Grimoire - Released

[NewDArt]

An object's worth is exactly what someone is willing to pay for it.

To that person, yes. Which would be subjective.

That said, that's not actually the worth of the object. It's the perceived worth of the object - as you're paying before you can actually establish the worth.

I used the word objective for a reason.

 

[daveyd]

I don't care for blobbers / dungeon crawlers in general, but I sincerely hope those poor bastards who backed it on Indiegogo or buy it for the release price enjoy it.

 

[Ripper]

I believe the backers have not even been sent their keys yet.

 

[mercy]

- Fullscreen scaling eats couple pixels from the active game screen, so there are portions that become invisible.
- Immediately crashes after first fight in prison with a nice error message:

ERROR 'ResPack.cpp' Line 671 Data Record Index Exceeds End Of Binary / 19

- Interface and sound system didn't age well.

 

[SirJames]

The value of things is all over the place. You'd think if our governments were actually doing a good job by now they could have replaced taxes with something more modern like a few ad banners and be pulling in as much money as Google while leaving everyone else 50% richer.

 

[NewDArt]

Oh, another aspect of worth I forgot to mention is that, if someone pays a certain amount of money for an object - it's not even necessarily because he thinks the object is worth that amount of money. It might simply be that his desire or need to obtain said object is greater than his desire or need to pay a fair price.

I know this may come as a surprise - but a lot of people are not particularly invested in the actual value of things. Some people are in a position where they don't have a rational reason to care at all.

Yes, I know reality is complicated and it gets in the way of these convenient illusions

 

[redman5427]

You'd think if our governments were actually doing a good job by now they could have replaced taxes with something more modern like a few ad banners and be pulling in as much money as Google while leaving everyone else 50% richer.

HA. Pretty sure most governments believe " a sucker born every minute and two to take him" theory.

So Grimoire is out. I am pretty sure the drama is far from over. Hey Cleve, is there a way to get rid of those side and bottom UI's similar to what Wiz 8 did? If you were going to copy Wizardry then you should have made it a bit more modern.

 

[Kelefane]

The current price tag is a blatant ripoff.

 

[NewDArt]

The current price tag is a blatant ripoff.

Yes, Cleve is ripping off himself by destroying his chance of making a decent profit.

 

[Kelefane]

Not to mention hes already trolling Steam users over on Steam and getting into random flame wars and deleting any posts that have any negative vibes toward the game. He would delete all of the negative reviews the game is getting too, i'm sure.

That alone should tell ANYONE to stay away.

 

[NewDArt]

Well, there's the game and then there's the person who made it.

 

[Lucky Day]

To that person, yes. Which would be subjective.

That said, that's not actually the worth of the object. It's the perceived worth of the object - as you're paying before you can actually establish the worth.

I used the word objective for a reason.

There is no objective price for anything.

For the seller, it is always as much as they think they can get for it. For the buyer, it is the amount they are willing to pay for what they are going to get. Sometimes the buyer is often not aware that "value" is a vague concept.

There is no such thing as a "ripoff" in terms of an "unfair" price.

 

[wolfing]

I watched a few hours of Grimoire streamed this morning (it was in the background while I coded, watching here and there). After the initial shock at the bad sounds, the horrible UI and the lack of explanation for anything, it didn't really look so bad, not bad at all, I was starting to like it. The reviewer even praised that he didn't have one crash in the first like 2-3 hours… and then the game crashed, and then it crashed again 10 minutes later (just walking around), and then it crashed, and then it crashed again, so he called the stream done.

 

[Kelefane]

There is no such thing as a "ripoff" in terms of an "unfair" price.

I disagree.

What we have here is an antiquated clunky game that resembles something that was created in circa 1995. This game is priced at $39.99 right out of the gate during a gaming era (2017) in which some current bug free smooth as butter running AAA titles don't get priced that high.

In other words, Grimoire might have been a $39.99 game back in the mid-1990s, but in 2017? Are you kidding me? This is a $3.99 game at best. Grimiore as it stands right now, looks like many of the 1990s abandonware games you can find for free across the internet.

The $39.99 price tag is a sick joke. So yes, ripoff. Verily.

 

[NewDArt]

There is no objective price for anything.

I said reasonably objective estimation.

Which would be the smartest price in terms of both short term and long term profit.

For the seller, it is always as much as they think they can get for it. For the buyer, it is the amount they are willing to pay for what they are going to get. Sometimes the buyer is often not aware that "value" is a vague concept.

The seller is not necessarily an idiot - and if he's halfway smart, he has to take into consideration several factors that go way beyond exclusively the price of the object.

