On Braid and Pricing

I can’t believe this even an issue. Well, hopefully any publicity is good publicity.

“What do you guys and gals think?”

I think people who complain about the price are petty losers. And since nobody has done that in this thread yet, I can say so without directly offending anybody. :)

I think people are terrible.
I mean $15?
I can find $15 in my room without even trying, and I’m british.

I dont think braids problem is that it costs $15 its that everything else costs less. Without any kind of PR to tell people this game is worth it then people wont recognise it as worth it. Games strongly rely on viral marketing and unless braid can get a good few fans to spread the word that $15 will still be a barrier.

Personaly if a games good i’d throw the money down strait up.

By most accounts, it’s one of the best games on XBLA– maybe THE best game on XBLA. It’s a fantastic new indie game with some compelling, new gameplay ideas.

But, screw it. I’d rather spend $50 on a bunch of crappy remakes and ports than $15 on a satisfying and innovative experience.

>4
This.

“Paying for a product” is a materialistic process, and a pretty straightforward one at that. We’re all used to running scenarios in our heads about how much we’d need our new pair of scissors in everyday life and therefore coming to the conclusion that we’d pay up to X amount of money for a good pair of them. The utilitarian value is evident. The problem is when the product is art or has an artistic and therefore nebulous end. A bigger problem still is when it is both utilitarian (a video game is to degrees) and artistic at the same time.

Braid (I played it last night for a couple of hours at a friend’s house, now waiting for PC port) seems to me to not be at all about replayability, and some people seem to put that very strongly in their equation of how much a game should cost.

I think that’s what we’re used at, as we were brought up by escapist-sub-hollywood-movie-style- vicarious-living videogames where the point is “for how long can I get away from reality with it before tedium sets in”. Braid doesn’t seem to be about diffusing real-world stress or an outlet for pent-up aggression at all though (I’ve never felt less desire to bonk enemies off of the screen in a game as with the walking heads or cat rabbits in Braid), so that upsets the pricing paradigm most people are used to. A good videogame straddles an uncomfortable between space as a product: it’s both exciting gameplay and something more. Exciting gameplay let’s say can be quantified to a degree, the “something more”… not so much. Yet we want the something more, don’t we? We want it to be a bigger factor in the next generation of videogames, right? We’re pushing late twenties or early thirties now and killing spider demons in FPSes isn’t as enduring a passtime as we once thought it would be, right? If we do want more we should celebrate games like Braid by well, buying them.

I personally think 15 dollars are a good price for a game that both soothes and confounds, challenges with gameplay and premise equally like Braid.

15$ dollars are like… 9 euro.
And with 9 eur you can barely have a decent pizza and a coke.
Also, a 1 and half hour dvd movie costs more, so the “replayability” factor has little sense.

The real problem is that XBLA is full of cheap crap, and users aren’t willing to pay more than 10$ for “an xbla game”, i think microsoft needs to make a sort of filter, like “bugdet games” and “full price games” on xbla, and raise the average quality (and the prices, yes.)
Would be nice to have quality games for 15$, as i’m pretty bored of frogger remakes and that kind of stuff….
So yeah, i hope microsoft will raise it’s prices, with that, developers would be more interested in putting more efforts on xbla

The burrito in the comic is disturbing to me.

@Lez: $15 is nothing to you because the exchange rate is in yore favor

Regarding my last post, I meant Super Mario 3 and Super Mario World (on the Wii’s Virtual Console)

I have no problem paying more money for bigger games. It’s short games without much replayability that I bawk at paying more than $5 for. Esushally when cheap games like Peggle are addictive as fuck and last longer.

Both sides of the dialogue are pretty meaningless.

In reality things are really simple: price your game however you like. Buy games if you expect what you’ll get will be worth the price.

Getting angry in forums? Fulfils no known economic purpose.

Half-Life 2 Episode 1 was also priced $40.
Has it much replayability? I didn’t think so and the game lasted for only 5 hours.
I’d pay $20 for a game like braid. And the fact that it’s on xbla doesn’t mean it has to be a cheap game.

I agree with Fish, he’s got an excellent point. I mentioned Super Mario 3 and Super Mario World for the Wii Virtual Console and those have a shitload of play value. I would much rather get a game that has plenty of play value for the right price than something that looks pretty but costs more. Braid doesn’t look bad but the game really didn’t show signs of anything unique enough for me to have to dish out extra dough.

