Someone convince me how this is a 70$ game.

[Haos Serpenoid]

This not a Final Fantasy 7 remake situation, and not even that game was 70$. We already know what the main set up of the story and the characters are from a PS Vita game. How is this remake of a PS Vita game worth more than Persona 5 Royal and Persona 4 Golden?

[Haos Serpenoid]

Originally posted by fender178:

Originally posted by Haos Serpenoid:

It's not even a poor situation. It's just generally not smart giving more money to a company not even putting forth that much more effort compared to their past products. At least other companies like Rockstar and Square Enix have been making their newer games huge enough to have A justification. Atlus just seems to be jumping on the bandwagon with the exact same style but smoother animations. They wanted us to give them money for one of the worse remasters in gaming for the same entry, and now they're asking standard price with 10 more dollars for a remake they actually bothered to put effort into without AI. I understand that they're trying to compete, but a game where most of it's content was already written by a great PS2 game? Not a good place to start.

No this remaster is NOT the one of the worst in gaming. I have seen way worse than this. Look at the GTA 3 trilogy that's a lot cheaper than this but its a huge pile of garbage. Rockstar cheeped out on the GTA 3 Trilogy remaster. Also Atlus DID NOT use AI if they did we would known about it because of Valve's new rules about using AI. I disagree with most of what you say because I think P3 was a great place to start because a lot of fans asked for it. Also you have no idea what you are talking about didn't put any effort into it? You are 100% clueless because they put quite a bit of effort into it.

The game we are talking about here is the remake. I'm referring to the actual remaster of the game that they used AI to smoothen, with very bad audio compression. Persona 3 Reload is the remake. Persona 3 Remaster is the bad remaster I'm referring to.
I say that the remake doesn't take as much effort because of the writing, story, and style that was already established compared to others.

[Collon_ex]

It might be pointless to talk to you as you already shown the bias toward the game.
If you think it not worth it, then it not for you simply as that.

This remake was created to capitalize on the popularity and momentum of P5 and new player that came in from it and never experience P3 before.

About the game aspect that worth the money imo (if you care to read)
- New combat mechanic
- New Adjustment to dungeon, Minor story phasing and social link adjustment.
- New music arrangement.
- QOL improvement feature.

You can choose to play the cheaper version either PS2, or PSP.
But it will not be the same experience, if that make sense.

[Haos Serpenoid]

Originally posted by Lil Scream:

It's a $70 game because they priced it at $70 and people paid the asking price. Amazing but true. Maybe the next one will be $80. How wild would that be. That's another TEN DOLLARS.

Yes, 60 + 10 = 70$
You'd be surprised by how big of a difference that small amount does in the long run. Either you're not good at managing funds, or you're not in a position to care. I would love to see your explanation for what this remake of an already great game does for this "very small" price jump above Persona 5 Royal.

[.]

I love how this thread constantly forgets that they're charging $70 for a game with Denuvo on it.

[Haos Serpenoid]

Originally posted by Collon_ex:

It might be pointless to talk to you as you already shown the bias toward the game.
If you think it not worth it, then it not for you simply as that.

This remake was created to capitalize on the popularity and momentum of P5 and new player that came in from it and never experience P3 before.

About the game aspect that worth the money imo (if you care to read)
- New combat mechanic
- New Adjustment to dungeon, Minor story phasing and social link adjustment.
- New music arrangement.
- QOL improvement feature.

You can choose to play the cheaper version either PS2, or PSP.
But it will not be the same experience, if that make sense.

You're right. This price jump is not for me, hence is why I'm talking about it and why I'm not giving them money. I'm talking about it to bring negativity to the price jump decision to get the devs and others attention from a consumer's feedback. I also brought this up because I actually was interested in what other people had to say about whether this remake of a game does enough to be different enough to almost be 100$

I would love to have a way to properly play the original game but they screwed up with the remaster that you can play on steam and scalpers make the ability to play the original game on it's original hardware even more expensive then this. And yes, pirating and emulating is an option but that's a very easy excuse to make for content in an important industry.

[Shrike]

Originally posted by Haos Serpenoid:

I would love to see your explanation for what this remake of an already great game does for this "very small" price jump above Persona 5 Royal.

I don't believe in some esoteric concept of price-justifying quantifiable "value." The worth of a product is whatever the market will bear. The thing is worth $70 if enough people pay the $70 to meet whatever predetermined units sold target the publisher is aiming for; which it apparently has. The willingness of a targeted share of the market to pay the asking price is the only materially real point of reference, everything else is aimless meandering and abstraction.

[fender178]

Originally posted by Haos Serpenoid:

Originally posted by fender178:

No this remaster is NOT the one of the worst in gaming. I have seen way worse than this. Look at the GTA 3 trilogy that's a lot cheaper than this but its a huge pile of garbage. Rockstar cheeped out on the GTA 3 Trilogy remaster. Also Atlus DID NOT use AI if they did we would known about it because of Valve's new rules about using AI. I disagree with most of what you say because I think P3 was a great place to start because a lot of fans asked for it. Also you have no idea what you are talking about didn't put any effort into it? You are 100% clueless because they put quite a bit of effort into it.

