No Man's Sky Amazon Pre Order

Clonedbaby said:
What indie developers decided to do was way smarter than this though.

Kickstarter allowed for indie devs to assess risk and get enough funding to create a game for an audience willing to pay more than $15 for their game to be created, to exist. This isn't a new frontier. Its a lot better for something to exist outright due to an audience coming forward, rather than creating something and hoping the game resonates with an audience that's in love with the game conceptually.
Click to expand...
Outside of Elite and a few others, most Kickstarted indies are still in the $10-$30 range. Few are even in the $20-$30 range. Most range from $10 to $20

http://store.steampowered.com/tag/en/Kickstarter/#p=0&tab=NewReleases

In that list, only 3 games are above $30 (might have overlooked a few), the highest being priced at $45 and it isn't even an indie game (Pillars). Elite is able to be priced at $45 because it's the continuation of a popular franchise.

So yeah, it's absolutely is a new frontier. It's not like indies came onto the scene at varying prices, and those at the lower prices proved to be the better sales. Indies started at that price range on XBLA, starting with Braid and Geometry Wars and Limbo and those early indies, and have never really been able to expand beyond it outside of the few exceptions
 
Miracle said:
Shouldn't the quality and/content of the game be a bigger indicator for a price point than how many developers worked on said game?

I mean, for an "indie" title, No Man 's Sky seems pretty damn big with loads of content. Regardless of what the real price will soon be or how many Devs worked on it, I think the $60 is pretty justified no?

If people aren't willing to pay that much, then it will be lowered. Doesn't seem like a big deal to me.
Click to expand...

We have no real idea how much actual "content" is in No Man's Sky. Only vague concepts.

It's too early to tell whether the game will be "worth" a $60 asking price or not. But given the size of the team and the amount of time they've been working on it, I have my doubts whether they'll be able to generate a full "AAA" game's worth of interesting, meaningful, engaging content.

While I'll be there day 1 with whatever the asking price is (including the price of a Morpheus if that's compatible), I think a price of <$40 is more realistic in this market. Unless they start showing the goods for real.
 
You didn't understand my point, I think.

People are willing to pay more than the perceived asking price for a videogame they want, Kickstarter proves this in spades. Kickstarter is just as important as the marketplace itself, its even more valuable. If a indie dev feels they can buck the trend and deliver something grand, they themselves set the price on development and then ask who wants it and how much is someone willing to give.

Kickstarter is a safer and smarter method of assessing the market, creating something without nearly as much risk, and then satisfying any pricing bias that exists in a marketplace.
 
davepoobond said:
21 characters and less than 10 maps. neato, totally worth 40 bucks. you even get to endlessly shoot people in the same arenas and same locations... and earn xp! wow
Click to expand...

These satirical examples are beyond terrible because game design, game mechanics, difficulty, depth, and other factors that are naturally demonstrated by a game are ignored. If something is harder to demonstrate or sell, that's how it is. No Man's Sky is a harder game to sell mechanically than it is conceptually.

If someone asked me what is deeper when it comes to game mechanics, which game has more depth and will take more time to master, Street Fighter IV or No Man's Sky, I'd say Street Fighter IV. If the intention is to keep the complexity of No Man's Sky a secret, as a treat for the player, you can't blame people for questioning if there's much there at all when it comes to gameplay or mechanics.
 
davepoobond said:
21 characters and less than 10 maps. neato, totally worth 40 bucks. you even get to endlessly shoot people in the same arenas and same locations... and earn xp! wow. its almost like they are completely different
Click to expand...

It's a new IP by Blizzard who are known for overcharging in regards to the amount you get and it's still quite a bit cheaper than NMS is going to be apparently.
 
Clonedbaby said:
You didn't understand my point, I think.

People are willing to pay more than the perceived asking price for a videogame they want, Kickstarter proves this in spades. Kickstarter is just as important as the marketplace itself, its even more valuable. If a indie dev feels they can buck the trend and deliver something grand, they themselves set the price on development and then ask who wants it and how much is someone willing to give.

