As many have said here - the aoe community is very passionate. If you think about it, it makes sense. This is a community of people that have stuck around have stuck around for 15-20+ years. So the people still playing AOE are the ones who absolutely adore the games and the series. Because of that, many are harsh critics of anything that doesn’t fit their idea of a perfect AOE game.
The reality is, AOE4 will NOT be AOE2 and it will NOT be AOE3. It’s going to be a brand new game entirely. I’m hopeful that it ushers in a new era of RTS and that I fall in love with it the same way I fell in love with the previous games. But I’ll never expect it to fully replace the previous games. We have DE for that .
All in all, I agree. I don’t think the criticism is merited. But I do understand where it’s coming from, it is a unique and passionate community. Here’s to hoping for the best, and if by chance someone working on the game sees this post - keep pushing forward. There are many of us rooting for you and thankful for your work!!
I can feel you . Every time I read this guy somewhere on the forum I’m like
[/quote]
I am not quite sure as to what you are referring too?
However, if by chance, you are referring to the person i was replying too. Then i should probably mention that, just to point out the inconsistencies in their argument, that they listed NON-AAA games as their “evidence” for why AoE 4 would cost LESS THAN $60 American currency.
In case, you were not aware, Iron Harvest started on kickstar, and was NOT FUNDED by a AAA game publisher, OR an independant AAA game studio.
Then there is Steel Division 2 - Which was NOT PUBLISHED by a AAA game publisher.
It was, in fact, SELF-PUBLISHED.
(Brand name can and DOES attract a higher price point - Just look at EVERYTHING APPLE).
Do note - Steel Division 1 - Also known as Steel Division: Normandy 44, the publisher of which, IS a AAA game PUBLISHER.
Do note - BOTH Steel Divison 1 AND 2, have a particular PRCIING MODEL, that MUST BE NOTED. They have a BASE edition for approximately $40, and then they have a DELUXE EDITION for $60 American Dollars.
Not to mention there is a higher edition that costs even more, and more expansions NOT included in those game purcahses.
Not to mention that the game developer studio is, in fact, some random studio, and quite probably NOT recognized as a AAA game developer studio.
There is also the last game called “Ancestors Legacy”. Never heard of it. So it is doubtful that it is even a AAA game.
Apaarently the company that PUBLISHED “Ancestors Legacy” is based in Moscow, RUssia. (Which makes me really want to make a joke about you “colluding with the russians”). Lol.
After researching “Ancestors Legacy”, it is ALSO NOT made NOR published by a AAA game developer studio or publisher. Which is why it costs LESS THAN $60. It is actually developed by a POLISH game stuido. Which appears to NOT be an indie studio, but is also NOT a AAA game developer studio. It actually appears to be a B-rate game developer studio. (Note - B-rate studio DOES NOT necessarily refer to “inferior products”, it is a loose classification terminology, used for referencing a studio that is Neither makes AAA games, NOR is an indie developer.
ALL of the games that the person posted “as examples” were NOT AAA games, and therefore NOT relevant. The person COMPLETELY IGNORED THE CONTEXT.
Yes. I too, understand what it is like to read a comment where someone makes a FALSE EQUIVANCE.
What are you talking about? How would anyone be able to tell emotions without the use of emoticons? The fact, that i use emoticons, and that they are all smiley emojis, shows that i have no ill intent. The usage of such emoji’s indicates exactly that.
Also, the capitalization of specific words or sentences is to highlight exactly which words or sentences are MOST important.
IT IS to Highlight the Most Importamt Part . Part. For you thats Like 10% of all sentences which would be too much
Thats the Same with emojis - If you meant no i’ll intent, one after the section (1!) Also fulfills that Point
Regarding the Games and prices, the Point was Not that they are AAA but that they are RTS. Its Not The Posters fault that any Most recent RTS were Not made by an AAA Dev.
Also especially with MS it depends how much resources they Invest in this Experiment, and how their pricing Policy will Look.
