Add in the limited component and you've suddenly doubled the people who want it. Both types of customers are needed to make physical versions of these games a reality. Take one out and we might not even be able to hit Sony's minimum order quantities for some games. I hope that doesn't sound completely insane.
No, this is perfectly reasonable and makes absolute sense. Those in here complaining and wishing for pie in the sky scenarios do not understand the economics of small print runs in media.
I found your comment on exclusivity bumping up total sales interesting.
I recently gave up collecting vinyl as I was sick of getting excited for a release or finding out about a release after the fact only to realize I had no chance of securing one.
This culture of driving up profits by excluding others from enjoying a product is toxic and one I feel becomes even more counterintuitive as we move towards more media as service models. Movies, music and even games to some degree are lowering the barrier of entry so that the experience can be shared.
I wish you luck in your venture and this thread alone proves the demand is there I just don't wish to support it anymore.
You are asking for the digital future. These games already exist digital. If you want a physical copy, then by definition you are putting yourself at the feet of physical limitations. Digital has infinite stock, zero or near zero inventory fees, easy/quick worldwide distribution.... physical has none of those things.
Also - i never had issues buying limited vinyl. I doubt many people bought to flip -- most were people in the scene.
Did YOU read what we're trying to get under scrutiny in the first place?
It's not about having a larger run per se, but fulfilling demand until it's there. I'm perfectly fine with initial 1500 run for ALL games. But as long as there's still demand, just print another batch.
The "intentionally very limited print run" said there is. So gauge, even raise price if you need, but do it. It would defeat collecting? Dont' think so. They would be hyper niche games in ridiculously low numbers anyway. It would just defeat the purpouse of monetizing in the short term, and it's nothing I'll lose sleep about.
We wouldn't even get our first batch.
Not to mention, you're being completely naive to the simple truths of small batch printing. You're acting as if they can just snap their fingers and produce another 1500 without risk; there is always risk. Keeping inventory on hand is expensive, and they'd be pushing away the collectors market to do so.
I mean, let's say they were 'Everybody Gets Them' games. They print 1500 games with the promise to print more. Collectors don't bite, but that's okay, over the course of a week the first batch still sells out. So they see if people want more, get a bunch of emails, print another 1500... and sell 200. Bye bye, Everybody Gets Them games, sorry you got buried under your own inventory. Would that happen for sure? Of course not - -but it's a serious risk, and it's a risk you're not taking into consideration in your scenario.
Limiting the run expands the initial market and limits risk for small batch printing. That's the economics of it. It gets physical copies out there. Do some abuse it? Sure. But it's still best-case scenario for all involved -- they sell out and many get physical copies.
Unless you're running with the attitude "Haha I got this and you cannot get one" then printing more copies will never ever be a bad thing.
Is there a reason cannot lock in pre-orders with payment by a certain date and print enough to meet orders?
There are many reasons. I already mentioned some in an earlier post. A small company assumes large risk doing it this way.
For example -- if you do a small print run for 1500 you know your risk is, say, $15000 or $20000 out of pocket -- but given the market you know you're likely to sell out or at least break even.
If you take preorders, and suddenly instead of 1500 you're now printing 10k copies... well, now you're sitting on 10k * $25 = $250,000 dollars. You've now just turned a relatively small project into a massive undertaking -- just think of all the packaging/shipping/etc. More importantly, if something goes wrong -- say inventory gets damaged or their is a problem with a supplier, you do not have the funds to fix it. And there's also a delay now -- so instead of getting orders and shipping out right away, you've got people asking for refunds [maybe demanding them angrily if there is a delay for some reason]... it's all a recipe to potentially lose your shirt.
TLDR - you open yourself up to huge risk that is not present with the current system. Is it doable? Sure. But it's a completely different animal and not nearly as simple as some make it out to be.
No prob. But you seem to overestimate my interest in "the collector's market" and the scalping logic behind them, regardless of how may times I explained I'm not interested in any of that side of the operation.
Your lack of interest in the topic does not change the economics of the topic.
You are also conflating 'collector logic' and 'scalper logic' and acting as if they are interchangeable. They are not. Just because someone likes collecting rare things doesn't mean they plan to flip them or are scalpers.