Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Are MMO with subcriptions too cheap? Games too cheap in general?

1356789

Comments

  • HarafnirHarafnir Member UncommonPosts: 1,335
    This is a troll post and nothing else. No logic, no thought, just an attempt to rile people up.
    Celciusblueturtle13blamo2000Angel_PieroMisterZebubcraftseeker

    "This is not a game to be tossed aside lightly.
    It should be thrown with great force"

  • CelciusCelcius Member RarePosts: 1,367
    Harafnir said:
    This is a troll post and nothing else. No logic, no thought, just an attempt to rile people up.
    This is probably accurate. It is obvious to anyone with half a brain that they should not raise the price of games, let alone subscriptions. 
    blueturtle13Thupliblamo2000craftseekerGdemami
  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,122
    You are right games have been the same price for 30 years. Why raise them to allow a better life for the developers. smh

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,122
    DMKano said:
    The price of making MMOs has gone up drastically, but the sales price has remained the same because the masses dont want to shell out more than they did 20 years ago.

    So the sub price is still $15 today.

    To make for the difference (and more) cash shop model has become widespread, even games with a box price and sub have a cash shop now.

    So if you want to pay more - spend money in the cash shop.
    Dark Souls wont let me. They don't have a cash shop. 

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 17,872
    DMKano said:
    Geeky said:
    Fortnite is free to play and it's made more money in 1 year than almost every mmo ever made.  (Obviously not a couple of them)


    There are 2 things - Fortnite the most popular game in the world - so when you have 100million+ players it's easy to rake in cash.

    Also Fortnite is the best monetized game IMO - epic has figured out how to make players feel like they are progressing their characters with pure cosmetics - and that is not easy to do.

    So you are taking 1 in a million type of game as a measuring stick - Fortnite is not your average game, its not the norm, just like WoW wasn't the norm. These are exceptional games that should not be used as measuring sticks.
    His point only stands if Epic's Fortnite template could be applied to every other game, but it can't. What you're saying is true. It's the exact same situation as WoW, LoL, and Overwatch.

    This won't stop other form blowing millions only to crash and burn trying to replicate their success.
    blamo2000blueturtle13MrMelGibson
    [REDACTED]
    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ



  • DeadSpockDeadSpock Member UncommonPosts: 304
    Games have been the same price since the 1990’s and even in the 80’s
    they absolutely should be priced higher. 
    Studios know this as well but are afraid of the backlash involved with raising the price. 
    For those who say they should be cheaper because of micro transactions well why do you think developers started to do this in the first place? To recoup a larger ROI 
    I worked on a project for the PS3 launch and the team thought of releasing it at a $69.99 price point but Sony would not allow it. Saying market baseline is what it is. Saying gamers won’t spend that kind of money on a game. Which the team found funny considering the hardware was so highly priced. 

    Bullshit!!!
    Games in 80s-90s you bought them and that was it now every few months you have to buy new expac which is not really an expac is part of the original game cut in purpose to be sold for more money and how about season pass and subscription those didn't exist in the 80s and 90s.
    CelciusGdemami
  • blamo2000blamo2000 Member UncommonPosts: 558
    You are right games have been the same price for 30 years. Why raise them to allow a better life for the developers. smh
    Do you mean the developers or the executives?  I've never heard anything about any company making fancy-graphics games using profit-sharing with the people actually making the games.


    Gdemami
  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,122
    DeadSpock said:
    Games have been the same price since the 1990’s and even in the 80’s
    they absolutely should be priced higher. 
    Studios know this as well but are afraid of the backlash involved with raising the price. 
    For those who say they should be cheaper because of micro transactions well why do you think developers started to do this in the first place? To recoup a larger ROI 
    I worked on a project for the PS3 launch and the team thought of releasing it at a $69.99 price point but Sony would not allow it. Saying market baseline is what it is. Saying gamers won’t spend that kind of money on a game. Which the team found funny considering the hardware was so highly priced. 