For instance, he has to consider the amount of potential buyers - and he has to consider that there is such a thing as the future. Meaning, not only is he likely to set the price according to how much profit he can ultimately make - and not how much profit he will make on a single sale - he also has to understand that people respond to pricing in a psychological way and you can build a strong consumer base by selling your games cheaper than would yield maximum profit for a single game - in an effort to increase profit for future games.

There is no such thing as a "ripoff" in terms of an "unfair" price.

Yes there is. But again, you would have to understand nuance and human psychology and get way, way beyond your simplistic concept of worth.

 

[Lucky Day]

so I take it neither of you have been in sales, or taken an economics class?

When I had simplistic notion of consumer rights drudged into me buy my hippy teachers in Canada, I probably would have agreed with you.

what you refer to as a "reasonably objective estimation" is more often called a "comp". A "comparable price".

Cleve wants to make $250,000 off his game if we use his Indiegogo. What he got was $10,598.

As an unmade game, people valued it game in total as $10,598 less the refunds he gave out. What they were buying was a promise a game would be made by him and they'd obtain a copy. Those folks who contributed money for a promise did not perceive the actual game should be less than $40 because there was no actual game yet. They're return on investment was less secure than if they waited for Steam - and considering the development history, it was quite a gamble.

Do you see the disconnect young paduan? Luiji and Pongo both thought $36 was a price they were willing to pay. Some people would buy it at $4. Some would not buy it at all.

What Cleve is doing, since he wants his $250,000 dollerydoos, is making a sales pitch that its a 600 hour game, with 64 interactive PC's, etc.

These are the sales points where he's trying to give the game "added value" to make you see its worth $40 and to make $36 sound like a discount when it fact its simply the price. Because a price is a price. It comes down to him simply wanting $36 each for him. Where is the incentive to give it away? A collective responsibility to the brotherhood of man?

Any sense of betrayal, well that's on the individual. Simply don't buy it, or use it to negotiate a lower price. That's on you. That's your psychology in a nutshell.

 

[rjshae]

Grindmore

Eh, time will tell.

 

[NewDArt]

so I take it neither of you have been in sales, or taken an economics class?

When I had simplistic notion of consumer rights drudged into me buy my hippy teachers in Canada, I probably would have agreed with you.

what you refer to as a "reasonably objective estimation" is more often called a "comp". A "comparable price".

Cleve wants to make $250,000 off his game if we use his Indiegogo. What he got was $10,598.

As an unmade game, people valued the game in total as $10,598 less the refunds he gave out. What they were buying was a promise a game would be made by him. Those folks who contributed money for a promise did not perceive the actual game should be less than $40 because there was no actual game yet.

Do you see the disconnect young paduan? Luiji and Pongo both thought $36 was a price they were willing to pay. Some people would buy it at $4. Some would not buy it at all.

What Cleve is doing, since he wants his $250,000 dollerydoos is making a sales pitch that its a 600 hour game, with 64 interactive PC's, etc. These are the sales points that where he's trying to give the game "added value" to make you see its worth $40 and to make $36 sound like a discount when it fact its simply the price. Because a price is a price.

Any sense of betrayal, well that's on the individual. Simply don't buy it, or use it to negotiate a lower price. That's on you. That's your psychology in a nutshell.

I'm afraid the credentials card is worthless without a convincing argument. Maybe you should have listened in class - or maybe the teacher should have had some actual insight.

What you're doing is just repeating yourself without responding to the points I made that you can't get around by ignoring them.

I'm not sure what you're talking about in terms of a betrayal, though. It would seem to be unrelated to anything I've said.

I said rip-off. A rip-off is if you're deliberately manipulating people into paying more than they think something is worth.

Check out the price of cocaine for an excellent example of this.

Again, you need to understand human psychology and you can't remove that factor and pretend it doesn't exist. People are not robots - and they're not rational. They're also not to blame for that - because that's human nature, which means it's not a choice.

I never said Grimoire was a rip-off, though - except that I think Cleve would make a higher total profit from a lower price, meaning he's ripping himself off.

Again, you seem to be subject to the laughably simplistic position that people (always) think something is worth what they pay for it. I know this for a fact because I often pay more for stuff than I think it's worth. Much more, even.

I've already provided several other examples of how that's obviously not the case.

 

[rune_74]

I played a pretty complete version few years back and the game was pretty enjoyable as a wizardry type game.

Now, I don't think it is worth what they are charging it should be more in the 15 to 20 range.

 

[Lucky Day]

Ack, I've done it - I've got down the rabbit hole with Dart.

So this is what its like. As a successful salesman (I sold over $1000000 in merchandise in 1996) I shall simply move onto another customer.

My pitches in this conversation are leading to a lose-lose situation. I believe I can get better traction from another potential buyer who will see the "value" in what I have to say.