To those who say Octopath is not worth 60 dollars...

[DonFerrari]

Alara317 said:

Mandalore76 said:

 

Wow, so in your opinion, all the work that went into the story, the battle system, the abundant hours of content, the voice acting, and soundtrack (all of which have been highly praised) were only done to "disguise the low investment in graphics".  Just... wow.  I would argue that Square put more care into some of those aspects than they do their "AAA" flagship Final Fantasy series.  I have often found the voice acting and dialogue in particular in Final Fantasy games to be so atrocious and off-putting as to make me not want to play the game regardless of how "pretty" the graphics look.  Some people appreciate the total sum of a game's parts.  I'd much rather the money I spend go to a total enjoyable package, rather than a game that took a lot of effort pushing graphics to disguise a low investment in the actual game itself.

You should probably quit wasting your time. It's clear at this point the dude thinks graphics and production values are more important than gameplay, story, longevity, or any other method of getting value. None of that matters to him if the game doesn't run at 60 FPS with photorealistic and physics intensive hair flow, it's not worth full price (Clearly a facetious exaggeration but the point stands.) That said, he has made it clear that a game's value should be directly tied to its budget, so a game with a 10 million dollar price tag should invariably cost less than a game with a 50 million dollar price tag; yet, in spite of that I guarantee he'd not be willing to pay 100 dollars for a game like Grand Theft auto V or Destiny in spite of their massive budgets. 

Fairweather consumer, I believe is one way of putting it. He wants every excuse to lower the price because he's cheap (he even said he rarely buys games at full price), but won't apply the logic he uses to go in the other direction. 

I, like most people, determine a game's value by its volume of content, price, hours of time it gets out of me, and quality of time spent with it. Octopath, so far, has excelled in all of those categories. I'm almost done Chapter 2 for all characters and I'm coming up on about 40 hours (I'm slow, sue me). yeah, that's worth it. Even if I stopped now - less than half way through the game and having probably seen less than a third of all the game's content - I still feel the full price I paid would have been worth it. 

So yeah, DonFerrari is CLEARLY a person who values graphics and production costs over fun factor or gameplay. Best to not keep indulging him. that's why I didn't respond to his last response to me; his worldview is so fundamentally flawed (or at least so distanced from my own) that I don't feel I can have a reasonable conversation with him about the subject. 

So yes, I DO feel that a game's profit should be linked to quality, not productuon cost. I DO think a game developed for 1 million should still make a tonne of profit if it's a good and appealing concept. Look at Minecraft; THAT game hit home for a lot of people despite it being a game that could almost be rendered on an N64. sure, the game was only 30 bucks (or 20 or 10, I don't know anymore' seen it everywhere from 5 to 50), but the game's core mechanic is the sort of thing you can get in a $1 mobile game.

Thank you for admitting you were exaggerating and distorting.

The game needs ALL to be worth 60 USD. so if I would use the points you listed it would be as in group theory.

Game that have only graphics, production value and big budget -> not worth 60 USD.

Games with only gameplay, story, longevity -> not worth 60 USD.

Games with both and other not listed -> May be worth 60 USD.

Having all this and I liking -> worth 60 USD.

Not that hard to understand when you aren't trying to defend a product price point instead of acting like a costumer look at control and enhance your own budget. Basically any game that doesn't have the full package can go to the wait list and be bought for 10, 20, 40 or what much worth I personally decide for it. Very few games end up entering my 60 bracket, about 2 per year or so.

So you can say that even my favorite franchise (Gran Turismo) is not worth 60 to you (may not even be worth 10 for you, and you'll listen your reasons, could even be just one -> doesn't like the genre) and I'll have no problem with it. As long as you don't try to put "objective value" or "others can't have a different opinion based on these reasons" I won't have any problem with it. At most I'll be sad that you are losing a great experience, but that is your choice.