Has jast ever thought of a partnership with mangagamer to get physical copies of there games out like shuffle? I hate digital downloads and won’t buy anything that way unless I get a physical copy that I can keep or I see no real point in paying for them but I would shell out 50+ to buy a physical copy of any game/movie.
I don’t get why Jast has to get involved. It’s not like they have their own replicating plant. They outsource making physical copies to another company, and MG could just do the same. MG doesn’t want to do it due to the costs involved. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were bankrupt by now if they had physical copies. :lol:
I don’t see why MG isn’t offering an affiliate program, though… letting affiliates sell downloads has very little extra cost and can boost sales a lot.
I think everyone can agree that MG needs more connections in the English market. They really should do something other than go to conventions.
As for physical copies…they’re already on the record as stating, in a nutshell “We’ve already invested heavily in our digital distribution model. The market is currently too small to justify additional investment in physical distribution.” They’ve previously stated they’re in the red, so additional investment in infrastructure is unlikely.
But who knows? If MG kicks the bucket and JAST takes them over (like with G-Collections)…you might just get your wish. I imagine Peter would be quite happy to have access to all the licenses available to MG.
I dunno … On the one hand, I doubt very much all the people behind MangaGamer would be willing to talk to Peter. I mean, he never got Shuffle! himself, did he? Or any of these other titles? MG is being run from the Japanese end of things and obviously does business quite differently than the way Peter is used to doing them.
On the other hand, I pooh-poohed the idea of “we’ll sell the download copy and a physical copy for a few bucks more than a physical copy alone”, and then Peter went and did it. Furthermore, precedent exists that more than one time he has at least attempted to license-rescue titles from now-nonexistent companies. (The one Hobibox game that had to be canned due to code issues, G-C’s acquisition, and the Milky House Collection being at least 3 examples so far.)
Ultimately, it comes down to a matter of cost. MG is not making a profit yet. Making physical copies and shipping them costs money that has to be deducted from your margins. They can’t really charge much more than they already are, even for a physical copy. Which means they would make less money on each unit.
MG has to be figuring mentally: How many sales of physical copies would they just have not gotten (that is, the lack of a physical copy = lost sale) versus how many sales are they cannibalizing from themselves (how many would have bought the download if it were the only choice, but instead say ‘oh, I’ll buy the physical copy instead’). They run the risk of having their total sales not really moving upward, just the sales of download versions cratering and the physical copies selling about the difference.
If that were to happen, MG would be losing more money than they are now. And I see a serious risk that this would turn out to be the case, since these are such a niche product to begin with. So that’s why they’re not.
That statement sounds more like if someone else was willing to shell out the money, they’d be favorably inclined to do it.
And who’s going to do that? Peter? Using Nandemonai’s cannibalism argument, that’s like giving Peter the deed to the company.
The industry is setting itself up to ride the ‘download only – right NOW’ horse. The industry wants the consumer to ‘make a choice’ but me thinks they are not going to like the choice that will be made.
Check Gamasutra on an almost daily basis; the posters (who are industry insiders) clearly note why they want digital download, and it ain’t to save customers some bucks. They have convinced themselves that the entirety of issues in the industry is solved by removing used product from the equation. Thus, all of the money generated will go to themselves, no one else. And given that the largest cost of the game at retail is NOT production or distribution, but development and license related, you are not going to see those $60-70 games drop to $20-30. It is also why you see the refocusing of the argument back on what the customer is actually buying is a ‘limited license’, thus trying to excuse why the retail customer should not have the right to resell.
All that being said, I still think dl is an acceptable course for older and niche within a niche titles like these. In the case of backcatalog titles, the development costs are long since equated for, so the only new costs would be translations or whatever coding needs done to make it playable on newer systems – thus the cost of purchase COULD be at the lower values. Then for titles which simply will not sell many copies, purchasers of said titles may just need to recognize the extra costs subsidize a product that they simply would not have gotten. Matrix Games (who do old school PC wargames) are a good example of this as is MG, although they do seem to be making an effort on the price issue.
