I’ll play the game in like 4-5 years like how I played the first one years later for way cheaper. So cheap I couldn’t be disappointed with the writing and just enjoyed the solid but unremarkable game
I think I had it on my wish list because I was never going to pay full price and then when it came down in price I looked again at it and I just thought nah, I actually don’t care. So I never bought it.
They’re not exactly starting from a solid foundation.
If any game was going to get away with being $80 it’d be something like grand theft auto or one of the next call of duties, not this one. But maybe they’re trailing it on a game that they know will only be moderately successful at best anyway, that way they don’t lose huge amounts of money if it fails to win over players.
Support your local libraries. My city’s library system is so good that I borrow games on release day all the time. You get them for 1-2 weeks, Most games that are older than a few weeks you can keep for up to 3 weeks, which gives me plenty of time to knock them off my list. Im sure I’ll get this one soon enough, im currently playing AC Shadows which I borrowed
There’s these things called consoles, that let you put a disk in, they both contains the game and a license to play it. Though these days some games just sell an empty box with a code to download the game.
What a bizarre concept. I doubt they’ll ever catch on. We already have computers, and you don’t need any fancy “discs” or “empty boxes” to play games on them, either. Just download what you want straight from the internet.
It’s great, I can lend my friend the games he doesn’t have, and I can do the same with his games. In this way, we can play many more games than we have the money for. Especially useful since we’re in the US, and internet infrastructure is still poor here, his only option is satellite, which takes far too long to download anything.
Yeah but who needs friends when you have millions of random strangers on the internet to talk to? The infrastructure issue is a problem that I’m too urbanized to understand. My neighborhood alone gives me the choice of cable, DSL, fixed wireless, and fiber. Move to a place like this, and you won’t need friends or these newfangled “con-souls”.
Some games, some are on cart too. Switch 1 is actually probably the best because just about every game is fully playable unlike ps and Xbox which require patches often to run alright. Switch 2 I hear cyberpunk is fully on the cart, but I doubt many publishers are willing to pay for the bigger carts, so we’ll probably see a lot of third parties be just the key, which is ridiculous.
Not sure how it works nowadays, actually! As a child I would borrow PC and PlayStation games from the library. They were physical copies of course. But with Steam keys and all I’m not sure!
I bought the first one for $20. For the second I’ll play on Game Pass, if it is available, or again wait for $20. Maybe even less if I forget about it, which I might.
I won’t buy this at full price, when Outer World’s two goes on sale at 50% or more off, that is when I will buy it! By then, all the major bugs should be resolved, and new content will be making this game even better. I blame Obsidian Games from not trying to shout down Microsoft and fight them in a Waffle House parking lot over this price.
While the company would love you to buy it at launch for $80, they’re fine if you wait for a (first party) sale.
Look at the first Outer World. At launch sold for $60. Three months post launch, $50. Six months post launch, $40. One year post launch, $30.
If this new game sells the exact same, but starts at $80, they’re ahead. Even if the $80 number scares away a lot of people, they’re ahead. Only if it scares away a shit ton of people will it be a problem.
In a way, I hope it scares enough gamers away that it sends a message. I want there to be repercussions, Nintendo might get away with it (due to fanbase), but other companies need to be curtailed and fast!
Nintendo gets away with it because their games rarely have a discount. An $80 game today will be $80 in a year. After several years you sometimes get a limited discount for their best selling games. A bundle or a voucher can be a small loss leader, usually if you buy one of something you buy another.
The other thing of course is that Nintendo makes absolutely top tier games. The fan base is earned. You can buy a Mario or Zelda game, knowing nothing about it, and it’s going to be good. Pokemon is the obvious exception here, the mainline games are fine, but would be nothing without the brand. (I also won’t forgive them for Super Mario Party, that was a $30 game, not $60.)
I don’t expect $80 games to go away, because as long as someone will pay it, it’s free money. But if sales slump too much in the long run I do see quick discounts, possibly even for Nintendo games.
Nintendo makes pretty good games but nothing about their product is “top tier”. The online experience is terrible, their flagship games suffer from framerate dips, pop-in, and stuttering because they don’t invest in better hardware, and speaking of hardware they went with the same will-break-down-and-drift sticks because they’ve been coasting for ages. Meanwhile they’re suing fan projects into the dirt and growing increasingly out of touch. (Sony and Xbox are hot on their heels, the big three could really do with some outside competition)
Oh I absolutely agree there are plenty of criticisms about the company itself and their other offerings, but the games are absolutely top tier.
Their online is miles behind, games from Smash Bros to Mario Maker to Mario Kart could all be improving with better online, but since they were terrible at online I never used them, but those games were still excellent.
A lower powered system or poorly optimized game has some frame rate dips or stuttering, but never in a way that gameplay was affected. I know people will disagree but I’ve never had an issue with it.