Kickstarter is a safer and smarter method of assessing the market, creating something without nearly as much risk, and then satisfying any pricing bias that exists in a marketplace.
Click to expand...
I'd have to disagree The game tiers (usually equivalent to what a purchase/preorder would be) tend to still be in the $10-$20 range. There are higher priced tiers, of course, but those include the game plus additional rewards

The base game tiers are usually still equivalent to the typical indie game price on Steam or consoles. I follow Kickstarters and indie games closer than most people on GAF do, so you can trust me on that
 
More_Badass said:
I'd have to disagree The game tiers (usually equivalent to what a purchase/preorder would be) tend to still be in the $10-$20 range. There are higher priced tiers, of course, but those include the game plus rewards

The base game tiers are usually still equivalent to the typical indie game price on Steam or consoles. I follow Kickstarters and indie games closer than most people on GAF do, so you can trust me on that
Click to expand...

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/ysnet/shenmue-3/description

$30 for a digital copy of the game, 26,000 backers.
$60 for a physical copy of the game, combined total of 20,000 backers.

Chances are, without a kickstarter, there would be no way to gauge if consumers would be willing to pay double the amount for a physical copy of Shenmue 3. $60 at retail would've been a gigantic risk for a publisher to consider.

$100. 6,500 backers.
 
Clonedbaby said:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/ysnet/shenmue-3/description

$30 for a digital copy of the game, 26,000 backers.
$60 for a physical copy of the game, combined total of 20,000 backers.

Chances are, without a kickstarter, there would be no way to gauge if consumers would be willing to pay double the amount for a psychical copy of Shenmue 3. $60 at retail would've been a gigantic risk for a publisher to consider.

$100. 6,500 backers.
Click to expand...
You're comparing Shenmue 3 to the typical indie game Kickstarter

Shenmue 3

At least choose comparable examples. The vast, vast majority of video gaming Kickstarters price their base tier from $10 to $25, usually in the $10-$15 range. Yes, there are exceptions. But we're talking about the general indie game

Usually, a no-hype/little-hype indie game. Maybe a debut project, maybe a developer's second or third game. Not games on the level of Shenmue 3, riding years of hype and a Kickstarter launch announcement during E3
 
Everything I've seen for this game screams "this is hugely ambitious...FOR A 10 PERSON TEAM". Not "This is hugely ambitious for any team." The ONLY thing impressive about this game for me is that it's being pulled off by 10 people. Nothing else about the game seems like something that couldn't be done faster and even more intensely with more people.

Why should I pay $60 for a game that is literally held back timeline-wise and scope-wise by dev numbers?
 
Clonedbaby said:
These satirical examples are beyond terrible because game design, game mechanics, difficulty, depth, and other factors that are naturally demonstrated by a game are ignored. If something is harder to demonstrate or sell, that's how it is. No Man's Sky is a harder game to sell mechanically than it is conceptually.

If someone asked me what is deeper when it comes to game mechanics, which game has more depth and will take more time to master, Street Fighter IV or No Man's Sky, I'd say Street Fighter IV. If the intention is to keep the complexity of No Man's Sky a secret, as a treat for the player, you can't blame people for questioning if there's much there at all when it comes to gameplay or mechanics.
Click to expand...

i think its also asinine to assume that complexity of game mechanics dictates the price of anything when it comes to games. the perceived value of the concept is quite literally the only thing people who are buying a game have to go on.

if the concept doesnt sell, what does it matter about the gameplay?

Familienoberhauptvogel said:
It's a new IP by Blizzard who are known for overcharging in regards to the amount you get and it's still quite a bit cheaper than NMS is going to be apparently.
Click to expand...

Blizzard also released a game called Heroes of the Storm funded by microtransactions. not really sure that is valid anymore. we also dont know if there is a free base version of the game yet.
 
More_Badass said:
You're comparing Shenmue 3 to the typical indie game Kickstarter

Shenmue 3

Come on. If you're trying to prove your point, at least choose comparable examples
Click to expand...

So indie games aren't that important, but indie devs should still ask for more money, even though they clearly aren't on the same pedestal as Shenmue 3?

What's a comparable example to No Man's Sky?

Typical indie game is a term that goes against your entire point.
 
davepoobond said:
i think its also asinine to assume that complexity of game mechanics dictates the price of anything when it comes to games. the perceived value of the concept is quite literally the only thing people who are buying a game have to go on.
Click to expand...

