Support NeoGAF

[Varth]

Plenty of ways around this. People Will Just buy it in PS4.

I mean, is there anyone that legitimately thinks this would have sold significantly on Switch anyway given installare base and the Zelda presence in the lineup? Kinda makes sense to make up for poor sales on the platform with an higher price.

 

[Oregano]

Definitely! Those in the know can get the game cheaper from the U.S. shop.

It's worth nothing that Deep Silver is the EU publisher, not Sega themselves.

 

[Vinnk]

Plenty of ways around this. People Will Just buy it in PS4.

I mean, is there anyone that legitimately thinks this would have sold significantly on Switch anyway given installare base and the Zelda presence in the lineup? Kinda makes sense to make up for poor sales on the platform with an higher price.

I think it could have sold pretty well. Less competition and by May people will need something else to play no matter how good Zelda is.

I agree it probably wouldn't have been a smash hit but now it definitely won't be.

 

[jonno394]

Plenty of ways around this. People Will Just buy it in PS4.

I mean, is there anyone that legitimately thinks this would have sold significantly on Switch anyway given installare base and the Zelda presence in the lineup? Kinda makes sense to make up for poor sales on the platform with an higher price.

It could have sold decently to Switch users. It likely won't be out until Summer and people will likely be looking for single player experiences once they've finished Zelda and realised all they have (retail wise) are Mario Kart, ARMS, Disgaea 5 and Lego to choose from.

 

[EDarkness]

It could have sold decently to Switch users. It likely won't be out until Summer and people will likely be looking for single player experiences once they've finished Zelda and realised all they have (retail wise) are Mario Kart, ARMS, Disgaea 5 and Lego to choose from.

A little off topic, but I hope there are a few announcements to fill in some gaps around this time. That's why I was looking at this game, because I wasn't sure what was going to be released and it looks like a nice little game to play to pass the time. But not for the price they're asking.

 

[The Boat]

Plenty of ways around this. People Will Just buy it in PS4.

I mean, is there anyone that legitimately thinks this would have sold significantly on Switch anyway given installare base and the Zelda presence in the lineup? Kinda makes sense to make up for poor sales on the platform with an higher price.

On the contrary, now is the perfect time to get the foot in the door, new owners are looking for games and there isn't a lot of competition yet. Marking up the price is a good way to mess it up.

 

[Vinnk]

A little off topic, but I hope there are a few announcements to fill in some gaps around this time. That's why I was looking at this game, because I wasn't sure what was going to be released and it looks like a nice little game to play to pass the time. But not for the price they're asking.

I feel the same. It would be a nice game until some of the big hitters come.

 

[DeuceGamer]

Every game apart from Just Dance and Puyo Puyo Tetris
Not much else out yet, but I guess that World of Goo may also cost more than the 3.99 EUR they are asking for on other platforms.




Alternative facts?

Puyo Puyo has added value in the Physical release.Digital has price parity which everyone seems to agree is fine.

Just Dance has always had lower prices on last gen. Wii, Xbox 360, PS3 were always $10 cheaper than PS4, X1.

What platforms is World of Goo on?

I can't believe people are defending this.

 

[Herb Alpert]

Puyo Puyo has added value in the Physical release.Digital has price parity which everyone seems to agree is fine.

Just Dance has always had lower prices on last gen. Wii, Xbox 360, PS3 were always $10 cheaper than PS4, X1.

What platforms is World of Goo on?

I can't believe people are defending this.

Apart the publisher I can't see anybody defending this. Even these blind "Nintendo fans"

 

[jonno394]

Puyo Puyo has added value in the Physical release.Digital has price parity which everyone seems to agree is fine.

Just to pre-empt Shiggy, UK/EU gamers do not get a digital discount for Puyo Puyo Tetris.

 

[DeuceGamer]

Just to pre-empt Shiggy, UK/EU gamers do not get a digital discount for Puyo Puyo Tetris.