If they sell it for 60, thats Like 2 years of Gamepass, which includes that Game. Which May BE why 60 will Be asked.
However MS also knows RTS is a niche Game Genre. IT think they will settle around 50, WE will see
Development time was long, Relic updated engine and developed tools just for AoE. They travelled world to get info about history in first hand and sound records for units that is different for every age. Every civ has it’s own theme. They built dedicated dev studio World’s Edge just for AoE. There are many investments. Halo Wars 2 was also 60$. I think AOE4 will be 60$ too. You can play via gamepass on day 1. So if anyone has doubts about game they can try it for 1 month for a cheap price.
The game was announced in 2017 actually. Since it will be released in 2021. That is 4 years of development minimum. Presuming the development begun at the year of announcement. Thought i could have begun development earlier.
Do note - You need to create an account and submit a review and activate your account before being able to see the acual statistics for the salaries. However, just type in something like “Relic Entertainmnet salaries” to google and it “should” (though no guarantee), show you, the first few salaries and their numbers.
NOT including the cost for computer equipment, rent, or anything else. It is, on average, $80,000 American dollars per employee.
260 employees X $80,000 = $20.8 MILLION.
$20.8 MILLION X 4 YEARS = $83.2 MILLION.
Not to mention that a marketing budget is usually THE SAME amount as the actual development cost. Therefore you can easily DOUBLE the $83.2 MILLION to get;
$166.4 MILLION.
Now SOME PEOPLE, who are illogical, might say the "calculation is “flawed”, but they would be WRONG.
Now that is the COST. Though the actual cost will probably be higher.
Now $60 DIVIDED BY the 30% STEAM CUT = 46.15
Then you have 46.15 DIVIDED BY the 30% CORPORATE TAX = 35.50
So the ACTUAL amount that a developer OR publisher WILL MAKE from a single copy of a game being sold is ACTUALLY $35.50
Therefore 35.50 X 4 MILLION copies sold = 142 MILLION. NOT even enough to cover the cost of development + marketing. However, add 1 more MILLION.
And then it is 35.50 X 5 MILLION copies sold = 177.5 MILLION. Just enough to BREAKEVEN.
However, even this calculation is BASIC and does NOT take into account other taxes, and other costs that may be, and quite probably ARE associated with running a business. Therefore the company MIGHT even need to seel EVEN MORE copies to BREAKEVEN.
And that, is NOT even factoring in the INVESTORS of the company, which WILL want to see returns for this game. Which would QUITE EASILY mean the game would NEED TO sell even 2-3 MILLION more copies than the “BREAKEVEN NUMBER”.
Not to mention, that IF the game WAS to sell for LESS than $60 American Currency, then the game would need to sell EVEN MORE copies.
(Which is actually a part of the marketing plan, for long term sales, whereby the price is “partially” reduced, in order to induce further purchases of the actual base game). However, if the game is being sold for $50 then it would be reduced to $40. WHEREAS, if the game was sold for $60, then it would be reduced to $50.
Those who WILL buy the game, WILL BUY IT, REGARDLESS OF PRICE. Those who WILL NOT buy the game (at the $60), WILL WAIT for the game to GO ON SALE. (Most people WILL buy a game BECAUSE it is on sale - NOT because of the price point).
Side note - World’s Edge is more of a “Director” studio, that co-ordinates the three (3) other studios, those being, Forgotten Empires (AoE 1 DE), Tantalus Studios (AoE 3 DE). I forget which studio was directly, and mostly invoolved in making AoE 2 DE.
Just to be clear, employees from all companies did help out with each game, but MOSTLY, it was a single developer that did MOST of the work for each individual game.
True. That is also EXACTLY the point. It was a FALSE context. The person even noted that TOTAL WAR games ARE an exeception. However, the person NEVER stated that TOTAL WAR games ARE AAA-Games. Thereby, PROVING their own point, wrong.
