Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop/ adjusted for inflation in 2018, that is $78m, with the creativity it affords people, you can be assured Labo costs more than that.........For reference (I am not sure if you are a programmer) but Visual Studio (Microsoft's programming tool which is only useful to programmers) generally costs a lot more than Microsoft Office 2016, but I don't expect anybody who only uses Microsoft Word to understand why it should cost as high because any features it provides is of no use an utterly meaningless to them. Like I said before, the value a person attaches to anything is the utilitarian value it offers to them.

I am not aware we were talking of any other April asides from this past April. In terms of the discussion however it makes no difference whatsoever (provided you've not lost your train of thought of what l was responding to........i.e your saying that Labo being one of the highest sellers in April doesn't mean it sold well  because (according to you) April had a low quantity of noteworthy titles. You are still making an assumption here because you do not have the actual sales figures. Having a low quantity of noteworthy titles is no validation that Labo didn't sell well.

Yes, it is, vita is overpriced with the bait of vita's price when in fact, you need a memory card for it or ps2 game on ps4 is definitely cash grab. Double standard or not, i don't care about Wii U just like you don't care about ps2 games on ps4 so you are talking about yourself too. Heh

I don't care about Vita as well, but it seems like it's very important to you.

But i care because i play mostly HH, so to me vita price is a bait and can't do anything without a memory card. That is overpriced. Also, it is not like vita is a generation ahead 3ds or 10 time stronger, not even close. And Sony trick people that vita have power of ps3 is just BS lie. Yeah, that is horrible dirty PR of Sony

So the hypocrisy and bias of others (but coherence and neutrality of yours) is decided by how important something is to you, not about the facts or behaviors of the people you are talking to? Gotcha.

Guess Labo doesn't concern you, so it isn't a problem, still PSVR is.

PS2 games on ps4 and vita don't concern you, so it isn't a problem, but Switch and Labo are, especially when you don't care about Labo, understood

Nope, I acknowledge both problems, but that you bringing people supporting it from Gamasutra was completely non-sense for you to try and put Bias that you yourself pretend to not have. Should we pick your posts side stepping WiiU and other selectivity on this very thread instead of people that aren't even in this site?

Just because you haven't seen anyone yet, doesn't mean there is none. And you asked for example only, so i named gematsu and siliconera, acknowledge both problems but still ignored it, keep complaining about Wii U and Labo until i mentioned them, yeah, not any bias at all

Anyone here said there isn't bias in favor of Sony or that the issues with PSVita or price of PS2 games doesn't exist? Nope. The fact that people in gematsu or siliconera support those practices means squatch when we are talking about people not only in VGC but in this very thread, perhaps even you, defending the proposition of price for Labo.

You said we weren't complaining about PSVita, in a thread that isn't about Vita, and a problem that is know and exist for a platform that is about dead and 5 years old. All off-topic, mind you. You used that as a mean to try and disqualify people complaining about the overprice of Labo.

Should everyone when complaining about one specific subject complain about everything all the time? That is a very absurd proposition.

WiiU was only brought to show that you not complaining about it in this thread doesn't show any bias as you tried to infer on not complaining about PSVita in this thread. But then you decided to make a triple somersault and say that WiiU complains are irrelevant, but PSVita is relevant because you care about HH (and I even refrained from asking for you to prove you complained about battery life or price of Switch for example).

Still waiting to see you questioning duduspace1 on his premisse of marketing cost equaling development cost, or Labo costing same as pokemon because they both were released on a Nintendo platform, or price equaling cost or Labo costing the same to develop as GoW, or his promise to provide well thought estimatives for Labo costs.

1- Yes it's true. And one of the reasons why digital games cost the same as physical, so they don't take out even more market from retail, because without the profit from the SW they wouldn't keep selling the HW (one store chain in Germany even stopped selling X1 after they put the Gamepass out). They may make more profit from Labo, can you prove it? Because we have several sources for the average retail margin on the retail priced AAA games. Just wanted to point the sophism on the "It uses more space so it must have higher margin".

2 - I do agree, I would see Labo as accessory and they usually are very overpriced (controllers as I said usually cost less than 15 and sell for 60). Which justs address the OP and goes against people saying Labo isn't overpriced or a rip-off.

3 - Yes it's a very different game from regular games that cost 60, but not overall best in all areas to justify the extra 20 (since they are cutting a lot on the SW side and the cardboard by itself is peanuts cost to make as well)

Sure the profit for chain and also the expectation of lower sell (which I don't think is the case since from what we have heard Labo was expected to do good, and the people saying it isn't overpriced don't say it sold bad or below expectations... so they can't have it both ways right?)

Most console games have 60 price point, and budgets vary but average AAA would cost you over 30M and need over 1M sales to recoup. Smaller games (no indie) from what we know need something from 100-250k to 1M to break even (seems like several of Japanese niche releases are very profitable under 100k sales). That is one of the main reasons I don't like Nintendo policy on prices. They hold the 60 for like 4 years on most of their games, on average sell more than most games and budget lower.

No it doesn't. And what about it? Keep reserving your right to have double standard, it's pretty obvious to everyone.

I didn't pick all Sony employees or year costs to make the estimative. I picked the studio, which only released one game in a 5 year period (and you can bet their external support have been with minimal crew, even more when those games were Indie... or do you think Indie games use 50 people to make?). Also gave you GoW3 declared cost (which had a much shorter cycle) and average AAA development budget. But we all know you had no idea about the costs when you decided to declare Labo costed similar to GoW because it does some things other games don't. Next we are going to see you saying a 3-wheeler car cost as much as a F1 car because both do things other cars don't.

You pick up the team that developed Labo, with the duration of the project and do similar math and it would at least makes more sense than "Pokemon marketing costed 50M so Labo probably also costed 50M to develop).