I think its more asinine to think this than to gauge mechanical complexity and its correlation to value.

Also, some concepts are much easier understood or palatable than others, that was my main point. The interpretation of value is what this thread is all about.
 
Clonedbaby said:
So indie games aren't that important, but indie devs should still ask for more money, even though they clearly aren't on the same pedestal as Shenmue 3?

What's a comparable example to No Man's Sky?
Click to expand...
Very few games were on the same pedestal of Shenmue 3. Indie or AAA. It's not exactly a fair comparison

And why are we comparing Kickstarter tier prices? A successful Kickstarter doesn't mean much in terms of sales or market acceptance. There have been several games this year that were successfully Kickstarted that flopped or didn't sell well. The mindset and drive to pledge is different from the mindset and drive to purchase from Steam or some digital storefront

If we're going to discuss this, probably best to keep it in terms of the prices of released indie games.
 
Clonedbaby said:
I think its more asinine to think this than to gauge mechanical complexity and its correlation to value.

Also, some concepts are much easier understood or palatable than others, that was my main point. The interpretation of value is what this thread is all about.
Click to expand...

except none of what you are saying is even the basis of most peoples arguments.

they are literally saying "its an indie game so it shouldnt be priced that high"
 
I'm quite shocked at the outright rebuttal of some gaffers on the potential price just because NMS is an indie or lacks Activisions 500 strong dev team numbers.

So the game will probably cost £40-45. I was expecting that kind of price range with how massive in scope, ambition and content will likely end up in the final version.

Plus for that amount of money to relieve a childhood fantasy, I'd say it's a fair price to give Hello Games if the game meets my expectations.
 
1. The game is not going to be $60 but i understand if it is $60 at launch

2. Indie does not mean <$60 and just because the vast majority of indie prices at <$60 does'nt mean other devs cannot.

3. If the game is priced at $60, consumers decide if it is worth it.

4. This game has a bigger scope than a lot of "AAA" games.
 
BigDug13 said:
Everything I've seen for this game screams "this is hugely ambitious...FOR A 10 PERSON TEAM". Not "This is hugely ambitious for any team." The ONLY thing impressive about this game for me is that it's being pulled off by 10 people. Nothing else about the game seems like something that couldn't be done faster and even more intensely with more people.

Why should I pay $60 for a game that is literally held back timeline-wise and scope-wise by dev numbers?
Click to expand...

If the game is good why does any of this matter? At this point it just sounds like you guys are coming up with any reason to not pay $60 for the game.
 
Once I see more about the gameplay systems in No Man's Sky then I will judge what it is worth.

People spouting off about it not being worth 60 dollars because of the size of the team and it being Indie are making an ass out of themselves if you ask me. What the hell does that have to do with anything?

If this game can provide the promised trade, crafting, combat, exploration and fully generated universe with even a mediocre level of skill than it is worth 60 dollars.

One could literally name dozens of games that will most likely offer less content that are priced at 60 dollars.
 
I would think that the budget in this game is what is making it a full price retail game. The sheer scope and size of it seems worthy of that price too, can't believe people have the opinion that small teams mean budget games.

You guys realise that the original Gran Turismo only had a max of 15 people working on it at any one point

Wikipedia said:
It required 5 years to complete the video game.[7] In an interview with Kazunori Yamauchi, development of Gran Turismo started in the second half of 1992. Yamauchi added that at different times there were only seven to 15 people that helped to develop the game.
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_(video_game)
 
BigDug13 said:
Everything I've seen for this game screams "this is hugely ambitious...FOR A 10 PERSON TEAM". Not "This is hugely ambitious for any team." The ONLY thing impressive about this game for me is that it's being pulled off by 10 people. Nothing else about the game seems like something that couldn't be done faster and even more intensely with more people.

Why should I pay $60 for a game that is literally held back timeline-wise and scope-wise by dev numbers?
Click to expand...

You're pulling a lot of assumptions out of thin air. There's no guarantee that the team would've churned the game out faster with more people, considering the fact that the size and scope of the world is based on seed algorithms.

