Mind Our Own Business
by Keara22HI, HSM team writer
So: when did Sony become our grandma? And the developers become our indulgent parents? It’s time to grow up and realize that the real world and the virtual world have a lot in common. In Home, you are treated as an adult, whether or not you are actually capable of mature behavior. That means things cost money. Sony and the developers create entertainment for you, and that costs them money. Real, actual money. Money they have to recoup by selling you something for more real money than it cost them to create it.
When you were a child, life was idyllic: if your parents could afford it, they would give you what you needed — and then also try to give you what you wanted. Whining, wheedling, and complaining were useless if your parents simply did not have the money for whatever it is that you thought you needed to make your life complete.
When you reached the age where you were through with school, moved out of your parents’ home, and into your first full-time job, you woke up to the way the world works: you get what you pay for. And if you cannot pay for it, you learn to live without it. You don’t go out screaming at the top of your lungs that Mercedes Benz should not advertise a car you cannot afford. You do not get furious at Samsung for offering a large flat-screen TV you cannot buy.
You learn the “instead of” rule that applies to most lives: look in your grocery basket, as an example, at all the non-essential items placed there: cigarettes, alcohol, potato chips, candy bars, sodas, and other “goodies” that we crave, but could live without. Remove one of those items this week, and put the money aside that you would have spent for it. Do it again next week. And the week after. By now, you are losing some ugly pounds, you are breathing better, you aren’t wired on caffeine, and you are accumulating some discretionary dollars to spend on other things.
What other things? Discretionary dollars are those dollars that are left after all the essentials have been paid for, such as rent, medical insurance, car payment, utilities, phone, and food. Anything bought with a discretionary dollar is a luxury because it is not a matter of survival. And those “luxury purchases” are usually made on the basis of emotion, not logic.
If our purchasing decisions were made based on logic and on the function of the item, we would all be wearing plain white t-shirts, the cheapest jeans on the market, and plastic flip-flops. Thus, some items considered absolute essentials — such as clothing — are “essential” only at the lowest possible price. But we turn them into luxuries when we buy a more expensive item because it makes us feel good about ourselves.
Now apply this to Home: some of the children in Home who are still dependent on their parents for their discretionary dollars get very upset when a game offers desirable options that cost money they don’t have. It seems to be easier to get angry at the developer for enticing them, than to get angry at their parents for not giving them a large enough weekly allowance to buy everything they want. So, some waste their time in Home screaming about pricing.
Granted, some developers have poop for brains when it comes to pricing strategies. The automobile industry learned almost a hundred years ago to offer a ‘basic’ model in the advertised sticker price and then add on options for more money. It was up to the car salesman to sell the car first and then sell the optionals until the customer ran out of money or said “no more.” In the 1930’s, if the first option was a heater for an additional $10, it would usually sell, if it was a cold climate area. So a lot of basic model plus heater car sales were made. But a lot of basic model plus air conditioning for an additional $50 did not. Not because no one wanted air conditioning. No, it was because that additional purchase would have required more “instead of” decisions for a lot of people.
It might come as a shock to you, but during the Depression years, a lot of cars were sold with no heater, no radio, no white-wall tires, and no air-conditioning. But then, there was no television in those years showing you a new Cadillac sedan with all the bells and whistles, making you feel like your life would not be complete without one.
Part of the problem of the “freemium” strategy with games is the presumption that everyone who tries the game has the money to go on. This is like assuming that you can let the baby lick the lollipop long enough to taste it and want it — and then tell him to run out to get a paper route so he can buy it! Imagine the frustration when you get just enough of a taste to whet your appetite and then it is taken away from you. Just like, imagine seeing very persuasive ads on television for electrical appliances 
you can never afford — and then a riot happens and the plate glass windows on the appliance store break!
In Home, people from all economic strata are lumped together as one great consumer pool. What will motivate some to buy will frustrate and anger others. Is there any solution to this problem? Ironically, I have been playing a game on my PC that has found a solution that works. The game is made in the Netherlands and is written in Dutch. Fortunately, it is simple enough that the language barrier did not make it impossible to play and enjoy. What is a problem, however, is the upgrades for the game are all quoted in their currency, not US dollars. And I am such a dunce, I couldn’t figure out how to pay for the upgrades.
This game designer, however, realized that (1) the game is more fun, the more “friends” you have playing it with you and (2) not all of those friends have discretionary Euros to spend. So, every upgrade is offered two ways: the player can buy them immediately or perform some tasks to earn them. It is easy to see who is buying the upgrades — those are my friends at levels 60 – 90. And I plug along at level 45, having a lot of fun.
