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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Horizon: Zero Dawn costs $60 - Is that a fair price?

Eric2048 on 09 February 2017
RolStoppable said:
Sprash said:

You remember that? (that was so long ago)

I must have left a big impact on you^^

Troublemakers always leave an impact on me. You also used to cowardly launch attacks on me while avoiding to quote me.

...

Moving on to the explanation for this thread which a lot of people are in need of, in many cases despite them being aware of the thread I made one day earlier about 1-2-Switch. Here's the first paragraph of that thread:

1-2-Switch is a minigame compilation that retails for $50. If you think that all games should be the same and therefore must be judged the same, that price will definitely stick out as expensive. But that isn't the proper way to evaluate the value of video games, right? If you are open to the idea of variety in video games, you will find the Switch itself to be an amazing piece of hardware. Now how about we apply the same thought process to 1-2-Switch?

Since I know how the VGC community thinks and which kinds of gamers post here, it was easy to predict the answers. A lot of people have an elitist view where anything that doesn't match their personal preferences is bad by default. This is addressed in the above quote that calls out the closeminded perspective of judging all games and even consoles in the same way. In the case of 1-2-Switch, people didn't even know the scope of its content, game modes and options, but none of that would have made a difference anyway, because playing video games with other people is something that most here don't do at all. The VGC community is a highly concentrated sample of people who are into singleplayer games and/or online multiplayer. If someone rushed into the 1-2-Switch thread to make a post along the lines of...

"Of course it's too expensive. How can that even be a question?"

...then that's not something that hurts me. All these people actually did exactly what I wanted and expected them to do.

Since the 1-2-Switch thread was more successful than anticipated, I launched this thread as a sequel. But for this instance I turned the tables and therefore used a game that would create opposite reactions. I've already said in this thread that The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild could have been used all the same, but Horizon: Zero Dawn was the better pick because it was guaranteed to have a bigger effect. The original post of this thread points out a few things that Horizon: Zero Dawn doesn't have, but in this instance people are quick to point out that not all games must be the same to defend something they like. Once again, people behaved the way they were expected to do.

So what's to learn from this?

Try to be more openminded for both games and consoles. Try to be more tolerant. Try to appreciate variety instead of condemning it.

Making such requests nicely simply doesn't work. People need to be trolled because that makes the message notably stronger. And if you got played like a fiddle with both of these threads, don't think of yourself as a victim. Your behavior is the one of an aggressor, barging into threads to bash things that don't fall in line with your personal preference, and trying to make everyone who likes other things feel miserable.

Of course I don't believe that people will stop, but I don't want them to stop anyway. As long as these people do their thing, I will be able to do mine with ease.

i understand that people have different preferences in games, i just don't think 1,2 switch is great game for the genre it's in. i've played party/minigames that i've enjoyed and i think are really fun. 1,2 switch just doesn't look fun at all, i wouldn't even call it a video game.



Around the Network
Kerotan on 09 February 2017
potato_hamster said:
Kerotan said:

Good.  It's well documented that active posters who become mods are less active as posters thereafter.  There's exceptions to the rule like CGI but I don't we can risk Rol losing interest.  

 

Keep that mod position dangled just above him out of reach and he'll keep coming back for more.  

#SaveRolFromModCurse

Don't worry. Donald Trump has a better chance at being mod than Rol will ever have.

He's the head mod of America.  I believe h could be mod of Vgchartz.  

 

#Trump4Mod



potato_hamster on 09 February 2017
RolStoppable said:
potato_hamster said:

No of course not. But still your point of view is one of arrogance, where you continue to think that your opinion is objectively right, and acting like you're manipulating people with your obvious troll post, and then blessing people with wisdom after they reacted to your nonsense as you predicted, all the while shaming them for having a differing opinion to your own.

No one thinks that all games should be the same. No one thinks that all games should have the same feature set. This is a straw man you created in your head. Your initial troll that Horizon isn't worth $60 because it doesn't features that other $60 games have is ridiculous. That game is worth $60 only to the people willing to pay $60 for it. If that game comes out and only sells 100K copies in its first week, then clearly the market feels that game wasn't worth $60. It doesn't mean that the people that were willing to spend $60 on it were wrong, and it doesn't mean that those who weren't willing to spend $60 on it because it didn't have multiplayer, or because the character wasn't customizable were wrong either.

