they feel they need to and reluctantly give in since it's cheap.
A more expensive subscription with a clear message that this is for a minority that wants some peace of mind and not the main way to get games in the future would help
With $30 and a shirt there's almost no reason not to subscribe and I see demand being quite high, either because people want to or because they feel they need to and reluctantly give in since it's cheap.
A more expensive subscription with a clear message that this is for a minority that wants some peace of mind and not the main way to get games in the future would help
zenosparadox
Member
The problem with this reasoning is twofold:
1. Not every subscriber will buy every game, so subscriber count is not necessarily an indication of how many copies to order
2. The pre-sale could seriously cannibalize the normal allocation. Maybe just 10%, but what if it was 20-40%. LRG could end up with a lot of leftover copies, and that financial risk would be the worst thing for a company like LRG if they cannot move product.
It seems unfair to everyone else to put the product behind a pay wall, in that case. Are the games not for everyone, or is it just for the really "dedicated" fans that will pay more?
1. That's what the poll is for.
2. They will have an uncontroversially more precise estimate of demand with this and without. This scenario doesn't exist. Of course they should take into account subscribers when choosing how many to print for general sale, but they've already said they are well aware of that.
foobarry81
Member
Absolutely. You could still end up in a situation where demand greatly exceeds supply.
If you would actually want an idea of print size, you could offer sort of a pre-order model where collectors could pre-order for a slightly higher amount (e.g. pay $5 extra to ensure you get that specific game), and thus be ensured of their copy. And other people would then pay regular price, but take their chances and potentially miss out.
Pre-order amounts put in by collectors and potentially scalpers could then be a much more accurate indication of how popular a game really is going to be.
Yep, there's a real danger that apart from the subscribers nobody else really wants certain games all that badly.
They already said they are not doing a pre-order model, period. That is not only more expensive for customers than a subscription model (there are WAY more than 6 games a year), it's also much more complicated
For the last part: This already happens. No one knows if "people really want certain games all that badly". Except now there will be more reliable information from actual subscribers on top of that uncertainty.
foobarry81
Member
I know, I'm just saying it's the only way to actually get a good idea of what demand would be like.
Nope, wrong. Subscriptions will only tell you how many people, out of your regular customers, are willing to pony up a bit more for peace of mind, in case they would want certain games. It doesn't tell you anything at all about demand for specific games. Not even about an average print size.
E.g. you could be subscribed, and order just 2 games in an entire year.
Kresnik258
Member
Might as well say here that no matter if I moan about missing a release or feel that such a subscription is a bit iffy, I really love what you guys are doing and that you communicate so much with the community. It's very commendable and I really appreciate it.
Some of you are acting like paid memberships or 'fan' clubs are controversial. They exist in many forms and venues. I can see the insurance comparison, or even a ticketmaster comparison. There is an associated cost for peace of mind in higher administrative costs. The fact that they're trying to come up with a way to add some value in the form of a shirt and membership card shows they actually care about the value and perception. It is up to you if you will get enough peace of mind to find value in it. If you don't, that's fine, but that shouldn't stop it from being offered to those that do.
foobarry81
Member
I think I'd do the same. As much as I'd love to have peace of mind, it's not something I can spend even more money as I already spend pretty much my entire monthly gaming budget with LRG every month.
Kresnik258
Member
?
Who is stopping it from being offered to people that do want it? LRG put it out to discussion. People are giving their opinions. Is this your first visit to a forum?
OT: Thought about it some more and yeah, I'd definitely sign up. Like others have said, I'd prefer separate subscriptions for Vita only/PS4 only as I'm only interested in the Vita games, and do worry that at some point in the future we're going to see release schedules dominated by PS4 games. But otherwise, although it initially set off a lot of alarm bells in my mind, I think I could get on board with it.
Nope, correct.
I estimate demand for a living. They have to be cognizant of the bias in the subset of customer that choose to subscribe, but it's valuable information nevertheless for choosing print run sizes.