But that's what a lot of the rage in this thread is. Uninformed jumping to conclusions, then using those as reasons to be angry about the price (that is not even confirmed to be MSRP).
 
I don't think the price should depend on the size of the team or the "indieness", it should depend on the market situation and expectations. The notion that being priced at $40 or $20 takes something away from the game is ridiculous. You price it lower and expect to make up the difference in volume.

There are plenty of bad games priced at $60 and plenty of amazing games priced at $10 or $15.
 
There's nothing that this bad boy can't solve:

1.JPG
 
JCX said:
What about this game made you think it was budget priced? I always expected 60.
Click to expand...

Probably because it's made by a small indie team on a tiny budget compared to most games that are sold for $60?

Meier said:
I can't imagine why anyone would think a game this big would not be $60. Weird.
Click to expand...

Do we price games by the size of their in-game universe now? I made a prototype of a Minecraft-like with an infinite(ish) non-repeating procedurally generated world last year (for fun/learning), should I sell that for $60 too just because it's huge? Making a game with a massive world isn't hard, what's hard is making it varied and interesting. Yes, NMS is much more impressive than the little demo I made, but I don't see how its unfathomable scale automatically makes it a $60 game. It's just (very clever) algorithms, it's not like it's any harder to make it generate a billion planets than a hundred once the rules are in place.

Now, I'll buy the crap out of this game regardless of whether it's $30 or $60, but I'm not sure I see the logic of everyone who says it's obviously a full-priced game.
 
RoadHazard said:
Probably because it's made by a small indie team on a tiny budget compared to most games that are sold for $60?



Do we price games by the size of their in-game universe now? I made a prototype of a Minecraft-like with an infinite(ish) non-repeating procedurally generated world last year (for fun/learning), should I sell that for $60 too just because it's huge? Making a game with a massive world isn't hard, what's hard is making it varied and interesting. Yes, NMS is much more impressive than the little demo I made, but I don't see how its unfathomable scale automatically makes it a $60 game. It's just (very clever) algorithms, it's not like it's any harder to make it generate a billion planets than a hundred once the rules are in place.

Now, I'll buy the crap out of this game regardless of whether it's $30 or $60, but I'm not sure I see the logic of everyone who says it's obviously a full-priced game.
Click to expand...

It's just a price listing dude we don't know if the game is $60.

Secondly, if Hello Games value their near infinite open world space sim at 60 bucks then that's their choice-let the chips fall where they may.

You could charge $60 too for your minecraft clone which is fine. However, you automatically know you can't do that because your a burgeoning game designer with a game that can't match that price point whereas HG's value proposition potentially can.

I don't see what's hard to understand NMS being potentially $60 if that's what the devs want.
 
kobu said:
If the game is good why does any of this matter? At this point it just sounds like you guys are coming up with any reason to not pay $60 for the game.
Click to expand...

So what if I am? What difference does it make to you whether I buy the game at $60 or not? It's November and I've paid full price for a game on day one this year one single time. Bloodbourne. Outside of that, EVERY game I've purchased has been after release when it's on sale.

EatinOlives said:
You're pulling a lot of assumptions out of thin air. There's no guarantee that the team would've churned the game out faster with more people, considering the fact that the size and scope of the world is based on seed algorithms.

But that's what a lot of the rage in this thread is. Uninformed jumping to conclusions, then using those as reasons to be angry about the price (that is not even confirmed to be MSRP).
Click to expand...

That's what being a consumer is. A mix of informed, uninformed, properly marketed to or improperly marketed to set of people who will or will not buy your product for a chosen price.

It's not "rage" to say that a company has not given me a compelling enough reason to pay $60 for their product, no matter my reasons. Just because you're willing to buy and I'm not doesn't mean I'm angry or enraged. And trying to convince me that my consumer-driven reasons are flat out wrong doesn't help your cause.
 
Why people are saying No Man's Sky is an indie? It's backed by Sony, is it still an indie? The size of the team doesn't make an indie. Indie comes from the word INDEPENDENT. It's then released without publishers or other bigger aid. Sony backs this one up. It's not INDEPENDENT then.

And what the hell? Why indie is a curse word? Without "indies" there wouldn't be modern gaming. Look at the games on C64 and Amiga era. 99% "indies". That is from where these modern AAA devs come from. From indies. From small studios into bigger developers.