Also, lets be reasonable. You can’t really compare games (even Indie games) from one platform to the next. Why? Because you can’t do things like MOD a game on XBLA, yet you can MOD all kinds of Indie games that are out for the PC. Aquaria is a perfect example. Sure it’s $30 bucks, BUT, you’re getting A LOT more bang for your buck and this is especially true if you use the level editor and enjoy modding (or even have the slightest interest in modding). So I believe I’m correct (and I agree with others) when I say that Braid is over-priced. I’d really like to get into it more but the price is not right.

Oh and it’s not really fair for Penny Arcade to try and talk shit about anyone considering their mediocre game on XBLA is 1600 PTS… That’s insane.

Again, look at Castlevania: Symphony of the Night and how much game-play value is actually there. I admit, it comes down to people opinions of the type of games they like, but you can’t argue that there is a hell of a lot of game right there for 800 pts. That, to me, is fair. Games like Soul Calibur, on the other hand, should have only cost 400 pts. Especially considering they cut the code in half and excluded half of the game-play and didn’t bother to add an online mode… it’s not even a decent port (though the controls are surprisingly better than Soul Calibur IV).

People say they’d pay $15 or $20 dollars for Braid but I think that’s only because they’ve paid the $15 for it and need to somehow justify that they’ve spent that much on it when it’s not a very long game, but just as important, it’s not everything everyone makes it out to be. I just like the unique look of it, but I’m not gonna spend the money just to check out it’s graphics. I hope they have much success, but they may have had more success if the price was more reasonable.

Just my opinion, you don’t need to agree or get upset about it.

free games, supported by donations would be the most ideal solution for me. people would just spend as much money as they think it’s worth it and they could afford (1-100$?). players would be more involved that way too, because each donation would be kind of a personal appreciation for the developers. they could even be mentioned on the website as contributors, as important parts of the development process. the buissness related feelings would change for the better on both sides that way, i guess, because it would be absolutely fair. and marketing would be easier too, because players could just tell everybody about this freely downloadable game, so they would advertise it naturally.

but i know, it’s probably still unrealistic to make real money like that… most people aren’t familiar with that sort of business (yet) and think it’s not professional…

but we all know about the DRM drama and the massive software piracy issue. that will never go away, and i’m actually happy about it, because digital distribution really doesn’t fit the old market law!! although digital WORK is like any other kind of work (making games is basically no different form building a house for example), the VALUE of every pure digital PRODUCT isn’t bound to QUANTITY at all, but only to the CONTENT of the work! that’s completely different to how the analog world worked for centuries… – software products (music/movies/games/apps/…) are no PHYSICAL OBJECTS, that’s the point. all digital goods are infinitely copyable IDEAS. — i see no reason to set a fixed price for one piece of software, because there is never only ONE PIECE – but there is always an INFINITE amount of them. so it’s really time to get rid of all the old thinking here, in my opinion.

(that could be realized in the world of inide games maybe, they are so young…)

only one internet currency world wide would be ideal (something like PayPal), so that everybody could VOTE for the things he/she likes and want to see more of. supporting people, don’t exchanging value as objects. money as a real global voting system. all would be free.

(ok, i’m aware of the fact that there already are many open source projects and indie games out there which give the users the possibility to donate. but they are often clearly made as public projects, without any business in mind. it’s an more an optional thing to donate there. – but if a long awaited title like Braid would come out “for free” on PC, or even bigger games, that would change a lot, i guess.)

You know this is all opinion and also based on your living situation right? Getting mad at people just because you feel like spending 15 dollars and they don’t is fucking stupid.

This is only speculation, but this is what I’m seeing based on my observations. People are upset that Braid is 1200 points not because it’s converted price is $15. From what I understand, it has more to do with there being an XBLA game selling at a price higher than the average usual 800.

Eight hundred points and bellow have become the comfort zone for many. Penny Arcade’s game and Braid are both priced outside of that comfort zone. So the immediate reaction for many is to declare the games as being “too expensive.” And so the world explodes with arguments and debates.

well, i haven’t seen much of braid, except a gameplay trailer at gametrailers.com,
but all i saw were 3 things, namely, a pipe with a man eating flower coming out of it, canons shooting at you, and a critter you can jump on, all 3 things i saw in mario before (can’t mario sue braid? i mean, those were almost exact copies), except the main character kept going going into slow motion, i guess that was the time travel thing.

