By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
padib said:
DonFerrari said:

You are already paying for the service when you buy the console and then when you buy the game. You may be fine with paying for online, but I`ll hold it is greedy.

I also completely understand Sony justification for rasing the price for PS5 with inflation and increased development cost, plus customers accepting it, but it is still greedy.

How can you say Nintendo needs to charge for online to keep the costs of the server when we just had someone saying he paid over 200 USD to have Smash plus all DLCs. That is obscenelly high (with DLC costing pennies to make compared with their price), and won`t even enter the area of keeping the full price for a whole gen.

Because I understand the cost of software development, I own a software business. I pay for what I understand is the cost of the work.

The Smash game with its DLCs has an equivalently obscene amount of content with 89 playable characters and nameless assist trophies, stages, items, pokemon, each with the work required to make them work. So I am glad to pay the money for what I get. But when the online service is trash and games are always staggering, that's when I get upset.

Do you understand me now?

Edit: I spent 200CAD, in USD it's 160USD

You paid 3 times for the game to have content that isn`t really 3 games worthy of it. Or do you think from the base game to the additional chars and extras it costed them twice over the base cost?



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."