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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - To those who say Octopath is not worth 60 dollars...

Naum on 21 July 2018

I'm starting to see a pattern here from the people not saying it's worth 60$.....



If it isn't turnbased it isn't worth playing   (mostly)

And shepherds we shall be,

For Thee, my Lord, for Thee. Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, That our feet may swiftly carry out Thy command. So we shall flow a river forth to Thee And teeming with souls shall it ever be. In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritūs Sancti. -----The Boondock Saints

Around the Network
Mnementh on 21 July 2018
Wyrdness said:

No development cost don't matter they mean bugger all to what we enjoy in a game they can make them for free for all we care if they content is good then it's worth the price we pay. The Order cost a tonne of money to make it has nowhere near the same value as many cheaper to develop games, the fact that someone is trying to push development costs as a factor of value is downright shocking as those costs mean nothing in determining enjoyment of any game.

This is to the point and exactly what needs to be said to this matter.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]

Mnementh on 21 July 2018
DonFerrari said:
Wyrdness said:

According to whom exactly?

It offers well into the 50+ hour mark of content and the gameplay, story, music and so on are universally noted as good to high quality, compared to its competition it holds up very well. The whole handheld blah blah excuse is worn out and flawed news flash for anyone using that old chestnut handhelds are consoles on the go now this isn't the GB days.

No development cost don't matter they mean bugger all to what we enjoy in a game they can make them for free for all we care if they content is good then it's worth the price we pay. The Order cost a tonne of money to make it has nowhere near the same value as many cheaper to develop games, the fact that someone is trying to push development costs as a factor of value is downright shocking as those costs mean nothing in determining enjoyment of any game.

So let's say when you buy a house you don't care if they used the most garbage material or top notch, the price should be the same and companies should suck as much profit as possible from you and you wouldn't care as long as you like the house itself?

You make the wrong comparison. If I find a better house for cheaper that fulfills the same criteria (rooms, area and so on), I'll take that obviously. But as prices of houses in different areas differ it happens people buy more expensive houses with cheaper materials in areas they want to live in instead of taking the cheaper house with better materials in an area they don't want to live in.

Same with games. Name me the game which offers me the same as Octopath traveler but is better? You'll probably not find it. If I want a well-done turn-based RPG game with awesome art-style, then God of War just doesn't help.

There was the comparison with Shining Resonance in the thread. Both games had demos. And while I liked  the Shining Resonance demo and might purchase this game later on (maybe on lower price), the Octopath traveler demo blew me away. I can't say Shining Resonance has Waifus and is therefore the better game. Because Octopath traveler offers so much enjoyment, Shining Resonance is just no comparison. With all on the table it is obvious that Octopath has way more value than Shining. At least for me. And seemingly it is a big success worldwide, so this is true of many others. Octopath is just way more unique, that alone adds a lot to value.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]

HintHRO on 21 July 2018

And who is saying this exactly? Never saw a comment like that here or on any other forum.



Mnementh on 21 July 2018
DonFerrari said:
Wyrdness said:

Strawman argument because your argument here hinges on the quality of materials used to build a house when in fact the actual scenario is you buy a house that was built with materials that weren't from top expensive brands but are still of good quality resulting in a house that still stands up to other houses. In that scenario the cost to build it doesn't matter because the quality still matches any other product out there.

Nope, Octopath wasn't made using good quality material in the same venue as AAA games are. It was made using cheap alternatives.

And just to make something very clear to you, 100h of content that aren't as good as 30h of another doesn't make it same value. And that is the root of those people point.

Also if amount of content and duration would be a good reason to charge 60 USD them you should be charged 60 USD to buy the classics (like FFs from PS1) on your current system, but no company do that because those games aren't up to the same standard of games that are charged 60 USD nowadays.

For me it seems more like you are trying to validate your own expenditure and an attempt to deflect any critics that you were overcharged and should feel bad about your purchase.

They don't charge that much for the classics, because they are old, and the many already played it. If you lower the price people are willing to pay AGAIN, but not full-price.

Besides that, a company can spend a lot and I mean a LOT of money in producing a game, and it still turns out shit. It has low value, despite being costly to produce, as you would say using premium materials. On the other hand, something  with low-tech materials made in manual work can be way more valuable to people than something high-tech made with the best materials. Because it is unique and they like it the way it is. Octopath traveler is pretty unique. I don't get anything else which offers a similar experience. There might be the possibility I don't like the experience - that is OK, in that case I wouldn't buy it. But as it happens I like this experience, I can get it off no other game and content and art-style are pleasing.