    Bullshit!!!
    Games in 80s-90s you bought them and that was it now every few months you have to buy new expac which is not really an expac is part of the original game cut in purpose to be sold for more money and how about season pass and subscription those didn't exist in the 80s and 90s.
    How is DLC a default for cut from the original game?
    Like Prey? Or Doom? or Horizon Zero Dawn? Or Zelda? or Dishonored? or Persona 5? Or...you know what? nevermind….that is like, your opinion man. 
    TorvalGdemamiMrMelGibson

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,122
    blamo2000 said:
    You are right games have been the same price for 30 years. Why raise them to allow a better life for the developers. smh
    Do you mean the developers or the executives?  I've never heard anything about any company making fancy-graphics games using profit-sharing with the people actually making the games.


    Most game studios don't have executives. 
    PhaserlightGdemamiMrMelGibson

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • DeadSpockDeadSpock Member UncommonPosts: 304
    edited August 13
    DeadSpock said:
    Games have been the same price since the 1990’s and even in the 80’s
    they absolutely should be priced higher. 
    Studios know this as well but are afraid of the backlash involved with raising the price. 
    For those who say they should be cheaper because of micro transactions well why do you think developers started to do this in the first place? To recoup a larger ROI 
    I worked on a project for the PS3 launch and the team thought of releasing it at a $69.99 price point but Sony would not allow it. Saying market baseline is what it is. Saying gamers won’t spend that kind of money on a game. Which the team found funny considering the hardware was so highly priced. 

    Bullshit!!!
    Games in 80s-90s you bought them and that was it now every few months you have to buy new expac which is not really an expac is part of the original game cut in purpose to be sold for more money and how about season pass and subscription those didn't exist in the 80s and 90s.
    How is DLC a default for cut from the original game?
    Like Prey? Or Doom? or Horizon Zero Dawn? Or Zelda? or Dishonored? or Persona 5? Or...you know what? nevermind….that is like, your opinion man. 
    I don't play any of those games I will mention the one I do play Destiny 2 I bought it 99$ client + season pass I was happy thought I was good for as long as Destiny 2 will last when started playing I beat the game in matter of 6-7 hours on 1st day the game was very short and cut but that's not all now the expac I had to purchase it and had to purchase 2nd season pass...
    I don't know which cave you live but that's reality right there.
    edit: other games I play CoD same as the above game+season pass + expac+season pass so on.
    I also play FFXIV game+sub+expac+shop
    Post edited by DeadSpock on
    Gdemami
  • GruugGruug Member RarePosts: 1,642
    How about we see a superior quality game EVERY RELEASE before we talk about raising the prices. I see too many games, including MMO's, that I do not feel are even worth the price they are asking let alone saying they "deserve" more. The issue isn't that devs aren't getting the money they deserve but rather that the quality of games is so random that we the customer are not always given what we currently pay for.
    CelciusGdemamiTindale111

    Let's party like it is 1863!

  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,122
    DeadSpock said:
    DeadSpock said:
    Games have been the same price since the 1990’s and even in the 80’s
    they absolutely should be priced higher. 
    Studios know this as well but are afraid of the backlash involved with raising the price. 
    For those who say they should be cheaper because of micro transactions well why do you think developers started to do this in the first place? To recoup a larger ROI 
    I worked on a project for the PS3 launch and the team thought of releasing it at a $69.99 price point but Sony would not allow it. Saying market baseline is what it is. Saying gamers won’t spend that kind of money on a game. Which the team found funny considering the hardware was so highly priced. 

    Bullshit!!!
    Games in 80s-90s you bought them and that was it now every few months you have to buy new expac which is not really an expac is part of the original game cut in purpose to be sold for more money and how about season pass and subscription those didn't exist in the 80s and 90s.
    How is DLC a default for cut from the original game?
    Like Prey? Or Doom? or Horizon Zero Dawn? Or Zelda? or Dishonored? or Persona 5? Or...you know what? nevermind….that is like, your opinion man. 
    I don't play any of those games I will mention the one I do play Destiny 2 I bought it 99$ client + season pass I was happy thought I was good for as long as Destiny 2 will last when started playing I beat the game in matter of 6-7 hours on 1st day the game was very short and cut but that's not all now the expac I had to purchase it and had to purchase 2nd season pass...
    I don't know which cave you live but that's reality right there.
    I list a whole bunch of games that counter that that you do not play and I am the one living in a cave? Weird. Ok mate, your opinion. No worries! Happy gaming!

