Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[penguinofhonor]

Edit:
And where exactly did you find the 60$ price point? I've looked over some of the articles about the game and the price itself isn't mentioned anywhere.

I looked at a bunch of articles and their site and can't find a price point, so I'm assuming it hasn't been announced yet and the $60 rumor is spreading because it makes people angry. I can't see it being that pricey - this is a game made by 12 students that will run for a limited time.

[ConsUme]

Yep looking back it is a rumour...

In fact the most I can see this game is $30, which will still be a little much...

[Krevsin]

So instead you get the fun of seeing a cool looking multiplayer game, buying it, and finding out the multiplayer's dead and nobody plays it anymore.

This is why a game should stand on its singleplayer or allow players to host their own servers.

Yes, I dislike muliplayer-centric games where players cannot host their own servers. It's like proudly and loudly announcing the fact that the game will eventually die and that there's nothing you can do about it. The only exception I grudgingly tolerate are MMOs.

[ChairmanPoo]

I think rather than a stupid cash-grab it's a stupid artsy game... which COULD be a cash grab in the sense that it tries to bolster sales for a mediocre game coasting on the polemics their sales strategy gets.... but it's not primarily one.

[Trapezohedron]

It's a cash grab to me, mainly because pulling out the game and publicizing this news on PCGamer, if it takes off without a hitch (the gameplay looks too plain; then again it's alpha), means that they're creating artificial demand "I must go grab this game to experience it before it becomes lost forever!!!1!1".

Then again, there's no solid news on pricing yet. Honestly think if they sell it at 10$~, it would barely even reach break-even point.

E: Steam will also have cards, which will happen to be limited edition by the time they pull it out... And believe it or not, there are actually collectors...

[penguinofhonor]

If someone sets up a fair in my town, is it creating manipulative artificial demand if it only lasts for one weekend? How long are the owners obligated to pay to keep it open so I'm not influenced by the limited availability?

I don't think that this is a cash grab, because if it is then it's a stupid and risky one. If they screw this up, the game could become infamous and really hurt the devs' reputation or the profitability of the next game they make. It would be a much easier and more reliable to throw in microtransactions and some CoD-style Skinner boxes.

[Krevsin]

The fair analogy does not really apply. Unless the fair only takes place once and then never happens again, ever.

I don't think it's a cash grab, I think it is more like an attempt at artistic expression that will probably backfire.

[penguinofhonor]

That happens. There have been fairs that do not recur regularly, or at all. Is someone who sets up a fair obligated to do so again in the future to avoid creating artificial demand?

[Krevsin]

That happens. There have been fairs that do not recur regularly, or at all. Is someone who sets up a fair obligated to do so again in the future to avoid creating artificial demand?

Fairs make a poor analogy for games. They are not as focused on providing a singular experience, they are a collection of multiple experiences, like entertaining rides, showcases and even games. They would be more applicable to an arcade.

The crux of the issue isn't whether or not they should create artificial demand for their game, that's a perfectly valid strategy for making money. There exist a lot of services that are highly exclusive (upper class restaurants, stereotypically) and even gaming has subscription-based MMOs.

What is the issue is that they're not creating exclusivity or artificial demand, they are literally killing off the game. Nobody will ever be able to play it ever after a certain point in time. Which means they have a very limited amount of money they can make from the gaem. It is a decision that makes no sense from the business side of things.

Unless they were trying to make a grander artistic statement about games dying off.

Or maybe they're trying to spice up an otherwise mediocre multiplayer game and hope the people will be so curious their game will turn into a sales hit before the anyone notices how bad it is.

[Jopax]

I think it's the former. Since this started out as a student project and was later expanded upon I honestly think that they've made everything in service of making their point or telling their story or whatever is their intention (I don't really know it myself). And that takes quite a bit of balls, especially in todays world, to put your message before the need to make money.

[ZebioLizard2]

I think it's the former. Since this started out as a student project and was later expanded upon I honestly think that they've made everything in service of making their point or telling their story or whatever is their intention (I don't really know it myself). And that takes quite a bit of balls, especially in todays world, to put your message before the need to make money.

Unless of course they are banking on this unique gimmick in today's current environment to earn them a favorable amount of money without the need of constant server upkeep later down the line in the hopes that this sales pitch will be a unique enough method to draw people into what would otherwise be a mediocre video game.

Should this prove to be a method that shows them it's a worthwhile gimmick to bank on, I bet you anything we'd see "The Flock 2" at a later date. Either way it's not something I hope catches on, planned obsolescence isn't exactly a favorable marketing gimmick for myself.

[Virtz]

I think it's the former. Since this started out as a student project and was later expanded upon I honestly think that they've made everything in service of making their point or telling their story or whatever is their intention (I don't really know it myself). And that takes quite a bit of balls, especially in todays world, to put your message before the need to make money.

Or it takes a lot of misguided confidence in the ability to live off of such "messages". Like Tale of Tales had.

[kilakan]

Personally I think the entire concept of putting the game down as a 'cash grab' since basically everything that askes you to pay for it is a cash grab in one way or another.  Everyone wants/needs money they just don't often like to admit it. Now it may be a very disappointing product in the end but a developer trying to do something different in an over saturated games market is something I personally applaud.  Just look at it like the mmo games that require a subscription, you are paying for something that the money you drop will only give it to you for say a month.  This is different sure cause you don't know how long your 'subscription' is gonna hold out, but provided it's more than a month and less than say $15 which is standard for those sorts of games than I'd say they are doing pretty good.  Or if it's like 60$ than I'd hope it lasts for a year, and is also enjoyable enough for me to play it that long ect.

Either way I'm looking at it like a subscription to an online game that I just am not allowed to renew.

[Kanil]

Either way I'm looking at it like a subscription to an online game that I just am not allowed to renew.

You pretty much can, in the event that they make a sequel.

It strikes me as a slightly novel cash grab; planned obsolescence isn't a new thing, but being upfront about it is.

[Astral]

Planned obsolescence works for most gadgets out there, why not a video game? iPhones (who play dirty by adding "features" in new versions of iOS that slow down older models noticeably), Androids, most of the machinery in an average home... most of them aren't made to last more than a few years, because then the manufacturers can't count on people as a steady income stream.

At least with this you would know that it's going to go out at some point, rather than being surprised when it does.

I see a lot of games that I've purchased in the past as a cash grab, where I played them for a few hours then never thought of touching them again... they were interesting experiences, sure, but they didn't have enough to keep me playing, either due to the devs abandoning it in one way or another (StarDrive 1, among others) or because it didn't have any replayability. I feel this will be a combination of both, in that the devs will set it up as an interesting first run, then pull support once that end point has been reached, in lieu of expansions or other content (a la any MMO out there).