?
Who is stopping it from being offered to people that do want it? LRG put it out to discussion. People are giving their opinions. Is this your first visit to a forum?
.
If it was, i'd probably still be rocking myself in a dark closet.
foobarry81
Member
Yeah, estimating demand is the same thing in every business, I'm sure. Say you're at McDonald's and estimating the daily need for hamburger patties in a specific restaurant, I'm sure you are the expert as well to estimate demand for niche collectible video games... ;-)
Honestly, if people subscribe for this, it's not necessarily because they have the intention to buy every single game. It's because they fear missing out on one or more releases they would absolutely want, or else because they fear not being able to complete a set. Or, potentially, to support LRG.
Which means that if you have 2 different releases - say Octodad and Söldner-X 2 - having 2000 subscribers could still mean that only 200 of them would actually buy Octodad whereas 1700 of your subscribers would buy Söldner-X 2. That's a huge difference for this type of business.
From the amount of subscribers you can't even tell how many people are actually complete set collectors. You could only do that if you kept a detailed database on your customers. And then still there are those who potentially missed out on certain sales. Or who weren't in there from the beginning. From what I've seen, there are plenty of people who don't go for a full set.
Another factor are scalpers and resellers. These people often have expert knowledge of what will sell off fast and what won't. Not all of them of course, but the successful ones do.
A subscription service will deter them initially (because it costs money and eats profit), but if they deem it worthwhile in the long run because of the types of games LRG signs, they might still subscribe and thus secure guaranteed profit. These scalpers are another factor that you have little control over in any estimates you may make. Because they're speculating, so it's as volatile as the stock market.
So I would say estimates based solely on subscriptions are pretty much worthless.
I think a membership/subscription would benefit customers, but would be a poor way of predicting demand, specially if numbers don't change much and the other customers end up with ~200 copies left for them to fight over. I don't want to see it like other people paying to have a privilege I'm not having just because I'm not paying extra and at my expense.
My dissertation involved estimating demand for durable goods in subscription services, so... yes?
Every single one of your issues has a simple solution with their current shop and email system, and I think they know it. Of course estimates wouldn't be "based solely on subscriptions". No one *ever* claimed it should be!
It's a great idea. It will work. And it has the bonus of adding information to their business.
foobarry81
Member
So you write dissertations for a living now?
Because first you said you made estimates for a living, and now you're an expert because you wrote a dissertation (who knows how long ago). That dissertation could've been awful too for all we know.
And you could still be estimating demand for hamburger patties right now...for a living.
Please stop pulling the expert card when you have no more inside information in this whole business than the rest of us do.
Tell me, expert, how accurate was your estimate for the Söldner-X 2 demand?
You claimed that subscription numbers are valuable information though. Well, they aren't. Not for individual demand for the different releases at least. And not even for average print size requirement.
When you have 10,000 subscribers, would that mean that if you released Söldner-X 2 and Breach & Clear: Deadline on the same day that both would need 10,000 copies? Because if they don't, you don't exactly base your print sizes on subscription numbers, do you?
LRG really doesn't want to get stuck with a couple thousand unsold copies.
foobarry81
Member
Yeah, I would do that too when I wouldn't, like you, really have any valid arguments other than "I'm the expert here.".
Pellegri Testament
Member
It's already been said that it's impossible, primarily due to Sega. They did try to go after it at least, it just wasn't in the cards.
NinjamicWZ
Banned
Paying $30 will probably just make the angry entitled a holes even worse, because now they've paid to be VIP and they better get their money's worth... or they refuse to pay and can soap box about greed, privelege, bias etc. Just my take after thinking about it here, but it's not my biz and I don't pretend to know best.
Hype for Shadow Complex. I don't actually own it and it's something I'm interested in enough to buy a PS4 release.
Hype for Shadow Complex. I don't actually own it and it's something I'm interested in enough to buy a PS4 release.
- Status