Yeah, it doesn’t surprise me.
Just gonna be another torrent for me.
Fuck these hypocrites. They’re all greedy, entitled consumerists.
Avowed was cool but not really worth the 70. I doubt TOW2 is worth 80, and specifically especially because Microsoft/ActiBlizzard is just following the Nintendo train, which is what everyone knew was going to happen with triple A studios.
Oh, it just modern Obsidian, no one is going to buy it anyway.
Came and went.
It’s crazy to think that a handful of people who have floated around Obsidian/Interplay/Black Isle have created (in my opinion) some of the best games to have ever existed.
You put a name like Chris Avellone or Tim Cain onto a project and I’m going to pay more attention to it than any AAA with millions put into trailers and other bullshit to sell you down the river.
I came!
$80? No problem! 🏴☠️
This Thread-
“We should improve gaming somewhat”
“Just don’t buy the game!”
Well, yeah.
Vote with your wallet. I improved gaming by not buying a Switch 2.
Thank you for your contribution.
That’s sort of how it works though isn’t it? If games at $80 are too much then less people will buy, profits will drop and publishers will either lower prices, or vanish and get replaced by ones that lower prices.
pretty sure AA and AAA studio execs can also organize and collectively agree on an $80 or higher price tag until it eventually sticks
How dare you use economic theory against them!?
Don’t you realize gamers are supposed to be stupid children who will gladly pay whatever price is asked of them?
Here’s the thing, there are already vendors doing largely what. Indies generally:
- cost less
- release in a playable state
- take risks on new ideas
- don’t have microtransactions
But people usually talk about big AAA games in these complaints. Buy indies and we’ll end up with more variety.
I buy mostly indies now, usually on gog or itch too.
But sometimes on steam if it’s multiplayer.
I’m not going to bother reading the article, because you can both be anti-capitalist and participate in the system as it exists today. The developers can’t pay rent with good vibes.
The developers can’t pay rent with good vibes.
They can consume less and live in cheaper areas.
But why would they unless they’re forced to?
Clearly they should just make their own coffee and cut the avocado toast right?
That would be a start.
They should also stop subscribing to dumb shit like netflix and spotify. Instead of using doordash, they should get comfortable making their own meals.
We can’t expect the system to change unless a majority of its participants are willing to change.
It’s a cultural problem, and people like you are doing your part to make sure it never gets solved.
OK boomer.
Thank you for the compliment.
My generation is full of morons so it’s nice to be seen as different from them.
Also the developers don’t set the price
A healthy way to look at things, but also the guaranteed way to maintain the status quo. It’s funny how that works.
They can take action in other ways, including publishing anticapitalist messages in their game.
deleted by creator
I view society as a poison I can use to hurt people. Very anti-capitalist, and promotes participation in capitalist society.
Well, for starters, games are going to get more expensive.
That is their prerogative. Mine is not buying overpriced games.
That’s always been the case. They can charge whatever they like, I’ll only buy if I think the price is worth it.
Play that years down the line. The first one was OK but I paid like $15 for it with the expansion. Obsidian hasn’t had a clear jump in quality since the MS purchase. Possibly even signs of writing regression with Avowed so can’t imagine much hype for this game
Grounded is fun, and 2 is right around the corner, though they did (and plan similarly for 2) to release it in phases in early access and gather community feedback at every step
“Capitalism is when pay money for things. I am very smart.”
Jesus Christ, I am begging people to actually learn what capitalism is before writing takes likes this.
I think it has more to do with how much they’re charging rather than them charging anything at all.
i.e. They’re maximizing profit off of people’s low standards by charging the most people are willing to pay while giving the least they’re willing to accept.
If this honestly had to be spelled out for you and you’re not just being willfully ignorant, you should really get some remedial education before shitting on others.
These days its increasingly ‘capitalism is when you pay money for the chance to have a thing’
I mean, that’s literally what it is?
Chance as in gambling, so often you don’t even get what you pay for even with ‘reputable’ brands. This is particularly bad with appliances.
I’m sure if it was up to the developers and creative minds behind the game this would have never been an issue. Sure, things like inflation have made the process of making games more expensive, but it’s not like the extra money is going to actually go back to the developers. I’m so sick of this “games are more expensive to make” bullshit while they treat their employees like garbage and make them work ungodly hours. Micro$oft makes more money in one day than most of us or any of the developers will ever see in our entire lifetimes yet they need to lecture us on why we need to give them more money.
To be clear, I hold no grudge against the actual developers of this game. The first one was pretty decent and I’m sure this next one will be relatively good as well. But remember that we are talking about the company that forced Arkane to make Redfall when they had no desire to make it, and after it failed fired everyone at Arkane Austin and closed the studio. This isn’t about making their money back to cover the cost of development, it’s about making as much profit as possible with the least amount of effort possible.
Games continue to get cheaper to make as middleware improves and advancing hardware lessens the need for optimisation. If companies choose to spend more on games despite this then that’s their problem.
Capitalism deals with industry being owned privately.
If you want to complain about Microsoft being a publicly-traded, private-sector company rather than a worker cooperative or part of the government or whatever, okay, at least I can see where you’re coming from.
But a socialist economy is perfectly compatible with having high prices.
Microsoft doesn’t expect anyone to pay $80. They expect people to sub to Game Pass instead.
Ahh yes, perpetually renting access and being beholden to price hikes “just because.”
Makes sense all the morons who subscribe to netflix and spotify are also stupid enough to shill game pass.
Yes? That’s literally a huge segment of the market. It doesn’t matter how agressive a few retards are.
That’s even worse.
I guess the author learned that being anti-capitalist is somewhat trendy and couldn’t resist writing this opus. But this has nothing to do with the game or games in general.
Of course you can - if an adequate share of that money goes to the devs, the only issue is the money that doesn’t go to the devs. And they very likely don’t have much control over that money
That’s a lot of money for any game, let alone one that will also be launching on Game Pass and, like its progenitor, is smaller scale than other open world RPGs of this ilk.
It’s this thinking that led to Starfield and Redfall being priced at $70 and Hi-Fi Rush priced at $30.
I could bitterly rationalise it if this were the release date trailer for the next Fable and I discovered Playground Games was charging me $80
Why? Playground hasn’t even made a game in this genre before. Why do you expect that to be more worth $80 than the company that’s been making acclaimed RPGs since its inception?