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • DeadSpockDeadSpock Member UncommonPosts: 304
    DeadSpock said:
    DeadSpock said:
    Games have been the same price since the 1990’s and even in the 80’s
    they absolutely should be priced higher. 
    Studios know this as well but are afraid of the backlash involved with raising the price. 
    For those who say they should be cheaper because of micro transactions well why do you think developers started to do this in the first place? To recoup a larger ROI 
    I worked on a project for the PS3 launch and the team thought of releasing it at a $69.99 price point but Sony would not allow it. Saying market baseline is what it is. Saying gamers won’t spend that kind of money on a game. Which the team found funny considering the hardware was so highly priced. 

    Bullshit!!!
    Games in 80s-90s you bought them and that was it now every few months you have to buy new expac which is not really an expac is part of the original game cut in purpose to be sold for more money and how about season pass and subscription those didn't exist in the 80s and 90s.
    How is DLC a default for cut from the original game?
    Like Prey? Or Doom? or Horizon Zero Dawn? Or Zelda? or Dishonored? or Persona 5? Or...you know what? nevermind….that is like, your opinion man. 
    I don't play any of those games I will mention the one I do play Destiny 2 I bought it 99$ client + season pass I was happy thought I was good for as long as Destiny 2 will last when started playing I beat the game in matter of 6-7 hours on 1st day the game was very short and cut but that's not all now the expac I had to purchase it and had to purchase 2nd season pass...
    I don't know which cave you live but that's reality right there.
    I list a whole bunch of games that counter that that you do not play and I am the one living in a cave? Weird. Ok mate, your opinion. No worries! Happy gaming!
    I don't like the games you like the cave comment is cause you act like what I said is my opinion when its a well known fact not knowing it makes you ignorant on the subject.
    Gdemami
  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,122
    Gruug said:
    How about we see a superior quality game EVERY RELEASE before we talk about raising the prices. I see too many games, including MMO's, that I do not feel are even worth the price they are asking let alone saying they "deserve" more. The issue isn't that devs aren't getting the money they deserve but rather that the quality of games is so random that we the customer are not always given what we currently pay for.
    That has and always will be the case in everything you buy. 
    MrMelGibson

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,122
    DeadSpock said:
    DeadSpock said:
    DeadSpock said:
    Games have been the same price since the 1990’s and even in the 80’s
    they absolutely should be priced higher. 
    Studios know this as well but are afraid of the backlash involved with raising the price. 
    For those who say they should be cheaper because of micro transactions well why do you think developers started to do this in the first place? To recoup a larger ROI 
    I worked on a project for the PS3 launch and the team thought of releasing it at a $69.99 price point but Sony would not allow it. Saying market baseline is what it is. Saying gamers won’t spend that kind of money on a game. Which the team found funny considering the hardware was so highly priced. 

    Bullshit!!!
    Games in 80s-90s you bought them and that was it now every few months you have to buy new expac which is not really an expac is part of the original game cut in purpose to be sold for more money and how about season pass and subscription those didn't exist in the 80s and 90s.
    How is DLC a default for cut from the original game?
    Like Prey? Or Doom? or Horizon Zero Dawn? Or Zelda? or Dishonored? or Persona 5? Or...you know what? nevermind….that is like, your opinion man. 
    I don't play any of those games I will mention the one I do play Destiny 2 I bought it 99$ client + season pass I was happy thought I was good for as long as Destiny 2 will last when started playing I beat the game in matter of 6-7 hours on 1st day the game was very short and cut but that's not all now the expac I had to purchase it and had to purchase 2nd season pass...
    I don't know which cave you live but that's reality right there.
    I list a whole bunch of games that counter that that you do not play and I am the one living in a cave? Weird. Ok mate, your opinion. No worries! Happy gaming!
    I don't like the games you like the cave comment is cause you act like what I said is my opinion when its a well known fact not knowing it makes you ignorant on the subject.
    What is a well known fact? That some games monetize poorly while others do not? Agreed. 
    MrMelGibson

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • DeadSpockDeadSpock Member UncommonPosts: 304
    DeadSpock said:
    DeadSpock said:
    DeadSpock said:
    Games have been the same price since the 1990’s and even in the 80’s
    they absolutely should be priced higher. 
    Studios know this as well but are afraid of the backlash involved with raising the price. 
    For those who say they should be cheaper because of micro transactions well why do you think developers started to do this in the first place? To recoup a larger ROI 
    I worked on a project for the PS3 launch and the team thought of releasing it at a $69.99 price point but Sony would not allow it. Saying market baseline is what it is. Saying gamers won’t spend that kind of money on a game. Which the team found funny considering the hardware was so highly priced. 

