No Man's Sky Will Carry An Intergalactic Entry Fee on PS4

Wow, that is surprising! I was expecting £15.99 at most. But if it gets reviews as good or better than The Witness did then I'm sure it will do well. Certainly does look like it has a lot of potential.

@get2sammyb I was! I see your point, but it is an indie developer and before The Witness came out I can't think of any indie game that cost above £16.

I don't have a big issue with the price, just surprised.

That teensy team probably hasn't slept in years making this game, considering the scope and difficulties they've ran into, like that flood. If it's as good as the hype suggest, then more power to them, they've got my money.

I never realised this was made by an indie developer so I was expecting around that price anyhow. Will still be picking this up first week

Out March 3rd?

I was expecting $40... That said still looking forward to it.

This is a problem.

Blockbuster films which have taken years to make with a cast of hundreds are released on Blueray for £15. We dont expect this of games - but why is it beyond the realms of possibility to ask for a similar price point?

The argument about time, effort and budget its taking to create these games is null and void - its a total scam, $60 is crazy money for a 6 man team over 3 years.

Just what is this nonesense? Im gutted, £25 and I would preorder £30-£40 and I would wait until release. £50plus on release in the UK and I will just buy a better graphics card for my PC to run elite better. This is a total joke.

People really thought this WASNT going to be full priced? A game like AbZu or maybe RIME I could see but this?

If I had a ps4 I would get it.But 59.99/ dollars is a little high I never payed more than 40-50.I was expected it would be 69.99-79.99.

@Splat

I was expecting 40 US as well, but if it's a good game, I won't argue with 60 US whatsoever.

@3Above

Yes, it's a bit comical that people get up in arms about 60 dollars.............

...........unless you happen to be SFV. #capcomsucks

@LieutenantFatman That 15.99 is Pounds, right? There have been several $19.99 games in the US. Even on the Wii U at least 3 or 4. 15.99 may be $19.99 though.

If I had to guess before this I probably would have guessed $15. Maybe $20 b/c that seems to be becoming the new norm. But I would never had said $60 for an indie game made by a 3 person team. R&C is $40, and despite Sony ignoring it, it still looks great.

No way this game was developed on the same mega-budgets as other full retail releases.

Now look, I don't mind budget disparities between $60 games- I buy both mega budget AAA titles all the way down to AAA platformers and everything in between. But they're all extremely polished, EXTREMELY, and provide the full retail experience.

I'll pay $60 for this IF it's just as polished and robust as you would expect from a full retail release. No favoritism will be granted. You charge full price, you're going to be held to the same full standards of critique as every other $60 game.

@3Above
Uh, no. I certainly didn't. Why would I? It's an indie game (not to say indies are incapable of providing the full retail experience but let's face it- statistically speaking the vast majority don't, which is why it was not expected). Just because it's hyped doesn't automatically warrant a $60 price tag.

***EDIT***
And for the record, I have always questioned selling randomly generated content for the same price as thoroughly well thought-out, purposeful, masterfully designed content. Randomly generated content is never as good as expert level design. But it's cheap, and "good enough" for most. So more and more we see developers using this tactic. It has its place in gaming for sure, but, for full retail price I expect masterful game design, not random placement. It feels so... mediocre compared to something purposely designed a specific way. And tbh, I'm ok settling for randomly generated content, provided the price reflects it.

My only real comment is that I'm tired of people and their dismissive use of the term indie, as though not being tied to a big money publisher somehow makes the time and effort developers put into a game less worth while.
Before the likes of EA and Ubisoft became money making giants with annual output schedules, computer games came from developers who made them because they wanted to. The whole industry exists because of people like "indies" and there are a lot of spoilt little twits who would do well to think about that.

No Man's Sky is one of the most ambitious games I've ever seen and it's a much bigger risk for a small team to make something like this than it is for someone being bankrolled by a massive publisher, why shouldn't it be the same price as any other full release?!

Wow, no way am I paying full price for this game. Don't forget about the little extra's that are sure to come at a later date, is there a season pass lol. £20 max or it's never seeing my library. Just like The Witness (which I wouldn't pay more than a tenner for).

This game never appealed to me from the start, as Minecraft, I just don't care for the exploration itself and I like a story wrapping the thing.

I just want a damn release date already! I could care less how much it costs. I've wanted it since the first footage of it was shown!

Charge £15 for an indie game and everyones ok with it because its all "part of the plan". Charge £50 AND EVERYBODY LOSES THEIR MINDS!.

@Grawlog "Who cares how many people made the game, or how long a game took to make? How does that in any way relate to the retail price? These are serious problems for people?"

Because next thing you know every single indie game will have a £50 price tag and AAA games will be £100 each. How do you know a game will keep you engaged? The ante goes up when the relatively fair pricing of games between 1995-2010 has now become a shambles.

