Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Low price doesn't mean there's gonna be lot of cheaters. Reason why csgo has lot of cheaters is, because it has old engine with bad functioning anti cheat. (also comunity is not good at all) Prime acc is also shit. Valve devs got a great idea with levels system (you can play competitive when you reach lvl 3 or 4) but they fuck up the idea. Look at league of legends ... you cant play ranked games until you reach lvl 30 - it takes about 120-180 games > 1 game = 35min > 150 games = 5 250mins => 87.5 hours > let's take 90 hours ... If you play 4 hours per day it takes 22.5 days to reach lvl 30 and play RANKED games. Imagine if this system will be applied to FPS game ... do you think cheaters want create hundreds accounts to cheat again and again if they have to spend 22.5 days leveling up to play another ranked game? Probably NOT.

Look at COD, it costs 60 euros because the put lot of staff into the game and thousands of hours were spend to develop it. (I know, devs fuck up everything) BUT produce game like this costs 100x or even 10000x more than indie gamse (huge dev team, investors, advertisement... etc.) and Bat44 is kind of indie game.

IMHO bat44 should costs 10-15 euros , cause small dev team + micro transaction (every one be able to support devs and game buying skins and other cosmetics staff) => low price does mean huge community -> popularity .... popularity -> event sponsoring -> eSport growing

Edited by LysoO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

14 minutes ago, LysoO said:

Look at COD, it costs 60 euros because the put lot of staff into the game and thousands of hours were spend to develop it.

Ye? So why it does feel like they took their last game and applied a different texture on it with their each "new" game? Their 4-5h campaign is WAY too short to justify the price and MP is really just a reskin. 

Also microtransactions are really not a reason to have a low price. Most online games these days have some sort of microtransactions.

Edited by DarkMortyr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, DarkMortyr said:

 

Ye? So why it does feel like they took their last game and applied a different texture on it with their each "new" game? Their 4-5h campaign is WAY too short to justify the price and MP is really just a reskin. 

Also microtransactions are really not a reason to have a low price. Most online games these days have some sort of microtransactions.

fully true!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, take how much most AAA titles charge, now consider how much they cost to make.

With this info you apply the same proportion to a game like Battalion with a small dev team. Plus you need to consider that being a small studio may cost less but also has less popularity.

However, a platform like steam gives any game the range they need to be worldwide purchased.

Another thing, that could be used as a strat, is to organize the community to buy the game on the same day/week to be able to climb on the steam ladder of most purchased games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO 20-30 euro is a decent price as long as you roll some "free weekends" after release so people can get familiar with the game. We know the game will be good cause we test it and provide feedback, but there're still many people out there, who think it's just "shitty cod reskin".

Edited by skitelo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, HypeRNT said:

i mean if people are willing to buy multiple games then a $50 price tag is nothing special.. i mean its an expected price for a ps4 game these days.. Obv as a customer i would love to pay as little as i can, but just speaking in general terms, if someone told me the price tag was $50, i would say, ok cool, and im sure it will be under that im just trying to emphasize the normality of that price tag.

As for titalfall, i think the price tag made perfect sense, like you said its a AAA fps game, i think people are just not as excited about modern warfare type combat as well as like you said it came into competition with cod and bf which is basically suicide for any other franchise to launch an fps game with in that time frame.

Overall, personally myself i am not worried about the price tag at all, i would predict that it will be at $29.99, regardless, im a competitive player and all i really are about is how polished the game is for an Esport, id pay a lot more then $50 for a game like that, but thats just me.

$50 in pounds would be what, £30-£40 on somewhere like steam, and I know I would feel a bit turned off from it. I ain't rich, as a matter of fact I'm still part way through getting my PC after 4-5 months of saving to get the motherboard, CPU, RAM and a new case. A new game being good doesn't by itself bring new players in droves, it's it being accessible and/or fun. Accessibility includes it's price not being too high, so that most people can afford it as well as being able to get into it and have fun at whatever level you want to play. I have a bit of a small experience in competitive anything, but what I have is in Insurgency, and that has a small price barrier of £7, but then the skills required to be able to play and the need to develop those skills normally turned people off and so went nowhere as a competitive game however fun it was. As long as those two are balanced and people can enter and be retained and stay for a while then the game will do fine :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Masser said:

