Eurogamer: Is Hollow Knight Silksong's 'cheap' price a problem for other indie games?
- Thread starter Reizo Ryuu
- Start date
- Opinion Drama Cringe
dragonyeuw
Member
There's alot of Indies games I would buy but not at $30-40 dollars. I'll tend to wait until they hit $20, which frankly is the same for AAA. Companies can charge whatever the fuck they want and the consumer will make a judgement call on if they want to buy it and at what price tag.
I find the entire conversation around Silksong's pricing to be weird. I suppose I 'get' the concern for smaller developers but....it doesn't seem like there was any way Team Cherry was getting out of this unscathed. Price it at $40 and you'll probably get a few people argue that its going to sell gangbusters so they could have 'done right' by customers and sell it for cheap. But since they are in fact doing exactly that, all of a sudden the entire weight of the Indies industry is riding on it. Like what were you expecting, really? For them to price it at $40 so you then can in turn price yours at $30? A rising tide, so to speak? Or just maybe it reflects that your game isn't 'worth' as much as you think it is and you'll probably get more bites at a lower price, since there is a large section of people who are going to wait for a sale regardless, and not far past launch. The industry has trained us for this and there's more content than you can possibly consume. I would say there's too many games in general, probably a weird thing to say on a gaming site, and that's served to devalue the media more than any single company coming along and 'under-charging'.
Hell for all we know, Silksong may stay at $20 for its entire life cycle as its priced to move, instead of pricing it at $30-40 and then slashing it 50% in a few years ( like what commonly happens with the first game and the point I bought in). At $20, knowing the amount of 'value' and content you're getting, that's basically 'fuck it, why wait?' mode which I'm sure was the point and very much part of its marketing. Like what? $20??!! Shiiiit I'll grab it for Steam AND Switch. Those are the kinds of conversations you should want your customers to have, not '$70...$80? Fuck that I'll wait for a sale'. The entire industry has so expertly gaslit us into being ok with overcharging for half-baked buggy 'we'll fix it later' crap that you collectively lose your shit when a company actually exceeds expectations. What a novel concept.
I find the entire conversation around Silksong's pricing to be weird. I suppose I 'get' the concern for smaller developers but....it doesn't seem like there was any way Team Cherry was getting out of this unscathed. Price it at $40 and you'll probably get a few people argue that its going to sell gangbusters so they could have 'done right' by customers and sell it for cheap. But since they are in fact doing exactly that, all of a sudden the entire weight of the Indies industry is riding on it. Like what were you expecting, really? For them to price it at $40 so you then can in turn price yours at $30? A rising tide, so to speak? Or just maybe it reflects that your game isn't 'worth' as much as you think it is and you'll probably get more bites at a lower price, since there is a large section of people who are going to wait for a sale regardless, and not far past launch. The industry has trained us for this and there's more content than you can possibly consume. I would say there's too many games in general, probably a weird thing to say on a gaming site, and that's served to devalue the media more than any single company coming along and 'under-charging'.
Hell for all we know, Silksong may stay at $20 for its entire life cycle as its priced to move, instead of pricing it at $30-40 and then slashing it 50% in a few years ( like what commonly happens with the first game and the point I bought in). At $20, knowing the amount of 'value' and content you're getting, that's basically 'fuck it, why wait?' mode which I'm sure was the point and very much part of its marketing. Like what? $20??!! Shiiiit I'll grab it for Steam AND Switch. Those are the kinds of conversations you should want your customers to have, not '$70...$80? Fuck that I'll wait for a sale'. The entire industry has so expertly gaslit us into being ok with overcharging for half-baked buggy 'we'll fix it later' crap that you collectively lose your shit when a company actually exceeds expectations. What a novel concept.
Last edited:
Fbh
Member
People talk as if the financial safety they got from Hollow Knight just fell out of the sky for them.
It didn't, they took a risk by quitting their job and working on an indie game, founded by a kickstarter campaign of only like $40k, they released it for $15 which even back in 2017 was pretty cheap for a game like this (specially considering the volume of content), and it became a big hit not because they had some multi million dollar marketing campaign but because many people recognized the quality of the game and good word of mouth + an affordable price made them stand out.
Hollow Knight back in 2017 was already cheaper, of higher quality and more content packed than many similar games. No one complained back then, weird.
It didn't, they took a risk by quitting their job and working on an indie game, founded by a kickstarter campaign of only like $40k, they released it for $15 which even back in 2017 was pretty cheap for a game like this (specially considering the volume of content), and it became a big hit not because they had some multi million dollar marketing campaign but because many people recognized the quality of the game and good word of mouth + an affordable price made them stand out.
Hollow Knight back in 2017 was already cheaper, of higher quality and more content packed than many similar games. No one complained back then, weird.
{insert code here}
Member
20 is normal pricing for indie games.
Hari Seldon
Member
Nothing annoys me more than whiny ass indie devs that spend 24/7 on social media (instead of working on their fucking game). Them and their bootlickers in the enthusiast media can go fuck themselves.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
What fucking world do we live in?
