So what price do you think NMS (No Man's Sky) will be at launch and how much are you willing to pay for it?

[Christopher]

The game will be a full retail ASAP release.

60 bucks a pop for you guys that need a fix

[StrickenBiged]

39.99 Physical

 

29.99 Digital

 

29.99 Physical

19.99 Digital

 

When was the last time either of you saw a game where the digital release was cheaper than the physical one, at launch? In my experience, the digital copy is usually £5 - £10 more expensive than going in store, and £15 - £20 more than buying a physical copy online. 

 

I think this game is going to be a full priced release. I don't understand the argument that just because a game is "indie" it should sell for less than a "AAA" release. If the production value is there, then it's there. 

 

The term "indie" is becoming less and less meaningful these days, as many traditionally "indie" devs are obtaining finance or support from publishers and platform holders on terms which allow them to retain creative control and IP rights. Additionally, many are turning to crowd-funding and investors in order to raise much higher budgets than they used to have access to as indy developers, allowing them to make much larger games.

 

But if you want to keep the traditional definition of "self-funded, no external publisher" = "indie", then you should remember that Witcher 3 was an indie under those definitions (albeit the dev, CD Projekt RED obtains capital from CD Projekt, the owner of GOG.com). Anyone feel that the $60/£55 price tag (at launch) wasn't justified there?

Edited February 1, 2016 by StrickenBiged

[IronMask75]

I'd hazard a guess to say that, for all the coverage, help and support that Sony are giving this game, that it would be reflected in the price, so I'm going to say it will be about the same as a AAA title. Sony need to recoup some of the outlay and they may rely on the hype train to squeeze a few extra dollars out of this release.

 

Having said that, I just hope there's a killer Collector's Edition for the game that adds some goodies like art books and posters. A scale model of the ship would be awesome. Perhaps a Limited Edition console like that mockup image that was floating about on imgur. I would buy the shit out of that!

 

 

[damon8r351]

$29.99 reflecting the fact that it's sort of a big deal but that it's an indie title developed by a small studio that will probably have only a digital release. I don't think it it will be as expensive as The Witness, and it shouldn't, because $39.99 is too expensive for that game to sell at. I don't care how good The Witness is, $39.99 is too expensive for a digital only game developed by a small indie studio. And $60 is right out.

[Attorned]

I think it will be between $40-60 at launch.

 

I'm willing to pay just $20, so i will wait at least a year (or a sale) before i can buy it.

[Waffle-Sensei]

Probably $20-25 honestly. I mean, it's still an indie game. Maybe not a particularly small one, but indie games don't typically go for that much despite the quality.

Or at least they shouldn't... *shifts eyes over to The Witness*

[NotAFoxAnymore]

Probably $20-25 honestly. I mean, it's still an indie game. Maybe not a particularly small one, but indie games don't typically go for that much despite the quality.

Or at least they shouldn't... *shifts eyes over to The Witness*

But the scale of the game is equal to that of a AAA game. It's kinda ridiculous to say they shouldn't go for the amount that they're worth just because it's an indie game. There's no way it'll be $20

[StrickenBiged]

Why does something being "indy" mean that it must be priced at less than half a AAA release? 

 

If the only games that are worth the RRP of £55/$60 are the samey, mass-market appealing, designed by committee, "AAA" titles that we're used to seeing get churned out by the big publishers on an annual basis, then you can kiss goodbye to the possibility of ever seeing games that combine the production values of something "AAA" like CoD or Assassins Creed with the innovation of something like Braid or Volume.

 

If indies felt that their market will only tolerate a maximum RRP of, say, $20/£15, then they'll never reach for the graphics and scope of "AAA" games and we'll be stuck with the kind of indie games that (usually, the same) people look at and think "fuck me not another 8-bit indy - pass".  

 

Some successful indies go on to invest their success in bigger and better things as they continue to grow and build off their successes. Those bigger and better things may cost more to produce and, so, may require a higher launch price to recoup their investment. This should surprise no-one.