$50 in pounds would be what, £30-£40 on somewhere like steam, and I know I would feel a bit turned off from it. I ain't rich, as a matter of fact I'm still part way through getting my PC after 4-5 months of saving to get the motherboard, CPU, RAM and a new case. A new game being good doesn't by itself bring new players in droves, it's it being accessible and/or fun. Accessibility includes it's price not being too high, so that most people can afford it as well as being able to get into it and have fun at whatever level you want to play. I have a bit of a small experience in competitive anything, but what I have is in Insurgency, and that has a small price barrier of £7, but then the skills required to be able to play and the need to develop those skills normally turned people off and so went nowhere as a competitive game however fun it was. As long as those two are balanced and people can enter and be retained and stay for a while then the game will do fine :)

I mean $50 can be a turn off for a game like this, but hell,  counter strike series was always cheap, and as ive stated i think its going to be $19.99 or $29.99, im just simply saying what i would pay for a game that will support dedi servers/mod tools/PC community, because there are very few out there, those features to me are priceless these days. These days  mobile games come at a decent cost as well, or filled with micro transactions which these days its pretty common and almost expected, hell i actually think they help most games secure budget for further content(look at pubg with their new cases/items to support the lan in Germany).

Overall what will define this game is if its going to be regarded as an esports game, otherwise there are plenty games out there with a story mode, better graphics and a ton of fluff, but no competitive scene, people dont play csgo for graphics or story mode, simply because its a competition based game and thats what im hoping battalion will be, a high skill shooter with great support and hopefully lot of communications with leagues will help it grow its Esports base. Im sure the price will make a lot of people happy.

Edited by HypeRNT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pricing it between 20-30 US on steam EA is probably a good move. I see so many new game priced 50-60 and I just ignore them. Especially with the Aussie dollar conversion rate, 50-60US is a ripoff for most games now days. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lawbreakers released yesterday for $29.99 and has a lot of similarities with Bat44.

-FPS -multiplayer only -UE4 -dedi servers -competitive -new IP -loot boxes

no complaining voices at that price but that game had no early access. maybe that needs to be factored into the price at EA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

40€, or more, is way too expensive for a multiplayer game that has no established fan base (or a very large marketing budget).
20~25€ seems
a good compromise between  being attractive to new players, and being a barrier to cheaters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its fine, i mean csgo isnt much more expensive either, its all about how they market this game. There needs to be hype going on, and if its this close to release, im expecting opportunity to get my hands on it before the release in early 2018.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Xtreem said:

Price at $10.99, think they could make it a bit more expensive, what does everybody think about it?

They didn't specify, but remember they might be referring to it being £10.99 considering they're British, and were talking to a British interviewer according to others as I haven't seen the interview yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Xtreem said:

Price at $10.99, think they could make it a bit more expensive, what does everybody think about it?

If this is really true then i'm a bit disappointed. I have bought a standard steam key from their kickstarter for 15/20 euro's. So that means that i have overpaid if the game retails for 10,99. I was in the understanding that if you help them build the game, by donating to their kickstarter, you'll get a reduction when the game releases. Why else would i take the risk of donating to something/someone unknown and not be rewarded for it, while someone else waits and see how things play out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SupreMe said:

If this is really true then i'm a bit disappointed. I have bought a standard steam key from their kickstarter for 15/20 euro's. So that means that i have overpaid if the game retails for 10,99. I was in the understanding that if you help them build the game, by donating to their kickstarter, you'll get a reduction when the game releases. Why else would i take the risk of donating to something/someone unknown and not be rewarded for it, while someone else waits and see how things play out?

yo supreme. Ive bought beta access for 50 pounds at humble bundle. Still no beta access and in Jan its gonna be 10.99 :D So yeah im a bit dissapointed about this aswel but well if it actually helped the development and the retail prize will bring many more people into the game so it becomes longterm esports then its at least worth it. But I see your point

Edited by jackis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SupreMe said:

If this is really true then i'm a bit disappointed. I have bought a standard steam key from their kickstarter for 15/20 euro's. So that means that i have overpaid if the game retails for 10,99. I was in the understanding that if you help them build the game, by donating to their kickstarter, you'll get a reduction when the game releases. Why else would i take the risk of donating to something/someone unknown and not be rewarded for it, while someone else waits and see how things play out?

I see Kickstarter more as an option to support the idea as a whole rather than just a webstore where you can buy fancy stuff.

There are a whole bunch of people (including me) who've paid pretty large amounts, only to support Bulkhead so they would be able to make this game. I don't see nor hear anyone of the higher tier backers complain? ^^

 

People use Kickstarter to get their ideas lifted off the ground. There are many ideas and so on, but remember that ideas, strategies and opinions are able to change since it's all so early.

We we're promised to be able to play the Alpha. Well, I guess we did. 

Just be patient, folks. I'm sure these guys know what they're doing. And hey! At least they're not scammers like a bunch of creators on Kickstarters are...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, BlueSmiley said:

I see Kickstarter more as an option to support the idea as a whole rather than just a webstore where you can buy fancy stuff.

There are a whole bunch of people (including me) who've paid pretty large amounts, only to support Bulkhead so they would be able to make this game. I don't see nor hear anyone of the higher tier backers complain? ^^

 

People use Kickstarter to get their ideas lifted off the ground. There are many ideas and so on, but remember that ideas, strategies and opinions are able to change since it's all so early.

We we're promised to be able to play the Alpha. Well, I guess we did. 

Just be patient, folks. I'm sure these guys know what they're doing. And hey! At least they're not scammers like a bunch of creators on Kickstarters are...

They guy above you sort of complained aswell and he pledged more to the development of this game than me. And I agree with you that kickstarter is there to lift idea's off the ground. But I also think that people who put faith into your idea and support you should get some sort of reward. Otherwise you could you sit on the sideline, see how things work out, risk nothing, in fact even be rewarded for it by paying less. That is just wrong. 

On another note, on their kickstarter page it explicitly says that the full game will retail for £30,00. So changing prize strategy after the kickstarter ended would be misleading in my eyes. Don't get me wrong i'm super stoked for this game, but i want things to be fair and as promised.

Edited by SupreMe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, SupreMe said:

They guy above you sort of complained aswell and he pledged more to the development of this game than me. And I agree with you that kickstarter is there to lift idea's off the ground. But I also think that people who put faith into your idea and support you should get some sort of reward. Otherwise you could you sit on the sideline, see how things work out, risk nothing, in fact even be rewarded for it by paying less. That is just wrong. 

On another note, on their kickstarter page it explicitly says that the full game will retail for £30,00. So changing prize strategy after the kickstarter ended would be misleading in my eyes. Don't get me wrong i'm super stoked for this game, but i want things to be fair and as promised.

i agree with both groups of backers who are unhappy and happy with the reduced price because there are valid reasons why both perspectives are right. the biggest issue in all of this is kickstarter backers took all the risk and have so far not been told if taking that risk is going to be rewarded. if Bulkhead say they're dropping the price they should also be saying how they'll be compensating early backers at the same time. there's alot of potential PR fallout from this that they don't seem to have considered. my suggestion would be to give backers double the copies they were promised so they can gift it to a friend or sell it on.

Edited by Farq-S
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw Joe answer in another topic so obviously they're reading the forums, therefor I would appreciate it if someone from bulkhead could give more insight in their price strategy. Because honestly when I think about it if the game would retail for less than i've backed in the kickstarter I would feel a bit scammed. They say in the kickstarter that the game will retail for 30 pounds so they lure people by offering a key for 20 pounds. If now they would deviate from this strategy without compensating, that would be sueable for misleading. Ofcourse nobody would do that because it involves a small amount and it's just about a videogame, but still...

For me a reason to never back a kickstarter again if this is common policy.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree both with @Farq-S & @SupreMe and i'm suprised still that there hasnt been any kind of clarification, either it's going to be explained in the upcoming news at the end of this week as promised or one of the devs will post something about it in here.

I guess maybe tagging the community manager would be the best way to get a clear answer regarding this matter? @[CM] BigTuna @[CM] phantasy

I'm also one of the closed beta founder @jackis and kind of feel left behind the courtains regarding the state of the game and aswell a proper roadmap of the game atm.

