No Man's Sky

[Tech614]

Just like jim in the video I posted I have dropped ALOT of time into binding of Issac and any price would be worth it. Just so happens I got it with PS+. That game alone made my PS+ ($50) worth it.

Yet, TBOI didn't cost $60. Which he admits and makes his own point on it retarded as well as yours.

[Jtbrig7390]

Still waiting on a better excuse for the game to be $60 then "buy AAA games charge that for garbage!" or "so many hours of content bro!".

Yea, still waiting on you to explain why TBOI doesn't cost $60 with a bigger staff behind it then NMS.

Ok then here is the reason.....

They want to sell it for $60. Thats it your opinion nore mine changes that. Until Dawn cost $50 and can be beat in 6hrs (Platium in 12). Value is opinion not fact so stop trying to pass urs off as one.

- - - Updated - - -

Yet, TBOI didn't cost $60. Which he admits and makes his own point on it retarded as well as yours.

Still waiting on a real reason why they shouldn't charge $60 for it. Someone sounds entitled and I hate using that term.

[Remilia]

More and more I get the 'spore' feel about this game. Spore touted a lot of what No Man's Sky does, and we all know how that fireballed. They don't release much information on it, they want to charge $60 for it, it's been in development for how long now? I really think the hype is going to reach such epic proportions that even the people who WANT to enjoy this game are going to rag on it once it releases.

Which brings us to another important question: What is the POINT to this game? I mean, I have nothing against open-ended games. I really don't. But it seems to me like the wonder of exploring new planets, finding new critters and such, is going to wear off rather quickly. Where's the carrot on the stick, my reason to keep going? What's the incentive?

And again with the details, I've heard rumors of crafting, but that's about all, just rumors. And what about our ship? Other than the only slightly different looking one you get if you pre-order, do we get new ships? Can we upgrade them? Modify them? What about our gear? Or is there no point in any of that? We've seen ship to ship combat in space, what about when we're out of the ship? Do we have weapons?

They just haven't given us enough information to warrant pre-ordering this game for me. I usually blindly pre-order games I'm interested in, but the more I think about it, the more cautious I become.

A while back. It should answer some of your stuff.

http://www.pcgamer.com/no-mans-sky-hands-on/

[Tech614]

ROFLMAO. The fact you believe the bolded is sad.

The fact you don't is sad.

THQ went bankrupt for a reason. Square took MSs money for TR timed exclusivity for a reason, Kojima wasn't allowed to finish MGS5 for a reason, Irrational Games got shut down after BSI failed sales expectations for a reason, Capcom won't make a big budget game unless someone else pays for it for a reason.

Should I go on? It's like the AAA game industry hasn't been collapsing under neath us for the last 8 years in your magical world.

[endersblade]

A while back. It should answer some of your stuff.

Ah, thanks for this. Hadn't seen this one yet.

[Tech614]

Still waiting on a real reason why they shouldn't charge $60 for it. Someone sounds entitled and I hate using that term.

The irony is hilarious, you're using AAA games as an example of why indy games should cost $60 and I'm entitled? LMAO.

[Jtbrig7390]

The fact you don't is sad.

THQ went bankrupt for a reason. Square took MSs money for TR timed exclusivity for a reason, Kojima wasn't allowed to finish MGS5 for a reason, Irrational Games got shut down after BSI failed sales expectations for a reason, Capcom won't make a big budget game unless someone else pays for it for a reason.

Should I go on? It's like the AAA game industry hasn't been collapsing under neath us for the last 8 years in your magical world.

Yes some AAA companys have gone under in the last 8 years. Some has also grown in the past 8 years. Its a everchanging thing.

So once more why should they not charge what they think the game is worth? You know nothing about it and yet say its not worth its price tag. Its there game if you think you can do better go for it.

[grandpab]

And again with the details, I've heard rumors of crafting, but that's about all, just rumors. And what about our ship? Other than the only slightly different looking one you get if you pre-order, do we get new ships? Can we upgrade them? Modify them? What about our gear? Or is there no point in any of that? We've seen ship to ship combat in space, what about when we're out of the ship? Do we have weapons?

They just haven't given us enough information to warrant pre-ordering this game for me. I usually blindly pre-order games I'm interested in, but the more I think about it, the more cautious I become.

There's definitely weapon, gear, and ship blueprints. They say it gets harder as you get to the center of the universe. There's no levels in the game, so your progression and how far you can go and what planets you can land on will all be based on your gear.

[Jtbrig7390]

The irony is hilarious, you're using AAA games as an example of why indy games should cost $60 and I'm entitled? LMAO.

No moron I am telling you AAA or Indle doesn't matter. If they feel its worth $60 for all the hours they put into it then by all means charge that.

I can give you a list of AAA titles that is no where near worth $60 (In my Opinion). I mean fuck look at Skylanders and the new Tony Hawk game.

[klogaroth]

The fact you don't is sad.

THQ went bankrupt for a reason. Square took MSs money for TR timed exclusivity for a reason, Kojima wasn't allowed to finish MGS5 for a reason, Irrational Games got shut down after BSI failed sales expectations for a reason, Capcom won't make a big budget game unless someone else pays for it for a reason.

Should I go on? It's like the AAA game industry hasn't been collapsing under neath us for the last 8 years in your magical world.