 

At the end of the day, this discussion is kinda pointless. Always pay what you feel a game is worth. If you're unsure whether you are £55/$60 committed to NMS (if that's what its RRP turns out to be) then do not buy it until you have more information such as reviews or let's plays available. 

[damon8r351]

People are misunderstanding this game completely. It may have 15 quintillion planets in it, but this game is not "AAA in scale". A big team of developers haven't been sitting coding objects into place by hand like a Far Cry game or GTA for your personal amusement later on. You're not going to find later on that the particular group of rocks you've been driving past for the last 8 hours are going to be the site of an endgame story mission later on and are arranged that way specifically to help you get through it by stealth. The game environment is procedurally generated by a code a half dozen guys in a proverbial garage (that got flooded) made up, and have had to trick-fuck and jury rig it in places to make it playable for you. Which means, conceivably, somewhere in the galaxy, you'll find the desert planet with octagon-shaped flowers with red spots, and then right next door in the next orbit you'll find the exact same flowers, except with black spots. You're going to drop down on a planet and think "Wait, I just saw something exactly like this about 15 minutes ago." Not because it was always ever intended like that, but because that's the limitations of procedurally generated games like this. This game is less Space-Assassin's Creed in production values, and more like a game like Rebel Galaxy. Which was made by two guys and a handful of people they paid as subcontractors to help finish their game.

 

Which makes me believe that later on I'm going to hear people crying about this game later on because it won't be as polished as they're leading themselves to believe a game "AAA in scope" should be, and not an indie game, while pretty ambitious, is still a procedurally generated game put together by a half dozen guys in a garage.

Edited February 9, 2016 by damon8r351

[StrickenBiged]

Many "AAA" games use procedural generation. First that springs to mind is Diablo 3, but any game which is designed to have near infinite replayability (according to the player's tastes, of course) probably uses PG to generate its maps, enemy encounters, etc. 

 

Left 4 Dead is another great example, albeit the PG there was used for the enemy encounters rather than the levels. (Edit: In fact, that's a great example. Think of how quickly Valve pushed out L4D2 after L4D; suggesting that asset and level design are relatively quick and straightforward in comparison with the AI director that was running the show in the background.)

 

Just because a game uses procedural generation does not mean that your level design costs are lower overall. You still have to design, set and QA the rules that the PG algorithms follow, design the assets that are called up once the PG algorithm has done its thing and, probably most importantly, QA the shit out of it because with randomness involved you increase the risks that the algorithm could spit out something unplayable (e.g. a door you need to go through is behind a wall), broken (e.g. if the water in Minecraft was floating in the sky or mountain shaped), or unengaging (repetitive, bland environments). 

 

If you're designing a 20 hour, narrative driven game, you'd probably save money by hand-crafting everything, yes. But designing a PG system that generates good results that people will actually want to play is hard work (according to what I've read, I'm not a game designer). 

 

Second edit:

 

I knew I'd seen this discussed on EC:

 

Edited February 9, 2016 by StrickenBiged

[AARCT1C]

I'd be pretty happy with $50.

[Doom]

I'm not willing to shell a single € at launch.

I'll wait, as usual, for it to drop in price and to get bugs fixed.

[GoldenShaka]

Well guys, in a blink of eye PS blog showed No man's sky asking price, it was set on $60.

 

In no time it was eliminate from the blog but it seems that pre-order will start in a couple of days, March 3rd.

 

[DaivRules]

Looks like most people expected it to be in the $40-60 range, which is quite a big range really. Also looks like most voters aren't willing to pay that much for it, but I think launch numbers will surprise some people.

[MMDE]

Well guys, in a blink of eye PS blog showed No man's sky asking price, it was set on $60.

 

In no time it was eliminate from the blog but it seems that pre-order will start in a couple of days, March 3rd.

 

 

Won't get at release, that's for sure. It has nothing to do with NMS really, I simply don't buy games for 60USD.