Not sure what's going on in Euro but obviously I'm speaking of North America. That said, if it can be done in North America there is no reason why it can't be done on other regions.

 

[jonno394]

Not sure what's going on in Euro but obviously I'm speaking of North America. That said, if it can be done in North America there is no reason why it can't be done on other regions.

Indeed, this is likely a publisher decision. SEGA see sense in offering a lower priced digital release but Deep Silver not wanting to.

 

[Shiggy]

Puyo Puyo has added value in the Physical release.Digital has price parity which everyone seems to agree is fine.

Just Dance has always had lower prices on last gen. Wii, Xbox 360, PS3 were always $10 cheaper than PS4, X1.

What platforms is World of Goo on?

I can't believe people are defending this.

Nobody is defending it. I simply mentioned two specific instances where we already know that the Switch version is more expensive. And for Just Dance 2017 and Puyo Puyo Tetris this is a fact in Europe. Just because it's different in North America, it doesn't mean that it's not that way in Europe.

 

[DeuceGamer]

Indeed, this is likely a publisher decision. SEGA see sense in offering a lower priced digital release but Deep Silver not wanting to.

In the end, it's not right in Euro either. Cart prices are not increasing the cost by $10 over Blu Ray. Can everyone agree on that?

 

[jonno394]

Nobody is defending it. I simply mentioned two specific instances where we already know that the Switch version is more expensive. And for Just Dance 2017 and Puyo Puyo Tetris this is a fact in Europe. Just because it's different in North America, it doesn't mean that it's not that way in Europe.

I don't think Nintendo are forcing anyone, anywhere to price match digital vs physical rrp. It's just that if you as a publisher have the chance, why wouldn't you charge the same amount?

I'd wager that if SEGA were publishing PPT in the EU, we might have gotten a lower price on it too.

 

[Kyry]

In the end, it's not right in Euro either. Cart prices are not increasing the cost by $10 over Blu Ray. Can everyone agree on that?

I don't think we can until we know what cart prices the publisher is being charged.

Edit, perhaps they ordered a small amount.

 

[Herb Alpert]

In the end, it's not right in Euro either. Cart prices are not increasing the cost by $10 over Blu Ray. Can everyone agree on that?

Of course not. Cents, not dollars.

Come on, 10 bucks a cart lol

 

[DeuceGamer]

I don't think we can until we know what cart prices the publisher is being charged.

Really? People believe the carts increase prices over Blu Ray by a full $10? Do also think in Aus that's why they are charging $30 more?

There is no way the carts increase costs by $10 over Blu Ray. If that were the case then how could Has Been Heroes sell at $20? If carts were $10 more than Blu Rays, that means half of their price are already gone just to produce the cart. On top of that we have several people in the know that have stated the cart prices are not the reason for the price increase.

Edit:

Nobody is defending it. I simply mentioned two specific instances where we already know that the Switch version is more expensive. And for Just Dance 2017 and Puyo Puyo Tetris this is a fact in Europe. Just because it's different in North America, it doesn't mean that it's not that way in Europe.

Im not aware of Europe but it obviously doesn't make it right there either and people should voice their displeasure with those releases as well. My guess is Just Dance gets a pass because gamers don't care (and it will be $15 in a year), not that it makes it right.

The fact that Puyo Puyo Tetris is sold at different prices in North America is proof that it can be done and that the Publisher in Europe is clearly just trying to take advantage of their customers.

 

[jxN3]

I mean, I understand that it's a lot of work porting and optimizing, but can somebody explain why that justifies releasing the game at a higher price?

Tim's post basically read like "we have absolutely no faith our game will actually sell well on the Switch, so we're bumping the price as a safety net."

If the game was received well, I would have easily waited for the Switch port. The ability to play games anywhere makes the Switch my preferred platform for all my games.

It's only 10$, but I just think it was a silly idea.

