Is it ok that Kirby is a 60 dollar remake?

[Remember_Spinal]

that cost 10 dollars more than the original game, with only graphical updates? I have literally seen zero discussion or thinkpieces on this so im just wondering? Most people seem pretty excited.

Will digital foundry do a hour long video on it?

 

[Obi-Wan]

I was replying, but I didn’t realize it was an actual visual remake.

That makes me a lot less skeptical. I guess it just depends on whether the remade visuals and whatever has changed here, as well as how the game holds up. Fans will have to make that call.

I do think the reality of the situation, whether for TLoU or this, is that the company is going to charge whatever they predict can make them the most money while not upsetting fans long-term.

As long as there is clamor and hype for projects like this, I don’t see charging full price changing, even if yes, the game is less expensive than a ground-up project.

 

[Yossarian]

Doesn't matter. Tendies will buy it regardless

 

[TaySan]

Yes. Let the market decide if it's worth $60

 

[arvfab]

I don't understand these silly discussions regarding prices, be it for ports/remasters/remakes or new games. The decision if a game (or anything else, actually) is worth its price, is always personal.

 

[EDMIX]

That is the Nintendo way. From what I've read, they state remaster and others state remake.

Maybe I remember the game differently, but this merely looks like a resolution bump from the Wii version, will have to hear more about the changes, but as much as I like Kirby, I don't know if I'm down for a $60 remaster lol Maybe I remember the Wii differently based on nostalgia lol

Will get on deep sale or used.

 

[laynelane]

I've re-bought games as newer iterations came out (RE4, for example) for the convenience of playing on current hardware and also just wanting to have the best version possible of a game I love. Paying the same as a new release isn't something I'd want to do, but there are plenty of people who are fine with it. It's up to the individual if it's okay, imo. Though since this has become a fairly well-entrenched trend (remakes, remasters) it must be financially successful to some degree.

 

[ParaSeoul]

Will digital foundry do a hour long video on it?

But their TLOU Part 1 video was one hour showing all the changes. I doubt this trash could even provide a 10 minute video.

 

[Fahdi]

Mandatory

 

[Bryank75]

I felt ripped off when I bought Tropical Freeze, so I won't be paying 60 for this... I'm not a big Kirby fan anyway.

 

[Oogabooga]

Mandatory

Agree 100%. I always wait like a year to try new games, But I don't pay more than 30$ for a game. It's super hard for new games or the best selling games to be 20$ or less. Most games will be dirt cheap after like 6 months or during winter sale. You can call me cheap all you want idc, but I save a lot of money like that and I don't feel bad if the game sucked it's just 30$ or less.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Yes. Let the market decide if it's worth $60

It's just funny because there are certain people who decided they were better than the market when it came to TLOU Remake.

Personally I have no problem with what Nintendo deems a good price for a remake, same with Sony. Unfortunately a lot of fake people and anti-PS/anti-Sony folks hold Sony's feet to the fire for business practices they turn a blind eye to when Nintendo does similar or even more egregious in certain cases.

Either be consistent in what you stand for/against or shut your mouth, is what I'd have to say to people who are hypocritical on this stuff, tbh.

I don't understand these silly discussions regarding prices, be it for ports/remasters/remakes or new games. The decision if a game (or anything else, actually) is worth its price, is always personal.

The problem is there's a cottage industry of disingenuous loud-mouthed, toxic gaming figureheads with big platforms who weaponize things like "unfair" high prices for remakes or games in general when Sony does them, but suddenly dip out and go ghost when Nintendo does the same thing.

It's an extension of the misplaced idea that Nintendo does their own thing and don't compete with Microsoft or Sony (this has never once been true; the fact they have had to radically change business approaches multiple times over the years is a direct result of competing with other platform holders and trying for a new marketing angle), wrapped in a strong sheet of childhood nostalgia. Only now it's been silently weaponized to excuse Nintendo for some of the same business practices Microsoft and (this gen in particular, especially) Sony are criticized for.

And since most of the people who criticize certain business practices like $70 games or remakes they try saying aren't worth the price, are hardcore Xbox/PC fans (some of them with big social media platforms), then it's mainly weaponized against Sony. Unfortunately, all this does is toxify otherwise genuine online gaming discussions, because the people who use these points against Sony aren't interested in actual solutions; they just want to keep repeating it to drill the idea of how anti-consumer and evil they supposedly are as a corporation, as if no other company cares about maximizing profit margins or that somehow a company like Sony is exactly the same as Microsoft in terms of revenue pipelines, heritage, corporate structure or market goals.

Sorry for the mini-rant; I just genuinely dislike disingenuous takes that show clear hypocrisy as if it's bad for one company, but perfectly fine for another. But I'm speaking in a very general sense.

 

[ethomaz]

More a personal opinion.

If it is not a real remake then it is not worth.
TLOU Part 1 is a clear case of graphic bump being sold as remake at full price.

