Support NeoGAF

[StreetsofBeige]

1q

That doesn't make it a good value. I was comparing value between two similar games. People would be willing to spend $120 on God of War Ragnarok. They'd sell less but still make a profit. We shouldn't champion the free market as the deciding factor of what a game should cost. Gamers are willing to spend stupid money on bad deals all the time. Just cause the market supports fortnight skins costing $20 doesn't make those worth $20. These are mass produced products and last I checked AAA profits are at an all time high.

The hard thing about free market pricing is determining what is good value because everyone's definition is different and typically is biased to their own interests

Ferrari might sell 1,000 cars at $1 million each. Toyota might sell 1 million Corollas at $20,000.

To me, neither is worth paying the money. I'd rather pay $50,000 for a mid level car. But some people will think the car class I like is crap.

 

[Shits_McGiggles]

All of the people complaining about paying $70 for a 10 hour game makes me realize that game studios are completely justified in trying to focus on live service games. A lot of gamers would prefer to be dead inside playing some monotonous bullshit that is designed to keep them addicted rather than playing a short but awesome experience.

 

[Jim Ryan other Clone]

So price it accordingly then. 40$ or bust.

Then people like you cry why there is no Innovation in gaming why is everything copy pasted etc. 2 hours at the bowling hall costs 70 with drinks, a restaurant will ask you also for food, drinks and dessert over 70 and you will go 4 hours later to shit it out. A game that costs 70€ that will entertain you for a weekend is not worth it enough for you?

 

[Ywap]

How is it even possible to stretch a 12-14 hour game out to triple length like that? I play games slow af too but that's a ....stretch.

It might be a stretch, we'll see

 

[OmegaSupreme]

All of the people complaining about paying $70 for a 10 hour game makes me realize that game studios are completely justified in trying to focus on live service games. A lot of gamers would prefer to be dead inside playing some monotonous bullshit that is designed to keep them addicted rather than playing a short but awesome experience.

Word.

 

[EverydayBeast]

Length isn’t an issue, I appreciate 15 hour games.

 

[Werewolf Jones]

I'm buying this shit full price day one. I played through Dead Space the first one like 5 times. I'll probably do the same with this if it's fire. So that's easily 50 hours at least.

 

[gamer82]

thast ok if ia gmaes to long i dont have the time to play it off and end up not finsihsing it.

 

[Lucifers Beard]

Not sure I'll get it on release date but I'll pick it up for sure, providing it isn't a dud. 12-15 hour games are way more likely to get a second/third playthrough from me.

 

[Umbasaborne]

A girthy length indeed

 

[DeepEnigma]

It's interesting to see people actually craving shorter games with less padding. The burnout on long, grind games is real.

Valhalla did that to people, lol.

 

[Stuart360]

12-14 hours is fine for this kind of game, as long as it really is 12-14 hours. Didnt Scorn devs say Scorn was a 6-8 hour game when in reality most people beat it in 4-5 hours.

 

[touchfuzzy]

This game is almost $100 in Canada, that’s gotta be like a original RE4 level quality 12-14 hours to be worth it. Might check out on sale.

 

[Nickolaidas]

Probably closer to 18 hours for me as I check every single corner of games.

Yup. And half the time I'm walking, not running.

 

[Nickolaidas]

12-14 hours is fine for this kind of game, as long as it really is 12-14 hours. Didnt Scorn devs say Scorn was a 6-8 hour game when in reality most people beat it in 4-5 hours.

Never gave any thought to hours-to-beat info for SH games. RE7 can be beaten in less than 4 hours, but I take like 30 hours to beat it. I walk, take my time, go slowly when in unknown territory because I'm wary, etc.