 

[Shiggy]

I don't think Nintendo are forcing anyone, anywhere to price match digital vs physical rrp. It's just that if you as a publisher have the chance, why wouldn't you charge the same amount?

I'd wager that if SEGA were publishing PPT in the EU, we might have gotten a lower price on it too.

The last time Nintendo forced anyone on certain prices was on DSiWare. It wouldn't be good for them as a platform holder to set up any such barriers.

In case of PPT I could see licensing fees to Sega as a reason. Deep Silver might want to make some money and sees this as a way to increase profits, hoping that the majority of people won't do cross-region buying.

 

[Kyry]

Really? People believe the carts increase prices over Blu Ray by a full $10? Do also think in Aus that's why they are charging $30 more?

There is no way the carts increase costs by $10 over Blu Ray. If that were the case then how could Has Been Heroes sell at $20? If carts were $10 that means half of their costs are already gone. On top of that we have several people in the know that have stated the cart prices are not the reason for the price increase.

Because there could be a volume discount. A small publisher buying few carts gets a worse price than a large publisher buying many.

Has Been Heroes is only being sold by gamestop physically, the same company publishing it. Eliminating the middleman provides savings. Gamestop also sold Song of the Deep for 15 dollars physical, abnormally low for even a budget physical game.

 

[PdotMichael]

Good luck trying to sell your game to the retail market as small publisher if you sell the same game for way less in digital form.

 

[jonno394]

I mean, I understand that it's a lot of work porting and optimizing, but can somebody explain why that justifies releasing the game at a higher price?

Tim's post basically read like "we have absolutely no faith our game will actually sell well on the Switch, so we're bumping the price as a safety net."

If the game was received well, I would have easily waited for the Switch port. The ability to play games anywhere makes the Switch my preferred platform for all my games.

It's only 10$, but I just think it was a silly idea.

What I don't get is what extra leg work has to be done to get the game running on the switch that isn't covered by a £29.99 RRP. Like, most of the "real" work has been done when developing the other versions of the game (so engine, assets etc) and now it's "simply" a job of porting this. Are they saying that the porting process costs more than the whole dev process of the game on other consoles?

 

[DeuceGamer]

Because there could be a volume discount. A small publisher buying few carts gets a worse price than a large publisher buying many.

Has Been Heroes is only being sold by gamestop physically, the same company publishing it. Eliminating the middleman provides savings. Gamestop also sold Song of the Deep for 15 dollars physical, abnormally low for even a budget physical game.

No way they would release a Switch version of literally over half of their total retail price was going to cart production. It just doesn't make financial sense whether they are the Publisher or not.

What about people in the know stating that cart prices are not the reason for the increase?

In the end common sense tells us there is no way cart prices are over $10, regardless of the number purchased.

Edit: so what is the excuse in Australia? Do carts cost $30 Australian dollars there?

 

[Kyry]

No way they would release a Switch version of literally over half of their total retail price was going to cart production. It just doesn't make financial sense whether they are the Publisher or not.

What about people in the know stating that cart prices are not the reason for the increase?

In the end common sense tells us there is no way cart prices are over $10, regardless of the number purchased.

You are ignoring part of what I said. Gamestop is probably buying enough units to ensure they don't pay as high price as some other small publishers would pay.

Your People in the know probably can only speak to what they or their partners were/are being charged.

I wish we could get someone like Limited Run to weigh in on this. They have spoken about how Vita games cost them more than PS4 games even when purchased in smaller amounts.

 

[Father_Brain]

I'll still buy the game on PC at some point, but man, this is pretty indefensible.

I also wonder what makes the game so much harder to port to Switch than Snake Pass; obviously, different UE4 games have different technical demands, but this doesn't *look* like it's on another level technically.

 

[AHindD]

Sounds like Sony did the right thing when cancelling everything to do with this developer.
Pretty shitty thing to do. Not going to support any version of this thing.

 

[Oregano]

Good luck trying to sell your game to the retail market as small publisher if you sell the same game for way less in digital form.

