The 4 day "Early" access

[TheDoctor123]

WARNING: OPINIONS BELOW

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ I am so sick and tired of games releasing "early" for those who pay and extra 1/3 of the price and trying to prey on your FOMO.

RELEASE THE GAME WHEN IT"S READY AT THE SAME TIME FOR ALL PLAYERS FOR A REASONABLE PRICE!!!!

Super scummy and frustrating, for all those thinking of purchasing the pre-order, DO NOT purchase the gold or ultra editions. Let's make a statement against this malpractice.

(8/14/24) EDIT 1:
I am adding in this for 2 reasons.

1. I am seeing people mention that most people are not buying the gold+ editions for the 4 day early unlock and consider it a bonus. While I agree that this is true, this does not account for everybody. IMO, I believe that a different bonus should have been offered instead. If they wanted to stress test servers, they could have done so with a beta. I think to properly run a stress test, they need to have all players involved, not just the minority who are willing to spend high dollar on some higher edition.

2. I am seeing some people echoing the argument "It does not affect you". I think that this argument is fair, but it overlooks some of the main criticisms that I would like for people to consider when deciding to purchase. For those who want to avoid spoilers for the campaign from news articles, Reddit, or the main steam page (like myself) it becomes extremely difficult. Additionally, this is a title that features not only a single player experience, but a multiplayer one as well. People getting early access with have more time to find out META strategies for COOP and PVP before the massive wave of "4 day late peasant unlock" players come. Possibly (and most likely) harming the experience of others who are not joining in on the action right away.

Aside from these 2 main points, I just overall do not like the trend of game companies finding more and more ways to squeeze money from consumers. I do not like the trend of "paying for convince" that these new practices encourage. I believe that this is something that almost all AAA release games will be doing after the wild success of other titles doing this. It is something that is here to stay, but in my opinion it just leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

(8/30/24) Edit Final:

I did not think I would be editing this post again, however I think many people are reading this post and then misconstruing what I am trying to make a point with here, so I want to make 1 final edit here to put this to bed.

The price is not something I am frustrated with. I think my original wording was bad when I made this post initially (I would edit it, but I do not want to change the post so people can see it in it's entirety) and I am willing to admit that it was a poor choice of words and I should have been more constructive. I am willing and able to pay the 30+ dollars for the upgrade, but I still will not simply because the early access is part of the edition. Money was not something that ever mattered to me here, I was making a general statement about the games industry as a whole.

Finally discussing what I think matters here, which is early access as a general thing. Sure, 4 days isn't a big deal, but I think that the business practice as a whole is just a bad idea. IN MY OPINION, I do not like the precedent this sets, as it has been proven successful for worse. it leads me to ask questions for the future of games like: "what kinds of things will the games industry do next to abuse sketchy marketing strategies?".

All of this is strictly my opinion. I did not intend or want this post to blow up like it has, I simply wanted to state my opinion to a few people and have a cordial discussion about it, but this is not what this post has become. I only wanted to leave this post in the best way I could so that others can try and have valuable discussion here. I will not be editing this post again or contributing to further discussions here due to the toxicity this post has been festering. If you wish to get a hold of me and have a chill chat about it, feel free to reach out.

[CupCupBaconBox]

I'm happy as long as it's a good slinkman game

[tfa]

Originally posted by VengefulDevil:

Originally posted by TheDoctor123:

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ I am so sick and tired of games releasing "early" for those who pay and extra 1/3 of the price and trying to prey on your FOMO.

RELEASE THE GAME WHEN IT"S READY AT THE SAME TIME FOR ALL PLAYERS FOR A REASONABLE PRICE!!!!

Super scummy and frustrating, for all those thinking of purchasing the pre-order, DO NOT purchase the gold or ultra editions. Let's make a statement against this malpractice

Jeebs, the poors are getting loud again.

You mean the principled are getting loud again.

[KaijuSoul]

dude cant even pick a point of his own argument.

[Tyr_One_Operator]

Originally posted by sd:

Who says Zelda was properly priced in 1986?

I guess the market because nobody batted an eyelash when purchasing one of the most popular games of the year.

And it wasn't priced higher than any other game. That was just the price of games.

Originally posted by sd:

Nintendo games were overpriced and on expensive cartridges. How about a Doom comparison. The original was $40 in 1993. On pc there's no licensing fee so id software got about 55% on a sale. So they got about $22 net per sale on Doom. $22 in 1993 adjusted for inflation to 2020 when Doom Eternal released is $39. With Doom Eternal they get 70% on a pc sale which is $42 net. Doom 1993 took 6 years to reach 3 million sales while Doom Eternal sold 3 million copies at launch.