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
I posted one word in all caps lol. But bro.....open your eyes! There is no "cult-like" mantra outside of what you are doing here. Here are 4 high level video game executives that have said the same thing about GamePass that others on GAF have said. And this doesn't include what Jim Ryan and Shawn Layden have said (because they were executives only for Playstation and you'd say they are biased).
Former Bethesda Exec Says Gaming Subscription Services 'Worth Jack S***' Without Proper Support for Game Developers - IGN | shawn layden | 21 comments
Final Friday post: I'm just going to leave this here. I believe Pete's colorful quote hits this nail right on the head. The question is not, "is the service profitable for the platform". Is it healthy and helpful for the developer is what we need to ask. https://lnkd.in/guHygh-v | 21 comments...
www.linkedin.com
Bobby Kotick Won't Allow Call of Duty on Subscription Services on Day One, Franchise Earns Over 2x on PS Than Xbox
CEO Bobby Kotick says he won't put CoD on subscription services on day one, and that PlayStation earns twice as much as Xbox through the franchise.
mp1st.com
Take-Two CEO Says Launching New Games Into A Subscription Service Like Game Pass Makes No Sense
"I don't think that ever made sense. I still don't think it makes sense."
www.gamespot.com
Former Bethesda Exec Says Gaming Subscription Services 'Worth Jack S***' Without Proper Support for Game Developers - IGN
Pete Hines, Bethesda’s former senior vice president of global marketing and communications, has some thoughts about gaming subscription services like Game Pass, saying they are "worth jack s***" without the developers who make games for them.
Punished Miku
Gaslighter Pro: 16.7 Fireflops
Price collusion. Value developers. Don't ever fire anyone. Infinite games and you must buy them all at a high price or you're a piece of shit even if you can't play them all. End all rentals. These people must be valued at all costs. End crunch. Ban AI voice acting. Value.
Last edited:
Magic Carpet
Gold Member
No Mans Sky is currently $60.
Hornet the diagonal pogo jumper is $20
I could spend 50 hours in No Mans Sky
Or I could Rage Quit in 5 hours in Sillksong.
Hornet the diagonal pogo jumper is $20
I could spend 50 hours in No Mans Sky
Or I could Rage Quit in 5 hours in Sillksong.
MagiusNecros
Gilgamesh Fan Annoyance
Just a couple days ago NMS was on sale for $23 lol
Edit: Still on sale via GOG for $23.99 for a little over a day if you missed the Steam sale.
Last edited:
Dacvak
No one shall be brought before our LORD David Bowie without the true and secret knowledge of the Photoshop. For in that time, so shall He appear.
This.
The free market will (for better or worse) always work itself out.
I feel for indie devs these days, though. It's insanely competitive, and you genuinely need a lot of luck (on top of a phenomenal game) to even be noticed. And for some devs, that means risking a higher price to prep for lower sales/visibility, if the alternative is a lower price with the same lower sales/visibility.
Pedro Motta
Gold Member
God, how wrong could you be? This is NOTHING like Gamepass.This is literally the same as the Gamepass devalues games argument. This is what you all have sounded like this entire time.
Promoting price collusion, advocating for raising prices, attacking anyone who wants to try and offer a good deal. That's been a nonstop thing here for years. Should Silksong be $40 to fight against devaluing? Don't forget, it's also on Gamepass. Imagine all the damage this will cause because you got a $20 game. This is what valuing developers means; it means you pay up while they complain about other people's products that they have no say over at all.
Why is this suddenly "insane" now? This is what the dominant discourse has been on GAF for literally years, in literally every single thread mentioning GP, literally every single time.
Team Cherry is Indie and has extremely strong financials on their side due to the sucess of Hollow Knight (15 million copies). They don't have publishers and lot of overhead, they are a very small team. They can charge whatever they think it's best for their business and labor, and it's way more than lucrative.
MSduderino
Member
Uhm... hello? Hollow Knight released for what, $15? And it still offered 3-4x the content of the average indie of its time. The very same things were being said in 2017. People's memory is getting shorter and shorter.
The real problem is the price (and, well, the very existence) of these and thousands of others:
Not to mention, collections of 30+ year old ROMS releasing for more than even Nintendo used to ask for their VC titles in the Wii era.
I'm surprised there hasn't been more chatter about price inflation/collusion on indie/single A games. HK/Silksong are really cheap for what offers but it more so makes other smaller games seem expensive.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
The issue is one of attention. If a game monopolizes the news cycle then it poses a visibility problem for anything else occupying the same launch window.
This should not be even considered a matter of debate as its so fundamentally obvious.
This is what's pissed me off so much with certain fuckwit YT commentators bleating about how terrible it is that other indie devs have bemoaned the way Team Cherry borderline shadow-dropped Silksong. Of course they aren't happy as anything coming out around the same time basically doesn't stand a chance without heavy marketing to prop up visibility.
