• ampersandrew@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Video games are often afraid to be only a couple of hours these days, often to their detriment, but if you multiplied a movie’s runtime by 2-3x for some extra production value in your game, you end up at that $35 price point easily for a game that’s 5-10 hours long. Even for a direct comparison to Atom RPG, I’d rather pay 2-3x as much for a Wasteland game to get what I’m looking for, and Wasteland games aren’t exactly short. Neither is V Rising.

    • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Video games are afraid to be only a couple hours because they are afraid of charging less than $10

      If your game is short, doesn’t offer replayability, and doesn’t have any novel gameplay to truly set it apart, then youtube Lets Plays offer real competition of getting basically the whole package.

      but if you multiplied a movie’s runtime by 2-3x for some extra production value in your game, you end up at that $35 price point easily for a game that’s 5-10 hours long

      That’s making a couple assumptions though, that price point is for large studio releases and non-matinee prices. If I go see a movie on a Tuesday afternoon, it’s only $7, a perfect price for an average small game.

      Even for a direct comparison to Atom RPG, I’d rather pay 2-3x as much for a Wasteland game to get what I’m looking for

      Atom RPG isn’t exactly a Wasteland game, it leans pretty heavy on classic Fallout, which while inspired by Wasteland, have diverged noticeably in the end product. So if you wanted to get what you’re looking for in this case, Fallout 1 and 2 are $10 each, or you can get a bundle of 1/2 and Brotherhood of Steel for $20 (more like brotherhood of steal amirite).

      • ampersandrew@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Video games are afraid to be only a couple hours because they are afraid of charging less than $10

        I would love to live in a world where we get FPS campaigns that are about 8 hours long, are fulfilling, and cost $60. That used to be the norm, and we were happy with that. A Let’s Play is not a substitute.

        So if you wanted to get what you’re looking for in this case, Fallout 1 and 2 are $10 each, or you can get a bundle of 1/2 and Brotherhood of Steel for $20 (more like brotherhood of steal amirite).

        That assumes I don’t care about things like better resolutions and frame rates, voice acting, modern considerations for how people actually interact with games, etc. I’ve also played Fallout 1 already.

        • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          That used to be the norm, and we were happy with that

          Then you should be supportive of deflation in the video game industry, instead of making excuses for why we should pay more for less

          • ampersandrew@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Again, “more” is often to the detriment to the value of the game, because adding hours is easy. I’m saying that, on a AAA level, games were worth more to me when they were shorter. We’re currently paying less for more. But at below AAA levels, I’m often served extremely well for $35.

            • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              I’m not talking about about adding hours, I’m talking about adding quality.

              But at below AAA levels, I’m often served extremely well for $35.

              yes, good games exist at that price point, but the average game is not good, and is not worth that.

              You mention things like better resolutions, better frame rates, better voice acting, more modern, more better, etc, but none of those things are what makes games good or worth more money. AAA games with cutting edge graphics and star-studded voice acting are not automatically good games, and in fact it frequently has an inverse effect where focusing so much time and money on stuff other than the game leaves a shitty game that will be forgotten about in months; that would absolutely not be worth $30, despite having all your superfluous qualities

              • ampersandrew@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                No, they don’t automatically make a game better, but if I’m choosing between two games that are similar in themes or mechanics, I’m leaning toward the one with voice acting and better presentation. That’s worth extra money to me. It’s far easier to retain story elements when they’re acted out. Production value is still value. Not only did I get a killer RPG for $60 in Baldur’s Gate 3, but I also got some killer performances to help sell it. That extra production value is worth extra money. I could play the previous two Baldur’s Gates for pennies on the dollar, and I did, but I would certainly say I got more value out of the game that costs more. In V Rising’s case, I know of no other action RPG/loot games that have been combined with survival games in this way, playing with independent movement and aiming instead of mouse pointers, so that’s worth the money to see. I think we’re done here, but your sense of value is just very strange.