By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
duduspace1 on 27 May 2018
Edit Thread
DonFerrari said:
duduspace1 said:

1. In your opinion I haven't, because you seriously don't get it that the cost that goes into a game getting into customer's hands goes beyond the cost of developing it. If you can't understand that simple logic after agreeing that the cost of developing GoW3 does not totally explain its pricing, I really can't help you because then you are basically just refusing to accept a reality that you yourself have pointed out.

2. Where and when did I make this claim ? For the records, before you twist this discussion completely out of shape, the thrust of my point is that you have shown no basis to claim that Labo is overpriced and as far as I am concerned, you still haven't. The rest of what you say about GOW, GoW3, are frankly speaking distractions and of little relevance at all.

1 - You haven't because you just put that they are comparable, you haven't said how, why and anything.

GoW3 pricing is standard AAA cost for the gen, so that in itself have 0 need to explain. I have told you that several times and you ignored. I also gave you some of the aspects that goes to the cost of making it.

You are mixing cost to develop with cost to ship in a try to change your point, but still have explained nothing of it.

2 - The type of minigames inside of Labo + cardboard is the type of game that goes on the cheap section of minigames, so 40 USD would be the usual price. 60 USD could be acceptable also since it's average gaming price. It doesn't have anything to justify 80 USD pricetag.

And you may say whatever you want, when I asked about the cost to make it (because you were trying to equate it to GoW) and you asked sources to give yours you haven't been able to provide anything except a marketing cost for Pokemon. And I know why, because you have no idea. Pokemon is more of the outlier in Nintendo expenditures (and that is because of marketing) because as I said estimatives is that it costed about 1M to develop, most Nintendo games are on the realm of the 10M. So you have to prove why Labo would be near 50M.

Just to help you more on believing that GoW budget on 50M estimative is conservative and about average of AAA see this as well https://kotaku.com/how-much-does-it-cost-to-make-a-big-video-game-1501413649

You won't see Nintendo games on the list for AAA costing 60M TO MAKE because the assets needed for Wii, WiiU and now Switch have been much lower than the competitors at the time because the HW itself doesn't get to the same level.

duduspace1 said:

2. I did not make such a claim as you state so please stop misrepresenting my position, you still have not said what the actual cost of making GoW is so you can't really claim that it cost more to develop than Labo. The cost of making a game or making something with physical components like Labo goes beyond just the cost of writing code or making pre-rendered or in-game animations.

The crux of the argument/discussion is that Labo is overpriced and you have not succeeded in proving that so stop the smokes and shadow distractions and claiming I said things I didn't say. It is all well and good if you want to believe GoW costs more to make than Labo (even if you have no data to prove it either way than extrapolating the costs of making GoW3 either reasonably or unreasonably), you however have not provided information about other costs that went into making and marketing the game. All you have given are development costs.

Note: Thanks for putting me in yur Sig, despite its obvious pettiness, it is quite flattering.

2 - I did plenty of times but you just ignore it.

You proposed yourself to give the cost of Labo, still waiting and you'll never do it because you have no idea how to make it.

What is obvious on the sig is that you have no idea of what cost to develop is.

1.  Why exactly do you think you can use standard AAA pricing and I can't use standard Nintendo pricing ? And just to correct a misconception you have, the reason why you don't see Nintendo games on that list has nothing to do with assets or the power of their console, it is more to do with the fact that Nintendo don't specifically release the cost of making each of their games to the public domain unlike individual development/publishing companies who deal with maybe only one particular game.

2. Kindly show me one of these your mini games that has similar features as the Toy-Con garage. Only a one track mind can possibly conclude that the Toy Con garage which led to the performance of Ariana Grande's music solely with the Switch and Labo is worth absolutely nothing beyond a mini game.

3. What is obvious on your Sig is that you are a very petty individual, but thanks for the publicity I didn't have to pay you for anyway. I am sure those who view your sig can read our posts and follow both our train of thoughts provided they are not as petty as yourself. I would be extremely glad if you still have it on by this time next year. 

I am still waiting for your confirmed actual cost of making GoW or at least a very reasonable estimation that is gotten from that particular game's development cycle itself and not a predecessor. All I have gotten so far from you are estimated extrapolations from GoW3. If you can provide it, then I assure you I would pick through Nintendo's financial report to get you a very decent idea of how much exactly it cost to make Labo.

Last edited by duduspace1 - on 27 May 2018