Like anything, games are only worth what people are willing to pay for them, and people saying that they're not willing to pay $50 for 1-2 Switch or $60 for any other game doesn't mean they're not being open-minded or unreasonable by deciding that those games aren't worth the MSRP to them. It's not elitist for having an opinion on what they're willing to spend their money on and what value games have to them, but it is elitist to think they're wrong for not having the same opinion as yourself.

If anything, maybe the lesson to learn from this is that you need to do a better job respecting the opinions of other people.

Like I said, you aren't the victim. You are the aggressor.

In an earlier post you made the claim that 1-2-Switch won't sell well. Here you argue that sales determine if the price of a game is justified, but you've already made up your mind. That is not the attitude of an openminded person. If 1-2-Switch was a video games that we could easily compare to others, then it would be possible to make a definitive call on it. But considering that it's really nothing like anything that came before it, the sensible thing to do would be taking a wait-and-see approach. The same holds true for the Switch console itself.

Also, I am convinced that you wouldn't have had an issue with this thread if I had used Zelda.

Just so we're clear here, because I'm not willing to spend $50 on 1-2 Switch, I'm not being open minded about it. It's not because I watched the unveiling at the Switch reveal, it's not because I watched a bunch of preview videos, including all of the official mini game videos, it's not because I saw Greg Miller and Hideo Kojima play it at an event. It's not because I own and have played a "videoless video game" in the form of "Johann Sebastian Joust" and wasn't a fan of it. None of that is enough. I have to spend money on it in order to be able to determine whether or not the game is personally worth $50 to me. The game is worth $50 because you are willing to spend $50 on it to try it out. Anyone who disagrees or refuses to do so like you are obviously closed-minded.

Let's apply that logic to other media:
See a trailer for movie and decide you'd rather not see it in theatre, or buy it on Blu-ray? Closed minded.
Read the back of a book and decide you'd rather not buy it? Closed minded.
See a poster for a theatrical production and decide you'd rather not see it? Closed minded.

There you go. That means that literally everyone on the planet that doesn't have taste and isn't willing to consume any other type of media is closed minded based on your flawed opinion on open-mindedness.  But thanks for gracing us once again with your poorly though out wisdom.




areason on 09 February 2017

Lol, i think it should be worth more then 60 dollars.

I never understood why all games were priced the same.



monocle_layton on 09 February 2017
ClassicGamingWizzz said:
Bandorr said:

1-2-Switch costs $50 - Is that expensive?

1-2 should not even be called a game, its a app and a bad one, its like sony taking 50 dolars for that app for the camera with the robots, its there and people tried it one time tops same will be 1-2 switch . Its something 2 or 3 dudes made in a day to show the potential for other games. Taking 50 dolars for that is like insulting people, not even 5 dolars let alone 50 dolars that is almost what zelda costs.

 

The only games i buy at 60 are rpgs like the one in the OP , most of them its more than 100 hours, they are made by big teams and take years to make, trying to defend 1-2 switch comparing to games like zelda and horizon its just silly, where you milk cows and eat imaginary food. if people wants to do that they should make a eating contest or go to a farm or something grabing cow tits.

 

 

You didnt trolled anyone with this , there is like 2 or 3 that dont know you and think this is something you think. Well there is 1 or 2 that find this thread hilarious, shit what a hilarious thread this is !!!

woah there man- you can't feel ice cubes in Legend of Zelda. 1-2 Switch is the game of the generation! Respect the ice cubes and cow titties! 



Around the Network
potato_hamster on 09 February 2017
RolStoppable said:
potato_hamster said:

Just so we're clear here, because I'm not willing to spend $50 on 1-2 Switch, I'm not being open minded about it. It's not because I watched the unveiling at the Switch reveal, it's not because I watched a bunch of preview videos, including all of the official mini game videos, it's not because I saw Greg Miller and Hideo Kojima play it at an event. It's not because I own and have played a "videoless video game" in the form of "Johann Sebastian Joust" and wasn't a fan of it. None of that is enough. I have to spend money on it in order to be able to determine whether or not the game is personally worth $50 to me. The game is worth $50 because you are willing to spend $50 on it to try it out. Anyone who disagrees or refuses to do so like you are obviously closed-minded.

Let's apply that logic to other media:
See a trailer for movie and decide you'd rather not see it in theatre, or buy it on Blu-ray? Closed minded.
Read the back of a book and decide you'd rather not buy it? Closed minded.
See a poster for a theatrical production and decide you'd rather not see it? Closed minded.

