No Man's Sky pre-orders start March 3rd, $59.99
- Thread starter trikster40
- Start date
Umm, there have been PSN games at retail that weren't $60.
Agreed. If Naughty Dog had made the exact same game, nobody would be scoffing at the price.
You're explaining what's so weird about that train of thought.
You're basing how much a game should cost based off its production budget instead of YOUR own value.
Because based off this way of thinking...some games should cost more than 60 dollars. GTA is a prime example.
Would you say GTA was too cheap knowing how expensive it was to make? I doubt you would...because this argument is only made to devalue smaller teams making smaller games and NOT to prop up larger teams making larger games.
In the end...it's a bs excuse to try and justify not paying sixty bucks even if the content warrants it. Because indie games and indie teams.
Xamtheking
Member
Answer me this
Minecraft offered hundreds of hours, had a small dev team, yet cost no more than $30.
Why should this be $60?
Minecraft offered hundreds of hours, had a small dev team, yet cost no more than $30.
Why should this be $60?
I am only 50% serious with this
BarringGaffner
Member
Everyone should buy this day 1 to be a part of the day one shitshow/conversation, because that will probably be more fun than the actual game (and I think it looks cool!)
LegendofLex
Member
minecraft should and could have been $60
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Not sure, but you do get double the points. So if it is digital only (which it won't be), then I would rather have double pints, than no points on PSN.
Fushichou187
Member
This will be a game where that is a great strategy for those on the fence since because of the vastness of the universe they're building out, you can watch people play and know that if you ever dive in, you'll still be discovering stuff that none of them ever will.
DOWN
Banned
But what can we identify as the problem causing so many people to think this game is priced higher than expected or warranted? And let's not go with "the consumers don't know any better" because many of those complaining seem to clearly have watched or followed the game in some form and thus identified it as too low on value for the $60 price range.
It's most definitely going to be a PSVR game. Probably even bundled with the hardware.
Blackleg-sanji1
Banned
Wasn't minecraft just kind of thrown out onto pc and built over time? than came to consoles much later?
BeforeU
Oft hope is born when all is forlorn.
I agree, charging retail price is a dumb idea. Should have been half of that. They should build a great and long lasting community first. This game seems like a good contender of selling a lot based on good word of mouth and community engagement.
$60 will put lot of people to think before buying it. Like myself.
To be worth $60 a game requires hype trains, animated GIFs, and review threads full of teary eyes, gnashed teeth, and wet tears. It requires Shu and Naughty Dogs and Halos and Master Chiefs. It requires an OT that's kicked off with a multi-post intro that is just regurgitated press kit bullshit sent to the creator who I at least _hope_ is getting a free copy under the table, for the sake of their dignity. It requires port beggings and money hats and lots of trophies and cheevos.
So, in short, it requires all of the things that truly matter when it comes to enjoying a video game.
DOWN
Banned
Thought we had heard a ton of times that there were serious strain issues getting this game and its procedural pieces to run okay on PS4.
Xamtheking
Member
That's thinking generated by this outrageous price that's equivalent to 120 dollars cut in half
You're a plant in NeoGAF, admit it
Minecraft doesn't boast the best of graphics, though
OrbitalBeard
Member
No, you're right. I must be thinking of another loot-based game. Diablo games have set maps that are randomly chosen when you play the game.
That being said, Blizzard could make a procedurally-generated game and no one would scoff at its price, regardless of whether or not they were personally interested in it.
ClayKavalier
Banned
Shovel Knight is $20 retail, so was the Wolfenstein expansion, and Terraria, and Minecraft, and Brothers. TellTale games are $30, so was God of War Remastered, so was Wasteland 2. There's been games like Tearway that retail at $40 IIRC. These are the ones I can think of off the top of my head.
Educate us more on how retail pricing works =P
AndrewDean84xX
Banned
Have we even seen the PS4 version running, or only PC using a PS4 controller? I wonder what the difference will be.
Kssio_Aug
Member
GTA still makes lots of profit costing 60 dollars though, so they don't need to charge more than 60 for it!
You're right... I am the one who decides the value I consider reasonable. And I don't think it's reasonable to a game that I suppose it's not a big budget development, that may sell pretty well giving all the hype behind it, a 60 dollars price tag. Also, i'm still unsure about its content... we don't know how much of it won't become repetitive after a couple of hours playing.
Maybe Diablo II. Diablo III maps are mostly the same outside of rifts. There are only a few maps that are vaguely randomized. Even if they all were, it's not even remotely on the same level as NMS.
Eh, I'd rather buy it at discount. I couldn't care less about the points.