This is called anecdotal. You can't take an isolated instance and compare it to the world. Especially an extremely small indie developer. The Legend of Zelda *WAS* the average game.

However, let's look at it (and I'll assume your assertions are fact):

Doom (1993): $40
Doom (2024): $84

I'm not going to account for weird sales and licensing adjustments as it is just too unique to be useful.

Originally posted by sd:

Software in general is cheaper now than it used to be. Windows 95 was $185 while Windows 11 is $100. Video editors are much cheaper now too.

Software like that is cheaper now because of software ecosystems and economies of scale.

However, production of software - especially entertainment software is much higher.

While it's hard to get a real cost of the development of Doom (1993), based on the size of the company (12 employees) - it's safe to assume that the cost of development was 250-500k (adjusted to today's dollars is ~435k-1M). I saw a tweet from John Romero that said it cost $500k, so maybe that's the number.

I was unable to find any rock-solid sources for Doom Eternal, but estimates range from $150M-250M.

Sales are higher now, but so are costs.

The proper cost of a video game is the same cost of any good that is not required - whatever the market will pay.

[cucamonster]

It really doesn’t make sense to spend extra for “early access” to a game that’s already finished. This is a terrible practice towards consumers, and the more expensive editions don’t have enough relevant content to justify the additional cost.

[Warbreaker]

Originally posted by cucamonster:

It really doesn’t make sense to spend extra for “early access” to a game that’s already finished. This is a terrible practice towards consumers, and the more expensive editions don’t have enough relevant content to justify the additional cost.

it doesn't you are right, nobody is buying early access, what people are buying is paid extra cosmetics and a season pass (more extra cosmetics), then as a reward you get early access, the early access is just bait, but in no way people are buying early access.

[OldGrumpyGuy]

don't like it, then don't buy it.

the world revolves around money and people with more can get ahead

[tfa]

Originally posted by Tyr_One_Operator:

Originally posted by sd:

Who says Zelda was properly priced in 1986?

I guess the market because nobody batted an eyelash when purchasing one of the most popular games of the year.

And it wasn't priced higher than any other game. That was just the price of games.

Originally posted by sd:

Nintendo games were overpriced and on expensive cartridges. How about a Doom comparison. The original was $40 in 1993. On pc there's no licensing fee so id software got about 55% on a sale. So they got about $22 net per sale on Doom. $22 in 1993 adjusted for inflation to 2020 when Doom Eternal released is $39. With Doom Eternal they get 70% on a pc sale which is $42 net. Doom 1993 took 6 years to reach 3 million sales while Doom Eternal sold 3 million copies at launch.

This is called anecdotal. You can't take an isolated instance and compare it to the world. Especially an extremely small indie developer. The Legend of Zelda *WAS* the average game.

However, let's look at it (and I'll assume your assertions are fact):

Doom (1993): $40
Doom (2024): $84

I'm not going to account for weird sales and licensing adjustments as it is just too unique to be useful.

Originally posted by sd:

Software in general is cheaper now than it used to be. Windows 95 was $185 while Windows 11 is $100. Video editors are much cheaper now too.

Software like that is cheaper now because of software ecosystems and economies of scale.

However, production of software - especially entertainment software is much higher.

While it's hard to get a real cost of the development of Doom (1993), based on the size of the company (12 employees) - it's safe to assume that the cost of development was 250-500k (adjusted to today's dollars is ~435k-1M). I saw a tweet from John Romero that said it cost $500k, so maybe that's the number.

I was unable to find any rock-solid sources for Doom Eternal, but estimates range from $150M-250M.

Sales are higher now, but so are costs.

The proper cost of a video game is the same cost of any good that is not required - whatever the market will pay.

What poeple are willing to pay and the proper price aren't the same thing. And that's a Nintendo game. This a a pc forum. PC games were around $30 in the 80's

It's not anecdotal. It's par for the course. I could have used God of War, Elder Scrolls, Witcher, Resident Evil etc as an example

Yes 55% was the average take for retail pc games. And yes 70% is the standard for Steam although any game that sells enough goes into the 80% category. So Doom Eternal actually gets 80% per sale.

Doom Eternal had $450 million revenue in the first 9 months so it was much more profitable than Doom even when factoring in budgets.

Development costs are up but sales volume more than makes up for it. Compare any long time publisher's recent profits vs the 80's and 90's and you'll see their profit is much higher than back then.

You spoke as if games were just like any other good when you first brought up inflation. Are you saying necessities aren't priced as high as people are willing to pay? Are you not aware of the ludicrous prices for groceries, rent and housing?

[VengefulDevil]

Originally posted by sd:

Originally posted by VengefulDevil:

Jeebs, the poors are getting loud again.

You mean the principled are getting loud again.

mmmmm no, no I don't.