It depends on what you consider way less. Digital downloads are still a minority, especially on a Nintendo platform and theres still a segment who is willing to pay a little extra for physical media.

$30 vs $40 doesn't seem like too big of a gap especially when you consider retail can sell below MSRP/RRP.

 

[DeuceGamer]

You are ignoring part of what I said. Gamestop is probably buying enough units to ensure they don't pay as high price as some other small publishers would pay.

Your People in the know probably can only speak to what they or their partners were/are being charged.

I wish we could get someone like Limited Run to weigh in on this. They have spoken about how Vita games cost them more than PS4 games even when purchased in smaller amounts.

Speaking of ignoring do you also think the cart prices are justifying the $30 increase in Australia?

GameStop is not getting such a discount that this argument makes sense.

Im sure the people that stated the cart prices isn't the reason for the increase would know prices regardless of quantity. Why would you assume they wouldn't consider the quantity before making statements that the cart prices aren't the reason for the increase?

Last, if they were $10 a cart a smart business decision would be to cancel the Physical version, or order more. It just doesn't make sense based on what we know IMO.

 

[PooBone]

Well that's dumb.

 

[KratosEnergyDrink]

I mean, is there anyone that legitimately thinks this would have sold significantly on Switch anyway given installare base and the Zelda presence in the lineup? Kinda makes sense to make up for poor sales on the platform with an higher price.

Rime is the type of game that would sell good on Nintendo hardware, probably much better than to the PS4 audience and it has not much competitors so early in Switches life.

But the ridiculous price politic of the Rime publisher already created a bad word of mouth that will probably have influence on sales for all platforms.

 

[KratosEnergyDrink]

I also wonder what makes the game so much harder to port to Switch than Snake Pass; obviously, different UE4 games have different technical demands, but this doesn't *look* like it's on another level technically.

The "hard to port" excuse is obviously a ridiculous lie to justify the higher price and is not based in reality only on the greedynees of the Rime publisher.

 

[mlclmtckr]

Rime is the type of game that would sell good on Nintendo hardware, probably much better than to the PS4 audience and it has not much competitors so early in Switches life.

Which is exactly why it costs an extra tenner.

They're a company trying to charge as much as the market will bear for their product. That's just capitalism.

I'm hoping it doesn't work out for them, I don't want to see this kind of thing set a precedent, but they're just running their business.

If people think it's too much they can just not buy the game instead of trying to figure out the publisher's intentions.

 

[DeuceGamer]

Rime is the type of game that would sell good on Nintendo hardware, probably much better than to the PS4 audience and it has not much competitors so early in Switches life.

But the ridiculous price politic of the Rime publisher already created a bad word of mouth that will probably have influence on sales for all platforms.

Completely agree. I think it would have sold decently and I think there was some excitement from Nintendo fans for this game. I think that's why there have been some people upset by this news.

Edit:

Personally I would have just got it on PS4 if there wasn't a Switch version, but since there was I planned on getting it on Switch. Now after this I plan on skipping it.

 

[audio_delay]

I think gamers should show solidarity, go to twitter or email them, that they are going to boycott any version of the game. And people should do it all the time, when prices differ for one specific plattform. I mean I would be pissed off, if a ps4 version of a game gets charged more, because it has "4k" support.
Gamers/players have to unite, if publishers or developer are trying to take the piss out of people.

 

[DeuceGamer]

I think gamers should show solidarity, go to twitter or email them, that they are going to boycott any version of the game. And people should do it all the time, when prices differ for one specific plattform. I mean I would be pissed off, if a ps4 version of a game gets charged more, because it has "4k" support.
Gamers/players have to unite, if publishers or developer are trying to take the piss out of people.

I agree and some people have been voicing their displaeasure on Twitter and in this thread where the Rime Community Manager is reading our comments. He said he would return and provide an explanation on why Australia is priced at $30 more and while it's not his fault, I don't expect anymore of an answer than we already got.