The game we are talking about here is the remake. I'm referring to the actual remaster of the game that they used AI to smoothen, with very bad audio compression. Persona 3 Reload is the remake. Persona 3 Remaster is the bad remaster I'm referring to.
I say that the remake doesn't take as much effort because of the writing, story, and style that was already established compared to others.

Then you should have added Persona 3 Portable as well to your title then because that so called remaster was of Persona 3 Portable. So that is 100% on you then. Not me.

[MikoMiko]

Originally posted by Haos Serpenoid:

Originally posted by Lil Scream:

It's a $70 game because they priced it at $70 and people paid the asking price. Amazing but true. Maybe the next one will be $80. How wild would that be. That's another TEN DOLLARS.

Yes, 60 + 10 = 70$
You'd be surprised by how big of a difference that small amount does in the long run. Either you're not good at managing funds, or you're not in a position to care. I would love to see your explanation for what this remake of an already great game does for this "very small" price jump above Persona 5 Royal.

If you are paying for $60 games when a $10 price jump matters that much, you are in no position to talk about "managing fund". As an entertainment product, it has no intrinsic value to consumers besides personal enjoyment. When enough people make the judgement that the potential enjoyment they can get out of it is worth the price tag, nothing else matters.

[Haos Serpenoid]

Originally posted by Lil Scream:

Originally posted by Haos Serpenoid:

I would love to see your explanation for what this remake of an already great game does for this "very small" price jump above Persona 5 Royal.

I don't believe in some esoteric concept of price-justifying quantifiable "value." The worth of a product is whatever the market will bear. The thing is worth $70 if enough people pay the $70 to meet whatever predetermined units sold target the publisher is aiming for; which it apparently has. The willingness of a targeted share of the market to pay the asking price is the only materially real point of reference, everything else is aimless meandering and abstraction.

I'm not talking about whether it's worth it enough for it to make it's money back and have a presence in the market. I'm talking about whether it needs to do this or not. And it doesn't. And as a consumer who cares about these products and industry, I want to make it apparent that we don't need to be paying this much for games simply because they are being released along side other games doing the same thing. As I stated before, they don't need to charge extra because they are going to make a good amount of money anyway from Persona's rise in popularity and gaming as a whole. If Persona 5 Royal can survive without 70$ then so can this game.

[Shrike]

Originally posted by Haos Serpenoid:

I'm not talking about whether it's worth it enough for it to make it's money back and have a presence in the market. I'm talking about whether it needs to do this or not. And it doesn't. And as a consumer who cares about these products and industry, I want to make it apparent that we don't need to be paying this much for games simply because they are being released along side other games doing the same thing. As I stated before, they don't need to charge extra because they are going to make a good amount of money anyway from Persona's rise in popularity and gaming as a whole. If Persona 5 Royal can survive without 70$ then so can this game.

There's that aimless meandering we talked about.

[MikoMiko]

Originally posted by Haos Serpenoid:

Originally posted by Lil Scream:

I don't believe in some esoteric concept of price-justifying quantifiable "value." The worth of a product is whatever the market will bear. The thing is worth $70 if enough people pay the $70 to meet whatever predetermined units sold target the publisher is aiming for; which it apparently has. The willingness of a targeted share of the market to pay the asking price is the only materially real point of reference, everything else is aimless meandering and abstraction.

I'm not talking about whether it's worth it enough for it to make it's money back and have a presence in the market. I'm talking about whether it needs to do this or not. And it doesn't. And as a consumer who cares about these products and industry, I want to make it apparent that we don't need to be paying this much for games simply because they are being released along side other games doing the same thing. As I stated before, they don't need to charge extra because they are going to make a good amount of money anyway from Persona's rise in popularity and gaming as a whole. If Persona 5 Royal can survive without 70$ then so can this game.

Who gave you the idea that capitalism is about survival? I sure hope the companies you invested in don't just "Survive".

[Haos Serpenoid]

Originally posted by fender178:

Originally posted by Haos Serpenoid:

The game we are talking about here is the remake. I'm referring to the actual remaster of the game that they used AI to smoothen, with very bad audio compression. Persona 3 Reload is the remake. Persona 3 Remaster is the bad remaster I'm referring to.
I say that the remake doesn't take as much effort because of the writing, story, and style that was already established compared to others.

Then you should have added Persona 3 Portable as well to your title then because that so called remaster was of Persona 3 Portable. So that is 100% on you then. Not me.