[Warbreaker]

Originally posted by sd:

You spoke as if games were just like any other good when you first brought up inflation. Are you saying necessities aren't priced as high as people are willing to pay? Are you not aware of the ludicrous prices for groceries, rent and housing?

Groceries, rent and housing, come up man, I'm trying to escape, don't give me PTSD

[tfa]

Originally posted by VengefulDevil:

Originally posted by sd:

You mean the principled are getting loud again.

mmmmm no, no I don't.

I doubt anyone is complaining on the grounds of not being able to afford it. They're complaining about anti-consumer tactics.

[Tyr_One_Operator]

Originally posted by sd:

What poeple are willing to pay and the proper price aren't the same thing.

Please alert every economist in the history of mankind as you have stumbled onto a new concept that undoes the very core tenants of basic economics.

Originally posted by sd:

And that's a Nintendo game. This a a pc forum. PC games were around $30 in the 80's

I was an avid PC gamer and recall going to Babbages and MicroCenter all the time - and games ranged from $39.99 to $49.99.

Originally posted by sd:

It's not anecdotal. It's par for the course. I could have used God of War, Elder Scrolls, Witcher, Resident Evil etc as an example

It's absolutely anecdotal because there are countless examples where this was not the case.

Originally posted by sd:

Doom Eternal had $450 million revenue in the first 9 months so it was much more profitable than Doom even when factoring in budgets.

Good for Doom Eternal. Now, let's talk about how most games don't have the success of Doom Eternal but cost just as much to create.

Originally posted by sd:

You spoke as if games were just like any other good when you first brought up inflation. Are you saying necessities aren't priced as high as people are willing to pay? Are you not aware of the ludicrous prices for groceries, rent and housing?

I specifically called out 'goods that are not required'.

Last I checked, groceries, rent and housing are required. This makes them price inelastic. And just because the prices are high (and boy are they) does not make them ludicrous nor necessarily improper. Prices are a result of many things from inflation to government regulation to overzealous gouging.

This is a conversation better reserved for a classroom and not the scope of this discussion.

[Tyr_One_Operator]

Originally posted by sd:

I doubt anyone is complaining on the grounds of not being able to afford it. They're complaining about anti-consumer tactics.

Who defines 'anti-consumer' here? You? Me?

It seems quite arbitrarily applied by most people to things they don't like rather than actual practices that benefit the company at the expense of the consumer.

Please show me on the doll where the bad company hurt you with a 4 day early access.

[Tyr_One_Operator]

Originally posted by cucamonster:

It really doesn’t make sense to spend extra for “early access” to a game that’s already finished. This is a terrible practice towards consumers, and the more expensive editions don’t have enough relevant content to justify the additional cost.

According to .... You.

Whereas I, and many others, disagree and felt that the offering was worth the money we spent and are quite happy with our purchase.

[tfa]

Originally posted by Tyr_One_Operator:

Originally posted by sd:

What poeple are willing to pay and the proper price aren't the same thing.

Please alert every economist in the history of mankind as you have stumbled onto a new concept that undoes the very core tenants of basic economics.

Originally posted by sd:

And that's a Nintendo game. This a a pc forum. PC games were around $30 in the 80's

I was an avid PC gamer and recall going to Babbages and MicroCenter all the time - and games ranged from $39.99 to $49.99.

Originally posted by sd:

It's not anecdotal. It's par for the course. I could have used God of War, Elder Scrolls, Witcher, Resident Evil etc as an example

It's absolutely anecdotal because there are countless examples where this was not the case.

Originally posted by sd:

Doom Eternal had $450 million revenue in the first 9 months so it was much more profitable than Doom even when factoring in budgets.

Good for Doom Eternal. Now, let's talk about how most games don't have the success of Doom Eternal but cost just as much to create.

Originally posted by sd:

You spoke as if games were just like any other good when you first brought up inflation. Are you saying necessities aren't priced as high as people are willing to pay? Are you not aware of the ludicrous prices for groceries, rent and housing?

I specifically called out 'goods that are not required'.

Last I checked, groceries, rent and housing are required. This makes them price inelastic. And just because the prices are high (and boy are they) does not make them ludicrous nor necessarily improper. Prices are a result of many things from inflation to government regulation to overzealous gouging.

This is a conversation better reserved for a classroom and not the scope of this discussion.

So you're saying nothing is overpriced? No corporations are gouging us? Apartment pricing has increased by 25% in the last 5 years. You think that's proper?

Ok I will concede on pc game pricing. Looks like $50 was a common price in the 80's.

Give me a few examples.

Doom Eternal didnt even make the top 20 best selling games list the year it came out.

You said non-necessities are priced at what the market is willing to pay. Got any proof that's not the case for necessities as well?

Gouging isn't improper?