Turok HD Remaster out tomorrow

Look again, that's that not blood ohohohohoho!

^^^ Pretty much

For me it's just how much BETTER the remaster plays than the old PC and N64 versions. If anyone who is familiar with those would just sit down and give it a shot, they'd see what a difference it is. The control and speed on the remaster is so fluent and awesome that it's just a blast to play, even having played the N64 one many times before. No contest. I can really appreciate that kind of thing a lot and I hope that Turok 2 follows a similar trend, despite the slower and more deliberate gameplay it has.

Not that there's anything wrong with pic #2 above, but it doesn't justify $20 for sure.

AndrewB said:

Not that there's anything wrong with pic #2 above, but it doesn't justify $20 for sure.

Except that the license is apparently really difficult, and Turok's print publisher evidently demanded an awful lot for this rerelease...

All I know is I'm definitely going to pony up the $20 as soon as I get some money. I can think of many full-budget games that are less worth the $20 than this humble port-update.

WildWeasel said:

Except that the license is apparently really difficult, and Turok's print publisher evidently demanded an awful lot for this rerelease...

Totally irrelevant. Software prices should always be set to maximize revenue; development cost is already lost money and must be forgotten.

If 100 people are willing to pay $20 for this, and 1000 people are willing to pay $5 for this, then the creators would be stabbing themselves in the face if they didn't lower the price. They would be losing 60% of their potential revenue.

I didn't realise you were the official arbitrator of all items of intrinsic value and their alleged worth to the consumer. How dare someone price something at a value you don't deem worthy. They should be hung up on a mast and flogged for disobeying your divine insight!

Edward850 said:

I didn't realise you were the official arbitrator of all items of intrinsic value and their alleged worth to the consumer. How dare someone price something at a value you don't deem worthy. They should be hung up on a mast and flogged for disobeying your divine insight!

I was going to come up with a clever rebuttal to this post, but then I realized that you didn't refute anything I said, so I would just end up making a fool of myself by responding to a nonexistent argument.

Refuting an argument would have required you to have posted something that could be considered rational thought. You are just posting a bunch of angry ramblings to justify why you can't spend pizza money on a video game (because seriously $20 is the same cost as the minimum price of delivery pizza), thus you demand it to be a particular price using field of economics that you have absolutely no experience or expertise in, all while under the guise that you speak for "everyone" rather than just yourself.

Once again, everything I posted 2 posts ago is 100% correct, and since you can't seem to come up with any response other than, and I paraphrase, "you're a stupid poopy head", I would be allowing myself to be massively trolled by explaining the numerous things that are incorrect in your posts.

Hey now, Quasar and co. probably get enough of this bickering out of the Steam forums. It's fine that you don't think Turok is worth $20, but do you really think that's a cause worth arguing "to the death"?

I bought it for $16 and it seems totally worth it to me.

Although I kind of wish the enemies with guns had a bit more wind-up time before they started shooting the crap outta me, but hey, whatever.

Shadow Hog said:

I bought it for $16 and it seems totally worth it to me.

Although I kind of wish the enemies with guns had a bit more wind-up time before they started shooting the crap outta me, but hey, whatever.

I feel like the guns (and the Longhunter's three Humvees) are among the few things that put up a credible threat on Normal mode.

(Well, there was also the time one of the huge Pur'lin knocked me off a cliff when he died...)

SYS said:

You need to keep calling them a faggot until they agree with you. Don't let the terrorists win.

Hey, that's disrespectful; bundles of sticks are smarter than Steam forum users.

Quasar said:

http://i.imgur.com/WQSTOPk.jpg

It's a shame how Turok 2008 turned out to be a terrible game.

AndrewB said:

Once again, everything I posted 2 posts ago is 100% correct,

So you must have quite good knowledge of the licensing conditions.
It's often not that easy to make something cheaper, because those fees can easily contain some fixed 'per item' amount, and if you sell below that point you not only get nothing, you make a loss on the game, the more it sells.

So for any fundamental criticism on the pricing we first need to know how much these people are scamming off.

Graf Zahl said:

So you must have quite good knowledge of the licensing conditions.

Nope, not relevant. Somewhere, there's an ideal price to charge for your product. Charge too much and you lose money by deterring too many customers. Charge too little and you are just leaving money on the table.

Duke Nukem Forever had insane development costs and challenges; does that mean it should have been priced at $200? Grand Theft Auto 5 cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make, yet it was priced at only $60. Why is that?