    Bullshit!!!
    Games in 80s-90s you bought them and that was it now every few months you have to buy new expac which is not really an expac is part of the original game cut in purpose to be sold for more money and how about season pass and subscription those didn't exist in the 80s and 90s.
    How is DLC a default for cut from the original game?
    Like Prey? Or Doom? or Horizon Zero Dawn? Or Zelda? or Dishonored? or Persona 5? Or...you know what? nevermind….that is like, your opinion man. 
    I don't play any of those games I will mention the one I do play Destiny 2 I bought it 99$ client + season pass I was happy thought I was good for as long as Destiny 2 will last when started playing I beat the game in matter of 6-7 hours on 1st day the game was very short and cut but that's not all now the expac I had to purchase it and had to purchase 2nd season pass...
    I don't know which cave you live but that's reality right there.
    I list a whole bunch of games that counter that that you do not play and I am the one living in a cave? Weird. Ok mate, your opinion. No worries! Happy gaming!
    I don't like the games you like the cave comment is cause you act like what I said is my opinion when its a well known fact not knowing it makes you ignorant on the subject.
    What is a well known fact? That some games monetize poorly while others do not? Agreed. 
    Bullshit no game company out there is playing it Mother Theresa they are all after the $$$ shit is actually out of control you forget the EA shitfest lol
    CelciusGdemami
  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,122
    DeadSpock said:
    DeadSpock said:
    DeadSpock said:
    DeadSpock said:
    Games have been the same price since the 1990’s and even in the 80’s
    they absolutely should be priced higher. 
    Studios know this as well but are afraid of the backlash involved with raising the price. 
    For those who say they should be cheaper because of micro transactions well why do you think developers started to do this in the first place? To recoup a larger ROI 
    I worked on a project for the PS3 launch and the team thought of releasing it at a $69.99 price point but Sony would not allow it. Saying market baseline is what it is. Saying gamers won’t spend that kind of money on a game. Which the team found funny considering the hardware was so highly priced. 

    Bullshit!!!
    Games in 80s-90s you bought them and that was it now every few months you have to buy new expac which is not really an expac is part of the original game cut in purpose to be sold for more money and how about season pass and subscription those didn't exist in the 80s and 90s.
    How is DLC a default for cut from the original game?
    Like Prey? Or Doom? or Horizon Zero Dawn? Or Zelda? or Dishonored? or Persona 5? Or...you know what? nevermind….that is like, your opinion man. 
    I don't play any of those games I will mention the one I do play Destiny 2 I bought it 99$ client + season pass I was happy thought I was good for as long as Destiny 2 will last when started playing I beat the game in matter of 6-7 hours on 1st day the game was very short and cut but that's not all now the expac I had to purchase it and had to purchase 2nd season pass...
    I don't know which cave you live but that's reality right there.
    I list a whole bunch of games that counter that that you do not play and I am the one living in a cave? Weird. Ok mate, your opinion. No worries! Happy gaming!
    I don't like the games you like the cave comment is cause you act like what I said is my opinion when its a well known fact not knowing it makes you ignorant on the subject.
    What is a well known fact? That some games monetize poorly while others do not? Agreed. 
    Bullshit no game company out there is playing it Mother Theresa they are all after the $$$ shit is actually out of control you forget the EA shitfest lol
    So the Witcher series is not an example of how to properly monetize a game? What about the Uncharted series? Or Tomb Raider? What about Stardew Valley? The TellTale Games? Hellblade? 
    Seems you are reaching a bit. Many do monetize poorly not most. 
    MrMelGibson

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • blamo2000blamo2000 Member UncommonPosts: 558
    edited August 13
    blamo2000 said:
    You are right games have been the same price for 30 years. Why raise them to allow a better life for the developers. smh
    Do you mean the developers or the executives?  I've never heard anything about any company making fancy-graphics games using profit-sharing with the people actually making the games.


    Most game studios don't have executives. 
    They all do.  That is inarguable.  The word doesn't have to be in the title for someone or people to have executive responsibilities.  