I NEVER said it was. Nor was that the point, of the refutation. The fact is, the poster was comparing “AAA-Games”, to “NON-AAA-Games”. Would you, or anybody, compare an Indie game price point, to a AAA-Game price point? no. That would be illogical.
Think of it like basic algebra when comparing Like terms. You ONLY compare “like terms”, NOT “UNlike terms”. (Probably NOT the best analogy. Hopefully you get the point).
The fact is, you CANNOT compare an RTS-AAA-Game price point, to an RTS-NON-AAA-Game price point.
Now IF the poster had stated an ACUTAL RTS-AAA-Game, such as TOTAL WAR, (particularly, the games from the main line - NOT a spinoff or anything), and shown that TOTAL WAR or any other RTS-AAA-Game, WAS, upon release, being sold for LESS THAN $60, THEN the person would have a valid point.
The fact is, the person cited an “invalid” context.
Completely agree, that IS a possibility.
An RTS game is not that much of a niche. After all, AoE 2 (2013) HD edition sold approximately 10 MILLION copies, as did the original AOE 2 release.Even AoE 1 original and DE sold quite a few copies. Even AoE 3 (even though it was not as good, as AoE 1 OR AoE 2), sold approximately 5 MILLION copies upon original release, AND on Steam, BEFORE the Defintive Edition came out.
The reason why NO ONE will ever see AoE Mythology DE is BECAUSE it ONLY sold approximately 2-3 MILLION copies upon original release and again upon Steam. Which is NOT enough to justify the cost of a Definitive Edition.
I suppose i do tend to overuse both capitalization and emoji’s.
BUT dont forgget the game will not be steam only, but also be available in the MS store, whichwill be 100% for MS.
I am no0t sure how many ppl play age DEs on MS Store rather than steam, but Iguess at least 15-25% re pure sales.
Even with that though, of course to get breakeven there would be much money needed. However, MS would be in a position to sell the game at the usual RTS price currently availble.
And as the critizuism in this forum might suggest, that COULD be a good idea. Because if ppl want amazing AAA graphics and get the current state for 60€, a lot of them wont buy the game. However for 40, its much easier to overlook the graphics not being THAT amazing. Its possible MS will calculate more in that direction, aswell as another one-
If the game costs 60, you can get it in gamepass for 6 months with 60€, or even 9 months with the current 1€ for 3 months beta.
Which means you may argue that you will pay the gamepass and after 6 months you played enough age 4 and stop.
However if its 40, 2 things happen.
its only 3 (plus 3) months of gamepass- half the time. So maybe you dont grow bored of it yet.
at any point in gamepass realizing you will want to play the game later aswell, its easier to pay 40 than 60€ for the customer - a smaller amount leads to a greater incentive.
I assume MS may take that route therefore. but I am not sure of course.
Ot also depends on f THEY think the game would be able to breakeven with only sales from the game. If they do, they may very well go the 60 € route
just a quick note regarding comparing AAA/ non AAA. Within a genre and price, you and companies can and have to compare these titles. Because thats what users do. They want an RTS they wont google how much money the creating company has, but how much the game costs, and maybe how it plays therfore the comparison will always be in pricing. Especially with empires apart, I assume, as it wil be most similar to age4 in gameplay ( I guess). So players will compare the 2. (also TW is only party RTS imo)
and even review media doesnt seem to care if a game was indie or not. You can see that in gamestars review of biomutant. They lament everywhere about allll lthe things they would have wanted and dint get in the game, and never once realize/note the game is actually indie
So apart from age of empires fans, the game will be compared to all other RTS.
I have to stand on my point that RTS is a niche genre. you DID show the great number needed to create a new game. Then you show the small numbers of the age games (although impressive for rereleases)
2 reasons for rts being a niche:
MS with age 4 is the last ambitious AAA 100% RTS Strategy game of the last decade or so (since SC2, I would say) - Total war games are indeed an exception herebecause they are no pure RTS.
