• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Rime comes out in May. Costs £10 more on Nintendo Switch.

D

DeuceGamer

Member
Stanng243 said:
The issue though is this wasn't originally developed with the switch in mind. When they bought the rights back, there was almost nothing known at the switch. I doubt they budgeted for releasing it there. Additionally, they had to hire an outside company to do the port, which is a cost exclusively on switch. In addition to the fact that carts cost more than discs. So, yes I'm okay with them passing on switch costs to switch users. I doubt it will be the only time it happens.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand your argument. Do you think porting to the Switch costs more than developing the game from the ground up?
 
Z

Zaraki_Kenpachi

Member
maxcriden said:
Not at all to single you out because (a) I like you and always enjoy your posts and avatar and (b) I've seen a lot of people saying this so this is really not directed at you specifically, but I don't understand the mindset of waiting to get the game used. So I don't ask this to call you out at all, but just to understand better (and please don't hesitate to let me know if I'm misunderstanding):

If I understand correctly, you want to play the game, but not pay the dev/pub directly for it, because of the $10 surcharge. But if you like the game, you'd want them to make more games, right? Wouldn't the best way to do this to be to decide you care more about them making more games than you do about the $10, and as such to just pay the $10?

In that sense it would seem to come down to if this $10 uncharge is offensive enough (and I am no fan of it either) that it is a more important issue than supporting the dev (who didn't set the price to begin with, necessarily) in a scenario where you do like the game and want them to make more games. I understand not wanting to support the publisher, but I kinda feel for the dev who didn't necessarily make the pricing decision and may have the greatest stake in the game's success.

(And I say all this as someone displeased about the $10 surcharge on the digital in particular.)
Click to expand...

So we should take price gouging and in general anti consumer practices because maybe they won't make future games? Did you rush to defend horse armor, online passes, and other anti consumer things because what if they stop making games?!?!?! Also, they're gouging one console so if they're deciding whether they will ever make another game based solely on switch sales which is the only platform they deem worthy of gouging... Then they won't be missed. It's really depressing people try so hard to defend terrible policies and this is a dev who's only ever released a single game.
Dariuas said:
Hey everyone,

I just finished reading through the last 13 pages or so of responses to this, so forgive the late response here.

First, it has been a long road getting to this point where we can announce a release date. We started the development of the Switch version as early as we could and it is a very resource intensive endeavor to make that port. We want to ensure that the experience on the Switch is the best it can be, which is the reason for the split release dates. It is not a decision we came to lightly, but it is a decision that had to be made.

On May 26th of this year, Xbox One, PlayStation 4 and PC players will be able to get their hands on RiME and begin their adventure. Physical copies for both PlayStation 4 and Xbox One will be available for $29.99 in North America and at various price points around the globe.

The Nintendo Switch version will come out at a later date which we will announce when we finalize development. We began working on the Switch later into development than the other platforms. Items such as engine optimization, the complex lighting system, and ultimately the general port process all take time, and we did not want to release the Switch version before it was ready. We are doing everything we can to minimize the delay.

The price point for the Switch version is something everyone is obviously interested in as we've announced that it will be higher than other console versions. When we released our suggested retail price, we took into account many things, including development, production, and manufacturing costs. When the decision was made to do a physical release for the Switch version at $39.99 it was done so based on those factors. That is the bottom line; we are not attempting to take advantage of a freshly released console, a specific group of fan's affinity for games, a lack of games on a specific console, or any of those factors, it all comes down to the cost to get it out the door.

I completely understand why some people are upset by this, and I want you to know this was not a decision we made lightly. It was a very hot topic here, and ultimately a decision had to be made. I am reading every single post and understand where the varying thoughts and feelings come from. I am sharing the sentiment from the community with our team, so please keep sharing your feedback.

Thanks,
Tim
Click to expand...
This is literally a word soup that has 0 meaning behind it. Like you even keep describing the same thing by same production AND manufacturing costs and even development costs! These are all things you have to pay on other consoles, you wrote paragraphs to give no distinction of why it's ok to gouge switch customers an extra $10. I really hope it was worth screwing over the customers to lose sales. Can't wait to see the sales numbers.


Also people saying they can't set the price lower on digital than retail because the retailers will flip their shit, Puyo Puyo Tetris is already doing this on the switch... It is doable and there's no word of retailers boycotting Sega over the two price tiers.
 