So the same apply to Nintendo or any other company that do the same.

 

[Fahdi]

Agree 100%. I always wait like a year to try new games, But I don't pay more than 30$ for a game. It's super hard for new games or the best selling games to be 20$ or less. Most games will be dirt cheap after like 6 months or during winter sale. You can call me cheap all you want idc, but I save a lot of money like that and I don't feel bad if the game sucked it's just 30$ or less.

You think you're cheap? My average buy in is $7 from my 500 strong Steam Library. I will wait years for a $5 Sale $10 if I am salivating. I'll spend $$$ for anything I like going out of service. Now, if only I had the same patience with food

 

[Swift_Star]

Of course it is. It's not a Sony game.

 

[Remember_Spinal]

It's just funny because there are certain people who decided they were better than the market when it came to TLOU Remake.

Personally I have no problem with what Nintendo deems a good price for a remake, same with Sony. Unfortunately a lot of fake people and anti-PS/anti-Sony folks hold Sony's feet to the fire for business practices they turn a blind eye to when Nintendo does similar or even more egregious in certain cases.

Either be consistent in what you stand for/against or shut your mouth, is what I'd have to say to people who are hypocritical on this stuff, tbh.



The problem is there's a cottage industry of disingenuous loud-mouthed, toxic gaming figureheads with big platforms who weaponize things like "unfair" high prices for remakes or games in general when Sony does them, but suddenly dip out and go ghost when Nintendo does the same thing.

It's an extension of the misplaced idea that Nintendo does their own thing and don't compete with Microsoft or Sony (this has never once been true; the fact they have had to radically change business approaches multiple times over the years is a direct result of competing with other platform holders and trying for a new marketing angle), wrapped in a strong sheet of childhood nostalgia. Only now it's been silently weaponized to excuse Nintendo for some of the same business practices Microsoft and (this gen in particular, especially) Sony are criticized for.

And since most of the people who criticize certain business practices like $70 games or remakes they try saying aren't worth the price, are hardcore Xbox/PC fans (some of them with big social media platforms), then it's mainly weaponized against Sony. Unfortunately, all this does is toxify otherwise genuine online gaming discussions, because the people who use these points against Sony aren't interested in actual solutions; they just want to keep repeating it to drill the idea of how anti-consumer and evil they supposedly are as a corporation, as if no other company cares about maximizing profit margins or that somehow a company like Sony is exactly the same as Microsoft in terms of revenue pipelines, heritage, corporate structure or market goals.

Sorry for the mini-rant; I just genuinely dislike disingenuous takes that show clear hypocrisy as if it's bad for one company, but perfectly fine for another. But I'm speaking in a very general sense.

Example A:

 

[RE4-City]

It's just funny because there are certain people who decided they were better than the market when it came to TLOU Remake.

Personally I have no problem with what Nintendo deems a good price for a remake, same with Sony. Unfortunately a lot of fake people and anti-PS/anti-Sony folks hold Sony's feet to the fire for business practices they turn a blind eye to when Nintendo does similar or even more egregious in certain cases.

Either be consistent in what you stand for/against or shut your mouth, is what I'd have to say to people who are hypocritical on this stuff, tbh.



The problem is there's a cottage industry of disingenuous loud-mouthed, toxic gaming figureheads with big platforms who weaponize things like "unfair" high prices for remakes or games in general when Sony does them, but suddenly dip out and go ghost when Nintendo does the same thing.

It's an extension of the misplaced idea that Nintendo does their own thing and don't compete with Microsoft or Sony (this has never once been true; the fact they have had to radically change business approaches multiple times over the years is a direct result of competing with other platform holders and trying for a new marketing angle), wrapped in a strong sheet of childhood nostalgia. Only now it's been silently weaponized to excuse Nintendo for some of the same business practices Microsoft and (this gen in particular, especially) Sony are criticized for.

And since most of the people who criticize certain business practices like $70 games or remakes they try saying aren't worth the price, are hardcore Xbox/PC fans (some of them with big social media platforms), then it's mainly weaponized against Sony. Unfortunately, all this does is toxify otherwise genuine online gaming discussions, because the people who use these points against Sony aren't interested in actual solutions; they just want to keep repeating it to drill the idea of how anti-consumer and evil they supposedly are as a corporation, as if no other company cares about maximizing profit margins or that somehow a company like Sony is exactly the same as Microsoft in terms of revenue pipelines, heritage, corporate structure or market goals.

Sorry for the mini-rant; I just genuinely dislike disingenuous takes that show clear hypocrisy as if it's bad for one company, but perfectly fine for another. But I'm speaking in a very general sense.

exactly whenever Sony does it the reactions are:

But when ever anyone else does it the reaction is:

apparently the biggest revenue maker in gaming right now doesn't know how to read the market according to some of these fanboys online