You know, the heavy marketing that indies almost never are the beneficiaries of...
The level of retardation required to cheerlead Silksong's success whilst failing to recognize that the way they've gone about releasing it with so little advance warning having the potential to kill the chances of the next indie great, just because they were unable to steer their launch out of the way, is remarkable.
This should not be even considered a matter of debate as its so fundamentally obvious.
This is what's pissed me off so much with certain fuckwit YT commentators bleating about how terrible it is that other indie devs have bemoaned the way Team Cherry borderline shadow-dropped Silksong. Of course they aren't happy as anything coming out around the same time basically doesn't stand a chance without heavy marketing to prop up visibility.
You know, the heavy marketing that indies almost never are the beneficiaries of...
The level of retardation required to cheerlead Silksong's success whilst failing to recognize that the way they've gone about releasing it with so little advance warning having the potential to kill the chances of the next indie great, just because they were unable to steer their launch out of the way, is remarkable.
Punished Miku
Gaslighter Pro: 16.7 Fireflops
It's still a dumb argument though. It's like saying you literally aren't allowed to shadow drop games.
You are. End of story. Oblivion is allowed to come out a few days before Clair Obscur. Silksong can come out anytime they want to release it. That's really the end of the discussion. Nobody owes you anything.
Icymanipulator
Member
Only reason I picked it up because it was $20.
At $40 I would have passed.
At $40 I would have passed.
Last edited:
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Here's the funny part......they did charge more lol!!! The first game cost $15 a launch. This game cost $20 at launch. That's a 33% increase of the cost of the game between the first and the 2nd game. It's the same as a game going from $60 to $80 (33% increase). What some of these indie devs REALLY have an issue with is how successful the game was the first time and how much attention it's getting now.
Steve Holt
Member
Why are the same people trying to make this about GamePass, it seems like it's every thread now, a big over the top defence of its existence. It's weird.
Buying a game isn't in the same ballpark as playing it day one on a subscription service - which has been proven to cannibalise sales.
Buying a game isn't in the same ballpark as playing it day one on a subscription service - which has been proven to cannibalise sales.
GermanZepp
Gold Member
Silksong is $7 usd in my Steam store kek
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
One where publications/websites bow to game publications/game executives that care more about themselves than gamers.
Wildebeest
Member
Indie devs need to worry about their game not standing out and people not knowing about it or having any reason to care about it. It is much worse to have people thinking that a game like Clair Obscur selling for 40$ is the baseline for production values and pricing for an "indie game" in 2025.
MSduderino
Member
It was prices being too high caused the last video game crash, not too low.
StreetsofBeige
Member
That's competition.
No different than why do AAA games with tons of gamers are priced at $70, while trainwrecks can be priced the same.
Will $20 Silksong give gamers a bad taste in mouth other shitty indie games cost $20 or more? Maybe.
But that's business. They can afford to sell it for $20 because they got a handful of people working on the game (cost efficiencies), got a big group of gamers willing to buy (loyal gamers), and making it better is the games get great reviews (quality). All at an affordable price. What's the problem?
Seems like a great deal. Only game companies that care are ones who look themselves in the mirror and can openly admit they sell junk at the same or higher price. So it's kind of embarrassing Team Cherry can do it but they cant.
No different than why do AAA games with tons of gamers are priced at $70, while trainwrecks can be priced the same.
Will $20 Silksong give gamers a bad taste in mouth other shitty indie games cost $20 or more? Maybe.
But that's business. They can afford to sell it for $20 because they got a handful of people working on the game (cost efficiencies), got a big group of gamers willing to buy (loyal gamers), and making it better is the games get great reviews (quality). All at an affordable price. What's the problem?
Seems like a great deal. Only game companies that care are ones who look themselves in the mirror and can openly admit they sell junk at the same or higher price. So it's kind of embarrassing Team Cherry can do it but they cant.
Last edited:
Gamer79
Predicts the worst decade for Sony starting 2022
No. These companies that are hating on it have to get better and learn to stop inflating budgets.
I bet most modern releases still spend millions on "DEI" studies.
It also does not help that many Women activist are now developers and openly hate men. Go look at some of the larger studios and it's insane how much good talent have been fired or forced to quit to replaced by woke Karens.
I bet most modern releases still spend millions on "DEI" studies.
It also does not help that many Women activist are now developers and openly hate men. Go look at some of the larger studios and it's insane how much good talent have been fired or forced to quit to replaced by woke Karens.
kiphalfton
Member
Idiots.
If the devs don't think it will hurt THEM financially by doing so, that's literally all that matters.
That just means the haters will have to manage their projects better. But that requires accountability and everybody is a bitch when it comes to taking accountability.
If the devs don't think it will hurt THEM financially by doing so, that's literally all that matters.
That just means the haters will have to manage their projects better. But that requires accountability and everybody is a bitch when it comes to taking accountability.
Last edited: