Planetary Annihilation costs 90$ (right now)

[generals3]

It is essential. Because the pricing only makes sense if alpha/beta testing a game is somehow something people should pay for. If you agree with me than you should be appalled by Uber's pricing like me.

No one is being forced to buy it, so why should anyone be appalled? Because you think the price for early access is too high? Then don't buy in. I'm not going to buy in, I have no interest in early access. The regular game, when released, will be $20. Is that a rip off?

Gamers can really suck as customers sometimes, here we are given a really interesting choice, the choice to get involved really early in development and help shape the direction the game goes in, and yet people complain and try get that choice removed.

Terrible.

Funny how i addressed what you just said in the post you quoted:

"And we don't feel entitled to whatever we want. We do however feel like it is our right to tell Uber their pricing is absurd and that they won't have our ???. Telling sellers we don't like their prices is the only thing we costumers have. Are we supposed to be mindless sheep who bend over and spread our ass cheeks?"

I guess you like to bend over?

 

[Amir Kondori]

I guess you like to bend over?

First of all, I reported your post. Implying I like anal sex is not ok forum conduct. Second of all my position is that the people complaining about the price for early access, not the full game mind you which will be much cheaper, are frankly foolish and complaining over nothing relevant. Its not just that people are complaining either, they are calling for the game to be pulled off of Steam!

But in any case I don't want to respond to you further b/c you obviously are more inclined to make personal attacks than discuss the topic at hand.

 

[GoaThief]

It will be $40 at release actually.

Also, the above images arthe steam page looks like after you start clicking "read more" links... like how your "look at how transparent they are" "proof" isn't even transparent. ]

One thing I am not is a liar, anyone can check the web page and it's all there exactly as I have shown. Perhaps you should see for yourself before making baseless accusations.

Really not interested in discussing anything else with anyone who is too stubborn/lazy in the face of truth.

 

[Candidus]

Relationships require a massive amount of commitment in the form of money, trust, and time. Playing video games do not carry anywhere the same amount of risk. When you suggest to someone who has experienced a failed relationship that resulted in trust issues that their problems are anywhere comparable to not getting a good sequel to some RTS, they will be understandably pissed off.

...

I didn't say they were comparable. In fact I explicitly said that "the scale and profundity of the cases may be very different".

Just because X type of betrayal isn't comparable to Y is a TOTAL bloody irrelevance to whether or not the word can be used to describe the reversal of trends taken in Supcom2 against a loyal fanbase, for the sake of what turned out to be a totally imaginary greater number of casual gamers just waiting to snap up a simplified Forged Alliance. I say it can.

Let's go all out, shall we.

I didn't want to dignify his attempt to derail with a like-for-like comment, but I've been cheated on. Making comparisons between that incident and any other use of the word "betrayal" might be something I'd do too... if I couldn't move the hell on. And in that event, I think anybody would be well within their rights to tell me to get a grip.

 

[Prosis]

It's very stupid to charge people $90 for a game. But its their game, they can charge what they like. Supply and Demand. If people are willing to pay it, then they'll charge for it.

Sure, it'd be worth getting upset about if a large portion of video games increased to $70. But for an indie developer making their own game, which will be reduced in price later on, I really don't have an issue with it.

 

[aSmo]

Whatever your personal perspective on the price tag, use of steam to crowdfund/moneygrab/whatever-you-think-ubers-motivations-are, and whether or not they are being transparent about it, it's still a Bad Move on their part. It's easy to understand how the average consumer would be confused by all this, and I'll hazard a guess that alot of people don't read the fine print. I won't comment on my personal beliefs, but rather shift focus to the point I'm trying to make:

The very fact that this debate exists is Bad for the fledgeling community that PA is. I personally *loved* TA, so much that I looked past the initial 'Wow that's expensive' price tag to see what the deal was. I quickly got lost in thousands of posts so polar, divisive and generally negative that I quickly got turned off from the whole thing. The simple fact is that a community of people who clearly give a shit about the game can do nothing but argue about the controversial approach Uber took. Noone is excited about the game, only the controversy. Noone is talking about the game, only the controversy. Whatever Uber said or didn't say, any public interest in the game is currently manifesting in internet bickering. It's totally toxic, and from a social or community point of view, the dynamic is eroding a foundation that should be in the early stages of being built.