Hollow Knight Sequel 'Silksong' Crashed Game Stores, as $20 Price Irks Competitors - Slashdot
games.slashdot.org
Last week Steam and other major storefronts crashed, reports the Guardian, including Nintendo's eShop, PlayStation Store and Microsoft Store. They were all "unable to cope with the demand for Hollow Knight: Silksong, the long-awaited sequel to the critically acclaimed 2017 indie hit Hollow Knight."...

Last week Steam and other major storefronts crashed, reports the Guardian, including Nintendo’s eShop, PlayStation Store and Microsoft Store.

  • Godort@lemmy.caEnglish
    352·
    2 days ago

    Honestly, I would’ve paid $60 for this game and still would be happy with it at that price point. The game is incredibly good, if a bit punishing.

    The fact that it was only $20 means that this game is an incredible value prospect, and will likely reach a much larger audience as a result.

    TC was in a lucky position because their first game was also incredibly popular and sold well enough that budget was probably never a concern, and not all devs have that luxury, but indie games are supposed to be like this. They’re supposed to be made for the enjoyment of the artform with lower scopes and lower budgets. They aren’t supposed to compete with the AAA space.

      • Brave Little Hitachi Wand@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        2 days ago

        What I notice in my experience (with a couple obvious exceptions) is that at any price, I typically get way more entertainment time per dollar with indie games. Hollow Knight is deep into pennies per hour long ago, Slay the Spire is close to free at this point, and even indie games I don’t finish end up being the cheapest form of entertainment I’ve got. That said it’s the same conversation, but an order of magnitude less “value” with big budget game releases.

        Back in the arcade era, they made games arbitrarily difficult to make us spend more quarters. Hence why so many middle aged gamers are good at platformers and have a chip on their shoulders about easier modern games. So I don’t know if hours per dollar is really the conversation we should be having about games, because that’s not the value proposition for me.

        The real value of games is as art. Such a variety of creative energies are poured into game development that it’s easy to end up with a whole that fails to cohere to some extent. When it does come together with not only cohesiveness but a clarity of artistic intent, that should be seen as an astonishing achievement.

        The real reason I think indie games do better in terms of the flawed metric of playtime per dollar is because of the smaller teams and leaner budgeting. I think we agree here. They are not as pressured by externalities to create on a schedule, to appear valuable to shareholders by clumsily chasing buzzword trends in game design, by monetising with dark patterns and micro transactions. Too much money is toxic to artistic pursuits.

        I guess my only quarrel with you is the idea that Silksong wouldn’t have been worth $60. I’m already ten hours in, just found the first main boss, and on your metric it’d already have beaten the best movie I’ve ever seen in theatres for entertainment time per dollar. It’s a flawed yardstick that still makes the game look good.