Adventure Gamers - Forums
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
New posts
No new postsFester Mudd and the Curse of the Gold.
I think it will be even more interesting after LSL:R comes out with a price range of 20-30 bucks. Almost 10 bucks of an episodic, voiceless and short game does sound like poor price choice.
I admit that I was a surprised by the pricing. I’m not sure what else to tell you, though; there clearly must’ve been later internal discussions I was not privy to, in which the plan was changed.
Josh
I understand. I hope you understand I didn’t mean it as a personal attack, afterall, I allready bought, played and enjoyed the first episode. I was just curious about what happened with the pricing. I want to see Fester Mudd succeed, but I don’t see how that’ll happen in its current (pricing) state.
The Walking Dead didn’t just win the AGGIE for best voice acting, but also best writing, character and overall GOTY.
Yes, I’m aware. The reason I just mentioned the aggie for voice acting (considering that Fester was supposed to be a cheaper game because of its lack of voices) was to say that the voice actors weren’t just anyone, they were top of the line, thus, they couldn’t have come cheap.
Duckman: Can you believe it? Five hundred bucks for a parking ticket?
Cornfed Pig: You parked in a handicapped zone.
Duckman: Who cares? Nobody parks there anyway, except for the people who are supposed to park there and, hell, I can outrun them anytime.
So if Fester Mudd is 10 bucks per episode, we can safely conclude this is pure robbery.
No, we can’t conclude that. You pay $12 to see Dark Knight Rises, and you pay the same $12 to see random low-budget indie films like Gabi On the Roof in July. Why are you treating games like a product that must have X amount of voice acting, X amount of gameplay etc.?
This isn’t a valid comparison. Theather tickets are indeed all the same price (though you do pay extra for 3D and IMAX), but games have different price ranges depending on scope, production values and licenses.
But even if I follow your argument, I still shouldn’t be paying more for Fester Mudd than TWD, which is even outside any promotion no more than 25 euro for the full season, which cones to 5 dollars per episode.
10 dollars for Fester Mudd is too much!
I have to say I hate games price discussion. It’s impossible to say how much the game is worth or is not worth. It depends of the buyer. Someeody put a some work into making this game and them or the company decided to price it 10$. You either like it and pay it or not and wait for a price drop. How the hell do you evaluate a game price based on some stuff like presence of voice acting or length? Games with 5 voice actores should be 20$, 7 voices 30$? Some games I would pay more for not having voice actors.
It’s those Awful iOS games fault… Now everything needs to be cheap.
Personally, I’d be willing to pay even more for Fester Mudd than $10 per episode. I’m a sucker for this style and it didn’t take more than a screenshot to convince me. I’d happily give some extra money for a game like this. My concern wasn’t about myself or my wallet, it was about the game’s chance at success, which was allready limited by it’s lack of voice acting, and now limited even further by being priced like the biggest productions within the genre.
How the hell do you evaluate a game price based on some stuff like presence of voice acting or length?
I think most people would agree that the more effort is put into something, the more valuable it becomes.
Duckman: Can you believe it? Five hundred bucks for a parking ticket?
Cornfed Pig: You parked in a handicapped zone.
Duckman: Who cares? Nobody parks there anyway, except for the people who are supposed to park there and, hell, I can outrun them anytime.
I think there’s also a question of other products of same nature in the same price racket. There’s a lot of voiced, retro adventure games in 10 dollar range, so omitting a feature that is pretty much a standard in new adventure games can diminish the value of a product to a potential customer.
I’ve seen some people complaining on the retro appearance, which isn’t a necessarily a deal breaker for them, but the omission of voice acting can be, as they see the price not bringing enough value to them.
I think most people would agree that the more effort is put into something, the more valuable it becomes.
I agree here, I just don’t think bullet points like voice acting or length are what determines the effort a developer puts into a game.
Going back to my prior example - Gabi on the Roof in July is not a “rip-off” at $12 a ticket just because Dark Knight Rises had MOAR explosions, MOAR famous actors, an hour MOAR running time and a budget 100x as high. Yet that’s exactly what people are saying is the case here. They’re works of art, not products worth $X depending on how many features they have.
I also find it amusing that adventure gamers, who tend to mock the types of gamers that make a big deal about graphics, are making a big deal about voice acting. I don’t have a problem with you wishing there was voice acting, but you have to see the dissonance if you think that the people who dislike pixel art are wrong for feeling that way.
You pay $12 to see Dark Knight Rises, and you pay the same $12 to see random low-budget indie films like Gabi On the Roof in July.
Actually, no I don’t. The more interested I am in a movie, the more I am willing to pay to see it. So something I REALLY want to see, I might be willing to see an evening show at first run prices. Other movies I will only pay matinee prices for. Others I wait for it to hit the cheap, second run theaters. Some I just wait for the DVD to come out so I can get it free at the library.