I would be quite baffled if i paid a let's say 32EUR for a closed beta, which maybe could be only a months worth of gameplay? Or if the lay-up is the same as Alpha maybe we're talking roughly about 6h gameplay in total? (This is just my own assumption from the current lack of information there is)

Alot of people are going to propably say in the lines with "Well, you're also supporting for the development for the game" yeah, i totally get it. But i'm also supporting a game based on the information that we had aswell, and the timeline which was presented aswell. Just too many questions, and someone has to be the "black sheep" to ask them.. Seen alot of people wondering the same but too afraid to ask due to (sorry to say this) whiteknight/fanboy-ism in the community and facing the angry mob.

#RantIsOver

Edited by Ryssk
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They made that Kickstarter in early last year in Spring if I remember correctly. Since then they have had several things change, with support from Square Enix who had previously published their game the Turing Test, but they only got their support post Kickstarter. Admittedly maybe they should have taken this possibility into account, but with a potential niche thing in the eyes of some such as a competitive 5v5 FPS where even if you don't see it as a niche game, you have CSGO, Rainbow Six and even PUBG now to compete with and would take a lot of effort, PR and potentially money to increase its player base and make it a money maker which is what businesses are made to do.

So with that taken into account, they also got a lot of support for a game which they had put three developers to work on for three weeks if I am not wrong. It was very early and so there was a risk people might have dismissed it and potentially only just been able to afford the game as a studio or have to drop it. I wouldn't be surprised to hear if they were overwhelmed with having hit their Kickstarter amount considering all of this. Almost as soon as I had heard about it around the Winter Update they mentioned about changing the price to be lower (So this was in November or December time), so maybe 5-6 months after they had finished their Kickstarter. Thing's had changed, and for sure they should compensate for having reduced the price to be £10.99, but it is the only real way of making the game a more probable success. A £30 competitive game, where it sure has matchmaking, the ability to rent servers, mod the game, and compete via leagues such as ESL, would not be successful in my mind. The game would need a constant flow of people coming into the game, enough so that it isn't the same 50 or so people at the top level (where ever that top level may be, pro or semi-pro it would still be a boring scene to be in with so few people coming into the top level) and considering that competitive play and competition is the main focus of this game, it would be sad to see it happen.

They have in the past promised extras I'm sure for those who backed the alpha stage, not sure about the beta stage though. I may be wrong and misinformed, but if so there is the potential for getting keys to give to friends or something similar.
I am personally not bothered, as I made a long-term investment. I didn't plan to play the alpha to be able to learn the best nades, smokes, wallbangs and prefires, but more just because I liked the look of the game. It looked like it had people who cared behind the reins, and so I only hoped to be able to play enough to get a feel myself for the game, and I did get to play a few hours of the game and decided that what I felt matched up with the footage and impressions I had got from the footage.
If anyone feels they didn't get their money's worth, feel free to go to BigTuna, Brammer or any of the other developers about it. All I would ask if not to be abusive, harass them or be rude about it. They have worked hard with good intentions and were just unable to see as far as this and some of the bumps that happened along the road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Masser said:

They made that Kickstarter in early last year in Spring if I remember correctly. Since then they have had several things change, with support from Square Enix who had previously published their game the Turing Test, but they only got their support post Kickstarter. Admittedly maybe they should have taken this possibility into account, but with a potential niche thing in the eyes of some such as a competitive 5v5 FPS where even if you don't see it as a niche game, you have CSGO, Rainbow Six and even PUBG now to compete with and would take a lot of effort, PR and potentially money to increase its player base and make it a money maker which is what businesses are made to do.

So with that taken into account, they also got a lot of support for a game which they had put three developers to work on for three weeks if I am not wrong. It was very early and so there was a risk people might have dismissed it and potentially only just been able to afford the game as a studio or have to drop it. I wouldn't be surprised to hear if they were overwhelmed with having hit their Kickstarter amount considering all of this. Almost as soon as I had heard about it around the Winter Update they mentioned about changing the price to be lower (So this was in November or December time), so maybe 5-6 months after they had finished their Kickstarter. Thing's had changed, and for sure they should compensate for having reduced the price to be £10.99, but it is the only real way of making the game a more probable success. A £30 competitive game, where it sure has matchmaking, the ability to rent servers, mod the game, and compete via leagues such as ESL, would not be successful in my mind. The game would need a constant flow of people coming into the game, enough so that it isn't the same 50 or so people at the top level (where ever that top level may be, pro or semi-pro it would still be a boring scene to be in with so few people coming into the top level) and considering that competitive play and competition is the main focus of this game, it would be sad to see it happen.

They have in the past promised extras I'm sure for those who backed the alpha stage, not sure about the beta stage though. I may be wrong and misinformed, but if so there is the potential for getting keys to give to friends or something similar.
I am personally not bothered, as I made a long-term investment. I didn't plan to play the alpha to be able to learn the best nades, smokes, wallbangs and prefires, but more just because I liked the look of the game. It looked like it had people who cared behind the reins, and so I only hoped to be able to play enough to get a feel myself for the game, and I did get to play a few hours of the game and decided that what I felt matched up with the footage and impressions I had got from the footage.
If anyone feels they didn't get their money's worth, feel free to go to BigTuna, Brammer or any of the other developers about it. All I would ask if not to be abusive, harass them or be rude about it. They have worked hard with good intentions and were just unable to see as far as this and some of the bumps that happened along the road.

 

6 minutes ago, Farq-S said:

think you're over-analyzing this a little too much @Masser. my observation was very simple. if bulkhead are saying the price is now going to be £10.99 when it was priced in the kickstarter at £30 people backed the game expecting the game to retail around that price. it's not a matter of whether they're receiving less or more of a game. if bulkhead are saying the price is now £10.99 they should be saying, in the same sentence, and our backers are going to get X by way of compensating them for backing us when the risk was at its greatest. it's about backers not being rewarded for taking a huge risk before the game even existed. if every kickstarter turned out like this there'd be no need for a kickstarter because people would just sit back and wait for the game to release taking zero risk knowing it'll be much cheaper.

 

Edited by Farq-S
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Farq-S said:

 

 

That may be true, but there are factors that they couldn't have foreseen. It's unfortunate for us it's happened, but they didn't know when they launched the Kickstarter they were going to have some of these things happen. It was out of their control to a large extent, and I think that they should clarify what is going to happen, but I just think it's very easy to say "They backstabbed us!" as some people have been hinting. Things change, and it is annoying when it happens, but if they didn't do anything then potentially these things wouldn't happen such as Square Enix picking them up like with the Turing Test, and in my mind, they had to change the price or be potentially left in the dust. They slipped up during the Kickstarter in my opinion stating a particular price even though it is something that is important to see, as it shows they had thought ahead of last year. They have slipped up now again and they should clarify. Don't know when EGX ends, but let's wait and see.

tl;dr They weren't in control entirely and it's more complicated than it seems they should clarify what they will or will not do with the tiers of the backers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Masser said:

That may be true, but there are factors that they couldn't have foreseen. It's unfortunate for us it's happened, but they didn't know when they launched the Kickstarter they were going to have some of these things happen. It was out of their control to a large extent, and I think that they should clarify what is going to happen, but I just think it's very easy to say "They backstabbed us!" as some people have been hinting. Things change, and it is annoying when it happens, but if they didn't do anything then potentially these things wouldn't happen such as Square Enix picking them up like with the Turing Test, and in my mind, they had to change the price or be potentially left in the dust. They slipped up during the Kickstarter in my opinion stating a particular price even though it is something that is important to see, as it shows they had thought ahead of last year. They have slipped up now again and they should clarify. Don't know when EGX ends, but let's wait and see.

tl;dr They weren't in control entirely and it's more complicated than it seems they should clarify what they will or will not do with the tiers of the backers.

what you said in your last sentence is all i'm saying. to me, this is not a matter of Bulkhead misleading or backstabbing in any way and anyone who implies that i would be one of the first to defend Bulkhead. it's just a matter of a gap in their communication with the players which can be easily rectified before anyone starts throwing incorrect accusations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×