RTS doesnt even get a specific genre. Its just strategy., and the market share of that, while not being minor, with around 10% according to this page in 2020 Video Game Industry Statistics, Trends and Data In 2021 (wepc.com) is still consoidered niche. Especially if it would be RTS only, not just strategy games.
Also keep in mind with the DEs, RTS did get a popularity bump, so it was lower than 10% before.
It was a nice until the recent years, where more and more indies started taking said niche, and MS doing the DEs, and it starts getting out of the nice. Age 4 will set in stone if RTS wont be nice atm anymore.
Also your answer to mine seems to have been a lot less caps-ulated than the ones before, so its already far easier to read
So according to you, RTS games are impossible to make because they can’t turn a profit. Hmm
Also, your math is off, 30% of 60 makes $42 and 30% of 42 makes $29.40
=117.6 million
times 5 million
=147 million.
So what you are saying is that making an RTS games loses you money. No one would make an RTS game if it loses them money, lol.
Total War prices have nothing to do with Triple A status, they are just overpriced.
Shogun 2, released back in 2011, has a full price of $66.91 with all the DLCs. For a 10 year old game, the full game costs more than modern day triple A games and double the price of Rome: remastered.
Total War Rome 2 full price is $177.89
Total War games are overpriced and you can’t deny it.
Besides, anyone who thinks an RTS game is going to sell 4-5 million copies nowadays doesn’t know the gaming industry
Never stated that at all. Thankyou for making a STRAWMAN ARGUMENT.
I literally typed in the entire message in 2 minutes. Not to mention i was half asleep when i did it. o what. The entire point remains practically the same. A difference of approximately 30 MILLION is barely a difference.
What are you? Kathy Newman? Does that make me Jordan Peterson?
Never said that at all. Thankyou for making ANOTHER STRAWMAN ARGUMENT.
Your false implication is illogical.
Nothing, by definition of the free markets is overpriced. It is priced at the exact price point that someone is willing to pay. If it was "overpirced, no one would buy it. People buy “TOTAL WAR” therefore, it is NOT “overpriced”.
why are you INCLUDING the DLC’s? That is illogical, and changes the context. Th example you jsut gave, is therefore INVALID.
TOTAL WAR; ROME 2, is in fact, being sold for $60 American Currency. AND is USUALLY DISCOUNT BY 75% every few months. (This is called a MARKETING STRATEGY).
Here is the reference link to the prices and the discount prices and WHEN AND HOW MANY TIMES the game was DISCOUNTED.
In case the link DOES NOT WORK. Just type into google
“Total War: ROME II - Emperor Edition SteamCharts”.
You should find the information there.
IF you are including the price of the DLC OR are NOT converting from your currency to American DOLLARS. Then what you are doing is ATTEMPTING TO DECEIVE EVERYONE. Whether knowingly, or NOT knowingly.
Actually it COSTS the EXACT SAME AMOUNT. Because IT IS a AAA-Game.
That is a REMASTER. NOT a NEW AAA-Game.
Actually they have EVERYTHING to do with AAA-Game status. Because they ARE AAA-Game status.
I LITERALLY gave a link to the CREATORS OF THE TOTAL WAR SERIES WEBPAGE. They LITERALLY DECLARE that their games ARE AAA-Games.
HERE IS THE LINK TO PROVE YOU WRONG. TOTAL WAR;ROME 2 IS LITERALLY IN THE TEXT.
It is specifically classified as an ERA Class Total War game. Which ARE AAA-Games.
Actually i CAN deny it, i DO deny it, and i WILL deny it.
NO ONE said anything about the game IS GOING TO SELL 4-5 MILLION… What was said, was that the game NEEDS TO SELL 5 MILLION. There is a difference. It is called linguistics and the english language. Do try to keep up. :smiley
YOU ARE INTENTIONALLY ATTEMPTING TO DECEIVE EVERYONE. I LITERALLY jsut went to the STEAM PAGE for Total War: Shogun 2. The price in American Dollars is $30 and NOT “$66.91”, as you have claimed.
