(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

  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    That’s exactly what Minecraft did…

    Free then 5 then 10 then 15 and so on, all price hikes that happened while the game was still in development and had not reached 1.0. it was one of the first mainstream example of an early access game!

    You just don’t want to recognize that Satisfactory today is different from what it was when it was first made available, just like Alpha and beta Minecraft weren’t the same.

    But hey, I guess I’m the one that’s not arguing in good faith by pointing out that the situation is pretty much exactly the same and that the alternative is worse for all current owners.

    Again, if you keep doing the same office job as before, do you refuse to ask for a pay increase and prefer to become poorer over time just because your job hasn’t changed?

    • CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      No you’re right, Minecraft did do that. At least they didn’t hide behind inflation though, they simply increased the price as content was added.

      Regardless, office pay has next to nothing to do with this. The consumer doesn’t directly pay the worker’s salary. The worker makes the product, the consumer buys the product, end of transaction.

      Pay is handled by the studio. If the devs want a pay increase, which is more than deserved, then the studio needs to find the funds for that. If they don’t have the funds then they need to create more product. Simple as. Artificially boosting the price of existing products isn’t the answer.

      Again, it’d be like if CDPR decided Cyberpunk was suddenly worth $90 after the 2.0 update. That’d be silly.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Pay is handled by the studio. If the devs want a pay increase, which is more than deserved, then the studio needs to find the funds for that. If they don’t have the funds then they need to create more product. Simple as. Artificially boosting the price of existing products isn’t the answer.

        So contrary to any other industry, game development studios don’t have the right to increase their price on products that are already on the market to follow inflation and to have the funds to increase their employee’s wages, that’s what you’re saying?

        Regardless, office pay has next to nothing to do with this. The consumer doesn’t directly pay the worker’s salary. The worker makes the product, the consumer buys the product, end of transaction.

        It’s funny because your next paragraph makes it seem like it’s the exact same thing happening for games, there’s a third party in-between the consumer and the employee doing the work in both cases.

        • CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Other industries follow the same standard. Buying a movie on Amazon that released in ‘95 doesn’t cost 100’s more dollars today than it did back then due to inflation. Like I said, digital goods aren’t affected in the same way that physical goods are.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            They actually are affected the same way tough, hosting cost, labor cost, the programs used for development, the computers used for development, all of these things cost more and more, just because some people in the industry don’t act on it doesn’t mean that the same thing doesn’t happen…

            Oh wait, what’s that? They actually do act on it by selling paid DLC for extra content and people are too dumb to realize that it’s exactly the same thing as increasing the price of the complete game while continuing to provide updates? Dang…

            Also, look at paid subscription services, are prices staying the same forever or they’re increasing? Because I’m looking at Netflix and they haven’t released a new program, they’ve just added more content and the price is going up! Plex’s lifetime price nearly doubled in 2014, they didn’t release a new program, it was the same thing just getting updated.

            You’re just mad because the Satisfactory team is being honest about why they’re increasing the price and it makes you angry because it doesn’t fit your vision of how the world should work but everyone else is doing the same thing just without mentioning inflation and that’s fine to you.

            • CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Hosting costs and labor costs aren’t equivalent to the costs of building a game from the ground up.

              And no, dlc isn’t the equivalent of bug fixes and updates lol. Factorio is a great example of that - they increased the price arbitrarily and plan on releasing a paid dlc.

              Paid subscription services increase because constant work has to consistently be put into them at a regular rate. There is no end point. It’s not as if a subscription server is “finished” and then only requires small updates and bug fixes - it’s a constant thing that requires endless man power and resources to keep afloat.

              There’s a massive different between Netflix and Oblivion lol.

              And in what world is everyone doing the same? The literal only other game to increase the price of a game over half a decade old has been Factorio. Literally nobody else, not even the scummiest publishers in the space, have done this.

              Regardless, as I’ve said, it’d be more than fine if the price was increased due to an official launch, or even if they just felt that they’d added enough content to justify it. But hiding behind inflation is scummy imo, and makes me regret supporting them in the first place.

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Paid subscription services increase because constant work has to consistently be put into them at a regular rate.

                So like an early access game that requires constant work to fix bugs and add content?

                The literal only other game to increase the price of a game over half a decade old has been Factorio.

                Even you said that Minecraft did the same (and I’m sure I can find plenty of early access games that did the same).

                As I said you’re just mad that they’re being honest, you’re angry that inflation is a bitch and you would prefer that some sectors pretend it isn’t, that makes you unable to analyze the situation objectively so you keep contradicting yourself. But I’m the one arguing in bad faith somehow.

                I’m done here, goodbye!

                • CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  So like an early access game that requires constant work to fix bugs and add content?

                  No, not like that. Maintaining a massive service like Netflix isn’t comparable to updating and bug fixing an indie project.

                  Even you said that Minecraft did the same

                  I’m specifically referring to using inflation as a cover. I’ve said multiple times that it’s fine for these projects to increase the price if they feel they’ve added enough content to warrant it. That’s what Minecraft did.

                  and I’m sure I can find plenty of early access games that did the same

                  That used inflation as an excuse to increase an existing game’s price? Go for it.

                  Either way, the fact that only two indie games in the entire industry are the only two to do this sort of proves my point. Sooo why would I be angry? Hell, I already own Satisfactory lol. But oh well, good luck to ya.