If a download-only version has no DRM (or very unrestrictive DRM–say, an activation code that doesn’t require an Internet connection), then what is the difference between a download-only version and a barebones retail package? A cardboard box and a shiny coaster? If there’s no DRM, you can back it up however you want. DRM IS the only meaningful difference between downloadable and packaged games. Therefore, the restrictiveness of the DRM is the core element any consumer confronted with a download-only title should concern himself with. Resale value? Other than irrational obsessions with the physical world, there’s no logical reason a download with no DRM should be worth any less than a barebones physical package.
That plays right into the pirates’ hands. In an age where you can get anything digital for free if you know where to look, you can’t afford to annoy your customers. If they feel ripped off, they’ll just go and pirate it next time. The idea of limited, non-transferrable licenses only really works in the corporate world where businesses have little choice but to comply (or face legal action). Another lesser exception is online services, where the core of the service itself is online. But in that case, you’re not really paying for a “product” anymore. You’re paying for a service.
It’s more complicated than that. You have to look at the number of people who dislike the downside of digital distribution - like me - who decided to suck it up, hold their noses, and buy the games anyway. Given that the market right now is very small, most of the legitimate consumers take the attitude that games really should be purchased to support the companies as much as possible.
So a lot of the customers who right now are buying the download version would immediately switch to buying packaged editions. Note that these are people who would be buying the download edition, but switched to the package version. And I believe [edit: most of the fans of the English eroge market are either not interested in MG titles, or are already in this category, or are pirates]. So I can’t say I see sales to already-existing fans going up too much as a result of this.
Instead, in this situation, the main advantage of discs is that you can market them more easily. I can lend a disc to a friend of mine and say “The first one’s free … heh heh heh”, or a friend can see it at my place and go “hey, can I borrow that?” and get hooked. Discs wind their way around the second hand market and expose people who would never have seen them before. It’s easier to get new customers when you have an actual product you can sell.
I’m not sure how strong of an effect this kind of word of mouth is; I suspect it is not very large, but then, I also suspect the market has only gotten to the size that it has because of this effect. Pulling in new customers is vital, and this download-only business cuts into that. At the same time, it makes sense for MG to do what they’re doing, given the tough place they’re in - they can’t worry about long-term right now when the short-term is eating them alive.
[Edit: let me clarify that second paragraph a bit …]
Which is another positive for the used market, unless every game out there also will come with a demo – and that’s not going to be the best way to sell a time/story intensive RPG or VN.
As I stated, the industry’s not going to like what they hear from their customers. Look at the screaming example of the PSP Go!, we are under 2 months from the system and the only thing from Sony is silence. Even pro-Sony sites have bashed the price-point, all new accessories and whatnot; and there still is no word on how current UMD owners will be handled. Persona’s going to be the first joint launch and NIS already has a few dl only titles, but as I stated, those are all niche titles which fall under different circumstances.
The industry needs to realize they will NEED to have a customer service solution in place for when someone dls an absolute disaster like a Damnation (or your overhyped crap here) or a 4-6 hour Terminator that lacks any additional reason to play.
I’ll second that, aside from the lack of physical copy, the biggest problem that MG have is that people don’t know about them! Allowing existing (and will established) online stores to sale their titles is the best way for exposing themselves. And let them fix the US$ price for those retailers.
as for those who refuse to get the digital copy of the title because they “need the physical” copy:
1- beggars can’t be choosers, if you are well enough that you can refuse a VN just because it is only available through a digital format, then I salute you. I, for one, am willing to install a 2gb VN even if it came on 5.25" floppies :mrgreen:
2- if by refusing to get the digital copy you mean that you refuse to get the pirated copy as well, then well and good. But if you are getting the pirated copy while at the same time saying you refuse to get the digital copy… then please, spare us the hypocritical argument and leave us in peace. (am not trying to say that those who refuse the digital copy are pirates, I am trying to make a distinction between the two).
any way, MG can opt for “on demand” disk duplication. It is already been used for some old movies/books/papers/reports in some stores, MG can apply the same thing for their titles… I know that I would love to get the physical copy of my titles (not for the lack of love of digital download… but because of bandwidth problems). Although I have to confess, I am not sure how complicated the “on demand” process is :oops: .
