PSA: Be Wary of "Pre-Steam Sale" Markups

Politrukk

New member
May 5, 2015
605
0
0
Snotnarok said:
Vigormortis said:
Snotnarok said:
Total Biscuit just came out with an apology as some of the devs on that/a reddit list actually did not mark up anything so be careful where you point your blame. It's apparently not super accurate.

https://soundcloud.com/totalbiscuit/retraction-and-apology-for-earlier-price-raising-post
More people should be aware of this. The site even says, on it's main page no less, that prices may be inaccurate.
But that ruins the click-bait if you go bringing in sources and details that may undo what the article stands for!

I'm not even sure what the upset is with GTA-V okay, it's a bundle that's discounted and not the game itself, but you click it, you see what's on offer and you go "oh, it's just extra in game money crap" and then the consumer uses what they call "a brain" to decide if they want to get it now or drop it.

The outrage is bonkers, it's not like people are clicking buy when seeing the full price then after downloading it going "hey, that wasn't on sale! I got ripped off 4 checkout stages and 4 carjackings ago!"

Yeah it's dumb but, outrage? I dunno I clicked on it myself and said "that's dumb" and moved on.

But, no idea if the OP actually is around to care about this anymore or is alright with posting unverified info as fact and moving on. (That's not a stab at the OP, I genuinely don't know the person so I'm hoping this can maybe get a bit more details since more have since come out.)

Also, another article pointing out some issues...yes it's Kotaku, whatever they have points that I agreed with http://steamed.kotaku.com/the-truth-behind-the-steam-summer-sale-controversy-1710941999?utm_campaign=Socialflow_Kotaku_Facebook&utm_source=Kotaku_Facebook&utm_medium=Socialflow
The outrage over GTA V is Simple.

It says the game is on sale, it isn't it's selling at full price.

In-game currency was something steam buyers received with a pre-order, which basically includes that in full-game price.

In-game currency in GTA being sold is an entire new concept to a lot of people and I don't even know if this is new or happened with GTAIV as well but I can't find evidence of it in the steam store.

Even if we're selling in-game currency, 20 euros for in-game currency smells more like horse dung than the Elder Scrolls IV Oblivion Horse Armor pack did.

It's as if the Witcher 3 had just gone on sale, still retaining it's full price but stating that all that free-dlc others got that first month is included in this bundle hence the price hike that is then negated by the discount sticker.


And about that Kotaku article: I actually saw the Ace Pack being sold at a "discount" all steam did was remove the discount disclaimer and I can't quite remember there being a 50 euro pack in the War Thunder DLC department before anyway.
I think it got confused with the following actual intended sale though :
Buy War Thunder - Steam Summer Sale Pack
Includes 3 items: War Thunder - Dora Advanced Pack, War Thunder - Fire and Maneuver Advanced Pack, War Thunder - Grant I Advanced Pack
SUMMER SALE! Offer ends 22 June
Package info
-50%74,99?
37,49?
Add to Cart
This product is not eligible for refund. Learn more
 

Snotnarok

New member
Nov 17, 2008
6,310
0
0
Politrukk said:
Snotnarok said:
Vigormortis said:
Snotnarok said:
Total Biscuit just came out with an apology as some of the devs on that/a reddit list actually did not mark up anything so be careful where you point your blame. It's apparently not super accurate.

https://soundcloud.com/totalbiscuit/retraction-and-apology-for-earlier-price-raising-post
More people should be aware of this. The site even says, on it's main page no less, that prices may be inaccurate.
But that ruins the click-bait if you go bringing in sources and details that may undo what the article stands for!

I'm not even sure what the upset is with GTA-V okay, it's a bundle that's discounted and not the game itself, but you click it, you see what's on offer and you go "oh, it's just extra in game money crap" and then the consumer uses what they call "a brain" to decide if they want to get it now or drop it.

The outrage is bonkers, it's not like people are clicking buy when seeing the full price then after downloading it going "hey, that wasn't on sale! I got ripped off 4 checkout stages and 4 carjackings ago!"

