![]() The simple fact is, and i’m guilty of it too, that we want nicer looking games with every release. A few pictures and a video and everyone knows how freakin’ realistic the hair is in that game. When you are on Steam or any other store it’s really, really hard to sell gameplay and story without spoilering. The fact is, that Really nice visuals sell. They aren’t pouring millions into a product no one will buy. ![]() And, as much as i agree with you, big studios will do their homework. Yes, IF the studios made cheaper games, then they COULD turn a profit at 60 bucks a game.īut that’s not what it is. I can see that.īut that’s not the reality. Back in 1995 i was playing Frontier which had a comparable and in some ways superior (planetary landings from day one) feature-set.īoth of you argue for a change in how games are made, which is ok. ![]() Something a teenager could have written in their bedroom in a couple of months.ĭon’t get me wrong, i like games to look good, but lately gameplay seems to be going BACKWARDS.Į.g., Elite Dangerous. One of the most profitable games in history (outside of WoW, that shit is nuts) was ANGRY BIRDS. They’re more focused on style than substance. They’re trying to “out-hollywood” hollywood, and expenses are through the fucking roof. I think this is a symptom of game budgets being massively bloated and they’ve lost the plot with regards to what actually makes a decent game. If you don’t want to spend the money, don’t and be happy with the experience you got. But whining because you don’t get a weapon for free that might not have existet anyways and isn’t planned in the single player experience is just dumb. So i can’t directly comment on that game. I haven’t played Rage 2 and don’t plan to. Even the smallest, cheapest option should be a complete game without paywalls and such. As long as the base game offers a complete experience, i’m fine with it. I don’t see anything inherently wrong in selling a cosmetics pack with a Single-Player only “cheat” at a price for those that want it. Let’s instead focus on making all of this as fair and non-exploitative as possible. Making the argument that all additional content is bad and every game should come complete without DLC is moot. Support games that focus on non p2w tactics, don’t encourage gambling and reselling of items and deliver a great value. We as consumers should make sure to support the “right” way to do this. Day one DLC is really bad, but it’s mostly to increase the base price of the game without going beyond 60$. Especially the second is a valid option for additional income that don’t influence your wins in a meaningfull way, but still allow you to show that you are a baller through some horrific skin for 10 bucks. Either a monthly fee (like WoW and others) or through cosmetics. It has been shown, that Many people are willing to pay for a great game in many ways that are NOT pay to win. I just don’t get how so many studios can fck this so royaly up. The 60$ mark has been there for a long time and consumers aren’t willing to go much higher. One option would be to increase the initial Price (which they do with special editions and such), but this prooves hard. The fact is, most studios feel like they can’t make a profit on big AAA games by “just” selling a copy per User at 60 bucks. I watched a great talk by a dev on that subject that i might be able to dig up later.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |