(But it’s also heavily on sale right now, for $15 - https://store.steampowered.com/app/526870/Satisfactory/)
Personally, I don’t mind at all. For one I bought it at $30, but also I have 2,000 hours logged. Per hour that’s a cost of $0.02 per hour (at the new price) if I had bought it at $40. I’m all for calling out studios like ubisoft for being greedy, but coffee stain has done a very fair job with Satisfactory IMO, and they very well deserve $10 more for the game.
That being said, go pick it up now for $15
triple the price if that means we eventually find out what those talking spheres do
And SAM ore
Honestly as much as I dislike it raising in price, if this is a price increase for the initial release that’s completely fine due to the fact that the game is definitely worth more than they’re selling it anyway, plus I give them props alone for releasing the fact that they are going to raise the price because most Studios would just have this really good deal and then raise the base price after the sale never letting anyone know ahead of time
I’d agree but apparently this is due to “inflation”, so more than likely they’ll increase it again on release.
You apparently haven’t watched the video. He explicitly said they wanted to raise it on release but have to do it earlier because of some steam policies
The video literally opens with him saying it’s inflation…
I’ve owned it for a while, I think I just hit 1000 hours in game.
I’m excited to see what 1.0 brings.
There’s an interesting theory going around that the steam rules that they have to abide by are surrounding sales. You can’t put a game on sale immediately following a price change like they’re doing, you have to wait something like 30 days. So it might be that they wanted to do a release sale, and this is a good opportunity for them to get the price change done in advance of the launch sale.
This implies that 1.0 is coming within a few months. I want to believe the rumors, but I’ve waited so long for 1.0, that I am very hesitant to get my hopes up.
I heard that, Snut was also very cagey on why they had to do a specific sale and how it was working. I think we’re getting very close to the full release…
Unrelated, do you know of any good multiplayer groups for satisfactory?
I’ve been looking to join some experienced people. I dunno if any such groups exist.
Personally, no. But, you can make a post asking! I’m sure there are people here who know of groups or are looking themselves!
Ahhh I’m torn about it. Is there any news about the stuttering issue that came with update 8? It’s unplayable now around the northern forest and if this is how 1.0 is I’ll pass
Plenty of optimizations since update 8 went into the beta channel, updates are paused right now because they’re spending all their dev time working towards 1.0.
There was a video not long ago talking about some of the optimizations coming to 1.0
They keep improving everything.
They can leave steam and stay on egs for all I care.
Gross, and they even used the “inflation” excuse the Factorio devs used, despite it literally not applying to existing digital goods.
Not even EA would try to increase the price of a half decade old game…
Edit: And wow, putting it on sale right before a price increase? Sounds like fomo to me.
They are still developing it. Aren’t they? If it’s got more stuff in it than when it originally came out a price increase could make sense.
By that logic any game that gets updated should have its price increase. No Mans Sky should cost like $100.
Yes, and?
Trying to make money from games with long term support is a tricky thing that companies keep trying to do - it can lead to season passes, microtransactions, deluxe/supporter editions, buyable maps and expansions - or stuff like this.
Companies try to get money to support game, more news at eleven…
Maybe games as a service shouldn’t be a thing then. Just a thought.
Well then, devs should be able to increase the price as inflation increases so the equivalent cost stays the same.
I wrote is elsewhere but I’ll write it again here:
Inflation affects physical goods because you need to make the product from the ground up every single time. Those materials cost money, and rise with inflation, so making the product from scratch each time gradually costs more as time goes on. Hence why they need to raise the price of the finished product - otherwise they’d literally lose money on each sale.
Digital goods don’t work this way, once the product has been made it can freely be distributed without having to be remade again and again.
Yes, it costs money to patch and update. But that’s not comparable to rebuilding the product from the ground up like with physical goods.
Selling the game is the devs income, if everything else costs more and you don’t increase your income you’re just becoming poorer.
Just because you’re doing office work do you believe you shouldn’t get a raise?
I mean, would you argue that the game isn’t worth the price increase? I’ve always felt that this game with what they gave you for content is well worth a $50 price point, honestly tentatively say maybe even a $60 price point, I mean I do agree you that it’s weird that they’re choosing to raise the price now, considering that they honestly should have raised the price point of the game easily one or two years ago, but I definitely wouldn’t go to say that the game isn’t worth the price that they’re asking for, I still personally believe they are under selling their game.
Honestly, they could increase the game after the sale, launch the 1.0 release and raise the price again saying that okay now it’s no longer Early Access and I think that would be 100% Fair, I’ve gotten exponentially more hours out of this game than I have out of games that I’ve paid $70 for
Tbh I feel it’s totally worth the price, and if they said that they increased the price due to the added value since releasing into ea I’d be totally fine with it. But using inflation as a cover, like the Factorio devs before them, is gross and deceptive. Hell, I’d rather them just say “we want more money”. At least that’s honest.
Like I said, it’s fine if they want to increase the price due to an official release, or simply because they feel there has been significant value added since launching into early access. Lots of devs do that, it’s not a big deal. But none of them lie about inflation somehow affecting an existing digital good in any meaningful way. Well again, except Factorio lol. But that guy also excused statutory rape so…
Yeah I do agree, it seems real sleazy blowing it under the guise of inflation, that being said it is understandable because inflation is infected quite hard with those projects, whether it’s hosting costs or salary well it may not be as much as physical products I can see where they may want to raise it but in this case I do agree I think they definitely had reason to just say “yo our game is good and we know it so we’re upping the price” okay maybe not exactly like that but you get the point
