Agreed, but pricing is a real bear. Doing the analysis, along with all of one's assumptions and guesstimates and strategic choices, is a PITA that is hard to do

Agreed, but pricing is a real bear. Doing the analysis, along with all of one's assumptions and guesstimates and strategic choices, is a PITA that is hard to do well and prone to being blown away by Week 1 results anyhow. So I took his advice as "advice to the indie developer who wants to focus on his game and recognizes that he has little business acumen or inclination." Which is sort of a lazy person in theory, but in practice, is sort of like the "self-publishing fantasy fiction writer who wants to focus on his book and recognizes that he has little business acumen or inclination." Etc, etc, etc. The author is basically saying, "Do all the analysis you want; in the end, for you, your most efficient strategy is likely to be pricing at the industry standard." Pricing well above the going rate can be a signal of quality, prestige, etc., but generally speaking, people have to know you to accept your implicit claims to those things. You have to have an audience. Your game is what economists call an 'experience good,' meaning that people won't be able to judge its quality until they've tried it. A high price is a barrier to trial. (This is why high-priced games often feature free, playable demos or other low-barrier trial mechanisms.) The other challenge with pricing high at the outset, then discounting later on is that it may breed market resentmemt. Pretty much everyone expects that a game will cost more if purchased in its first week of release than if purchased two years later. But a lot of people might feel burned if your game costs $X in its first week, and .5X a few months later. It might also encourage fans, even the hardcore, to simply wait out the clock until the expected discount period occurs. On the whole, however, I agree with you. But pricing is hard.