Even the Total War: Shogun 2 COLLECTION (Which includes ALL DLC) is approximately $60 or LESS. Not to mention the game QUITE FREQUENTLY goes on sale for 75% OFF.
Also, you are QUITE CLEARLY A TROLL. Which was why i never bothered to ACTUALLY reply to your previous post. Yet, you just went ahead and made another post anyways. Even though i was NOT talking to you.
Basically. At the end you state that they barely breakeven and that you don’t include all the other fees, so what you (perhaps unintentionally) inferred is that making RTS games can’t turn a profit, at least not a very large one
When you have employees to pay, 30 million is a big difference, especially when with the 30 million you are just barely breaking even. And I wasn’t insulting you, I was simply pointing out your mistake
Perhaps
You inferred it
Even if it is (which it is not) my statement stands, no one would make ANYTHING if it doesn’t turn a profit
too expensive; costing more than it is worth.
That is the definition of overpriced. Game companies overprice their games because they know people will buy it, if people didn’t buy the games the prices would drop. Would you seriously sell something at $40 when you know people would buy it at $60? That is why game prices have risen over the years.
Because that is the full game. Age of empires 2 (2013)'s full price is only $50, less than Rome:2’s base game price. If that isn’t overpriced, I don’t know what it. Especially since it is 8 years old.
Maybe because the people that would’ve bought it would’ve bought it by now, so discounting it doesn’t really effect the game paying for itself. And even with the 75% discount, the full game’s price is $44.47 (I am assuming the discount extends to the DLCs, if not then it is more) that is still barely more than the full Age of empires 2 (2013) game
I live in America, I use American dollars
I am not deceiving anyone, the full price of the game is $177.89. If you only buy the base game, you aren’t getting the full game, how can you not comprehend that?
It costs $7 more, that may not seem like a lot, but when you are selling millions of copies of a game, it is a lot. Also, a 10 year old game shouldn’t cost more than modern triple A games, whether it is a triple A game or not
Please point out where I have said that Total War games aren’t triple A?
Then you are wrong
So according to you, the game with be priced at least $80 dollars so they can at least break even. An RTS game costing +50% more than normal Triple A games, lol. No one will make a game that won’t turn a profit, so you obviously have a flaw in your calculations somewhere
I am telling the truth
For the base game, which doesn’t include all of the DLCs
And it keeps getting taken off and put back on. Taken off and put back on.
Except, I NEVER STATED THAT AT ALL. Congratulations on ANOTHER STRAWMAN ARGUMENT THOUGH.
Could you possibly be any more vague?
Except, I NEVER INFERRED ANYTHING.
Except, I NEVER INFERRED NOR STATED ANY SUCH THING. Once again, CONGRATULATIONS ON TAKING EVERYTHING OUT OF CONTEXT AND MAKING A STRAWMAN.
When you are referring to REVENUE OF HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. A counting error of only 30 MILLION, IS NOT MUCH. I was referring to the REVENUE DIFFERENCE, bbetween HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, comapred to a counting error of 30 MILLION. I was NOT referrring to the SALARY COST OF EMPLOYEES. ONCE AGAIN, CONGRATULATIONS ON IGNORING THE CONTEXT AND MAKING A STRAWMAN ARGUMENT.
Except, the CALCUALTIONS were ONLY THERE TO ILLUSTRATE A POINT, AND DID NOT NEED TO BE PERFECTLY ACCURATE. THE POINT BEING THE AMOUNT OF COPIES ““NEEDING””" TO BE SOLD TO BREAKEVEN.
I NEVER claimed that you were. I have no clue how you could even possibly conclude that the statement i made, either implied or explicitly stated that i thought you had insult me. I never concluded nor mentioned any such thing.
