>>719836764
>>719836917
>trying to get other people to collude with you to set a market price would ruin you in any other field.
predatory pricing is illegal.
>>719836807
>Good games sell. This happens 100% of the time.
this is a retarded naive take. existing brands have a halo effect.
why did the hungry knight demo go from 1/5 to 4/5 years later? did the game retroactively become better?
no. consumers are stupid retarded idiots that don't treat products objectively.

>>719837040
>Well it certainly would when you want a living wage out of just 1k copies.
nobody said that, the operative word in >>719834842 "10 000 copies every year consistently " is every year consistently. if you don't become an instant millionaire you can't retire.

let's say a hypothetical gamedev sells 15,000 copies of his first game but his second game two years later only sells 2000 copies, he's now suffering. if the game that sold 15,000 copies was 20 dollars instead of 10, he would have made 120,000, if the game was 10 dollars, his game would have made 60,000.

you can't afford any flops if you only get pennies for a copy, while if you get more per copy, you can keep making games instead of ending up destitute if just one of your games flops. you can't expect to make money consistently, it will come in bursts and droughts as an entrpreneur. you get a regular income as a regular employee, we don't, so the difference between scraping by with each game making just enough to survive ends with one flop, while if you got more per copy instead of getting undercut with people that made 20 million dollars today, you could keep making games.