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
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Look, I don't tell you how to spend your money, you don't tell me how I spend my money With 4.5k games you seem to have spent even more than I did, but that's of no concern to me and not my argument.
However, no matter how much money I have access to or how I spend it, it still does not change the fact that I can critique the asking price of a product. Which I did. Through examples I showed that similar remakes were priced lower, sometimes much lower. One of the remakes was even remade in the same style as the DQ III remake.
Just as the other remakes, it is advertised as changing little to nothing in terms of story and/or combat. That alone cuts down on development time and effort. No new monsters to design, no new story to create, no new music to compose, no new game systems to create. Add to that, that they are using an established engine and changes to that engine that they are familiar with through at least three previous titles (Octopath I + II and Live a Live remake) and you have even more costs you can cut. You don't have to create a new style, you already know how to work in it.
SE is only asking 60€ because it is DQ and because they believe that there are enough people who'll blindly pay that price at release without thinking.
The only winners, if it isn't slowed, are the shareholders and the companies (and their CEO / leaders), but not the consumers.
To be honest, I find it ironic that just because it is a well loved title, that many are willing to abandon all reason.
Anyway, it would be nice if you could find a counter argument, ideally with proof on why it should cost 60 €/$ or whatever it costs in other local currencies, instead of using veiled ad hominems.
Because your hypothesis seems to be that 60€ for a remake is an okay price.
Besides, I don't tell people to buy or not buy the game.
I just put the argument out there (which is shared by some people), that this price is too high for this type of product. I've also shown examples as evidence of that, and limited that evidence to SE published/produced games. This was in the way to show the null-hypothesis to the point of 60€ being a good price for a NES game remake.
I suppose this train of thought is only valid if people agree to shell out the 60 bucks or they're losers for waiting for a sale (your words). The funny thing is, I would've been inclined to agree with you if it wasn't for this double-standard.
The price point is too high for an RPG that's going to last 9-12 hours. And I 100% guarantee this will have some DRM/Denuvo snuck in day of launch.
Even the most casual google search of HowLongToBeat for Dragon Quest 3 suggests a time about 3 times more than that ridiculous estimate.
Probably more for us first timers, let alone any possible new additions.
That's not an estimate. This isn't a new game, you know that, right?
Anyway, even if you plod through and take your time, you're looking at 20 hours. You know besides the graphical facelift that the game features three things you can do right?
1) walk around and talk to NPCs.
2) walk around and engage in random battles.
3) walk around and pick up equipment.
You can play it on your mobile phone right now, give it a go if you haven't yet. DQ3 is short, and $60 for the facelift is price gouging.
Of course I glossed over that. I've played the original numerous times growing up, and played the SNES version with an English patch so trying to tell me the game length is besides the point. You glossed over everything else after globbing onto the first sentence so pot/kettle/black.
Because that's what I'm quoting and talking about.
You know that's the whole point when talking about game length, right?
If you've already played this then why do you even care in the first place?
There's going to be a looooot of new blood here who are happy to jump into what is - for all intents and purpose from our perspective - a new JRPG that we've heard some good things about.
I'm not interested in Mr Private profile No. #458 on a random forum boasting about how fast he can get his runtime down to after multiple runs.
You're not asking any of that in sincerity, are you? Seriously. And you're making an enemy out of someone over a game preference. Might want to do some inner searching over that.
Imagine playing this when you're 10 years old on an NES. Then you age, live life, grow up, and see this beautiful re-release.
Then find out it's riddled with DEI, priced through the roof for what it is, and is essentially nothing more than a glorified facelift? Us old timers are getting sick of seeing the games industry constantly treat it's customers like that, and you'll reach that point too, grasshopper. I feel bad that new players are thinking this is going to be something epic, because you're being fooled by the pretty graphics.
I mean, you saw the demo, right?
You enter a random battle, hear the first 15 seconds of this beautiful orchestral arrangement get cut off because the fight ended so fast, then you start walking around again and the music doesn't even start where it left off: it loops.
So you're telling me for $60 it's acceptable to do something like that? Games on the SNES FROM THE SAME COMPANY had music that remembered where it left off in between random battles. They want $60 they better pull all the bells and whistles!
Funfacts: the RPG you bought in the 90's actually costed much more (plus inflation taken into account) and a copy of Famicom/NES DQ3 online is expensive.
The mobile phone version is trash tho.
This remake enhanced the entire game and puts that one to shame.
So you've basically not paid this port, right? Just say that you'd rather pirate the game.
That's not a fun fact, because I got it for $18, used, 1990. That's $30 in today's money.
DQ3 is not one of the best JRPGs ever made, where did that ludicrous thought come from? DQ has been ignored in the west for decades until only very recently. When I was a kid, nobody knew what I was talking about when I would start gushing about my free copy of Dragon Warrior with Nintendo Power.
Can't really say I've felt the same level of rage about a plethora of other remasters and facelifts I've picked up over recent years when it has come to things I had played back in the day; Baldur's/Placescape remasters, Persona 3, Live a Live, Paper Mario TTYD+Mario RPG, RoTT, Luigi's Mansion 2 most recently; keen for that Dead Rising deluxe thing in a month or so also.
I'm probably forgetting a bunch more off the top of my head.
I think FFtactics and FF9 remasters might be at the top of my 2025 wantlist at the moment.
I dunno, some of us see the value in these re-releases and recognize the effort that has been put into them.
More importantly I suppose some of us have the disposable income where we don't see this as anywhere near as big of a deal as other are making it out to be.