Yeah it's dumb but, outrage? I dunno I clicked on it myself and said "that's dumb" and moved on.

But, no idea if the OP actually is around to care about this anymore or is alright with posting unverified info as fact and moving on. (That's not a stab at the OP, I genuinely don't know the person so I'm hoping this can maybe get a bit more details since more have since come out.)

Also, another article pointing out some issues...yes it's Kotaku, whatever they have points that I agreed with http://steamed.kotaku.com/the-truth-behind-the-steam-summer-sale-controversy-1710941999?utm_campaign=Socialflow_Kotaku_Facebook&utm_source=Kotaku_Facebook&utm_medium=Socialflow
The outrage over GTA V is Simple.

It says the game is on sale, it isn't it's selling at full price.

In-game currency was something steam buyers received with a pre-order, which basically includes that in full-game price.

In-game currency in GTA being sold is an entire new concept to a lot of people and I don't even know if this is new or happened with GTAIV as well but I can't find evidence of it in the steam store.

Even if we're selling in-game currency, 20 euros for in-game currency smells more like horse dung than the Elder Scrolls IV Oblivion Horse Armor pack did.

It's as if the Witcher 3 had just gone on sale, still retaining it's full price but stating that all that free-dlc others got that first month is included in this bundle hence the price hike that is then negated by the discount sticker.


And about that Kotaku article: I actually saw the Ace Pack being sold at a "discount" all steam did was remove the discount disclaimer and I can't quite remember there being a 50 euro pack in the War Thunder DLC department before anyway.
I think it got confused with the following actual intended sale though :
Buy War Thunder - Steam Summer Sale Pack
Includes 3 items: War Thunder - Dora Advanced Pack, War Thunder - Fire and Maneuver Advanced Pack, War Thunder - Grant I Advanced Pack
SUMMER SALE! Offer ends 22 June
Package info
-50%74,99?
37,49?
Add to Cart
This product is not eligible for refund. Learn more
I get it's disappointing that the game itself isn't on sale but it's not like you have to buy it to find out what's on offer, you click you see it and see what's up. I'll agree it's stupid but I don't see any reason for outrage.
In game currency isn't that new, on steam directly...thinking about it no...there's some stuff like Blacklight Retrobution I believe has some of that going on. I think the in game money thing is stupid too, I don't get why people would buy into it, even with Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer there's the option to buy but the in game money is so easy to get, why bother?

Hm, that's interesting about what you said in the end. Either way, thanks for clearing it up I mean like I said I still don't see the reason for the anger, and I still think the OP needs to update the article because now it's posted on facebook and is spreading bullshit.
 

Olas

Hello!
Dec 24, 2011
3,226
0
0
veloper said:
The only thing that matters is the price you pay. If it's not worth it to you, then don't buy. Simple as that.

If people are dumb enough to pay more than they really want to, just because there's also a "discount", then that's their problem.
Ya, to hell with dumb people. If they didn't want to be psychologically exploited they should have thought of that before being dumb. That goes for children and people with compulsive buying habits as well. It's the tax they pay for being that way.

I agree with you that this is a stupid ploy that most people should see right through, but it's still a dick move, that they wouldn't be doing if it didn't work on some people.
 

veloper

New member
Jan 20, 2009
4,597
0
0
Olas said:
veloper said:
The only thing that matters is the price you pay. If it's not worth it to you, then don't buy. Simple as that.

If people are dumb enough to pay more than they really want to, just because there's also a "discount", then that's their problem.
Ya, to hell with dumb people. If they didn't want to be psychologically exploited they should have thought of that before being dumb. That goes for children and people with compulsive buying habits. It's the tax they pay for being that way.
There is a point at which we should stop babying people and do all the thinking for them. I think this case is well beyond that point.
 

Olas

Hello!
Dec 24, 2011
3,226
0
0
veloper said:
Olas said:
veloper said:
The only thing that matters is the price you pay. If it's not worth it to you, then don't buy. Simple as that.