To which mistake are you referring too SPECIFICALLY? The ONLY error in the calculations was with decreasing the $60 by 30% and then by decreasing the NEW and LOWER amount by another 30%.
Not to mention that, i was ONLY using these CALCULATIONS to ILLUSTRATE THE POINT OF HOW MANY COPIES ““NEED”” TO BE SOLD TO BREAKEVEN.
You could even tell just by the fact, that i declared the STEAM CUT to be 30% SINCE the “STEAM CUT” changed around 2018/2019. Making the Steam cut 30% for the FIRST 10 MILLION (dollars), then 25% BETWEEN 10-50 MILLION dollars), and 20% for all sales OVER 50 MILLION DOLLARS.
Not to mention that TRUMP’s CORPORATE TAX CUTS, CHANGED THE 30% CORPORATE TAX, to 21%. Not to mention that YOU CAN CLAIM TAX DEDUCTIONS FOR EMPLOYEE SALARIES. (Though a tax deduction only works to REDUCE a TAX DEBT, therefore you NEED the game to have made a SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF MONEY to use ALL the EMPLOYEE SALARY TAX DEDUCTIONS).
YOU ENTIRELY MISSED THE POINT OF THE CALCULATIONS!!! The CALCULATIONS were to ILLUSTRATE THE POINT, that the game WILL NEED TO SELL MORE THAN THE 2-3 MILLION COPIES AMOUNT THAT YOU CLAIM THE GAME WILL “PROBABLY” SELL.
Do you mean “implied”? Because that is NOT what “inferred” means.
Actually games have remained stable at $60 since 2006.
If spomething IS overpriced. Then NO NOE would buy it. You do NOT understand the concept of “overpriced”.
There are these things called STEAM SALES. So should a game lower their price by 75% AND THEN have the game on sale by a FURTHER 75%? When a game is ON SALE many more copies are sold.
WRONG! The “full game”, is the BASE GAME WITHOUT DLC.
WRONG!!! When a game goes ON SALE it usually sells 10X as many copies in the few weeks on sale, then it would in several months. Not to mention MANY PEOPLE BUY 10 YEAR OLD GAMES WHEN TEY ARE ON SALE.
WRONG!!! YOU CANNOT INCLUDE DLC IN THIS ANALYSIS!!! YOU ARE WRONG!!!
And yet, you CONVENIENTLY IGNORED THE REST OF THE ARGUMENT.
THE FULL GAME, IS IN FACT, THE BASE GAME!!! DLC ARE RELEASED AFTER THE BASE GAME IS RELEASED!!! THEY ARE NOT THE SAME CONCEPT.
How can YOU NOT UDNERSTAND THAT?
You are USING A FAULTY COMPARISON!!! YOU CANNOT INCLUDE DLC RELEASED AFTER THE INTIAL GAME IS RELEASED!!!
No. Actually, YOU ARE WRONG!!!
Sure.
A NEW AAA-Game release DOES NOT go on sale. A 10 year old AAA-Game release DOES GO ON SALE.
People DO NOT BUY THE GAME when the price is LOWERED. They BUY THE GAME WHEN IT IS ON SALE.
Or you are WRONG! And you jsut try to claim that “somewthing” is IMPOSSIBLE to denty, just ot “falsly justify” your own FALSE POSITION.
Except i NEVER SAID THAT. The number of COPIES SOLD, IS NOT THE SAME THING AS THE PRICE POINT OF EACH COPY SOLD.
$20 more is 33% MORE, NOT 50%.
EXCEPT YOU ARE INTENTIONALLY DECEIVING EVERYONE.
Exactly! To include ANY DLC, is ILLOGICAL. The DLC is ADDITIONAL CONTENT RELEASED AFTER THE INITIAL BASES/FULL GAME IS RELEASED… NOT THE ACTUAL GAME.