So what you're saying is that because in the past companies have over-extended their production budget beyond what they should have done that in the future companies with better managed production budgets should never charge "full price" for a game?

[Jtbrig7390]

There's definitely weapon, gear, and ship blueprints. They say it gets harder as you get to the center of the universe. There's no levels in the game, so your progression and how far you can go and what planets you can land on will all be based on your gear.

A gear based progression sounds awesome personally. Everything being tied to level 1,2,44,22243....gets old fast.

[endersblade]

A gear based progression sounds awesome personally. Everything being tied to level 1,2,44,22243....gets old fast.

I can certainly agree to that. I didn't even think about there being a leveling system to be honest, just doesn't seem like that kind of game. I just want to hear more about the gear, ships, blueprints, etc.

[Jtbrig7390]

I can certainly agree to that. I didn't even think about there being a leveling system to be honest, just doesn't seem like that kind of game. I just want to hear more about the gear, ships, blueprints, etc.

Yep. I am interested and so is a buddy of mine.

Not sure if ill get the base game or the limited one. Sucks the collector isn't on ps4 but I don't think its worth the price of a collector anyway (IMO).

[Tech614]

So what you're saying is that because in the past companies have over-extended their production budget beyond what they should have done that in the future companies with better managed production budgets should never charge "full price" for a game?

Companies should charge in the price range that their budget qualifies for. Minecraft is a billion dollar franchise off of being budget priced for the small team behind it. No one should be charging what their "perceived" value of their game is.

I'm sure Notch and Edmund McMillen are up crying all night because the big bully AAA game industry charged $60 for their games and they charged less, oh wait they're not because they're both millionaires off of selling their indy games at indy game prices.

- - - Updated - - -

No moron I am telling you AAA or Indle doesn't matter. If they feel its worth $60 for all the hours they put into it then by all means charge that.

I can give you a list of AAA titles that is no where near worth $60 (In my Opinion). I mean fuck look at Skylanders and the new Tony Hawk game.

The fact you think Skylanders or THPS5 are "AAA" says it all right now. Both are made by small teams. THPS5 was a cheap cash in and Activision got called on their BS for it, Skylanders is a budget game that makes bank off selling action figures to kids it doesn't cost $60.

[Aoewy]

If they want to charge 100$, they charge 100$. If they want to charge 5$, they charge 5. Seriously just dont buy it if you dont think you'll get the value out of your money, the fact that its an indie dev team have no impact whatsoever. I'll pay the 60$ for that game and I'll enjoy every damn minute I'll play it cause for me I know I'll have enough entertainement value for the price, if you think you wont, dont buy it. Its that simple.

[Remilia]

Companies should charge in the price range that their budget qualifies for. Minecraft is a billion dollar franchise off of being budget priced for the small team behind it. No one should be charging what their "perceived" value of their game is.

I'm sure Notch and Edmund McMillen are up crying all night because the big bully AAA game industry charged $60 for their games and they charged less, oh wait they're not because they're both millionaires off of selling their indy games at indy game prices.

No, a company should charge what the market is going to accept, that's how maximizing profits work. Whether the market will accept it at that price has yet to be determined and as such is a gamble especially with no past history with this kind of game.

[Tech614]

the fact that its an indie dev team have no impact whatsoever.

People keep saying this, yet indy games not named NMS keep launching at reduced prices. Hmmm, wonder why.

Probably, because Sony's marketing back bone is not trying to fool people into thinking they're big budget games.

[grandpab]

Not sure if ill get the base game or the limited one. Sucks the collector isn't on ps4 but I don't think its worth the price of a collector anyway (IMO).

Funny thing is the LE was sold out on amazon within hours, and then amazon added more stock after they learned how many they'd have and that sold out either late that night or early the next morning.

[Jtbrig7390]

The fact you think Skylanders or THPS5 are "AAA" says it all right now. Both are made by small teams. THPS5 was a cheap cash in and Activision got called on their BS for it, Skylanders is a budget game that makes bank off selling action figures to kids it doesn't cost $60.

Ummmm Ya two games from Activision are totally not AAA titles.

Do you even think anymore? I guess because CDproject Red was a indle company Witcher 3 wasn't worth $60 was it.

- - - Updated - - -

Funny thing is the LE was sold out on amazon within hours, and then amazon added more stock after they learned how many they'd have and that sold out either late that night or early the next morning.

Figures lol. If I only get the basic copy its fine.

Not sure if ill have the funds at the time anyway.

[klogaroth]

Companies should charge in the price range that their budget qualifies for. Minecraft is a billion dollar franchise off of being budget priced for the small team behind it. No one should be charging what their "perceived" value of their game is.

I'm sure Notch and Edmund McMillen are up crying all night because the big bully AAA game industry charged $60 for their games and they charged less, oh wait they're not because they're both millionaires off of selling their indy games at indy game prices.

Companies should charge based upon a cost/sales calculation which matches their budget. Not solely a cost calculation. This is where AAA games have previously fallen flat. They have had such huge budgets that they have required simply unobtainable sales figures. Something that should have been spotted when setting the budgets in the first place.

There should be a graph (many graphs!) of predicted sales at each price point, along with predicted profits. The price point which results in the best predicted profit based upon this should then be selected. Unless you are aiming for something else, such as reaching as many people as possible to lay down the foundation for a franchise. Or to establish something as a "premium" product (think expensive trainers) to attach a certain image to your company.