|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ihadFG
I've been sick of it for a while too, I just think that this year especially has been the worst yet as far as everything feeling samey.
|
|
Bingo.
|
Quote:
|
I agree about lower prices for stuff like this, especially this late in the generation. Not every full release should be $60. Especially with a new IP, it might be better to release at $40. I want to see these kind of games do well, but the hype levels for games that aren't COD or Halo just aren't enough to justify a $60 price tag. If I didn't get them for $45 each, I would have just bought one (or possibly neither since a price drop is inevitable).
|
|
Agreed. New IPs are untested, so you can't charge the premium Halo/Call of Duty price and expect people to pass over those two games for yours. Launching in the fall is always a risky move, especially when you're going up against entrenched IPs like those two. Bad idea.
|
Quote:
|
People will pay $60 for COD or Halo because they know what they are getting and they are willing to pay for it. A lot of people aren't going to want to risk their $60 on a weird power-based stealth game or a turn-based strategy game. But maybe at $40 they would. And if they do well at that price, maybe a sequel could have a bigger budget and release at $60.
|
|
Exactly. I like to see different games coming out too, but then they shoot themselves in the foot by pricing it too high. I'd certainly try more games day one if they came out at $40. At $60? I'm waiting. I'm quite patient.
Build up your IP before you try to charge what the established ones charge. Makes sense to me. It works in other businesses too. Charge less to get your foot in the door, then charge more as demand and costs increase. Not charge full price and hope people give it a shot. So foolish.