If people are dumb enough to pay more than they really want to, just because there's also a "discount", then that's their problem.
Ya, to hell with dumb people. If they didn't want to be psychologically exploited they should have thought of that before being dumb. That goes for children and people with compulsive buying habits. It's the tax they pay for being that way.
There is a point at which we should stop babying people and do all the thinking for them. I think this case is well beyond that point.
How is not actively trying to manipulate people the same as babying them? I'm all for letting people make their own decisions. I just think those decisions should be as informed and unbiased as possible. Do you disagree?

Also, even if I bought into your libertarian hands-off mentality, what is this so-called "point" of yours based on? What about your knowledge of the games industry could POSSIBLY lead you to believe that it has well-restrained savy consumers? It's hard for me to think of a market more in need of policing to be honest.
 

veloper

New member
Jan 20, 2009
4,597
0
0
Olas said:
veloper said:
Olas said:
veloper said:
The only thing that matters is the price you pay. If it's not worth it to you, then don't buy. Simple as that.

If people are dumb enough to pay more than they really want to, just because there's also a "discount", then that's their problem.
Ya, to hell with dumb people. If they didn't want to be psychologically exploited they should have thought of that before being dumb. That goes for children and people with compulsive buying habits. It's the tax they pay for being that way.
There is a point at which we should stop babying people and do all the thinking for them. I think this case is well beyond that point.
How is not actively trying to manipulate people the same as babying them? I'm all for letting people make their own decisions. I just think those decisions should be as informed and unbiased as possible. Do you disagree?

Also, even if I bought into your libertarian hands-off mentality, what is this so-called "point" of yours based on? What about your knowledge of the games industry could POSSIBLY lead you to believe that it has well-restrained savy consumers? It's hard for me to think of a market more in need of policing to be honest.
Because on Steam they're not dealing with genuine retards or children with credit cards. Here's people who have the mental faculties, but sometimes just refuse to use them.

If that results in some of them buying a game for $50, then so be it. Fans do such things voluntarily.

Let's leave the nannies to worry about foolish people actually getting physically hurt, instead of getting worked up about the pricepoint of videogames.
 

Trippy Turtle

Elite Member
May 10, 2010
2,119
2
43
Well, while its not very honest or nice of them, surely you'd buy something based on whether its worth that price to you?
Not because there is some big green number next to it.
 

Odbarc

Elite Member
Jun 30, 2010
1,155
0
41
Maybe Steam decides what goes on sale and the retailer decide they won't want their product sold for less than what everyone else has paid and alters the price accordingly?

Either way, I don't quite understand this "I have to buy everything because it's more affordable" plague people seem to get because stuff is cheaper.

I've got a wishlist, but if the prices cut aren't in the 75%~90% off range, I'm not getting them and I probably won't touch anything else I don't want either. Witcher 3 just came out, say? Normally $60, 10% off because F everyone who preordered, right? But if the game were $50 off down from $100, I wouldn't buy it based on the green sticker telling me it's a good deal. You have to decide what's a good deal and then wait for that. Anyone who wants your money will tell you it's a good deal regardless of what the deal IS because they'll get your money.
 

Malpraxis

Trust me, I'm a Doctor.
Jul 30, 2013
138
0
0
TIL a sleuth also refers to a pack of bears.

On topic: The people are just as guilty for impulse buying. This has been going on forever in department stores, as anyone who worked on retail can tell you. The rule of thumb is to know what you want and how much you are willing to pay for it.
 

Olas

Hello!
Dec 24, 2011
3,226
0
0
veloper said:
Olas said:
veloper said:
Olas said:
veloper said:
The only thing that matters is the price you pay. If it's not worth it to you, then don't buy. Simple as that.

If people are dumb enough to pay more than they really want to, just because there's also a "discount", then that's their problem.
Ya, to hell with dumb people. If they didn't want to be psychologically exploited they should have thought of that before being dumb. That goes for children and people with compulsive buying habits. It's the tax they pay for being that way.
There is a point at which we should stop babying people and do all the thinking for them. I think this case is well beyond that point.
How is not actively trying to manipulate people the same as babying them? I'm all for letting people make their own decisions. I just think those decisions should be as informed and unbiased as possible. Do you disagree?