 

[Takat]

Unless there's an added bonus of playing as Link, I don't get the price hike.

I hope they will change their mind, because I was def going to buy it.

 

[frankie_baby]

They should've just charged 40 to everyone and no one would have complained

 

[tebunker]

Completely agree. I think it would have sold decently and I think there was some excitement from Nintendo fans for this game. I think that's why there have been some people upset by this news.

Edit:

Personally I would have just got it on PS4 if there wasn't a Switch version, but since there was I planned on getting it on Switch. Now after this I plan on skipping it.

Fortunately in this day and age they can save face by coming back and either offering more value or lowering the prices. I doubt either will happen but the door isn't closed to a mea culpa.

 

[Father_Brain]

The "hard to port" excuse is obviously a ridiculous lie to justify the higher price and is not based in reality only on the greedynees of the Rime publisher.

Meh, we have no way of knowing that. Genuine question on my part.

 

[DangerMouse]

What I don't get is what extra leg work has to be done to get the game running on the switch that isn't covered by a £29.99 RRP. Like, most of the "real" work has been done when developing the other versions of the game (so engine, assets etc) and now it's "simply" a job of porting this. Are they saying that the porting process costs more than the whole dev process of the game on other consoles?

Isn't this dev pretty small? All I can think of as a guess is that the game was built and optimized mostly to the extent needed for the stronger hardware it was targeting (plus there were those reports of development issues pushing the game back that supposedly lead to Sony dropping it/TW buying it back or whatever really happened). Making it work on a considerably weaker system at that point may not be easy or man-hour cheap for a smaller dev, especially when that system didn't exist for most of the game's development time. Given when it was first shown in Sony's conference it would seem to me the game was originally planned to come out quite a bit before the Switch. Not to give them a pass on the price though, so maybe they should have waited a bit until they could port it at the same price as the other versions, since they should have known no one would be happy paying more than others do, unless it actually were the carts raising the price.

Rime is the type of game that would sell good on Nintendo hardware, probably much better than to the PS4 audience and it has not much competitors so early in Switches life.

But the ridiculous price politic of the Rime publisher already created a bad word of mouth that will probably have influence on sales for all platforms.

I don't think so. From it's first showing people connected it to being an ICO-like title (maybe some Journey too), therefore I think it will do it's best on PS4 due to this. It probably would have done fine on the Switch too though.

I'll still buy the game on PC at some point, but man, this is pretty indefensible.

I also wonder what makes the game so much harder to port to Switch than Snake Pass; obviously, different UE4 games have different technical demands, but this doesn't *look* like it's on another level technically.

Meh, we have no way of knowing that. Genuine question on my part.

Agreed. I don't think we have any way of knowing for sure, so I also think it's a good question that we probably won't get an answer to.

Perhaps experience and team size makes it a less straightforward comparison. Sumo Digital has been around a while and made or contributed to a ton of games for a lot of platforms and publishers and wiki shows them at some point as 270 people strong with like 3 studios, Tequila Works seems quite small and only on their second game.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumo_Digital

 

[DeuceGamer]

Isn't this dev pretty small? All I can think of as a guess is that the game was built and optimized mostly to the extent needed for the stronger hardware it was targeting (plus there were those reports of development issues pushing the game back that supposedly lead to Sony dropping it/TW buying it back or whatever really happened). Making it work on a considerably weaker system at that point may not be easy or man-hour cheap for a smaller dev, especially when that system didn't exist for most of the game's development time. Given when it was first shown in Sony's conference it would seem to me the game was originally planned to come out quite a bit before the Switch. Not to give them a pass on the price though, so maybe they should have waited a bit until they could port it at the same price as the other versions.



I don't think so. From it's first showing people connected it to being an ICO-like title (maybe some Journey too), therefore I think it will do it's best on PS4 due to this. It probably would have done fine on the Switch too though.




