SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Pazarlama ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 19 Sayı: 3

MEASURING THE PRICE-VALUE RELATIONSHIP IN DIGITAL GAMES: A HEDONIC PRICING, QUANTILE REGRESSION AND DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS APPROACH

DİJİTAL OYUNLARDA FİYAT-DEĞER İLİŞKİSİNİN ÖLÇÜLMESİ: HEDONİK FİYATLAMA, KUANTİL REGRESYON VE VERİ ZARFLAMA ANALİZİ YAKLAŞIMI

Burak Bora(NEVŞEHİR HACI BEKTAŞ VELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, İKTİSADİ VE İDARİ BİLİMLER FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0002-4723-3405
Pages
632–653
Publication Date
2026-09-28
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Data envelopment analysis scores are not comprehensive measures of consumer value or game quality.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examines the relationship of digital game prices with quality, visibility, life-cycle, and publisher-structure indicators and the relative efficiency of games in observed user outputs per unit of price.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Cross-sectional data on 500 paid Steam games, collected on 20–21 May 2026 and selected through stratified sampling, are used.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Data envelopment analysis scores are not comprehensive measures of consumer value or game quality.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2026 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Dijital Oyunlar · Fiyat-Değer İlişkisi · Hedonik Fiyatlama

Abstract

This study examines the relationship of digital game prices with quality, visibility, life-cycle, and publisher-structure indicators and the relative efficiency of games in observed user outputs per unit of price. Cross-sectional data on 500 paid Steam games, collected on 20–21 May 2026 and selected through stratified sampling, are used. Hedonic pricing estimates average price associations, quantile regression evaluates their profiles across the price distribution, and input-oriented data envelopment analysis assesses the relative efficiency of the positive-review ratio and review volume with price as the input. In HC3-robust estimates, review volume is positively associated with price, whereas the discount rate, game age, and independent-publisher groups are negatively associated. Bootstrap tests show no pervasive differences except between the 0.50 and 0.75 quantiles for publisher-backed independent games. Twelve games are on the variable-returns frontier, whereas only one is on the constant-returns frontier. The findings show that market signals associated with price and observed user outputs per unit of price are distinct concepts. Data envelopment analysis scores are not comprehensive measures of consumer value or game quality.

Özet

Bu çalışma, dijital oyunlarda fiyatın kalite, popülerlik, içerik ve yayıncı yapısı göstergeleriyle ne ölçüde uyumlu olduğunu incelemektedir. Steam mağazasından derlenen 500 ücretli oyundan oluşan veri seti kullanılmış; fiyat-değer ilişkisi hedonik fiyatlama modeli, kuantil regresyon ve veri zarflama analizi ile değerlendirilmiştir. Ana modelde bağımlı değişken log fiyat, açıklayıcı değişkenler ise kullanıcı değerlendirme oranı, toplam yorum sayısının logaritması, oyun yaşı, indirim oranı, çok oyunculu destek, tür ve yayıncı grubu olarak belirlenmiştir. Bulgular, fiyatı en tutarlı biçimde açıklayan değişkenlerin yorum hacmi, indirim oranı, oyun yaşı ve yayıncı grubu olduğunu göstermektedir. Kuantil regresyon sonuçları, bu etkilerin düşük, orta ve yüksek fiyat segmentlerinde farklı yoğunluklarda sürdüğünü ortaya koymaktadır. Veri zarflama analizi ise yüksek fiyatlı oyunların her zaman daha yüksek fiyat-değer etkinliği üretmediğini; düşük ve orta fiyatlı bazı oyunların güçlü kullanıcı çıktılarıyla etkin referanslar oluşturduğunu göstermektedir. Çalışma, dijital ürünlerde fiyatlandırma ve tüketici değeri ilişkisine oyun pazarı üzerinden ampirik bir ölçüm çerçevesi sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Bora, B. (2026). MEASURING THE PRICE-VALUE RELATIONSHIP IN DIGITAL GAMES: A HEDONIC PRICING, QUANTILE REGRESSION AND DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS APPROACH. Pazarlama ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 19 Sayı: 3, 632–653. https://ajindex.com/articles/1301015

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (34)