X

xevis

Banned
Stanng243 said:
The issue though is this wasn't originally developed with the switch in mind. When they bought the rights back, there was almost nothing known at the switch. I doubt they budgeted for releasing it there. Additionally, they had to hire an outside company to do the port, which is a cost exclusively on switch. In addition to the fact that carts cost more than discs. So, yes I'm okay with them passing on switch costs to switch users. I doubt it will be the only time it happens.
Click to expand...

My point is that every version beyond the first is a port and making each such version incurrs extra costs. But the retail price of the game on those other platforms is not incrementally more than the first. Rather, the entire cost of development is amortised across all platforms to achieve price parity. They're purposefully treating Switch different. It's complete bull.
 
J

JP

Member
BizarroRhymeReason.jpg
 
E

EDarkness

Member
AcademicSaucer said:
They are going to lose money on the Switch version, who in theright mind is goign to buy that.
Click to expand...

Seriously. Gonna just say these guys are pretty dumb and gonna bail out of even looking at this game anymore. More power to 'em, but I'll be saving my money and I hope everyone else is, too.
 
C

CDX

Member
jambo said:
UHhh...
Tequila Works as well as Five Star Games has announced that RiME will release on May 26th in Australia for PS4, Xbox One and PC for a retail price of $29.99.

Stunningly, the game won’t release until Winter on Nintendo Switch and it’ll also cost double. It’s going to be $59.95 on Nintendo Switch both physically and digitally.
Click to expand...
http://press-start.com.au/news/nint...-cost-double-price-nintendo-switch-australia/
Click to expand...

Double the price?

That seems insane.

lol
 
C

Catchpenny

Member
Just epic stupidity. Switch is going to be my preferred system to buy indies going forward, but not indies that come late and cost more money.

On the bright side, the publisher will either realize their mistake, or the market will correct it for them and Rime will be available at bomba pricing a few months after launch.
 
S

SomewhatGroovy

Banned
Is Nintendo taking a bigger cut from publishers (and , in turn, the devs) than Sony and Microsoft are? Is the Publisher trying to net same profit they would see on other platforms?
 
R

Rezbit

Member
A

antonz

Member
All I really see in this is incompetence by the Developers. Releasing Late was a guaranteed way to reduce sales which I am sure plays a factor in why they think raising the price is ok. Less sales means more money per unit needed. However now you pretty much just guaranteed you will sell even less.

It is up to the Development Studio when they make a game to budget everything together then Come up with a X units needed to break even Plan. If You decide to make a port to a new system then you factor that into the Overall not into the late port only. Better to raise everyone's cost $1 than to try and force a $10 increase on a single sku.
 
S

Spirited

Mine is pretty and pink
AquaWateria said:
Wait I'm trying to understand what's going on here.

Like that price is puzzling.
Click to expand...

Australia <---- Your answer

Not saying this is in any way acceptable it's just pretty much the norm.

If you mean the price difference then that isn't that far away from the price difference outside of australia in %
 
D

duckroll

Member
jambo said:
UHhh...



http://press-start.com.au/news/nint...-cost-double-price-nintendo-switch-australia/
Click to expand...

Rezbit said:
EDIT: Oh there's an update to the article. But it's still ridiculous haha:
Click to expand...

Not at all to single you out because (a) I like you and always enjoy your posts and avatar and (b) I've seen a lot of people saying this so this is really not directed at you specifically, but I don't understand the mindset of waiting to get the game used. So I don't ask this to call you out at all, but just to understand better (and please don't hesitate to let me know if I'm misunderstanding):

If I understand correctly, you want to play the game, but not pay the dev/pub directly for it, because of the $30 $20 surcharge. But if you like the game, you'd want them to make more games, right? Wouldn't the best way to do this to be to decide you care more about them making more games than you do about the $30 $20, and as such to just pay the $30 $20?

In that sense it would seem to come down to if this $30 $20 uncharge is offensive enough (and I am no fan of it either) that it is a more important issue than supporting the dev (who didn't set the price to begin with, necessarily) in a scenario where you do like the game and want them to make more games. I understand not wanting to support the publisher, but I kinda feel for the dev who didn't necessarily make the pricing decision and may have the greatest stake in the game's success.