Okay Braid fanboys, perhaps you can lay a little blame on Microsoft for slotting this game at this time, perhaps it would have been less of an issue if it was slotted during a slower or shittier time of the season… perhaps.

Here’s the facts.

There’s not enough game play for $15 dollars, and Penny Arcades Adventure: On the Rain-Slick Precipice of Darkness isn’t worth $20 dollars (or 1600 pts). I wouldn’t even buy Penny Arcade’s game if it was 800 pts, I tried the trial and didn’t enjoy it. Braid on the other hand I probably would buy for 800 pts but I can pass it up and save my points because I know 1200 pts is out of my way and I still have other games to look forward too such as Bionic Commando: Rearmed – 800 pts. And then there’s Castle Crashers. So it’s not a big deal whether or not Braid earns our 1200 pts, although since everyone wants to bring up “making money”, had they set the price at 800 pts I’m sure more people aside from just myself would have been more inclined to part with their points because lets face it the game is short, there’s no replay value and people get tired of spending just because something looks good (though there will always be people who only buy things because they look good). If you liked the Trial for Braid then buy it, don’t let anyone else stop you. Quite simply as I’ve stated time and again, I didn’t find enough reason to dish out 1200 pts and I sure wouldn’t be comfortable dishing out 1200 pts now because there are other great games coming out and they will probably last longer at a lower point cost. So in the end to each their own but don’t try to convince me to spend my money when you’ve got your own to spend. I’ll decide where my money goes and trying to guilt people into buying something only makes them resent you even more. I urge everyone to give the Trial a shot because that’s what they’re there for and Trials are free. Can’t complain about that, but don’t go on and on saying how great something is when I’ve tried the Trial out and walked away with a feeling like people are purposefully trying to coax me into spending my money either threw guilt or just because supporting Braid is “the right thing to do” even though I wasn’t as fond of the game, and lastly not comfortable with spending 1200 pts on it. Simple really. Don’t be angry about it, you bought it, enjoy it. You want to make a game and charge 1200 pts? Make sure you’re game is packed to the tits with gameplay or don’t be bothered by other people and their critical views and opinions, it’ll just frustrate or anger you and that’s counter productive. Instead, listen to the audience and either take what they say with a grain of salt or learn from the experience and improve where you can. Feel free to discuss but don’t be upset that you can’t convince others to spend the money that you have spent, that’s just ridiculous.

points and commands, “DON’T BUY MY GAME!”

My issue isn’t with the price, it’s with the game itself, seems too short.

But, to be fair I don’t know how long the other four worlds are, the first world (world 2) is painfully short, though.

“I admit, it comes down to people opinions of the type of games they like, but you can’t argue that there is a hell of a lot of game right there for 800 pts.”

What? Sure you could argue that. SoTN is a good game, but it’s very repetitive. Go to area, kill enemies, gain level, find new items, kill new boss, repeat. Half the game’s map is even reused, the turned the castle upside down not just because it’s cool but mainly because it allowed them to double the game time with very little effort on the part of the level designers. If a game like SoTN uses cheap tricks like that to artificially expand the length of a game, is it really worth more than a game which did not use those tricks, but easily could have, to expand its length? I think Braid is worth far more than SoTN, exactly because it’s a shorter game.

Also, this is the funniest pair of sentences in this thread:

“Here’s the facts. There’s not enough game play for $15 dollars”

How is that a fact?

“At least add extra modes, or something that we can come back to.”

There is a speedrun mode after you finish the game.

1up review: http://www.gamevideos.com/video/id/20638

“My issue isn’t with the price, it’s with the game itself, seems too short.

But, to be fair I don’t know how long the other four worlds are, the first world (world 2) is painfully short, though.”

There are puzzles in the later worlds which took me several tries to figure out. Maybe I’m stupid, but there are two puzzles specifically that I would be amazed at if anyone could figure them out without a significant amount of thought and/or experimentation. How much did they charge for a Rubik’s cube when they first came out? This is the sort of thing people should be comparing to.

Also, the second world is as boring as it gets, each world adds further mechanics that need to be used.

15$ is half the price of an album. What if you didn’t like the album after you purchased it? Would you go around whining about how it’s wasn’t worth “your money” in particular? Even tho I disagree with it being xbox-exclusive, any indie game with a minimum of effort and originality should be worth every penny charged. I’ve bought Cortex Command for that exact reason. You’d rather pay 70$ for a half-assed modern doom-like with shiny graphics and cheap online gameplay that’s always been the same since Quake? Good for you.