RolStoppable said:
I have to preface my response to you with a few things. I play games for their content, not their graphics. The industry has decided to not go above $60 in the USA (€60-70 in Europe) for their games, so that's the generally accepted price for a premium game. In Europe PS2/Xbox/GC games used to release at €60, so prices for games have barely changed since then. I don't think I'd pay more than €60-70, unless there were a universal increase in game prices; Breath of the Wild at €65 (eShop price is actually €70, seems to be the sole exception on Switch) has been the only game I paid more than €60 for since the currency was introduced in 2002. PS and Xbox games are more regularly seen at €70. There's nothing in general that speaks against JRPGs costing $60. If they provide both gameplay quality and length to be $60, then it's fine if they cost that much. Of course that makes the genre a case by case thing like everything else. For example, other Square-Enix JRPGs like I Am Setsuna and Lost Sphear are overpriced despite sporting lower price tags than Octopath Traveler which is a 60 hours game with better gameplay systems and writing. Lower prices are always a benefit for customers, so the real question of importance is if customers get what they pay for. That's why it isn't a problem that Octopath Traveler costs $60, because the general expectation for a good full-priced JRPG is a length of 30-40 hours, a mark that Octopath Traveler comfortably exceeds. It's important to remember that this isn't an ugly game; the point of contention regarding production values is that a game shouldn't only look good in order to cost $60, rather it should look great. |
On a customer level for the ones that paid 60 and were satisfied with the price the 60 is justified, and for those that thought because the graphics aren't standard level or above so it isn't worth 60 for them both are valid (but likely if they wouldn't pay even 10 bucks for the game is more likely bashing the game for sport).

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."







