| Yerm said: never mind the "they spent $700 on a phone but cant bother to spend $10 on a game argument" the fact that they are complaining about the price is just ridiculous and petty. it shows that they actually enjoyed the demo enough to want to play it more, but got upset that it costed money. a price does not dictate quality. just look as No Man's Sky for example. it was a terrible game and nowhere near worth the $60 price tag, but lowing the price to say $20 will not magically make it a better game. it will still be a terrible game, it will just not cost as much money, and either way you decided to put money down for a game you knew was terrible. in terms of Super Mario Run, you cant say that a $10 price tag makes the game worse. the game is getting great reviews and obviously it is perfect for a mobile game. dont be butthurt because you refuse to put down money for something you want |
Sorry but you are plenty wrong.
Price won't dictate quality, but perceived value is completely impacted by price. That is the main reason some games you are ok paying full price and for others you wait for bargain bin, you basically wait for the price match the value you evaluate that thing.
So NMS for 60 may be considered ridiculous, but at 10 would be considered quite good (because you would evaluate it against other 10 buck games instead of AAA)
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."