(And I say all this as someone displeased about the $30 $20 surcharge on the digital in particular.)
 
R

RichiRamjag

Member
duckroll said:
Not at all to single you out because (a) I like you and always enjoy your posts and avatar and (b) I've seen a lot of people saying this so this is really not directed at you specifically, but I don't understand the mindset of waiting to get the game used. So I don't ask this to call you out at all, but just to understand better (and please don't hesitate to let me know if I'm misunderstanding):

If I understand correctly, you want to play the game, but not pay the dev/pub directly for it, because of the $30 surcharge. But if you like the game, you'd want them to make more games, right? Wouldn't the best way to do this to be to decide you care more about them making more games than you do about the $30, and as such to just pay the $30?

In that sense it would seem to come down to if this $30 uncharge is offensive enough (and I am no fan of it either) that it is a more important issue than supporting the dev (who didn't set the price to begin with, necessarily) in a scenario where you do like the game and want them to make more games. I understand not wanting to support the publisher, but I kinda feel for the dev who didn't necessarily make the pricing decision and may have the greatest stake in the game's success.

(And I say all this as someone displeased about the $30 surcharge on the digital in particular.)
Click to expand...

This is a good point. Preordering ten copies.

:p
 
V

Vinnk

Member
duckroll said:
Not at all to single you out because (a) I like you and always enjoy your posts and avatar and (b) I've seen a lot of people saying this so this is really not directed at you specifically, but I don't understand the mindset of waiting to get the game used. So I don't ask this to call you out at all, but just to understand better (and please don't hesitate to let me know if I'm misunderstanding):

If I understand correctly, you want to play the game, but not pay the dev/pub directly for it, because of the $30 $20 surcharge. But if you like the game, you'd want them to make more games, right? Wouldn't the best way to do this to be to decide you care more about them making more games than you do about the $30 $20, and as such to just pay the $30 $20?

In that sense it would seem to come down to if this $30 $20 uncharge is offensive enough (and I am no fan of it either) that it is a more important issue than supporting the dev (who didn't set the price to begin with, necessarily) in a scenario where you do like the game and want them to make more games. I understand not wanting to support the publisher, but I kinda feel for the dev who didn't necessarily make the pricing decision and may have the greatest stake in the game's success.

(And I say all this as someone displeased about the $30 $20 surcharge on the digital in particular.)
Click to expand...

In my own experience, I have never purposely bought a game used to spite a dev. However if I feel a game is overpriced I will wait until it hits a price point that I am willing to pay. Be it used, a price collapse, a Steam sale, whatever.

It may seem petty but when it feels like Switch customers are are being gouged and no compelling reasons are being given, I no longer feel like blindly purchasing at full price. I'll wait for reviews. I'll wait for a price drop. I may buy it used. This choice is not made specifically to punish the publisher (though it indirectly does) but I also don't feel like rewarding misguided decisions that could set a precedent.

And I may not buy it at all. This is also not to spite the dev. But when decisions like this are made it reduces my enthusiasm for the game and with so many other game choices (I don't only play Switch) I'll buy something I am excited about.

I can't speak for everyone though.
 
K

killroy87

Member
Not gonna lie, I'm blown away the dev hasn't come forward and publicly said they'll drop the price. I feel like this is just such needless bad press. I don't know how many legitimate sales they'll lose (Most people are all talk), but as an indie dev, it helps to have the community on your side.
 
N

NoHeDidn't

Member
Dat next gen tax.

The Switch is weaker than Ps4/Xbone but are they also saying devloping for Switch is more expensive? If they are saying that it doesn't bode well for huge 3rd party support lest they follow this path and anger consumers.
 
V

Vinnk

Member
Dariuas said:
Of course I will! Once I get to the bottom of that information, I'll let you guys know. :)
Click to expand...

Thank you for coming back. With how toxic this situation is becoming, I don't know if I would if I was in your shoes. And I know this decision is likely out of your hands so I hope people won't "Kill the messenger".

I will respectfully re-ask my questions from a few pages back. I know you might not be able (or at liberty) to answer them but, I really think someone DOES need to address them:

Vinnk said:
1. What has inflated the cost for the Switch version of your game?

I know for the physical version of the game there will be costs involved for the carts and the packaging. So if that is what is taking the price over I think it is reasonable to charge slightly more for the game to make up for those costs. But that brings me to the more important questions.

