To limit or not to limit, that is the question...

[Elektronite]

When making a new game for an old obsolete system, do you think that it is better to limit a new release to a certain number of copies? Say 150, 200, 300? , or, to keep making them as long as there is demand?

What do you think?

[onthinice]

That is a tough question to give a simple answer. I have know idea what it takes to create a game, the expense of the created game or to warehouse the finished games.

So I will respond this way. I'm not a fan of limited runs but I do like on demand games.

For me there are certain times of the year when I buy games and it is usually in the autumn months.

[Elektronite]

Do you think that people hold off buying when the game isn't limited, and buy quickly when it is?

[onthinice]

They probably do hold off when it isn't limited. I'm sure thinking the game will be available when they have the money.

Do pre-orders help or hurt limited runs?

I've seen postings about games that were supposed to be sold out, but are actually in stock because of delays in shipment or the buyer just canceled his order. In those situations I can see some customers who might have bought the cart if it had not been a limited run.

[TrekMD]

Personally, I don't like limited releases.  It makes getting games harder and sometimes, if you miss the window of opportunity, you miss the game altogether.  Having said that, I realize that for homebrewers there has to be some sort of limit given the logistical challenges of making the carts, etc.  If continuing to make the games is possible, I'd vouch for that. 

[Elektronite]

Personally, I find that people waiting is the biggest frustration. I put a lot of money up front for the printing...then have people say they are waiting for 'game x' to come out so they can 'save on shipping'....meanwhile, I am trying to get the money for the next release.

I've thought about giving early buyers a significant discount.....50 dollars....but they have to buy 2 copies...then after a month, the single copies go for 75....something like that....

I don't like limited either, but there needs to be some urgency to people buying the games,.....just how does one do that?

[TrekMD]

Yes I can see the logistics of it being a problem.  Preorders may be something that may help as that will at least give you some of that money that you need.  If you have a game pending release and one available, how about offering a discounted preorder price for the next title if the currently available title is purchased?  Would that help you?

[Elektronite]

Since I am a real business, I am not allowed to take money unless I have product to ship.

No 'pre-orders' really......except for people saying 'yes, I will buy it'

But considering I have printing of minimum numbers.....the fewer copies, the higher cost of the printing......

Limited might be the way to move games and then be done with it.

[TrekMD]

Since I am a real business, I am not allowed to take money unless I have product to ship.

No 'pre-orders' really......except for people saying 'yes, I will buy it'

But considering I have printing of minimum numbers.....the fewer copies, the higher cost of the printing......

Limited might be the way to move games and then be done with it.

Sounds like that will be the way to do it then.  What's the most you've sold of any given game? 

[TL]

Yes I can see the logistics of it being a problem.  Preorders may be something that may help as that will at least give you some of that money that you need.  If you have a game pending release and one available, how about offering a discounted preorder price for the next title if the currently available title is purchased?  Would that help you?

This ^

I have missed out on a number of games I planned to buy over the year because they were limited releases and when they were made available for sale I was skint 

The way Super Fighter Team do it is very good, when they released Zaku for the Lynx they did a run and sold out. Then they checked if there was still demand for the game and did another run a year later.

[Shadowrunner]

Yeah I really don't like limited releases either but from a business point of view I can understand it.

[Elektronite]

Yeah, one can't keep expensive boards in stock, trying to sell a large number just to earn a few bucks. I have had more than one person request that I wholesale them copies of my games for less than my cost....it is too bad that it has to be that way, but it looks like limited is the way it has to be

[DZ-Jay]

Limited release because resources are constrained to a home-brew developer, that's understandable and very reasonable.  Limited release for the sake of artificially giving the impression of scarcity in order to urge people to buy faster and make more money, that's unconscionable.

Real businesses build the return on investment into their model.  If the demand cannot be adequately supplied without artificial constraints or questionable tactics, then perhaps this market is just not profitable enough for a real business?

The worse part about that second option is how it affects the player community:  like others have said, people end up missing out altogether on some games, and the re-sale price turns into a gouging-fest by the hoarders, which makes most home-brew games even less approachable.  If the point is to get people to play new games and enrich a platform's catalogue, why even consider that model?  Ultimately, it becomes unsustainable.

Just my thoughts on the matter, not intended as an attack on anybody else's.

    dZ.

[Elektronite]

I hear you DZ....I agree. I don't think that anyone wants hoarders gouging people because they missed the boat so to speak.

On the other hand, how do you sit there with lots of money tied up in product, and a potential customer asks 'how many did you make?' with the answer being the sole determiner if they buy a copy (or two) based on how much they think they can eBay a game for later?

There has to be a way to encourage people to support the significant investment in materials, (without begging) and without relying on an artificial scarcity. The trick is finding the balance.

[DZ-Jay]

Or... Jut consider that it is charity work or a hobby and cannot be sustained in any other way.  It's a fair possibility, which may be unfortunate to some, but perhaps reality.

The truth is that it is a hobbyist and enthusiast market, and the programmers who bother to supply it, arrive at it from the same angle.

Nobody is asking to go back to the state of the industry back in 1983, where game producers were saturating the market with crappy sequels and cheap knock offs.  There aren't enough programmers to supply a constant stream of well designed games in the long run.

I do not mean any disrespect, honestly, but I just don't see how this market can be treated in any other way and expect to succeed.  If the time to market is long, and the investment requires a commitment that you are not willing to invest, then expecting a change of behaviour in such a small niche is disingenuous.

I disagree when you say that there "has to be way to encourage people to support the significant investment."  Most people don't care whether the game comes in a fancy box or in a paper bag.  They just want to play the game.  Your production is of very high quality, but sometimes the quality is not the sole discriminant for someone to make a purchase decision--especially when your customers themselves treat it as a hobby.

    dZ.

EDIT: I had problems posting this entry, and had to edit it numerous times because it kept being submitted half-way.