1.You have a link for Pokemon marketing cost?

2.Labo price is more about marketing cost and it definitely no cheap

3.Cheaper and also have worse resolution/fps than other systems, right?

4.So you are agreeing a system like Vita is a bit overpriced. Well, you should go to Gematsu site to see how many Sony fans will say anything to defend vita's price and bash 3ds like it is the only system that overpriced

1.You have a link for Pokemon marketing cost?

2.Labo price is more about marketing cost and it definitely no cheap

3.Cheaper and also have worse resolution/fps than other systems, right?

4.So you are agreeing a system like Vita is a bit overpriced. Well, you should go to Gematsu site to see how many Sony fans will say anything to defend vita's price and bash 3ds like it is the only system that overpriced

1 - you haven't given any explanation to make your extrapolation reasonable.

2 - You were claiming it costs similar to GoW, still waiting for any evidence of it. I don't have to do your work for you. I doubt that besides you, anyone here really thinks Labo costs the same to make as GoW.

1 - He gave the link, to wikipedia. Not sure why you are asking me source for others claim.

2 - Labo price is about Nintendo decision. Still his claim that Labo cost the same as GoW to be made is wrong. And we have no source for marketing cost of GoW or Labo, and from what I collect Labo didn't have the same push as Pokemon, Mario or Zelda to guess they have same marketing cost, also, GoW isn't some unmarketed game.

3 - Resolution yes, fps I don't know the others, PSVR gets to 120fps but of course most games will only do 60fps because PS4 isn't strong enough. Your point? You may think it is expensive (I don't, but perception is fair here) at 249 it is seldomly sold at this time but it is hard to say it's overpriced when competitors are more expensive.

4 - Is here Gematsu? Am I defending PSVita? Are people in VGC defending it? Have a no for the 3? So what does that have to do with the topic?

Shouldn't you instead be talking to Duduspace about his claims that Labo cost as much as GoW and his claim made without any significant source or arguments? Or did you preffer to come after me because Duduspace is favoring Nintendo while I'm criticizing?

1 - He gave the link, to wikipedia. Not sure why you are asking me source for others claim.

2 - Labo price is about Nintendo decision. Still his claim that Labo cost the same as GoW to be made is wrong. And we have no source for marketing cost of GoW or Labo, and from what I collect Labo didn't have the same push as Pokemon, Mario or Zelda to guess they have same marketing cost, also, GoW isn't some unmarketed game.

3 - Resolution yes, fps I don't know the others, PSVR gets to 120fps but of course most games will only do 60fps because PS4 isn't strong enough. Your point? You may think it is expensive (I don't, but perception is fair here) at 249 it is seldomly sold at this time but it is hard to say it's overpriced when competitors are more expensive.

4 - Is here Gematsu? Am I defending PSVita? Are people in VGC defending it? Have a no for the 3? So what does that have to do with the topic?

Shouldn't you instead be talking to Duduspace about his claims that Labo cost as much as GoW and his claim made without any significant source or arguments? Or did you preffer to come after me because Duduspace is favoring Nintendo while I'm criticizing?

Look like he didn't claim that but he definitely did it in your parallel universe, so good to know you are bringing the information of a different place and timeline to share with everyone. Criticizing? Now you mention it, where is your criticism about Sony? Oh i know, they are perfect and flawless. Not a surprise with the price of ps2 classic games on ps4 or the crossplay, it clearly show how much they care for the children. Sony is absolute godsend, yeah

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.

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.

Do yourself a favor and read the thread.

Haven't I agreed with both your critics about PSVR and PSVita? Must hurt to have this level of forgetfullness.

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.

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.

1 - Standard Nintendo price for games was 40 for HH and 60 for console, where is 80 standard for Nintendo?

Thanks for clarifying this piece of knowledge, now I know that if Nintendo was releasing the cost to marketing (because it seems cost to develop is meaningless) we would have Pikmin costing more than CoD or Destiny right?

2 - So you want to tie the price of Labo or Toycon to Ariana Grande music? That must be some kind of new metric as MS uses.

3 - You simply decided to ignore average AAA gaming develop cost, GoW3 as basis to extrapolate considering GoW was above and beyond every single aspect of GoW3, be it duration, size of the game, resolution, polycount, VA, texture, time to develop you name it. If you can find the magic that allows you to make everything more and costing much less I would be glad to share that with all developers, who mind you, have been very clear about cost for making games increasing from gen 6 to 7 and 7 to 8.

I shall give you another help just so you get an idea of production cost for GoW itself from another angle.

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/59173/publishers-calculate-game-budgets/index.html gives rule of thumb of 10k per month per employee.

http://sms.playstation.com/studio/ gives SSM have over 200 employees and they were solely developing GoW.

Their last launched game was ascension in 2013.

So that give us about 60 months, with 200 people at 10k. Total = 60*200*10000 = 120.000.000 in wages only for production cost.

This doesn't include marketing, outsource, temporary staff, etc.

Will you preffer the low balling of 50M I gave initially for GoW or do you preffer this 120M?