So? To what are you even referring too? It appears as though you are INTENTIONALLY MSSING THE POINT. Whether or NOT an “on sale game offer” is stable and remains, is IRRELEVANT. Only that it EXISTS, is of IMPORTANCE.
Because you INTENTIONALLY MISLEAD PEOPLE, AND INTENTIONALLY CHANGE THE CONTEXT OF YOUR CALCULATIONS.
Hey, it seems you 2 are running circles with your points of view on arguments here While I do notwish to disturb in any way, it simply seems you both havé different views on specific topics, but I also foudn some points on which you seem to think similar, maybe.
Its up to you whether you will continue your conversation, here or in a PM discussion, but maybe if I state some things to focus on the main core of what was said and the reason for the argument (not meant in any negative way) we can get back to more constructive discussion?
Age 4 will be an AAA RTS Game. (Thats a fact, I think we all can agree on)
In most recent times, new RTS games were rarely seen from AAA Devs, apart from Total war (Which. although some misunderstanding happens, you also both seem to agree with)
now that was the easy part. Lets go further.
3.1) You 2 have different definitions of overpriced. as @ChancierPrism63 stated, from economic perspective, and also from user perspective, overpriced would mean a game would NOT sell. I would say thats a fact, BUT
Thats why steam sales are there and often used to boost sales.which somehow makes it hard to argue with “game x is reduced all the time”. Let us compare the real launch prices.
3.2) however @GusTank04 also isnt wrong. From a consumer point of view, or a “neutral” perspective, you can at least state that a game has fewer content to offer than another, for the same (or more) money. Therefore it would be overpriced. Thats contentwise overpriced, so to say. Whichis also very true for some games and leads to
4) Do DLCs make the game complete?
That depends I would say. For new games I would argue they are complete on release, but can offer more content in the future, as many do, per dlc/season pass. So to have the 100%complete game, DLC should be included.
Which means if you try to argue for content-wise overpriced games, you SHOULD include all possible (non-cosmetical!) DLC, against the playing time o another game, also with all DLC.
And in this regard, the resolution would be
Total war is NOT overpriced economically, as it sells (Although if the franchise still did, they wouldnt have made the epic deal and gave the newest title for free on launch).
However contentwise and compare to Age 2 DE, Total war (the specific game mentioned) is indeed overpriced (As stated, in COMPARISON) -as its cost exceeds age 2s by far. And while I didnt play said total war game, I assume it could not possibly beat the age 2 DE contentwise by thrice the amount. If it did, the price would be fair again).
Of course you could also compare the base games. Not sure what good that would do, however since age 4 will release as base game first,it seems a viable idea to do so aswell.
Game Prices for AAA Games DID stay stable at 60€ for ca 2 console generations now, with some exceptions at 70. However with this generation, another price bump to 80 did happen. So either of you are right here depending onthe time frame
DLC can be important in regards to the potential sales of the game, and its profits. that depends entirely on MS.
yes, games cost a lot of money. IF Age 4 needs to sell x million copies to be a success depends entirely on how much resources MS offered Relic to create the game. But also it depends on what MS goals is.
I think we can safely say that 5 Million copies should be sold at the very least (from the data we have on the DEs). But this is a very MS specific number, and very small for an AAAGame. However for an RTS, that number is already quite big.
I hope that both of you can agree with most of what I said, and to end it on a positive note - we all are eager to see age 4 and hope it will be a success, so lets argue/discuss about that topic more and less about who said what exactly, or what they meant (Only if you want of course, feel free to continue your thread)
Yes you did. By saying that the company needs to sell at least 5 million copies infers that it is impossible to make a profit from an RTS game. Modern RTS games aren’t going to sell 5 million copies, lets be realistic here.
You inferred it by saying that they need to sell more than 5 million copies, anyone who has followed the RTS genre knows that it is a longshot to believe that an RTS game will sell 5 million copies nowadays
Did I say you were?
