Regardless where one lives in Europe (including countries where salaries are lower than those living in France or Germany for example: such as Hungary, Romania, Latvia or Serbia to name a few) yet they’re confronted with 89,99€ at release considering EVERYONE in Europe as wealthy (further from the truth since there are nations in Europe where people aren’t paid 8000€ a month, some are paid x10 less than that).
Regional pricing is indifferent in this case no matter as to their actual income, it’s weird since they count countries where Euros aren’t used (Czech Republic, Romania, Serbia) whilst people there aren’t earning high salaries, like this: a Romanian earns 815€ a month but are treated no different: a 90€ game at launch (about 10% of their wage), for some reason they don’t bother adjusting it based on a specific country.
Steam actually developed an entire toolkit allowing developers to price their products fairly. Even as far as by purchasing power parity or market strength per country. This was done after Polish gamers complained about their games being the same price as in Germany.
https://partner.steamgames.com/pricing/explorer
But it is up to the sellers to use those tools, Steam does not compell pricing.
And I just looked it up, this might have been broken in the past, but they updated it recently: https://youtu.be/Nz4FOKZRX_8
Still, developers need to use this.
Because the value of 1 euro is always 1 euro no matter where in EU you live.
Games are priced the same in California as Florida despite California having a higher cost of living.
Same thing. Because 1 dollar is 1 dollar.
Not really an analogy. OP is asking about different countries, not states. That thing about the euro being the same currency for all those countries doesn’t track either. Prices in the Argentinian store are in USD but it still has regional pricing.
It’s a completely succinct analogy.
You’re comparing different states with different countries. So no, it’s not an accurate analogy. It is succint, but it’s still incredibky misguided. Maybe you should google words before using them?
Maybe you should Google what a euro is.
Gottem
The whole point of EU that it’s a single economic zone
That does not equate to having the same price for everything.
Steam does not decide the price. The publisher does.
They used to accept Argentinian pesos. But no one wants it because it’s worthless so that’s why they have to pay in USD.
That’s completely besides the point. You said that they could have different prices due to having the same currency in the store. However, there are plenty of stores with the same currency and different prices.
Also, how much ARS is worth when compared to USD has absolutely nothing to do with why the store is in USD. For a period of time a few years ago, there was quite a bit of inflation and prices had to be updated constantly. To avoid this, they switched it back to USD. Customers paying in ARS does not mean that publishers/devs get paid in that currency.
You clearly think you’re more knowledgeable than you actually are.
Atomic made a great comparison and backed it up. No need to be so stubborn.
Except that they didn’t? I’m not stubborn, they’re just wrong.
I offered an explanation as to why I thought it was the same price in most of Europe.
It’s also quite easy to travel within Europe. So they might think it will get taken advantage of for significantly cheaper prices. Which means less revenue for the publisher.
“Quite a bit of inflation” is a very nice way of saying “the currency is useless”.
I don’t know which currency the developers are paid in. But Valve is paid in whatever currency you spend. How they handle it from there is up to them and their bank(s).
They still have to pay tax in the countries they sell products in. I can’t speak for all countries, but they generally want to be paid in their own currency.
In the end. It’s up to each individual publisher to decide how and where to price their game. It’s a question that has as many answers as there are publishers. I assumed we were all under that understanding but clearly I was mistaken.
That’s the downside to a unified market.
I live in NYC, where the median household income is about 40% higher than in Philadelphia. Rent is more expensive in NYC, which drives salaries up for what is otherwise the same job. When video games are sticky at certain price points, like $70 right now, that price feels cheaper to me here than it does just a few hours away in Philly. Money is weird like that, but when you’ve got digital distribution, they’ve got to make some calls about how to price things accordingly. If I buy a 20 oz bottle of Diet Coke in Brooklyn, it might be $2.50, but it could easily be $4.50 or $5 in Manhattan.
I’m pretty sure it’s the publisher who decides. They can either enable regional pricing or not. And many don’t. Simple as that, unfortunately.
Because that intricate subdivision you want would cost more than it might bring money because of more sales.
