The game do miss a lot of content that Sean Murray both showed and talked about though,
I didn't contest this.
and the game is below average with the triple-A price in my opinion.
Fixed that for you.
Sure you could say that some people had too high expectations but the same could be said about every single game out there.
Well, no. A lot of games had very low expectations and then were great. But No Man's Sky had some of the highest expectations of any game ever. Didn't actually change what it was.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Gamelord. Pixelmon Server Owner. Server IP: pixelmonprisma.mc-server.net | Server Discord:https://discord.gg/HkK855b
Thanks for the fix but I still think they should have gone with a lower price.
I'm a strong advocate of the idea that developers should put their games up for however much they please and consumers should decide for themselves if they will buy it. If enough buy it, it can't be 'too expensive'. It's all a matter of what each individual is willing to pay. Obviously enough people thought it was worth $60. If people buy on launch day and don't like it, that's their own fault. I do agree in a sense though, for the general consumer it isn't worth $60. I don't think that necessarily means it should have been cheaper.
And I'm not mad or something. Just find it an interesting discussion, that's all. Not agreeing is of course not similar to being mad.
I didn't actually mean to say you were mad. It was just the word I chose. Swap it out for dissatisfied if you'd like, it doesn't change the meaning of the post.
The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Join Date:
3/10/2014
Posts:
694
Member Details
I kinda wonder now... will Subnautica suffer the same fate when it finally hits Version 1.0? And we're forced to have a cutefish (tentacle monster) as a pet???
I didn't contest this.
Fixed that for you.
Well, no. A lot of games had very low expectations and then were great. But No Man's Sky had some of the highest expectations of any game ever. Didn't actually change what it was.
I'm a strong advocate of the idea that developers should put their games up for however much they please and consumers should decide for themselves if they will buy it. If enough buy it, it can't be 'too expensive'. It's all a matter of what each individual is willing to pay. Obviously enough people thought it was worth $60. If people buy on launch day and don't like it, that's their own fault. I do agree in a sense though, for the general consumer it isn't worth $60. I don't think that necessarily means it should have been cheaper.
I didn't actually mean to say you were mad. It was just the word I chose. Swap it out for dissatisfied if you'd like, it doesn't change the meaning of the post.
Steam, amazon, and psn are now giving full refunds regardless of time played due to mass consumer disappointment, and such things.
So go see about a refund if you're wanting one.
Obviously I'm not going to use this, but that's really awesome of them.
I watched some videos and now I'm mad. Sean's a lyre.
All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost
The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost
From the ashes a fire shall be woken, A light from the shadows shall spring
Renewed shall be the blade that was broken, The crownless again shall be king
I mean taking into consideration all 3 companies normal refund policies, it definitely is awesome they are able to make such exceptions
I kinda wonder now... will Subnautica suffer the same fate when it finally hits Version 1.0? And we're forced to have a cutefish (tentacle monster) as a pet???
Lonnehart's Youtube Channel
Y'know? I bought Minecraft because I thought it was a war game where you had to create tactically placed proximity explosive devices...