2. Why does the digital Switch version not cost the same as the digital versions on other platforms?

If Nintendo is forcing price parity that is of course out of your hands but as the digital version of Puyo Puyo Tetris shows, Nintendo does not forbid different price points for digital and physical.

Are you able to give us the reasoning behind this. Personally $40 seems like a fair price for your game. And if it was $40 across the board I would not have hesitated for a moment to pick it up. Also if the Switch physical version was $40 and all digital versions were $30, I would still pick up the physical Switch version realizing that I was paying a $10 premium for the card and packaging. I had every intention of buying this game.

But without an explanation for the price discrepancy I am feeling that I will probably pass on this title (or get it on a Steam sale down the line). I believe you when you say it is not your intention to overcharge Switch customers, but you need to further communicate why this price is justified. The problem right now is messaging. No one wants to feel like a sucker.

I thank you for supporting so many platforms and I wish you luck with your game but this will need to be cleared up or I can see the Switch version of this title underperforming. Customers have been led to expect that a later port of a game will either contain extra content or be priced lower. A game launching later for a higher price has historically not fared well. (See Mass Effect 3).

Anyway I look forward to hearing more about this title and the Switch version and I am definitely in a place to be persuaded back into buying it. I just need to know that I am being respected as a customer.
Click to expand...

I think it is not to late to fix the messaging on this. But the window of opportunity is closing. People are beginning to think of this title as "That price-gouging Switch game" rather than "That gorgeous looking adventure title that is finally coming out". And once those ideas take root, they are hard to change.

Again, thank you for your time.
 
K

KratosEnergyDrink

Member
NoHeDidn't said:
Dat next gen tax.

The Switch is weaker than Ps4/Xbone but are they also saying devloping for Switch is more expensive? If they are saying that it doesn't bode well for huge 3rd party support lest they follow this path and anger consumers.
Click to expand...

The "more expensive" part is completely a marketing spin to justify the hilarious price. The entry costs for developing on Switch are much lower than on every other console before and since Switch supports all modern engines there is simply no possible reason for "more expensive development".

Shame on the publisher of Rime for such a cheap excuse for their greedynees. With every new statement from the developer/publisher they look worse. They surely lost many sales with this stunt.
 
C

CronoShot

Member
UPDATE: The incorrect pricing was sent through by the publisher. The PS4/XB1 version will cost $59.95, the PC version will cost $49.95 and the Nintendo Switch version will cost $79.95.
Click to expand...

Alright, these guys can fuck right off now. I was trying to understand before, but this is disgusting amounts of gouging.

I'm sorry, Dariuas. I don't want your job.
 
D

DeuceGamer

Member
Dariuas said:
Of course I will! Once I get to the bottom of that information, I'll let you guys know. :)
Click to expand...

Thanks for attempting answer questions. I realize these aren't your calls and you seem like a nice person but I hope you are explaining to the Dev and Pub that this is basically them throwing money away on the Switch port. Not only that there are some who it turns off completely and now won't buy the game at all on any platform.

I feel like there were a decent amount of people that were interested in picking up Rime on Switch but this is essentially killing any and all enthusiasm for your game. Hopefully they see the light and walk back the ridiculous price hike on Switch.
 
V

Vinnk

Member
Ranger X said:
It seems those cartridges are costly!
Click to expand...

They might be. The Binding of Issac people said about $5 for the cart and the packaging. But they might be buying in greater bulk. And it's not like a Blu-ray and case costs $0.

But yeah, if it's a few dollar more for Physical, I think that's fair.

But when digital is also $10 more.

Unless Nintendo brand 1s and 0s are more expensive...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Deliver Us The Moon coming to Switch in 2024 (the cancelled Switch version is revived)
News Trailer
1
277
Flabagast replied
Hyperdimension Neptunia Re;Birth series ports coming to PS4, Switch | Nintendo Switch versions due out on May 23 in Japan
News
4
518
nial replied
Blasphemous 2 gets a nice physical collector's edition/ Release in May
News
9
871
Thick Thighs Save Lives replied
PAC-MAN Mega Tunnel Battle: Chomp Champs launches May 9th
News
8
511
rkofan87 replied
Pentiment coming to Nintendo Switch, PS4 & PS5 on February 22
News 2
81
4K
justiceiro replied
Top Bottom