    And can you name some examples of any game that made a big profit, or even more profit, passing that profit on to all the people who made the game?  If not, please tell me how a higher box price would enrich anyone but the executives?  

    Post edited by blamo2000 on
    CelciusGdemami
  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,122
    blamo2000 said:
    blamo2000 said:
    You are right games have been the same price for 30 years. Why raise them to allow a better life for the developers. smh
    Do you mean the developers or the executives?  I've never heard anything about any company making fancy-graphics games using profit-sharing with the people actually making the games.


    Most game studios don't have executives. 
    They all do.  That is inarguable.  The word doesn't have to be in the title for someone or people to have executive responsibilities.  

    And can you name some examples of any game that made a big profit, or even more profit, passing that profit on to all the people who made the game?  If not, please tell me how a higher box price would enrich anyone but the executives?  

    Two titles I worked on actually. Hellblade and City of the Shroud. It happens more than you might think. 
    MrMelGibson

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • AlbatroesAlbatroes Member EpicPosts: 5,262
    edited August 13
    Why do people assume games fit the same requirements that they did 10+ years ago? Alot of these titles take a fraction of the manpower to craft a title than they use to at that time. Couple that with a lot more companies just dealing with contracting and outsourcing instead of having specific positions meaning titles cost about the same or cheaper to make than they did 10+ years ago. Its called evolution. Programmers are often the only ones offered full-time positions while artists and voice actors usually work under contract, meaning they have a flat payment for whatever they have to work on for a period of time, not having to worry about paying these guys all the time. Look at the automotive industry if you want a real comparison. Materials have gone up over the years, obviously; however, a large portion of manufacturing positions have become automated, so yes the people that actually work those positions (programmers, some special manufacturers etc) get paid more than they used to but less people are in those positions. Prices should only go up if its proven that the same or more people work in those companies as they did over the period of time, otherwise it makes 0 sense to charge more if it requires less effort. Besides, its not like all new games were always 60$. It feels like I'm the only one who seems to remember about 15 years ago when the new title cost was 50$. Bringing Zelda and stuff, sure you get a base game for the same price, but you dont get the same features. So aren't you already paying the same for less? Meaning you're paying more for less than you used to. I get the base game but I have to pay for addition challenge modes/outfits/cut scenes (in some games) that used to all be baseline that are now sold separately. So isn't the price already going up compared to all those years ago? Just because the baseline price stays the same, doesn't mean the features do.
    Post edited by Albatroes on
  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,122
    Albatroes said:
    Why do people assume games fit the same requirements that they did 10+ years ago? Alot of these titles take a fraction of the manpower to craft a title than they use to at that time. Couple that with a lot more companies just dealing with contracting and outsourcing instead of having specific positions meaning titles cost about the same or cheaper to make than they did 10+ years ago. Its called evolution. Programmers are often the only ones offered full-time positions while artists and voice actors usually work under contract, meaning they have a flat payment for whatever they have to work on for a period of time, not having to worry about paying these guys all the time. Look at the automotive industry if you want a real comparison. Materials have gone up over the years, obviously; however, a large portion of manufacturing positions have become automated, so yes the people that actually work those positions (programmers, some special manufacturers etc) get paid more than they used to but less people are in those positions. Prices should only go up if its proven that the same or more people work in those companies as they did over the period of time, otherwise it makes 0 sense to charge more if it requires less effort.
    Where are you getting your info? That simply is not true. Most studios employ a whole roster of people of all disciplines. Contracting is a big part of the industry but it always has been from the beginning. It takes even more people now to make a game than ever before.   
    MrMelGibson

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • blamo2000blamo2000 Member UncommonPosts: 558
    blamo2000 said:
    blamo2000 said:
    You are right games have been the same price for 30 years. Why raise them to allow a better life for the developers. smh
    Do you mean the developers or the executives?  I've never heard anything about any company making fancy-graphics games using profit-sharing with the people actually making the games.


    Most game studios don't have executives. 
    They all do.  That is inarguable.  The word doesn't have to be in the title for someone or people to have executive responsibilities.  

    And can you name some examples of any game that made a big profit, or even more profit, passing that profit on to all the people who made the game?  If not, please tell me how a higher box price would enrich anyone but the executives?  