Agreed. I don't think we have any way of knowing for sure, so I also think it's a good question that we probably won't get an answer to.

Perhaps experience and team size makes it a less straightforward comparison. Sumo Digital has been around a while and made or contributed to a ton of games for a lot of platforms and publishers and wiki shows them at some point as 270 people strong with like 3 studios, Tequila Works seems quite small and only on their second game.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumo_Digital[/B]

Isn't Tantalus handling the port?

Also, since this game was made for X1 and PS4 originally, they planned on those systems covering development costs. They likely would have made a decision on Switch based on whether porting it would make sense financially. Do you think the port costs more than the entire development costs for PS4/X1?

 

[fernoca]

Perhaps experience and team size makes it a less straightforward comparison. Sumo Digital has been around a while and made or contributed to a ton of games for a lot of platforms and publishers and wiki shows them at some point as 270 people strong with like 3 studios, Tequila Works seems quite small and only on their second game.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumo_Digital

Isn't Tantalus handling the port?

Also, since this game was made for X1 and PS4 originally, they planned on those systems covering development costs. They likely would have made a decision on Switch based on whether porting it would make sense financially. Do you think the port costs more than the entire development costs for PS4/X1?

Yep, Tantalus is working on this and a few other projects too.

I guess the publisher decided to pass the costs of hiring someone to port it if anything.

 

[GabeTheGrouch76]

UHhh...



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

Jesus lmao. Six months later, at double the price? Dead on arrival. Do the people responsible for the pricing for this game really think they will be able to throw dust in people's eyes with that asking price?

 

[Mega]

Cartridges. It's N64 vs Playstation 1 all over again.

Bullshit because it also applies to digital version on Switch.

This is a new console tax, plain and simple. They're trying to take advantage of the situation where they think new owners are thirsty enough to play anything with enough meat on it, at whatever price.

 

[Lexxism]

Jesus lmao. Six months later, at double the price? Dead on arrival. Do the people responsible for the pricing for this game really think they will be able to throw dust in people's eyes with that asking price?

They probably just doesn't care. If it didn't do well, they now have a reason not to justify a new game on it.

 

[DeuceGamer]

Yep, Tantalus is working on this and a few other projects too.

I guess the publisher decided to pass the costs of hiring someone to port it if anything.

Seems like it and that's a poor way to do business. If they couldn't do the port and keep the price parity they should have thought about passing on the Switch version. I would hope they would realize charging more would kill a lot of the excitement for the game and possibly doom it to fail and think the port wasn't worth the investment.

I guess in the end some will still buy it but I plan on passing on it on all platforms unless they walk back the price difference.

 

[atbigelow]

Was actually interested in this before the price was announced. Sorry, pubs.

 

[ika]

I'm very interested in this game but I'm pretty sure I won't buy it if they scam us like this. Technically inferior (this I understand and accept) but later and more expensive without any extras.

I get that the game cards (they're not cartridges, people) are a little more expensive to manufacture than discs but having the same price digitally when it's cheaper on PS4/XBO/Steam digital shops it's shitty. Also $10 it's too much for that difference.

Didn't allow it with Wii U releases (rayman, watch_dogs debacle, Mass Effect 3...) and surely won't do it on Switch, sorry.

Maybe I'll get it down the line on a sale promotion, or if the publisher comes back to their senses before launch.

Last but not least, I appreciate that the community manager of the publisher/developer comes here to try to explain this, but it's kinda annoying how he dodges the important questions that people are politely asking (the extra price for the digital version).

 

[Dariuas]

I agree and some people have been voicing their displaeasure on Twitter and in this thread where the Rime Community Manager is reading our comments. He said he would return and provide an explanation on why Australia is priced at $30 more and while it's not his fault, I don't expect anymore of an answer than we already got.

I am still looking into this, I am at PAX this weekend so I will look further into this and get back to you, it just may not be until Monday.