And that’s why the only correct choice is a piracy. We just cannot afford to waste that kind of money on unfinished games. Especially while the economy is getting worse and worse.
Or one could play FOSS games. However, in such case I would still recommend supporting the developers as much as one can, if the game is enjoyable. Usually, those games are better than any AAA game that came out lately.
I’d say the other option is being patient gamer. I only buy at discounts year(s) after release. It’s a win win in my book:
- it’s way cheaper
- no beta testing, games are patched by the time
- the moment of purchase I might have a PC that is powerful enough for older game
- if the game had denuvo, it would probably be gone at the time due to its licensing costs
Man, I wish I could have a Lemmy community that bans pirates from all discussion.
Either a game is shit, made by abusive managers forcing crunch time, in which case there’s no moral issue with pirating it but also: Why would you want to for a shit game? Or, a game looks great, is fairly made by inspired artists looking for a return on their risk, in which case: Why are you not paying them for their work?
And I also have no patience for anyone claiming the latter type of game doesn’t exist. Stop gluing your eyeballs to AAA ads while constantly whining about them, and find some recommendation lists. My GOTY list for 2026 is already packed.
Or, a game looks great, is fairly made by inspired artists looking for a return on their risk, in which case: Why are you not paying them for their work?
Vast majority of people making games are on a Salary. They’re not getting any more or less return from you buying a game.
Just pirate. That’s the actionable way to solve your issues. Or buy from a key seller who abuses brasilians.
Maybe just bying Brazilian keys is better than abusing Brazilians?
What am i gonna do with a brazilian keys? I only need one
(For direct answer, see other replies)
In terms of fixing issues like this, I had an idea for a technology but wanted to see if others view it as privacy-violating.
So, you have an encrypted data packet. Optionally, that packet could contain an unencrypted signal outside of the encrypted portion, eg a header or similar, that signals it as: X-Domestic-Origin=true.
The idea would be: When a client device sends this header, it gets forwarded along lots of interchange points, but the legal rule would be that an interchange cannot include that header if the message is crossing national boundaries. So, the receiver of the signal can partially infer that the sender is likely a human within the same country.
Realistically, it would be easy to attach anyway - but since it’s unencrypted, it might become easy to trace back at least to the spot where it crossed the border, even if it would be difficult to fully track its origin. Law enforcement could fine the interchange spots choosing to forward the header, even if they can’t track down bad actors.
VPNs, similarly, would be asked not to include the header when forwarding traffic, but it would come down to their business preference and enforcement.
This could also, for instance, help structure social media in a way that prevents people being fooled by international astroturfers. A while back Twitter accidentally exposed how many MAGA accounts originated in Russia, and this could expose them without requiring detailed identity information on individuals.
It would need extra attention on misuse, as many would prefer not to send this signal even when they are in the same country; it would just be one way of a site asking for the least-necessary information for things like buying a game key.
It’s not an issue that needs to be fixed by us. It’s not impossible to price digital goods differently in different countries, but companies would rather close up shop than let you buy a product cheaper than in your region. At the end of the day - the lowest they can price it is how much it realistically costs and the rest is extra fees for living in more developed countries, but they are greedy and don’t care about consumers one bit.
Also the digital segregation you are describing is already rolling out anyway with ID verification, that won’t solve the problems you think it will however.
I assumed all of this was known, but seeing how simply you view the issue, perhaps not.
It is impossible to do that currently, though, isn’t it? You set 8 prices for 8 countries individually, based on how reasonably each country’s residents can pay through their cost of living. Then, residents of 7 of those countries use VPNs to just pay the price of the country with the lowest pricing.
Then, the publisher sees this is happening, and stops selling to the lowest-income country, or feels forced to inflate price there to account for price chasing. Everyone loses.
This is largely why publishers decide to ignore outcries from international customers pointing out ridiculousness of international prices.
I’m not going to speak towards a world that attempts to enforce digital ID verification, as I’d be a starch opponent to that my whole life, and I’ll only stop when ordinary citizens become pro-ID, which I have never seen one of. I still believe it’s possible to suggest technologies that provide partial forms of identity as needed without denying freedom of digital anonymity.
