| Author | Message |
|---|
Last post: 01 May at 13:54
|
Posted on 24 June 12 at 21:02 |
| Doesn't really look like my sorta game so I'll leave it |
Last post: 24 Jun 12 at 21:07
|
Posted on 24 June 12 at 21:07 |
| Wow, this games graphics could pass for NextGen. That cat is amazing!! |
Last post: Yesterday at 14:06
|
Posted on 24 June 12 at 21:25 |
| This looks like it could very well be worth the dollar, downloading now |
Last post: 22 May at 23:28
|
Posted on 24 June 12 at 23:59 |
| This looks really fun! Definitely worth one dollar. |
Jump right out of a creek! |
Last post: 29 Apr at 00:38
|
Posted on 25 June 12 at 03:11 |
SICK GRAPHX D00D.
I was actually debating playing something that didn't have achievements so my backlog wouldn't grow any bigger than it already is, this might be my solution. |
XBLA addict. |
Last post: Yesterday at 18:24
|
Posted on 25 June 12 at 04:35 |
| Most games are worth a dollar. |
Last post: 24 Apr at 02:37
|
Posted on 25 June 12 at 13:08 |
Jake2355 said:Most games are worth a dollar.I wouldn't say so. I think most games are worth negative dollars, meaning you'd have to pay someone to have them play for any extended amount of time. It's a common pricing misconception many game developers have. They tend to price their game based on the content they create. A simple game with hundreds of levels or tons of options, basically lots of replayability in the mind of the developer, makes the developer believe their game is worth more. In actuality there is no correlation between content and price, (or rather no direct correlation, please keep reading and I'll explain). Gamers pay if they want to play, and that's it. Only once they want to play does content factor in, which adds more playability. I've seen many indie developers make games that are not fun and think selling for $1 or even $5 is a deal. Lowering the price doesn't make a game fun. Mathematically, the game is worth a negative price when you answer the question of what price makes a gamer play?, which I believe is the true value of a game.
I should add that I define "fun" as willing to continue playing a game versus shutting it off. |
Matthew Doucette, Xona Games |
Last post: Yesterday at 17:01
|
Posted on 25 June 12 at 15:29 |
| You had me at "Lasercat." |
Last post: Today at 03:29
|
Posted on 25 June 12 at 16:21 |
| Reminds me of VVVVVV. Might have to pick it up for similar reasons. |
Last post: 25 Apr at 02:44
|
Posted on 25 June 12 at 18:12 |
| Looks like an interesting one, though not likely my type of game. I'll give it a shot, though. |
Last post: Yesterday at 18:24
|
Posted on 25 June 12 at 20:26 |
Xonatron said:Jake2355 said:Most games are worth a dollar.I wouldn't say so. I think most games are worth negative dollars, meaning you'd have to pay someone to have them play for any extended amount of time. It's a common pricing misconception many game developers have. They tend to price their game based on the content they create. A simple game with hundreds of levels or tons of options, basically lots of replayability in the mind of the developer, makes the developer believe their game is worth more. In actuality there is no correlation between content and price, (or rather no direct correlation, please keep reading and I'll explain). Gamers pay if they want to play, and that's it. Only once they want to play does content factor in, which adds more playability. I've seen many indie developers make games that are not fun and think selling for $1 or even $5 is a deal. Lowering the price doesn't make a game fun. Mathematically, the game is worth a negative price when you answer the question of what price makes a gamer play?, which I believe is the true value of a game.
I should add that I define "fun" as willing to continue playing a game versus shutting it off.Good lord dude, shut up. I'm coming at this from an achievement standpoint, as we are on an achievement site. So chill out. |
Last post: 24 Apr at 02:37
|
Posted on 25 June 12 at 20:36, Edited on 25 June 12 at 20:43 by Xonatron |
Jake2355,
Woah, you read me the wrong way. I wasn't attacking you, I was just rambling my thoughts out. I'm an indie developer myself so that explains my standpoint, which I should have made more clear. Plus Xbox LIVE Indie Games do not have achievements, so I completely misread you as well. |
Matthew Doucette, Xona Games |
Last post: Today at 01:15
|
Posted on 26 June 12 at 00:09 |
I've already played it (PC flashgame) and have to say it was awesome. Wasn't it's girlfriend LITERALLY an OWL ? LMAO, I'll check it tomorrow...
IMHO Microsoft should support this kind of games (Scape Goat, etc.) instead of wasting their money in having COD DLC a week earlier than their competition...
I meant, test it to ensure there are no gamebreaking bugs, add multiplayer if necessary (zombie state would benefit from it) then give it 50 gamerscore and a XBLA status.
MS needs fresh blood giving them exclusives and promoting indies wolud be cheap for them and great for both devs and gamers. |