Also, even if I bought into your libertarian hands-off mentality, what is this so-called "point" of yours based on? What about your knowledge of the games industry could POSSIBLY lead you to believe that it has well-restrained savy consumers? It's hard for me to think of a market more in need of policing to be honest.
Because on Steam they're not dealing with genuine retards or children with credit cards. Here's people who have the mental faculties, but sometimes just refuse to use them.
You were the one who called these people "dumb", and in your imaginary world where all consumers either act totally rationally, or somehow "choose" to act irrationally these kind of manipulative pricings wouldn't exist because they wouldn't work.

If that results in some of them buying a game for $50, then so be it. Fans do such things voluntarily.
And smokers pollute their lungs voluntarily, and morbidly obese people eat food voluntarily, and the people who make a living marketing unhealthy products to these people get to feel no responsibility because they can tell themselves that that they never physically forced any of these people to do this, and the problem persists.

Sorry, I just don't buy it, the buck should stop with the person with the greatest ability to make a change, not the person who happens to be at the end of the chain.

Let's leave the nannies to worry about foolish people actually getting physically hurt, instead of getting worked up about the pricepoint of videogames.
Because physical harm is the only type of harm worth caring about, obviously. Also, this entire thread is about the pricepoint of videogames, if you don't think it's an important issue why did you even come here?
 

veloper

New member
Jan 20, 2009
4,597
0
0
Olas said:
veloper said:
Olas said:
veloper said:
Olas said:
veloper said:
The only thing that matters is the price you pay. If it's not worth it to you, then don't buy. Simple as that.

If people are dumb enough to pay more than they really want to, just because there's also a "discount", then that's their problem.
Ya, to hell with dumb people. If they didn't want to be psychologically exploited they should have thought of that before being dumb. That goes for children and people with compulsive buying habits. It's the tax they pay for being that way.
There is a point at which we should stop babying people and do all the thinking for them. I think this case is well beyond that point.
How is not actively trying to manipulate people the same as babying them? I'm all for letting people make their own decisions. I just think those decisions should be as informed and unbiased as possible. Do you disagree?

Also, even if I bought into your libertarian hands-off mentality, what is this so-called "point" of yours based on? What about your knowledge of the games industry could POSSIBLY lead you to believe that it has well-restrained savy consumers? It's hard for me to think of a market more in need of policing to be honest.
Because on Steam they're not dealing with genuine retards or children with credit cards. Here's people who have the mental faculties, but sometimes just refuse to use them.
You were the one who called these people "dumb", and in your imaginary world where all consumers either act totally rationally, or somehow "choose" to act irrationally these kind of manipulative pricings wouldn't exist because they wouldn't work.
You make it too easy. Dumb is not the same as retarded. People can choose to act irrationally and will do so at times. That's their problem and normal adults have no excuses, unlike challenged people.
If that results in some of them buying a game for $50, then so be it. Fans do such things voluntarily.
And smokers pollute their lungs voluntarily, and morbidly obese people eat food voluntarily, and the people who make a living marketing unhealthy products to these people get to feel no responsibility because they can tell themselves that that they never physically forced any of these people to do this, and the problem persists.
That's just a trade-off. Smoking and eating fatty foods feels very nice, even if it may reduce your lifespan. Adults may make that choice for themselves.

Sorry, I just don't buy it, the buck should stop with the person with the greatest ability to make a change, not the person who happens to be at the end of the chain.
The responsibility lies with the persons making the choice for themselves. Nobody is forcing them at gun point and the terms are very clear. Nothing more is required.

Let's leave the nannies to worry about foolish people actually getting physically hurt, instead of getting worked up about the pricepoint of videogames.
Because physical harm is the only type of harm worth caring about, obviously.
It's called priorities. Freedom and personal responsibility may trump smaller concerns, such as regret over paying lunch money for a videogame.

Also, this entire thread is about the pricepoint of videogames, if you don't think it's an important issue why did you even come here?
Why, to argue for the current status quo, obviously. Don´t you think this thread would be awfully boring, if it were only an echo chamber for just your own position?