    Two titles I worked on actually. Hellblade and City of the Shroud. It happens more than you might think. 
    What did those titles sell?  The premise of this post was increasing price because games cost more to make.  Without checking Steam -  City of the Shroud just released (I know because I tried it), and I don't think many people would be willing to pay $140 for it, and I doubt it cost $60 million to make.

    Why don't you jack the price up on Steam and for the next chapter and we'll see if sales stay the same.  There is tons of evidence showing that sales (lower prices) increase units sold.

    I forget the name of it, but when it comes to pricing there is a formula.  Without using real examples since I forget the formula - If 100 people will by a product priced at $100, and 500 are willing to by the same product for $50, someone in finance is going to find the best price point for the company.  Something like 250 will pay 85 (again, a fake example), which would yield the highest profit.  A real example would have other information like cost per unit at various production outputs, etc.  

    The market, and market forces, are going to determine pricing.  Why wasn't City of Shroud sold at $60?  Because that isn't a good pricing for it.  And until someone can give an example of a AAA game with the latest graphics that cost a fortune to make sharing its profits with the regular people working on the game, even if we accept the theory that games have a release price tag that is for some reason being artificially retarded and this is screwing over people working on games with low salaries - there is still no evidence that increasing the initial price of a game will increase the salaries of the employees. 




    CelciusAngel_Piero
  • BluelinerBlueliner Member UncommonPosts: 123
    I would seriously pay $100 for a great MMORPG and $50/month if they had great devs, customer service and actually enforced rules.
    blueturtle13
  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,122
    blamo2000 said:
    blamo2000 said:
    blamo2000 said:
    You are right games have been the same price for 30 years. Why raise them to allow a better life for the developers. smh
    Do you mean the developers or the executives?  I've never heard anything about any company making fancy-graphics games using profit-sharing with the people actually making the games.


    Most game studios don't have executives. 
    They all do.  That is inarguable.  The word doesn't have to be in the title for someone or people to have executive responsibilities.  

    And can you name some examples of any game that made a big profit, or even more profit, passing that profit on to all the people who made the game?  If not, please tell me how a higher box price would enrich anyone but the executives?  

    Two titles I worked on actually. Hellblade and City of the Shroud. It happens more than you might think. 
    What did those titles sell?  The premise of this post was increasing price because games cost more to make.  Without checking Steam -  City of the Shroud just released (I know because I tried it), and I don't think many people would be willing to pay $140 for it, and I doubt it cost $60 million to make.

    Why don't you jack the price up on Steam and for the next chapter and we'll see if sales stay the same.  There is tons of evidence showing that sales (lower prices) increase units sold.

    I forget the name of it, but when it comes to pricing there is a formula.  Without using real examples since I forget the formula - If 100 people will by a product priced at $100, and 500 are willing to by the same product for $50, someone in finance is going to find the best price point for the company.  Something like 250 will pay 85 (again, a fake example), which would yield the highest profit.  A real example would have other information like cost per unit at various production outputs, etc.  

    The market, and market forces, are going to determine pricing.  Why wasn't City of Shroud sold at $60?  Because that isn't a good pricing for it.  And until someone can give an example of a AAA game with the latest graphics that cost a fortune to make sharing its profits with the regular people working on the game, even if we accept the theory that games have a release price tag that is for some reason being artificially retarded and this is screwing over people working on games with low salaries - there is still no evidence that increasing the initial price of a game will increase the salaries of the employees. 




    So you think we undersold Hellblade? Because even at over a million copies sold we were afraid to price it higher than we did. Public backlash is a finicky thing. If just a few complain it snowballs and takes years of hard work down the drain. 
    MrMelGibson

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • blamo2000blamo2000 Member UncommonPosts: 558

    So you think we undersold Hellblade? Because even at over a million copies sold we were afraid to price it higher than we did. Public backlash is a finicky thing. If just a few complain it snowballs and takes years of hard work down the drain. 
    I can't think anything about a game I've never heard of.  How did they do profit sharing?  Straight profit sharing or stock options?  

    Since you are in the game industry and I am not - do you know an example of a AAA game that made a huge profit and the executives shared that profit with their employees?  Or raised their employees salaries?  
    Gdemami
Sign In or Register to comment.