There you go. That means that literally everyone on the planet that doesn't have taste and isn't willing to consume any other type of media is closed minded based on your flawed opinion on open-mindedness.  But thanks for gracing us once again with your poorly though out wisdom.

You completely missed the point. Here's what I was talking about: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8294538

potato_hamster said:

Back in reality, 1-2 Swich will launch, not sell well, and everyone here will be right in saying that 1-2 Switch isn't worth $50.

You have to wait for the market response in order to make the definitive claim that 1-2-Switch isn't worth $50, because it isn't a game like any other. You yourself even made the point that the market ultimately determines if a price was justified, but that's contradicted by the post I linked. Preorder numbers for 1-2-Switch look solid, at least in Japan which is about the only place where we have a reliable enough source.

The next thing is that you don't have to buy a game or console to determine if the price is okay for yourself; I've never said otherwise. What my point is and always was, is that you (general you) don't determine what games and consoles are worth to other people. I've also never made a statement about whether or not I will buy 1-2-Switch.

I didn't contradict myself. In my opinion, that game isn't worth $50. It doesn't matter if it sells 100 million copies at $50 each, that game will never be worth $50 to me. But you could say that it would be worth $50 to the Switch user base if that turned out to be the case, but that still won't ever compel me to spend $50 on it.

You're right, I don't determine what games and consoles are worth to other people. But, the same applies to you! Your entire thread is about shitting on people because you don't like that other people have determined that the switch console and/or 1-2 Switch aren't worth the price TO THEM. People are expressing their personal opinions about their thoughts and feelings, and you acting as if they're pretending to represent the entire video game market. They're not.

P.S. Pretty hilarious if you're chastizing everyone for not thinking 1-2 Switch is worth $50 if you're not willing to spend $50 on it yourself. But you're right, that was an assumption I made considering how you're going to bat for it.



potato_hamster on 09 February 2017
RolStoppable said:
potato_hamster said:

I didn't contradict myself. In my opinion, that game isn't worth $50. It doesn't matter if it sells 100 million copies at $50 each, that game will never be worth $50 to me. But you could say that it would be worth $50 to the Switch user base if that turned out to be the case, but that still won't ever compel me to spend $50 on it.

You're right, I don't determine what games and consoles are worth to other people. But, the same applies to you! Your entire thread is about shitting on people because you don't like that other people have determined that the switch console and/or 1-2 Switch aren't worth the price TO THEM. People are expressing their personal opinions about their thoughts and feelings, and you acting as if they're pretending to represent the entire video game market. They're not.

P.S. Pretty hilarious if you're chastizing everyone for not thinking 1-2 Switch is worth $50 if you're not willing to spend $50 on it yourself. But you're right, that was an assumption I made considering how you're going to bat for it.

That's a bold claim, and not just because I bolded it.

Most people have actually a hard time to separate their emotions from sales analyses. If you ask them about their reasoning for sales predictions, it often comes down to how they personally feel about games and consoles. That's why someone like barneystinson69 predicts that Switch will sell less than Wii U. Sales analyses also include the evaluation of value for individual games. I don't condemn people only for what happened in my two threads, what I call out is behavior that can be seen all across VGC sales discussions.

You shouldn't find it hilarious that I grant a game that I won't buy the benefit of the doubt. Am I supposed to declare any game that I won't buy to be overpriced? Because that would be the logical conclusion, if you are making fun of me because I am not going to buy 1-2-Switch.

"We need to give 1-2 Switch a chance guys! Until you play it, you can't possibly know if it's worth $50, so you shouldn't claim it's not worth it. Until you do, that game is totally worth $50, just not 50 of my dollars!"

Tell me almighty, how you possibly came to the conclusion that you're not willing to buy 1-2 Switch without playing it first? How come you haven't given it the benefit of the doubt?

Yes, any game that you're not willing to spend the asking price on is by definition overpriced to you. I was unwilling to purchase Rise of the Tomb Raider for $60 when it came out for PS4 considering it was a year-old game. So I waited for the price to come down to $30, and picked it up then. Therefore it was overpriced to me at $60, but not overpriced at $30. Was Rise of the Tomb Raider for PS4 overpriced at $60 in general? Considering sales of the game picked up heavily between black friday and christmas day while the game was selling for $30, it's a safe bet to say that yes, it probably was.