Yes, joycon drift is a real problem. But that’s a hardware problem. We should absolutely give Nintendo shit for hardware problems.
Suing fan projects or being aggressive about YouTube/Twitch take down, all fair. Fuck Nintendo for all that.
But all of that is different from their games being solid. I don’t blame people who choose to emulate their games, they’re awesome games.
I’ll give you that Sony might be competitive, I don’t see Xbox/Microsoft anywhere close. I think Valve and the SteamDeck are probably 4th in the race, but Valve has to actually make a game. They made great games and should continue to do so.
This is what I have a problem with. The fan base WAS earned but now is taken for granted.
You can’t just pretend that online play isn’t important for multiplayer games. It’s a huge knock against the titles you mentioned.
Kirby and the Forgotten Land tries so hard to keep gameplay smooth that any enemies more than like 15 feet away drop to 8fps and it still dips when there’s too many effects on screen. Breath of the Wild simply banishes mobs that get too far away (or just run for too long) to keep the memory functional (and many things don’t even render at the edge of bow range). Super Mario Odyssey also aggressively culls actors and gets a bit sad when you force too much on screen (high up in Metro Kingdom, for example) It might not matter to you but it impacts the game enough for me to notice it.
I simply don’t think that you can trust a Nintendo game to be worth the day 1 cost.
I suppose the reason I’m so forgiving of the online features, is that I don’t use them. They’re a nice little addition for sure, but I do not see them as core to the game.
I think it’s embarrassing that they’re sooooo far behind. Definitely if they’re a thing you’re expecting, it’s going to sour your view of the game.
Performance is a personal thing.You’re not alone, it’s a common complaint, I won’t deny that. I’ve played all three of those games, Kirby, Zelda & Mario but never remember having an issue. I’m sure I did, but it never stuck with me. I remember Arceus looking like an GameCube game. But I also remember completing the Pokedex 100%.
I was burned by Super Mario Party, so that franchise is dead to me. Maybe others will burn me too.
I think the Switch 2 launching with just Mario Kart was a huge mistake. No Mario. No Zelda. I can’t remember the last time that happened. Donkey Kong is coming soon, and it’s supposedly similar to Oddessy… But we’ll have to see. There are great DK games, but he’s no Mario and it’s been a while.
Ah yes, classic Steam, paying devs big money to make their new release exclusive to Steam and unable to be purchased on any other lau—oh wait, that was another company?!
Well, at least now you have the capitalist monopoly here to save you! All hail!
You don’t need to get just new games. Do what a ton of people do: wait till they’re on sale. There is literally no hurry, wait till any game reaches the price point you think its worth. And then you get the best possible version of the game, both in terms of patches, most of the time with DLC included and the modding community has had time to make stuff (if that’s relevant).
It sounds nice, and yeah, that’s primarily publisher responsibility, but developers are allowed to talk to their publishers about pricing strategy. Framing it as if they have zero responsibility is a bit of a cop out. Limited comments and we don’t have the full story, but it makes it kind of sound like they didn’t even bring it up.
Absolutely. Sure Publishers want their cut, but it’s an agreement between Dev and pub. This just feels like Bungie blaming Acti-Blizz for all the things people didn’t like about Destiny.
Microsoft isn’t their publisher, they’re their owner. You’re utterly deluded if you think Obsidian is in any capacity to talk the price down with Microsoft, especially after Avowed failed.
Yar har fiddle dee, 80 bucks a game just ain’t for me, yar har fiddle and fat, I’ll just fucking sail the high seas numbnuts publishers, good job trading the 60 bucks I was willing to pay for the 0 you’ll be getting from me now.
And remember kids, if buying isn’t owning, pirating isn’t stealing.
You do you, but to me 99% of pirates are just entitled parasites who’ve never created anything in their lives and as such do not understand why content has a price. For me piracy is only justifiable when you have paid for the content but are being barred from accessing it via bullshit like Adobe DRM.
But pirating shit just because you disagree with the pricing is entitled behavior and I cannot condone it, as someone who thinks I have the right to price my property at whatever price I want. It’s not essential to your survival so you can just not consume it and move on.
There are a lot of other reasons to pirate content besides disagreeing with pricing. I get that the price point of this game is the subject here but I doubt 99% of pirates are at a disagreement over pricing.
I gave the only instance in which piracy is permissible in the comment you replied to. When there are arbitrary restrictions on how and where you can consume the content that you purchased. But a purchased must have had happened, because that’s what entitles you to access to the content. That’s literally the only instance in which piracy is valid. I’ve seen all the other arguments and they really don’t hold up to any kind of scrutiny because games, movies and books are not necessities and you are not entitled to access to anyone’s work while everyone is entitled to price their work however they like. If you want access to the content you pay what the gatekeeper is asking for, and if the content is not good enough for you to pay for it then surely it isn’t good enough for you to spend the most valuable resource that you have on it which is time.
gamesradar.com
Gorące