Unless your entire business model is some kind of sob story customer-sympathy strategy, the "ideal price" for your product is absolutely 100% unaffected by your trials and tribulations during development.

It's often not that easy to make something cheaper,

It's already been made.

because those fees can easily contain some fixed 'per item' amount, and if you sell below that point you not only get nothing, you make a loss on the game, the more it sells.

We're talking about a downloadable game here, not some tangible item that must be trucked to customers all over the country. It costs literally a fraction of a penny to deliver a gigabyte over an internet connection.

And sometimes losses are unavoidable. In this case, the ideal price remains the same, but it serves to minimize losses rather than maximize profits.

So for any fundamental criticism on the pricing we first need to know how much these people are scamming off.

No we don't, for reasons covered above.

I personally believe that $20 is higher than the ideal price for a game like this, and a lower price would actually recoup more money for the developers. But this is just opinion. Everything else I said is objective fact.

While neither in control of nor privy to any NDS marketing data, I heard through the grapevine that the units moved in the first week were in the 6 digit range so, I don't know how many people you think were deterred but it's definitely not on the scale of numbers you're implying in some of your comments.

I don't think AndrewB can business.

Quasar said:

While neither in control of nor privy to any NDS marketing data, I heard through the grapevine that the units moved in the first week were in the 6 digit range so, I don't know how many people you think were deterred but it's definitely not on the scale of numbers you're implying in some of your comments.

That's awesome, but it could be in the 9 digit range and everything I said would still apply

AndrewB said:

That's awesome, but it could be in the 9 digit range and everything I said would still apply

Except your implicit assumption is that the number of people with an objection to the price is significant enough to matter. You have no evidence for that. Either way, I believe the response has been more than adequate to not only recoup development costs but ensure profit.

I totally understand some people don't like the price point. I think it'd not be an issue even if they went $5 lower with it. However I also think that A. the people complaining are a small minority and B. a good number of them don't have any reason for it better than "I think this game is old and therefore it should basically be free." Nothing to do with whether or not they can afford it, how it compares to how much other stuff they buy costs (cue the kiddos with $80 worth of COD DLC being the first to post complaints on the forums, for example), or what they think the game is really worth.

Most of it is just straight up bitching to be frank. I sincerely hope there will be an equal number of people bitching at Bethesda for selling the new Doom for $60. The last time I paid $60 for a game was in the late 1990s and it was on a physical ROM cartridge.

Quasar said:

Except your implicit assumption is that the number of people with an objection to the price is significant enough to matter. You have no evidence for that.

Tell me, exactly what statement did I make that contained this "implicit assumption"? It seems like you're attacking a strawman.

fuck me, AndrewB/Quasar slapfight. Bring me the vaseline.

This is why we can't have nice things.

I want them to do each other in the ass, via live stream.


Oh, oh, and I want Cher music on in the background at full volume. Preferably something from the 2000s.

AndrewB said:

Totally irrelevant. Software prices should always be set to maximize revenue; development cost is already lost money and must be forgotten.

If 100 people are willing to pay $20 for this, and 1000 people are willing to pay $5 for this, then the creators would be stabbing themselves in the face if they didn't lower the price. They would be losing 60% of their potential revenue.

AndrewB said:

Tell me, exactly what statement did I make that contained this "implicit assumption"? It seems like you're attacking a strawman.

Do you even read your own posts?

Hey, quick question. If you guys ever do an update, do you think you could add an option to disable the flash that occurs whenever you pick up an item? It's sort of disorientating, especially when a lot of those little doritos are next to each other.

Is the blood colors fixed? I finished Vinny's playthrough of the game recently and noticed odd and contrasting blood colors with some enemies. Notably the leapers and alien infantry. The former only bled red whereas the latter bleed yellow.

Just bought it this morning. Congrats to Quasar, Kaiser, and the NDS guys for a solid release!

Cyanosis said:

Is the blood colors fixed? I finished Vinny's playthrough of the game recently and noticed odd and contrasting blood colors with some enemies. Notably the leapers and alien infantry. The former only bled red whereas the latter bleed yellow.

Seems like those are not currently fixed; changelog indicates that there has been some work done to the blood recently (adding support for the "green" and "none" options like the N64 game), but the beetles and leapers still bleed a combination of red and gold. I don't remember the N64 version clearly enough to tell if this is intentional, though.