Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
I really don't think it would be any higher than that. This aint Blizzard.
Keep in mind that financially Blizzard's not in as precarious a situation as Snail Games is either though.
45$ EA and every DLC map would have 20$ DLC expansion pack which would be a creature/engram.
Where is the value?
Imo its more realistic 15-20 range simply because they would want to get more people to buy it.
If they go 25-35 there are not alot of people who would put out with this especially when that would be every dlc map.
Obviously the profit per unit sold would be higher, but I don't see them doing something this tone-deaf business wise, that would piss the remaining community even more.
Even if it works in the short term works.
TLDR:
We were supposed not to be charged for the DLC maps, but they are doing exactly that and if they are going to charge the same amount as ASE DLC map for just creatures and engrams is just dystopian.
Do you honestly think, given the very small number of people that are ever dwindling that still play are going to be able to be enough numbers of folks paying 10 bucks per person per pack to help give them enough of a revenue stream to keep them sustainable though until the next pack is released?
Remember they still have outstanding loans and the sales from Ascended werent very good. Also remember that Snail Games has stated in their quarterly reports that Ark accounts for 80-90% of their revenue but that they have 20+ projects they've supported over the years including a now failed EV car company that went under in October.
So in the context of such things, I'd have to say it doesnt seem likely an under 10 price is fiscally feasible for them.
This was likely the more true intent of the misdirection with the initial marketing last spring.
I mean true but still a scam. Them being a horrible company that's dying from their own mistakes isn't our issue. We're not responsible for their failures. A product not worth the price is a product not worth the price.
Wont matter to me if they fix all the technical issues (not like they could with ASE) Oasissaur is a blatant Pay To Win scheme, and i honestly do not want to contribute to that mentality. I have avoided all games that go this route, i won't make an exception for ASA.
I honestly hope others follow suit.
14.99, because:
This makes sense and so true. I can totally expect that with each previously paid for DLC that they will do a new p2w drop at slightly lower than the cost of the original DLC.
Depends on how the sales of it go too I guess, else they will just go full 19.99.
https://steamcommunity.com/app/346110/discussions/0/613957600545398663/#c613957600545407965
Thank you for that Hermit. I'd rememembered him saying it but had not been able to find it(granted I didnt comb posts has hard as I could the last time I tried to look. Saved it now though and recommend others do so too.
Im going to edit my initial post to include it and quote the whole of it as well for reference.
Thanks again on that Hermit!
Correct. Also for the modders, they only receive 50% of the revenue. Pretty low when you consider the effort and if their own designs are not derivative.