ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl
ORIGINAL: Gary Childress
For me personally...anything over $400 and I would have to do a serious cost benefit analysis. Either that or postpone my next computer upgrade for another year. Under $400 I think my demand is pretty inflexible enough that I would have to buy it. I'd just have to cut back on a few other luxuries. What can I say, I'm a glutton for punishment. [:D]
So you would pay five times as much for an "upgrade package" as you did for the original game? That certainly shows a lot of faith in the new design team. Maybe I should re-phrase the question...
I would indeed if that were the price Matrix asked for. Of course I would hope that it would be cheaper. I thought the question had moved to how much Matrix would be able to get for the game. My apologies for misreading it.
How much would a "reasonable person" consider "within reason" for the AE expansion package?
If you put it that way, I'm not a mind reader (and assume no one else is either) and don't know what others would consider "reasonable". I only know how much is reasonable in my book and I consider myself a "reasonable" person. I assume "reasonable" would, likewise, factor in such things as how much would people be
willing to pay for it. If a for profit organization manages to sell something it produces for an incredible profit then I would say more power to them. It simply means that they have found something that others truly value. Maybe other gaming companies will take note and say, "wow, maybe we ought to try to produce something like that too." Then the cost will certainly come down when competitors enter the market. Maybe more companies will focus on turn based strategy games and less of their resources on role playing and personal shooter games. I've been through the gaming isle of more than a few retail stores and have to say that TBS games seem to be pretty few and far between when compared to other games.
I know of no government regulations which say a company is only allowed to sell its product for a marginal profit (but who knows in our society). If a company creates something good then it should be rewarded for it. It should be able to sell it for whatever price it thinks it can get for its product. I know of no regulations which say that everyone should be able to afford a product. Of course that doesn't mean that there is not more profit to be made in making a product affordable by a larger number of people. Also it doesn't mean that a company may decide on its own that it wants to make the product available to more people by marking the price for less than what it could otherwise expect to get for the product.
I can only hope that the proceeds of AE will go in two basic directions:
1. Some of it will go toward further development of a profitable game (ie. WITP II).
2. Some of it will go into the pockets of all those involved in improving the game as a reward for their dedication and commitment.
As for having "faith" in the design team, my faith is that if there are any bugs, the design team will stay true to its record and try to quash whatever bugs appear in further fixes. WITP has an excellent record of support as far as I am concerned.
[/center]