That's a wrap folks. Nothing further to see here.



potato_hamster on 09 February 2017
RolStoppable said:
potato_hamster said:

"We need to give 1-2 Switch a chance guys! Until you play it, you can't possibly know if it's worth $50, so you shouldn't claim it's not worth it. Until you do, that game is totally worth $50, just not 50 of my dollars!"

Tell me almighty, how you possibly came to the conclusion that you're not willing to buy 1-2 Switch without playing it first? How come you haven't given it the benefit of the doubt?

Yes, any game that you're not willing to spend the asking price on is by definition overpriced to you. I was unwilling to purchase Rise of the Tomb Raider for $60 when it came out for PS4 considering it was a year-old game. So I waited for the price to come down to $30, and picked it up then. Therefore it was overpriced to me at $60, but not overpriced at $30. Was Rise of the Tomb Raider for PS4 overpriced at $60 in general? Considering sales of the game picked up heavily between black friday and christmas day while the game was selling for $30, it's a safe bet to say that yes, it probably was.

That's a wrap folks. Nothing further to see here.

You never had an honest interest to argue the actual points that were made, did you?

Except for the points I addressed directly, you're right! But that's not an objective fact as much as it's your opinion based on your feelings, and that's the point I'm making.

You were projecting. You obviously have a hard time separating your emotions from sales analysis yourself, so you assume everyone thinks in the same way you do, except they're wrong and you're right, because reasons. You always put a lot of emotion behind what you present as objective facts. If I'm not mistaken you think the Switch will sell at least 50 million units, (and, might I add, think it's ridiculous that anyone would think it would sell less than that, regardless of their analysis), but that has nothing do you with your feelings about the Switch, right? Whereas barneystinson's prediction that it'll sell less than the Wii U is obviously based on nothing but emotions, because that's just crazy talk (according to you) Do you not see the cognitive dissonance there?  You said that Nintendo's board of director's won't choose to stop selling hardware mostly because you believe they're "special", and obviously there's more money to be made controlling their own platform than going third party, but Sega, it totally wasn't obvious that there's more money to be made on their platform, because Sega's IPs are terrible compared to Nintendos!. Need I go on? You inject your feeling towards Nintendo into your anaylsis of their actions (and the actions of others) in almost every single post you make about them, but when you do it, somehow it's acceptable. Funny how that works.

But hey, why take a good look in the mirror and admit that you're guilty of the very thing you blast others for when you can just continue in your hypocrisy?



Volterra_90 on 09 February 2017

That was an hilarious reading XD. It seems that nowadays everything that isn't open world and lasts a gazillion hours isn't worth full price. I've always found that a weak reasoning.



potato_hamster on 09 February 2017
RolStoppable said:
potato_hamster said:

Except for the points I addressed directly, you're right! But that's not an objective fact as much as it's your opinion based on your feelings, and that's the point I'm making.

You were projecting. You obviously have a hard time separating your emotions from sales analysis yourself, so you assume everyone thinks in the same way you do, except they're wrong and you're right, because reasons. You always put a lot of emotion behind what you present as objective facts. If I'm not mistaken you think the Switch will sell at least 50 million units, (and, might I add, think it's ridiculous that anyone would think it would sell less than that, regardless of their analysis), but that has nothing do you with your feelings about the Switch, right? Whereas barneystinson's prediction that it'll sell less than the Wii U is obviously based on nothing but emotions, because that's just crazy talk (according to you) Do you not see the cognitive dissonance there?  You said that Nintendo's board of director's won't choose to stop selling hardware mostly because you believe they're "special", and obviously there's more money to be made controlling their own platform than going third party, but Sega, it totally wasn't obvious that there's more money to be made on their platform, because Sega's IPs are terrible compared to Nintendos!. Need I go on? You inject your feeling towards Nintendo into your anaylsis of their actions (and the actions of others) in almost every single post you make about them, but when you do it, somehow it's acceptable. Funny how that works.

But hey, why take a good look in the mirror and admit that you're guilty of the very thing you blast others for when you can just continue in your hypocrisy?

Should I bring a mod into this?

I don't know why you feel like you need to ask my permission. Besides, the fact that you're threatening me with moderation likely means you believe there's more truth to what I said than you're willing to admit.

It's just too bad you're not a mod, isn't it?