  1. Abdelqader, H. (2025). Steam games metadata and player reviews (2020–2024) [Data set]. Mendeley Data. https://doi.org/10.17632/jxy85cr3th.2
  2. Aliev, A. R., Aliyev, T. A., & Eyniyev, R. (2025). Analyzing price dynamics, activity of players and reviews of popular indie games on Steam post-COVID-19 pandemic using SteamDB. International Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science, 17(3), 26–51. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijitcs.2025.03.03
  3. Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30(9), 1078–1092. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.30.9.1078
  4. Castronova, E. (2004). The price of bodies: A hedonic pricing model of avatar attributes in a synthetic world. Kyklos, 57(2), 173–196. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-5962.2004.00249.x
  5. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8
  6. Chevalier, J. A., & Mayzlin, D. (2006). The effect of word of mouth on sales: Online book reviews. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(3), 345–354.
  7. Chumpitaz, R., Kerstens, K., Paparoidamis, N., & Staat, M. (2010). Hedonic price function estimation in economics and marketing: Revisiting Lancaster’s issue of ‘noncombinable’ goods. Annals of Operations Research, 173, 145–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-008-0354-x
  8. Chun, H., & Lee, H. (2014). Measuring operational efficiency of Korean online game companies with DEA window analysis. Journal of the Korean Operations Research and Management Science Society, 39(3), 23–40. https://doi.org/10.7737/JKORMS.2014.39.3.023
  9. Cook, W. D., & Seiford, L. M. (2009). Data envelopment analysis (DEA)—Thirty years on. European Journal of Operational Research, 192(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2008.01.032
  10. Cook, W. D., Tone, K., & Zhu, J. (2014). Data envelopment analysis: Prior to choosing a model. Omega, 44, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2013.09.004
  11. Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Tone, K. (2007). Data envelopment analysis: A comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software (2nd ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-45283-8
  12. De Langhe, B., Fernbach, P. M., & Lichtenstein, D. R. (2016). Navigating by the stars: Investigating the actual and perceived validity of online user ratings. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(6), 817–833.
  13. Di Lizia, A. (2024). Social influence in online reviews: Evidence from the Steam Store. Warwick Economics Research Papers, 1505.
  14. Doyle, J. R., & Green, R. H. (1991). Comparing products using data envelopment analysis. Omega, 19(6), 631–638.
  15. Dyson, R. G., Allen, R., Camanho, A. S., Podinovski, V. V., Sarrico, C. S., & Shale, E. A. (2001). Pitfalls and protocols in DEA. European Journal of Operational Research, 132(2), 245–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(00)00149-1
  16. Gaming in Türkiye | MENA | EU. (2026). Türkiye Oyun Sektörü Raporu 2025 Yayınlandı. Gaming in Türkiye | MENA | EU.
  17. Godes, D., & Mayzlin, D. (2004). Using online conversations to study word-of-mouth communication. Marketing Science, 23(4), 545–560.
  18. Guzsvinecz, T., & Szűcs, J. (2023). Length and sentiment analysis of reviews about top-level video game genres on the Steam platform. Computers in Human Behavior, 149, 107955. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107955
  19. Güral, Y., Gürcan, M., Devecioğlu, S., & Halisdemir, T. A. (2022). Investigation of the performance of esports games with data envelopment analysis. Cuadernos de Psicología del Deporte, 22(2), 258–267. https://doi.org/10.6018/cpd.448551
  20. Huang, J., Xie, D., & Xu, Z. (2024). Sequential innovation and contribution distribution: Measurement from game live-streaming industry. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11, 646. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03073-7
  21. Koenker, R. (2005). Quantile regression. Cambridge University Press.
  22. Koenker, R., & Bassett, G. (1978). Regression quantiles. Econometrica, 46(1), 33–50.
  23. Lancaster, K. J. (1966). A new approach to consumer theory. Journal of Political Economy, 74(2), 132–157.
  24. Marchand, A., & Hennig-Thurau, T. (2013). Value creation in the video game industry: Industry economics, consumer benefits, and research opportunities. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 27(3), 141–157.
  25. Nelson, P. (1970). Information and consumer behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 78(2), 311–329.
  26. Newzoo. (2025). Global games market report 2025: Free edition. Newzoo.
  27. Rao, A. R., & Monroe, K. B. (1989). The effect of price, brand name, and store name on buyers' perceptions of product quality: An integrative review. Journal of Marketing Research, 26(3), 351–357.
  28. Rosen, S. (1974). Hedonic prices and implicit markets: Product differentiation in pure competition. Journal of Political Economy, 82(1), 34–55.
  29. Shapiro, C. (1983). Premiums for high quality products as returns to reputations. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 98(4), 659–679.
  30. Ward, D. R. (2015). Measuring the value of product characteristics in the presence of price dispersion. Managerial and Decision Economics, 36(8), 535–544.
  31. White, H. (1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48(4), 817–838.
  32. Wooldridge, J. M. (2020). Introductory econometrics: A modern approach (7th ed.). Cengage.
  33. Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2–22.
  34. Zhu, F., & Zhang, X. (2010). Impact of online consumer reviews on sales: The moderating role of product and consumer characteristics. Journal of Marketing, 74(2), 133–148.