Edit: I was wrong
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
Don't watch too much, it will spoil it for you ...
It's 60fps though, hardly a stretch to imagine it'd run in psvr
ClayKavalier
Banned
Could have, sure, but should have? It wouldn't be anywhere near as big as it is if had cost that much. Should the mobile versions cost $60 too?
Pricing isn't just a function of how many hours you can potentially play a game. NMS looks really interesting in demos, at $20 a lot of people would buy it just to check it out. At $60 a lot of people are going to say "Eh, I'm not really into sci-fi." A lot of people are going to want to see gameplay before buying. As is apparent in this thread a lot of people are just going to ignore based solely on the price.
I don't really have an opinion on whether the game is or isn't worth $60, but it does seem like a bad business decision to me. I wish them the best, and the Witness seems to be doing well at $40 so maybe this will too, but $60 takes something that could have had really wide appeal and makes it niche.
DOWN
Banned
Spoil what? They have hardly indicated they worked on a campaign whatsoever.
You didn't answer my question. Since you know GTA has a huge budget, would you have scoffed if it were priced higher than 60 dollars to accommodate the fact its budget was bigger than damn near every other game on the market?
GTA is making lots of profit because it's a sales monster and the online.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
Oh come on, the irony was sweet there:
With 18 quintillion planets out there, just how much is too much?
This is stupid. You're clearly not applying the complex formula involving the number of developers, the value of their productivity and X factor when judging the price of this game.
Vincent Grayson
Member
I've always expected this to be a $60 title, and based on what we've seen, I'm totally comfortable with that.
ComputerBlue
Member
Guessing it'l be $80 in Canada...
Game looks amazing, but I'll wait for a nice discount.
Game looks amazing, but I'll wait for a nice discount.
Games (and most consumer products) are priced on the basis of what the company feels people will be willing to pay for it. The most profitable price point is not always the highest one.
It's different for everyone, but there are certainly expectations and many of them seem to be agree upon, especially depending on the genre and whatnot.
A few years ago it seemed everything had the expectations of a multiplayer mode. If there is multiplayer there are expectations of how many modes there are and how many maps there are. SF V has had the backlash about no Arcade mode recently. People have expectations about curated content and the amount of created content from the developers. People have expectations for what might be a "single player mode". People have expectations for trophies and social features. Customization is another area that people have expectations about the amount of created content.
And even without all that, you have a procedural game that doesn't really have an end so some people go in with the expectations that there is "60 hours of gameplay" (curated content that may just the single player mode or expectations of 100% a game) or that a game will receive tweaks/updates/post-release content to keep it playable for a while.
But the biggest thing is that when people say it's an "indie game" and have certain expectations for value, I think the smaller teams and the smaller budget means less content and less polish (if not in the graphical side of things, at least in the bugs/details/performance), and like it or not, that truth determines value for lots of people.
This isn't all even my personal feelings on things, I just see it time and time again for many games, some I like and others I don't care for. I see it in reviews where that expectation can take away points, especially for the reviewers who are reviewing from the standpoint of "value", which many do. Die-hard fans may be willing to pay practically any price for a game, but especially once you start knocking on that $60 door, you are going to have to work harder to convince people to part with their money for a game that they might get bored of or might finish in a short afternoon of play.
I think this game will have a struggle, so if you are set on defending that price tag, buckle in.
levelplane
Neo Member
That definitely is procedural generation. Though, like you said it's just a one time thing.
Polioliolio
Member
The game looks great, but I'm not convinced each planet isn't just a hodgepodge with the same brontosaurus in a different color.
That's why it doesn't feel like 60 dollars to me.
I rarely buy games at full price though.
That's why it doesn't feel like 60 dollars to me.
I rarely buy games at full price though.
Kssio_Aug
Member
I answered your questions (not directly, but I did). I would not pay more than 60 dollars for GTA cause I don't think, under ALL circumstances, it would be reasonable for them to charge more than what they already do.
It doesn't mean I ignore my personal value as well by the way. Even if they had a reason to charge more than 60 dollars I wouldn't pay, cause I'd prefer spending 70 dollars with something else.
For me, it doesn't have a worthwhile story and I honestly don't trust the procedurally generated angle. You can tell me there are an infinite amount of planets. I don't care. What I care about is whether or not it's worth my time going to those planets, how fleshed out they'll be, and what reason I have for doing so. They showed space battles, but then we found out that there are no NPCs, they're just menus. For a space game, that nuked my interest considerably.
This is a game that I would love to have actual NPCs with a story to tell and quests to send you on, but it has none of that. I simply can't pay $60 for a game like this that offers so little of what I want.