So yes, it obviously has way more value to me than say Ryse. Ryse (seven years? oh my) had probably a higher budget than Octopath. Ryse had a meta of 60, Octopath of 84. Do you really want to push the point Ryse had more value than Octopath has, only because the devs burned more money? I don't play games based on the money the game maker invested, but in the result. Given, with higher budget the devs are often able to produce a better game. But as these examples show it is no iron rule.

The dev cost argument reminds me somehow of people, that drive a Ferrari not because they enjoy it, but to show off how rich they are. Gaming is no status thing for me, it is entertainment. So I look for the entertainment value, not the production value.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]

Around the Network
areason on 21 July 2018
Wyrdness said:
areason said:

It doesn't offer worthwhile content that's worthy of the 60 dollar price tag. 

It's a handheld game, on a console. Divinity Original Sin 2 retails for 45 dollars, all of the games which are similar to it do not retail for 60 dollars. 

Compared to the market, compared to its competition it does not hold up to it's price tag. 

And the idea that development costs do not matter is insane, you're basically asking to get ripped off. 

According to whom exactly?

It offers well into the 50+ hour mark of content and the gameplay, story, music and so on are universally noted as good to high quality, compared to its competition it holds up very well. The whole handheld blah blah excuse is worn out and flawed news flash for anyone using that old chestnut handhelds are consoles on the go now this isn't the GB days.

No development cost don't matter they mean bugger all to what we enjoy in a game they can make them for free for all we care if they content is good then it's worth the price we pay. The Order cost a tonne of money to make it has nowhere near the same value as many cheaper to develop games, the fact that someone is trying to push development costs as a factor of value is downright shocking as those costs mean nothing in determining enjoyment of any game.

Did you bother to read the rest of my post?

It doesn't matter how many hours it offers, its competition and the rest of the market that it's in do not retail for 60 dollars. 

Divinity Original Sin 2 costs 45.  



Shaunodon on 21 July 2018
areason said:
Wyrdness said:

According to whom exactly?

It offers well into the 50+ hour mark of content and the gameplay, story, music and so on are universally noted as good to high quality, compared to its competition it holds up very well. The whole handheld blah blah excuse is worn out and flawed news flash for anyone using that old chestnut handhelds are consoles on the go now this isn't the GB days.

No development cost don't matter they mean bugger all to what we enjoy in a game they can make them for free for all we care if they content is good then it's worth the price we pay. The Order cost a tonne of money to make it has nowhere near the same value as many cheaper to develop games, the fact that someone is trying to push development costs as a factor of value is downright shocking as those costs mean nothing in determining enjoyment of any game.

Did you bother to read the rest of my post?

It doesn't matter how many hours it offers, its competition and the rest of the market that it's in do not retail for 60 dollars. 

Divinity Original Sin 2 costs 45.  

Divinity Original Sin 2 on console ($60)

Pillars of Eternity 2 on console ($60)

Neither of them will have close to the demand or sales of Octopath Traveler as they're both niche PC-centric titles, so it'd make sense for them to be cheaper or drop in price faster.



areason on 21 July 2018
Shaunodon said:
areason said:

Did you bother to read the rest of my post?

It doesn't matter how many hours it offers, its competition and the rest of the market that it's in do not retail for 60 dollars. 

Divinity Original Sin 2 costs 45.  

Divinity Original Sin 2 on console ($60)

Pillars of Eternity 2 on console ($60)

Neither of them will have close to the demand or sales of Octopath Traveler as they're both niche PC-centric titles, so it'd make sense for them to be cheaper or drop in price faster.

They both cost less on steam. 

Niche? DOS2 had close to 2 million sales on steam last year. They aren't niche games. 

They are not niche, and they are priced that way because that is what the market expects. I disagree with the console ports costing more, but imo that is a result of console gamers bending to publishers. Which is what people are doing in this thread. 



Oneeee-Chan!!! on 21 July 2018
areason said:

Why does this game bother you so much ?



Shaunodon on 21 July 2018
areason said:
Shaunodon said:

Divinity Original Sin 2 on console ($60)

Pillars of Eternity 2 on console ($60)

Neither of them will have close to the demand or sales of Octopath Traveler as they're both niche PC-centric titles, so it'd make sense for them to be cheaper or drop in price faster.

They both cost less on steam. 

Niche? DOS2 had close to 2 million sales on steam last year. They aren't niche games. 

They are not niche, and they are priced that way because that is what the market expects. I disagree with the console ports costing more, but imo that is a result of console gamers bending to publishers. Which is what people are doing in this thread. 

Comparing console prices to PC, your argument has already fallen apart.
When I stated "niche PC-centric titles" that was obviously referring to the console ports/sales.