Edit:
Torrents and physical ownership score high for music fans
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/11/music_survey/
I imagine most people want a physical disk for music so they can play it in their car. Portability is less of an issue for eroge, particularly since you can’t play it without a PC. Music is much more flexible; the playback devices don’t necessarily support a digital format, so a physical disk can be very handy.
QFT.
As someone who has his hands in the developer’s side of the console market, I cannot express how devastating the used gaming market has been to profit making in the industry. I’m not talking about the side corner mom and pop store or pawn shops: I’m talking the multi million dollar running performed by juggernauts distributors like Gamestop. I won’t go into a long debate or spiel argument about opinions of what developers have done wrong: but point out the fact that mistakes and successes combined, people are losing jobs over the money loss. Some companies have witness sale plummet 50% for titles rated as 9’s and 10’s by gamers. Not a sunny picture, when you consider this is in ADDITION to piracy problems.
That having been said: the gamer in me is still a supporter of owning a physical medium, so I’m not 100% happy with pure download only products. Nonetheless, I won’t let it stop me from getting something I want. However I’ve been vocal with my colleagues that pre-order gifts are the better solution, than total digital media. Not merely free soundtracks or art books (which can be scanned or ripped), but stuff like collectible plushies and well made figurines. Also exclusive DLC that’s locked to a single registered user (but not material that was “cut” from the original game due to time… that pisses off people so much). Of course the con to all that is it costs a lot to pursue those kinds of things, and with money being hard to find in a world of rising costs, sometimes even such goodies will barely make you break even. Investors hate that… and it’s a good way of getting your studio blacklisted from ever finding reasonable funds.
Still… the ultimate problem is that no one has a solution for the retail used game market, because the ones raping the developers are the very people needed to actually sell the games. Square-Enix can’t tell Gamestop they won’t let them sell Final Fantasy 9000 after all… for obvious reasons.
All I have to say to all of this is: “too soon”.
As someone who makes a full-time living selling games:
Digital downloads are not intended to save customers some bucks, they are intended to make the developers more money. However, not all developers give a damn about used products. As more games move towards not just download-distribution, but account-based drm-locked downloads, the ability to resell/transfer games from one account to another will likely become more common.
I, as a developer who does not use DRM, can’t let people resell their downloaded copies because I have no way of shutting down the original copy. If the game were linked to an account and I could transfer that account to someone else and disable the original user, then the original user could sell it to someone else.
There are legal issues still to be worked out - some MMORPGs and the like really hate the idea of selling accounts or virtual goods - but I expect it to eventually get settled.
Production and distribution is a HUGE cost at retail, from my perspective. Selling a $20 game as a download gets me anywhere from $6 to $18. Selling it at retail? Maybe fifty cents, and that’s if I get paid at all. The retail scene is packed full of, shall we say, businesses with dodgy practices… games sold at retail are very likely to pass not a single penny back to the developers. I’m not just speaking for myself here, although I cannot name names. But the general word seems to be, you get paid up-front (advances and publisher funding) or not at all.
Downloads have a much more centralised revenue stream which is easier to keep an eye on.
Guess I have to ask 50% of what? The companies estimate on what they would sell? Sales compared to a similar title or the original? Those are all pretty nebulous things when bashing the resellers you are also in fact also saying something to the customer who decided to unload said title.
That being said, I can’t do anything but support your thoughts on enhancing the value of new game purchase. The whole content issue is another firestorm right now because of fiascos like SFIV where you are paying to unlock info on the disk, not stuff actually added. I have no issue with the cosmetics of Square’s “My Life” games for the Wii but agree some of the prices do go beyond the microtransaction and are out of balance with the costs to create said items. Fallout has shown customers are willing to pay when they do feel they are getting more than they had before.
Atlus and NIS can be argued as the leaders in “goods” stateside, but I wonder how much that is attributed to their relations with Japanese parent companies and that their customers have an understanding of the bonuses Japanese customers get. The metal tins, odd packaging and ‘making ofs’ DVDs may not be what mainstream US consumers desire but some lessons appear to be getting learned. It’s not that people would not have bought COD MW:2 without swag, but the added profit (even if it is the evil Activision) to the companies for adding only a quick port of COD1 for $20 more retail or that $149 ‘prestige’ edition will be noted.