I suspect I am not alone in this practice, either.
You pay $12 to see Dark Knight Rises, and you pay the same $12 to see random low-budget indie films like Gabi On the Roof in July.
Actually, no I don’t. The more interested I am in a movie, the more I am willing to pay to see it. So something I REALLY want to see, I might be willing to see an evening show at first run prices. Other movies I will only pay matinee prices for. Others I wait for it to hit the cheap, second run theaters. Some I just wait for the DVD to come out so I can get it free at the library.
I suspect I am not alone in this practice, either.
Yes but your reasons for not paying $12 to see an indie film do not amount to “that’s a rip-off because there aren’t any explosions or famous actors”.
You pay $12 to see Dark Knight Rises, and you pay the same $12 to see random low-budget indie films like Gabi On the Roof in July.
Actually, no I don’t. The more interested I am in a movie, the more I am willing to pay to see it. So something I REALLY want to see, I might be willing to see an evening show at first run prices. Other movies I will only pay matinee prices for. Others I wait for it to hit the cheap, second run theaters. Some I just wait for the DVD to come out so I can get it free at the library.
I suspect I am not alone in this practice, either.
Yes but your reasons for not paying $12 to see an indie film do not amount to “that’s a rip-off because there aren’t any explosions or famous actors”.
No, they are, “This movie is not worth $12 for me to see for (fill-in-the-blank-reason).” It might WELL be, in some cases, because say, the movie is in a foreign language with subtitles, and I don’t enjoy dealing with that enough to pay full price to see it. Which would be very similar to not wanting to spend a certain amount on a game because it had no voice acting. The difference being that I would not say that the full price was a “rip-off” in that case, but only that it was not worth it to ME. There ARE movies that I consider to be so poor that I feel like ANYBODY paying full price to see them IS being ripped off, though. That isn’t really as good an analogy to the case at hand, though. 
(Well, truthfully, I actually DO feel like full-price movies (especially those in 3D) ARE kind of a rip-off. But that’s more to do with me being old enough to remember MUCH lower movie prices, and not being able to mentally accept inflation as sufficient reason to pay that much more when the movies aren’t that much better in many cases. 
)
In the case of this game, I personally am not willing to spend $10 an episode at this point because I am not CERTAIN enough that I will feel like I got my money’s worth out of it. For me it has nothing to do with the lack of voice acting, but I’m not going to begrudge somebody else having that as a criteria. For me it has more to do with being only a first episode, from someone with whom I have no prior experience to lead me to assume that the finished project will be worth the final price. From my point of view, episodic games are a BAD risk unless either a.) all the episodes are out, and I can see how they were received as a whole, or b.) those putting them out have already earned my trust with prior products.
I’m not going to say it is a “rip-off” at that price, however. I have no way of evaluating that right now.
From my point of view, episodic games are a BAD risk unless either a.) all the episodes are out, and I can see how they were received as a whole, or b.) those putting them out have already earned my trust with prior products.
From my point of view, this comment makes the most sense of most I’ve read.
As for a.), all the episodes are not out, and episode one has received marginal reviews. Good, fun, retro humor - 
Short, voiceless, overpriced - 
As I stated before, I would buy the whole game for $30, but not three episodes for $10 each. I just don’t buy episodic games.
As for b.), Josh Mandel’s involvement in the project is all I need to make it a Buy once it’s released as a whole game. But, even he was surprised by the pricing.
For whom the games toll,
they toll for thee.
Fester Mudd seems really interesting, but even with all three episodes out I still think 30 dollars is a bit much. Sure, movies are expensive and all that and I only get 1½ - 2 hours of entertainment, but to me that’s comparing apples and oranges. Comparing this game to other adventure games it’s a bit pricey and especially since it’s from a completely untested developer so it’s a bit of a blind buy. If all three episodes were priced at 20 dollars I’d buy it, but before it hits that price I’ll let it be.
The difference being that I would not say that the full price was a “rip-off” in that case, but only that it was not worth it to ME.
Yea I guess that’s my main issue here. I wouldn’t use the term “rip-off”.
There are definitely cases in which I could consider a game a rip-off…$50 for this episode, for example, or if regular games went up to $200. But at $10 I’m not sure if it’s possible for a game to be a rip-off. There’s that game Thirty Flights of Loving which is around $5 for 30 minutes or something like that. Definitely would not consider that a rip-off - the initial experience may be fleeting, but it could stick with you for a lifetime.
In any event, there are free adventure games with full voice acting that are better than many commercial games, so if you’re going down the “rip-off” trail, any 2D AGS-style game that costs money is a rip-off.
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