Do I despise the game developer for selling the upgrades I cannot buy? No, of course not. If he wasn’t making the money to keep improving and augmenting the game, it would die quickly. Am I angry at Dutch friends who buy the upgrades? Not at all — that’s their prerogative. And am I enjoying the game? Yes, immensely. It is one of those farm games like Harvest Moon — and I am still waiting for a smart developer to come up with a version of it for Home.
Here’s the catch with SCEA Home: the audience is predominantly young and male, particularly since people as young as thirteen are allowed in. Which is all fine and dandy, except there’s a marketing presumption that this demographic constitutes the largest economic bloc in Home. Were I a Home developer, harsh as this sounds, I would spend less time trying to please the people who can’t afford my product anyway and more time figuring out how to appeal to those who actually have the means to generate revenue for me. There’s still plenty of free Home for people to enjoy without spending a dime, but that doesn’t mean they — and their feedback — are by default the target audience.
July 19th, 2012 by keara22hi | 6 comments
Keara is also known in Home as DarthGranny. She is a wicked little old lady with a wild sense of humor.
Very good and mature article. Home is bigger and different than it was not that long ago (So i’ve been told) Gone are the day for many where they could buy every new trinket and max out every new games. Choices need to be done now.
Sadly I dont always have the feeling i’m treated like a customer by Sony. Hiding behind “Beta & TOS” is not the best PR technique…
One question i want to ask thou.
What if all of a sudden anything different from the plain withe t-shirt, cheap jeans or plastic flip-flop was $200. You cant afford it? Not my problem, eat my bullets. heard that somewhere? I dont have problems with choices and luxury items. When they are luxury items…
Awesome article Granny and as you know, I totally agree. It isn’t the target demographic that is doing the majority of buying on Home, it’s us old farts with disposable income and too much free time on our hands.
I was always told as a child that “if you can’t afford something, save up for it. And if you can’t save up for it, forget about it”. This ethos has kept me safe from the credit crunch that I watched cripple a LOT of the people I know. Sure, daily/weekly/monthly food shops are still way more expensive than they should be, and half the UK is paying through the nose for its fuel but it’s still manageable to get by humbly.
The problem is that a lot of people want what they just can’t have. TV screens litter our lives and push images of granduier into our minds on a daily basis. Now some people (like me) can use their common sense and tell themselves that if they see something they TRULY feel they need to enrich their lives, they can save for it. However, even now while people are still re-mortgaging their houses for a flashier car, or nices suits with a little name tag on them. They crave that label, not because it fits better, or even feels better to wear. They do it for the vanity that there might be a slight chance that a complete stranger may just happen to notice that tag, and without saying a word, or any kind of acknowledgment, they get their oh-so-importiant ego boost that they are better than them because they “can afford” it.
There’s a well known triangle concerning labels like Prada, Armani and the rest. The top items made by these companies are tailored made items for the client, and generally cost the company more money to make than they sell it for. Why? Why give some uber-rich-and-famous person an exquisite item for less than it cost to make? Because they’ll advertise it, pushing the brand. The next tier is the ho-hum super rich, who’ll spend thousands on a handbag. Again, some good idvertising but without much monetary return for the company. Then we get into trinkets for the wannabes; shades, belt buckles, shoelaces etc. All the crap of the day churned out from a factory and stamped with it’s super brand logo, and sold to idiots who THINK that paying £150 for a pair of mass-made sunglasses is an investment towards his status in his society. This is where they make their lions share.
And I’m rambling like a loon again going waaaay off topic! Sorry…
I almost got talked into paying a high annual fee for the ‘prestige’ of carrying an American Express Platinum Card until I realized the only people who would ever see it (sales persons) would take it as a cue to charge me even more money. You are so right!
I loved this article Granny, you spoke true about the demographics that is for sure. I wonder if the developers have a way to look at the ages of the people who buy from them. I mean they have our ID’s, at least Sony does, and included in those is a birth date, but does this info get to everyone? In this day and age of privacy issues and having to sign docs to say we know their rules ect. do they share this info with anyone? I sometimes wonder about that.
It seems to me that sometimes they don’t look at it that way at all with some of the newer stuff coming out in Home. It is all youth oriented, and because of that I haven’t bought much recently in the way of clothing.
Nice read and you hit the nail on the head.
Tell me about it! If you think the choice of clothing is limited for woman, you should try the male department. I wear normal, adult street clothes most of the time. Since my “out of the noob” intial spending spree. I havent found anything new interresting. Sorry no underwear showing for Doc