Exactly. 5 million copies will not be sold, they’ll be lucky if they even sell 4 million. What you are saying is that they are going to lose money
I didn’t think you did, but I’ve had people say I was insulting then for simply giving my opinion, just wanted to clear that up that I wasn’t trying to insult you.
That mistake, a 30 million difference.
I know, that is what I am trying to tell you, yet you keep shooting me down with “strawman” argument.
I am just being realistic, something is wrong with your calculations somewhere because with YOUR calculations, it says that if they sell 2-3 million that they will lose money, a LOT of money. That is what you implied
Lol, yeah. I always get those two mixed up
I don’t remember Indie games back in 2006 costing $45+
I think you don’t, most people think higher price, higher quality, at least nowadays
Spoiler alert, most games go on sale.
Did I say they should lower it by 75%? Now who is undertaking a strawman?
Are you joking? Why am I even arguing with you…
That doesn’t change the fact that the people who would’ve bought it by now, WOULD’VE BOUGHT IT BY NOW. 1000+ people isn’t going to bring in any money, especially when it is discounted. Not to mention that the RTS genre is a niche genre
Yes, I can include them
Because it has nothing to do with my argument
How are you getting the full game if you can’t play multiplayer with others who have the DLC? Then you aren’t getting the full game, you are getting a part of the game. I understand games and their DLCs perfectly, it is you who does not understand the difference between base game and full game.
Fine 8-7 years, it is still and old game
Are we seriously going to start a child argument, no, you are wrong, nooo you are wrong. heh
Actually they have EVERYTHING to do with AAA-Game status. Because they ARE AAA-Game status. [/quote]
Still don’t see how I said they aren’t triple A games, I said they are overpriced, doesn’t have anything to do with their triple A status.
Yes it does. Maybe not as often as 10 year old games but it does go on sale
It is the only way it will make money according to you
Lol, yeah, you’re right my bad.
Except, no I am not.
No, it is completely logical
Exactly. When a game is released, you have yourself a full game. A complete game. When you release a DLC, you now have to buy the DLC to get the “full” game. You aren’t playing a full game when you have DLCs that add new factions, new maps, new campaigns, new units or whatever else a game has.
Seems like you tell that to people a lot, is everyone stupid or do you just think you are that much smarter than people?
Kinda hard to buy something when you don’t know when it will be put back on. Also, does this collection include the base game or just DLCs?
How can I change the context of my calculations? You are the one changing them…
What was that you said? WHAT EXACTLY WAS THE PRICE OF AGE OF EMPIRES 4 GOING TO BE? What was that you said about the “TOTAL WAR SERIES BEING OVERPRICED AT $60 AMERICAN CURRENCY”???
No. The game will quite possibly, if not probably, sell at least 6-8 million copies.
OR, there is, in fact, A FLAW IN YOUR CALCULATIONS. Which there is.
ALSO, relic entertainment has 260 employees. With the AVERAGE SALARY being approximately 70-80 THOUSAND per employee, per YEAR. That is SALARY, and therefore DOES NOT include the cost of office/business rent, electricity, or any other busines expense related to the HIRING AND WORK ACTIVITIES OF EMPLOYEES.
Now IF YOU WILL EXCUSE ME. I have to go and find someone else who i talked to a few months ago and who said “IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO SHOW THE GATHERING RATE OF RESOURCES”, for Age of Empires 2 Definitive Edition. Since there evidence was that “computers cannot compute fractions”. While also stating “they were studying a degree in eletronics/mechatronics” or whatever it was called. AND THEN, comes along, the new T-West video on myoutube PROVING that Age of Empires 2 Defintive Edition AND the original COMPUTE the resoruce gather rate USING FRACTIONS/DECIMAL PLACES.
But do not worry. Do not feel TOO BAD ABOUT YOURSELF. You are NOT THE FIRST ONE who has been in a discussion with oneself and LATER BEEN PROVEN WRONG.
.
. Every time I read this guy somewhere on the forum I’m like 