Ignorance is bliss I guess. Stupidity as well. Being blind is another thing, but being uneducated about your hobby, about a thing you do on your precious spare time is just lazy and rude towards every game dev.

And using indie as a synonym for bad or shit is just total idiotism.
 
AmaterasuOni said:
Why people are saying No Man's Sky is an indie? It's backed by Sony, is it still an indie? The size of the team doesn't make an indie. Indie comes from the word INDEPENDENT. It's then released without publishers or other bigger aid. Sony backs this one up. It's not INDEPENDENT then.

And what the hell? Why indie is a curse word? Without "indies" there wouldn't be modern gaming. Look at the games on C64 and Amiga era. 99% "indies". That is from where these modern AAA devs come from. From indies. From small studios into bigger developers.

Ignorance is bliss I guess. Stupidity as well. Being blind is another thing, but being uneducated about your hobby, about a thing you do on your precious spare time is just lazy and rude towards every game dev.

And using indie as a synonym for bad or shit is just total idiotism.
Click to expand...
I think the definition is a bit less concrete nowadays. I bet most people would consider games like Rain World, Ghost Song, Volgarr, and Hotline Miami as indie games, even though they are published by Devolver and Adult Swim
 
More_Badass said:
I think the definition is a bit less concrete nowadays. I bet most people would consider games like Rain World, Ghost Song, Volgarr, and Hotline Miami as indie games, even though they are published by Devolver and Adult Swim
Click to expand...

Is Valiant Hearts an indie? Or Child of Light? They're made by Ubisoft.
 
AmaterasuOni said:
Why people are saying No Man's Sky is an indie? It's backed by Sony, is it still an indie? The size of the team doesn't make an indie. Indie comes from the word INDEPENDENT. It's then released without publishers or other bigger aid. Sony backs this one up. It's not INDEPENDENT then.

And what the hell? Why indie is a curse word? Without "indies" there wouldn't be modern gaming. Look at the games on C64 and Amiga era. 99% "indies". That is from where these modern AAA devs come from. From indies. From small studios into bigger developers.

Ignorance is bliss I guess. Stupidity as well. Being blind is another thing, but being uneducated about your hobby, about a thing you do on your precious spare time is just lazy and rude towards every game dev.

And using indie as a synonym for bad or shit is just total idiotism.
Click to expand...

So now if people aren't willing to pay $60 for this game on day one, they're stupid, blind, ignorant, uneducated, lazy, rude gamers ruining the hobby? You seem overly defensive and in turn, overly aggressive towards gamers choosing not to spend $60 for this game.

JoeTheBlow said:
Yeah! Fuck those guys, spending years making the biggest space simulator ever made.
They should give us it for free.
Click to expand...

Not wanting to pay $60 = wanting it for free. Got it. You guys are incredible.

There's only one game this year that felt good enough to spend $60 on for me. I guess that means I really wanted every other game I bought on sale to actually be given to me for free. I guess not paying MSRP on day one for every game you buy means you're saying "fuck you" to those developers.
 
This is a weird thread. I don't actually know what the purpose is.

Are we just supposed to be surprised that an enormous, ambitious, interesting game costs as much as normal big games costs?

I'll try my best: Omg!
 
AmaterasuOni said:
Is Valiant Hearts an indie? Or Child of Light? They're made by Ubisoft.
Click to expand...
It's something I'm torn on

Consider the indie scene now. Devolver, Adult Swim, Team17, Double Fine, Chucklefish, all have publishing labels.

But then again, technically Limbo, Braid, Super Meat Boy were published by Microsoft, right? And I'm assuming most people would consider those games indie games, and if anything, the indie games that brought the indie scene into mainstream view. Does the fact that they were picked up by Microsoft and released on XBLA change that?
 
A seemingly infinite procedurally generated game that appears it will provide hours upon hours upon hours of play time and people are asking why it is $60?

One man painted the Sistine Chapel ceiling, does that make it not as impressive? Is that seriously the logic here, that because it is a smaller indie studio they do not have the right to charge $60 for their labor of love? Seriously?
 
