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

[Shiken]

DonFerrari said:

Shiken said:

So you would rather pay 60 bucks for a 6-8 hour game like The Order 1886, Battlefront 2, or Quantum Break than for a 100 hour plus game like Octopath Traveler based soley on production cost?

 

Seems self limiting if you ask me.  And judging by the sales for Octo so far, it seems that the price based on content view I spoke of is exactly how it work...just sayin'.

And wouldn't you also be limiting yourself by not playing games with 8h because it would cost 60?

If duration equate value or price then GT5 should have retailed for 1000 usd

I played The Order 1886 and enjoyed it when it first came out.  I am just taking the perspective of the general masses at the time and using it to counter a point on the other end of the spectrum.

When a game like The Order comes out and people say, "visuals are great and the gunplay is great, but it can be beaten in 6 hours so it should cost 20-30 bucks" with many of them pulling a 180 years later with an game like Octopath and say, "The visuals are too primitive so it should only cost 40 bucks despite having around 100 hours of enjoyable gameplay (if you like JRPGs), solid gameplay mechanics, and interesting plotlines," it just does not make sense to me.  I was simply making a point, not expressing my own feeling towards shorter games.  I am with you, it would be limiting.  That is why I play both.

 

To me, one aspect can balance another.  Of a game is enjoyable and is a technical feat for its time, the 60 is fine.  If a game has low production cost but offers more content than many other games for the same price, 60 is also fine.  It is not one way or the other, they are interchangeable.