You got remake and remaster mixed up and it's "100%" on me? If you say so buddy. Persona 3 Portable is a remaster, hence is why I called it "The remaster" instead of "The remake" which is what Persona 3 Reloaded is. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[Haos Serpenoid]

Originally posted by MikoMiko:

Originally posted by Haos Serpenoid:

Yes, 60 + 10 = 70$
You'd be surprised by how big of a difference that small amount does in the long run. Either you're not good at managing funds, or you're not in a position to care. I would love to see your explanation for what this remake of an already great game does for this "very small" price jump above Persona 5 Royal.

If you are paying for $60 games when a $10 price jump matters that much, you are in no position to talk about "managing fund". As an entertainment product, it has no intrinsic value to consumers besides personal enjoyment. When enough people make the judgement that the potential enjoyment they can get out of it is worth the price tag, nothing else matters.

That's the problem, people are throwing money at the "titles" of what they like without thinking, which leads to companies making decisions that aren't consumer friendly, like charging us more money, or putting less effort into what they release. Like what happened with the Persona 3 remaster. Little hard for a lot of consumers to enjoy products when they're becoming less and less accessible from unneeded price hikes for games they may or may not enjoy. You would probably say the same thing if it was 100$ saying that 40$ doesn't matter as long as the smaller amounts of people who bought the game had a good time. Even if most of the content is already written by the past like this remake we're talking about now.

[Dank Sidious]

Originally posted by sungoddess14:

By the way, to cutoff all the posts about inflation, I decided to do math on what digital games were priced compared to what their price should be due to inflation and I made a list. The price that digital games were sold for is in parenthesis.

2005: $49.99($49.99)
2006: $51.60($49.99)
2007: $53.07($49.99)
2008: $55.11($49.99)
2009: $54.91($49.99)
2010: $55.81($49.99)
2011: $57.58($49.99)
2012: $58.77($59.99 for Nintendo, 49.99 For XBOX 360)
2013: $59.63($59.99)
2014: $60.60($59.99)
2015: $60.67($59.99)
2016: $61.43($59.99)
2017: $62.74($59.99)
2018: $64.31($59.99)
2019: $65.44($59.99)
2020: $66.25(First advent of and all next gen games will be $69.99, previous gen games will be $59.99 for a few years)
2021: $69.36($69.99 Current Gen, 59.99 last gen)
2022: $74.91($69.99 Current Gen, 59.99 last gen)
2023: $77.99($69.99 Current Gen, last year of 59.99 last gen)
2024: $78.52($69.99)

If it were really because of inflation, then prices would've steadily climbed instead of jumping above inflation when a new generation starts($1.22 above Inflation at the moment of last generation's start in 2012, and $3.74 above inflation for the start of the current generation in 2020)

Math is fun.

Just because the companies manually adjust the price doesn't mean that inflation isn't one of the reasons that prompts them to do so.

[.]

Originally posted by Lil Scream:

Originally posted by Haos Serpenoid:

I'm not talking about whether it's worth it enough for it to make it's money back and have a presence in the market. I'm talking about whether it needs to do this or not. And it doesn't. And as a consumer who cares about these products and industry, I want to make it apparent that we don't need to be paying this much for games simply because they are being released along side other games doing the same thing. As I stated before, they don't need to charge extra because they are going to make a good amount of money anyway from Persona's rise in popularity and gaming as a whole. If Persona 5 Royal can survive without 70$ then so can this game.

There's that aimless meandering we talked about.

Kind of like your needless condescension. You aren't the genius you think you are.

Originally posted by Dank Sidious:

Originally posted by sungoddess14:

By the way, to cutoff all the posts about inflation, I decided to do math on what digital games were priced compared to what their price should be due to inflation and I made a list. The price that digital games were sold for is in parenthesis.

2005: $49.99($49.99)
2006: $51.60($49.99)
2007: $53.07($49.99)
2008: $55.11($49.99)
2009: $54.91($49.99)
2010: $55.81($49.99)
2011: $57.58($49.99)
2012: $58.77($59.99 for Nintendo, 49.99 For XBOX 360)
2013: $59.63($59.99)
2014: $60.60($59.99)
2015: $60.67($59.99)
2016: $61.43($59.99)
2017: $62.74($59.99)
2018: $64.31($59.99)
2019: $65.44($59.99)
2020: $66.25(First advent of and all next gen games will be $69.99, previous gen games will be $59.99 for a few years)
2021: $69.36($69.99 Current Gen, 59.99 last gen)
2022: $74.91($69.99 Current Gen, 59.99 last gen)
2023: $77.99($69.99 Current Gen, last year of 59.99 last gen)
2024: $78.52($69.99)

If it were really because of inflation, then prices would've steadily climbed instead of jumping above inflation when a new generation starts($1.22 above Inflation at the moment of last generation's start in 2012, and $3.74 above inflation for the start of the current generation in 2020)

Math is fun.

Just because the companies manually adjust the price doesn't mean that inflation isn't one of the reasons that prompts them to do so.

Inflation isn't one of the reasons; it's one of the flimsy excuses.