BigDug13 said:
So now if people aren't willing to pay $60 for this game on day one, they're stupid, blind, ignorant, uneducated, lazy, rude gamers ruining the hobby?
Click to expand...

If their only reasoning is "it's an indie, lol", then yes, that's what I think. It's the same thing with PS+: "I'm not buying this game I'm interested in because maybe some day it might be free on PS+". Who the hell thinks like that? If you're interested in playing something, you play it. It's that simple.

But if one cannot afford to pay $60, but can pay $40, then you should probably stop gaming altogether and buy food. That $40 compared to $20 more is lots of food.
 
BigDug13 said:
So what if I am? What difference does it make to you whether I buy the game at $60 or not? It's November and I've paid full price for a game on day one this year one single time. Bloodbourne. Outside of that, EVERY game I've purchased has been after release when it's on sale.
Click to expand...

So what are you driving at exactly here?

Doesn't mean the game ain't worth 60 bucks just because you place zero value on ever paying full price for a game.

Sounds like you should just wait for reviews, a discount and then make your decision in late 2016.
 
Eh, after paying $75 for Elite to play the beta and such and seeing what a work in progress that "super free to do what you want" game turned out ... I will definitely wait for a Steam sale or a PSVR bundle to pick this up.

I realized I like direction in games.
 
More_Badass said:
It's something I'm torn on

Consider the indie scene now. Devolver, Adult Swim, Team17, Double Fine, Chucklefish, all have publishing labels.

But then again, technically Limbo, Braid, Super Meat Boy were published by Microsoft, right? And I'm assuming most people would consider those games indie games, and if anything, the indie games that brought the indie scene into mainstream view. Does the fact that they were picked up by Microsoft and released on XBLA change that?
Click to expand...

Were they backed up by Microsoft? No. They started as indies and were released as indies. MS saw the potential and made them part of their roster. Are they still indies? I think so, yes, as they were created as indies.

:)
 
AmaterasuOni said:
If their only reasoning is "it's an indie, lol", then yes, that's what I think. It's the same thing with PS+: "I'm not buying this game I'm interested in because maybe some day it might be free on PS+". Who the hell thinks like that? If you're interested in playing something, you play it. It's that simple.

But if one cannot afford to pay $60, but can pay $40, then you should probably stop gaming altogether and buy food. That $40 compared to $20 more is lots of food.
Click to expand...

Wait, now you're saying if I'm not willing to spend $60 on a game it's because I'm poor and should buy food? Fuck off. People can spend what they want to spend on their hobby independent of their financial situation. Calling everyone who doesn't pay day one MSRP a poor person is fucked up. You should really be ashamed of yourself.

Not being willing to spend $60 on a game is not the same as not being able to afford $60 to spend on a game. Your worldview of others' consumer considerations is way out of whack.
 
BigDug13 said:
Wait, now you're saying if I'm not willing to spend $60 on a game it's because I'm poor and should buy food? Fuck off. People can spend what they want to spend on their hobby independent of their financial situation. Calling everyone who doesn't pay day one MSRP a poor person is fucked up. You should really be ashamed of yourself.
Click to expand...

I did not say that. I said if "one", meaning people that cannot afford to pay the full price, then they should consider dropping gaming altogether. This is very common reasoning against indies and "B2P" games, common thing in the F2P scene. But then why even bother to whine about the price?

You didn't even tell your excuse.

Not being willing to spend $60 on a game is not the same as not being able to afford $60 to spend on a game. Your worldview of others' consumer considerations is way out of whack.
Click to expand...

Sure. That's what I said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

No Man's Sky: Relics (New update)
35
2K
Trogdor1123 replied
Amazon finally cancelled Mighty No. 9 3DS pre-orders
26
2K
Heimdall_Xtreme replied
No Mans Sky Nintendo Switch 2 Edition Trailer (Free Upgrade)
37
803
Holammer replied
No Man's Sky Aquarius Update
38
3K
cyberheater replied
[Insider Gaming] US Retailer Documents Shed Light on Switch 2 Pre-Order Plans (April 9 pre-order, June launch, Pre-order stock will run out day 1)
Rumor 
38
2K
IDKFA replied
Top Bottom