You are very most right. My cost argument there was not one for the smaller independent side where the producer/programmer/developer are at most one or two indivduals who are also involved in the selling, but the EAs and such where sending code off to get pressed on a disk, printing a manual and shipping UPS does not equal the costs of hundreds of people working on a title for years. That should have been made clearer.
It’s funny but for someone who does not think the market is ready (nor will be anytime soon) for the multi-million selling AAA Modern Warfare’s of the world to be dl only; I spend a lot of $$$ on digital product. I got the way overpriced Idolmaster jets for Ace Combat cuz it is fun to waste somebody in a pink jet with Miki emblazoned on the side. I have purchased full retail downloads from Matrix Games because it is the only way I can get my fix for the serious military simulation. I have also purchased my share of indie titles — and all I can say in response is these smaller markets I do think dl only is the only choice.
That’s interesting. Does that mean that you also support that people should be able to eat in restaurants and only decide then whether they want to pay for the food or not? Or that one should be able to use a car until it’s dead (since a mere “try” of the car would rather amount to a “try” of the games, i.e. the playable demos) and only decide then whether they want to pay for the car or not? Tell me, what is your job. No, really. I’d like to know how much you’d like to work and know that you customers would only pay for your work if they consider it was merited.
Working people aren’t street performers, performing for your enjoyment and being paid only if you were satisfied with the entertainment. It’s the other way: you have to pay first, in order to deserve a right to access the means to potentially entertain you.
No more than having saved many people would entitle you to kill a few other people. A crime is a crime, and an illegal act is an illegal act. The fireman may have saved a thousand buildings from fires, it doesn’t make him burning even one less wrong. Thieves don’t only own stolen goods, they bought some as well; they’re still thieves, no matter how many 'Heh, sure I stole a dozen items but I also bought many!" excuses they make.
50% of what was expected to sell. Video games are a multi-billion dollar industry, and just like everything else - from gold to oil to weapon to drugs to motion pictures - market speculation has a powerful impact on what happens. Each new addition of Final Fantasy spends millions on game development, because speculation and estimates of expected sales gather investors with the millions of dollars to spend. It’s not as nebulous as you might think… more of a science than pure guessing. When a title costs 100,000 dollars to make, but only earns 50,000 dollars, when the studio wants to make a sequel, they’ll be lucky to get 50,000 dollars. On the flip side, if that title makes 200,000 dollars, the sequel might get 300,000 dollars, on the fervor it could make 600,000 dollars.
Video games aren’t eight friends working overnight things anymore¬Ö it takes a LOT of outside capital to produce the top tier releases with incredible CG’s, orchestra soundtrack, talented voice actors, and skilled programmers¬Ö more than most game studio have (at least, not in immediate cash). So we take loans, and our sales rate is basically our credit rating. We sell a lot of titles, we get better and larger loans. Market speculation is like our collateral for these loans.
I’m not bashing the resellers - I’m stating a situational event that is factual. The resale market has severely hit developers, because money earned from the resale market goes directly to the resellers. Not a single cent is ever seen by the original makers, except the one time the title was originally purchased. Even then I’m over simplifying the matter, because certain retail chains order 50% less than they used to, because they make more profit from reselling than they do from selling new originals, and purposely inflate the resell market with certain practices which I’m honestly not at liberty to say aloud and in the open (there’s some cases going on). Now if I was reseller, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with this. Gamestop’s revenue nearly doubled (that’s right… twice over) when they started systematic reselling of titles. One doesn’t have to be an economic genius to take notice something lost half their revenue for that to happen. It’s good for the resellers. Horrible for the developers. Furthermore some investors who used to provide for developers, are now lending their money to retailers, thus giving us less of the pie.
Truth be told, the customer is really just a bystander/victim in all this: it’s a Developer VS Retailer conflict. That’s why I wear my developer’s hat and gamer’s hat separately: what’s good for one, isn’t always so for the other. It’s all over money because it’s something we all need to get our jobs done. I know this sounds greedy and gimmie-gimmie, but reality isn’t always pretty… and this is the reality we’re facing. So the more Gamestop wins, the more Capcom losses. If you work for Gamestop: we can hire more workers. If you work for Capcom: here’s your pink slip.
Incidentally, I don’t work for Gamestop. 