Ive just downloaded galax-z, its not really for me. Now lets say I paid £50 for it. I would feel robbed. You would feel robbed. That's the problem.

How can CDPR make such a huge game for £50 - yet a team of 6 charge the same for a procedural generated game. Madness.

@MikLSP "No Man's Sky is one of the most ambitious games I've ever seen and it's a much bigger risk for a small team to make something like this"

Yes and no, ambitious - 100%. Bigger risk? Not really, there's a market for space exploration games. Elite was made way back in 1984 and went on to win best game for the BBC micro and Amstrad CPC, Eve has been hugely popular for years and Star Commander thingy (cant remember the name) is the most funded kickstarter project ever. They are just filling a gap. Is it too much to ask of the Joe danger team to provide one if the best games on the ps4? Yes - Joe Danger is average at best. The bigger risk would have been sticking with Joe Danger though as its a poor mans trials. Just like no mans sky being a poor mans Elite.

Make it £25 Sony and stop being stupid.

.

@LieutenantFatman 15.99? Stop. This has been trending to full AAA title for over a year now, especially since Sony started to come aboard and help with production as has been rumored.

@MikLSP Exactly, kids these days don't really know the history of video games. This project is quite obviously AAA quality and I don't think it really fits into an INDY or AAA or whatever label. I have extremely high hopes for this, and am happy that Sony stepped in to help with production etc. For what is on offer 60 seems very fair, especially considering games like Battlefront, Evolve, Titanfall, and The Order were all full priced and offered MUCH less. Get tired of the complaints about pricing honestly, especially when this is being made by a group of very passionate individuals that have dumped everything they have into its success. I will gladly pay 60.

Clearly I was under a rock when this news dropped.

I would be surprised by the price, but the hype of the game as well as it's status as an important PS4 title, I can see it.

Now, will I buy it? Well.....

@JaxonH It's not really an INDY per say at this point though. Sony has stepped in to help with funding, production, and publishing if the internet can be believed. I think Sony realized early on how special this game could be, especially if they want it as an exclusive for their vr. I have payed sixty for games and gotten alot less, but you are right, it must be judged as a full fledged title and not given the cheap indy treatment.

@SonyInfinity
Oh it absolutely does. Viewed through the lense of an indie this would score 10's across the board (I imagine, anyways). But with that full retail price comes full retail expectations, and what could have easily trumped the critical landscape becomes an all or nothing gamble. I hope it lives up to them, otherwise that overstepping of bounds could cost them- both in scores and sales...

I have all the faith in hello games to deliver on this don't fail me

Will wait for reviews and a physical edition.

Hm, I don't really play many indie games, so I'm not really familiar with that category. I didn't know No Man's Sky was even considered an indie, haha. That being said, I've been hyped about this game since I first saw it! However, as cool as it looks, I don't know that I would pay $60 for it at Day 1. If I knew a bit more about the game, I'd probably be more willing to drop that kind of money. As it stands, I am probably going to wait for a physical release, and some reviews. With all that being said, I'm not surprised at the price.

Honestly the lack of clarity and details, only very canned demos with the lead dev at the controls - leads me to believe there is more hype than game. I hope I am wrong. If it pans out I have no problems with a full price tag - everyone has to eat and earn a living. But lately pre-release secrecy has been a very bad sign.

Hahahaha, really? I was on the fence about this as theirs no way its really the size of the universe and its obviously just a hype machine. But this is a joke. I'll wait and pick it up on sale and if it comes VR compatible I may grab it for $30. They likely would have made more money charging $20-30, as it would've been an impulse buy. But now it will be competing with juggernauts like CoD, Horizon Zero Dawn, Dishonored 2, etc. This must be a joke as its just too funny.

Idk I kind of expected it to be priced like a normal game. It was being backed by Sony so I imagined it'd treated like any other first party game. Would I buy it? Dunno, I'll wait for the reviews. Horizon and Uncharted definitely because they are what I'd generally play on a PlayStation.

It's been listed on Amazon at that price for months. Why all the suprise?
Most indie games last for about 6-8 hours, if you are in to this game you will be spending a lot more time than that playing it. You are getting a (supposedly) never ending game, why wouldn't it be full retail price?
Personally I'm gonna wait for the reviews.

I personally have no issue with that...I don't define the value of a game as the development cost of it. If the game is good and offers quality/quality content then I'm happy.

Indie...this as a term is becoming very clouded. Can we really compare a game like Axiom Verge to No Mans Sky??

Not surprised really but I'm hoping that means there'll be a lot more to the game that we're still unaware of. I can imagine Sony seeing how much interest there was in the title and suggesting they improve it to the point where it would be a proper retail title rather than an indie experiment. This was VR-compatible too right? If it was bundled with PSVR that would be really cool.

20 No Man Sky game's and you'll have enough cash to buy a high end PC, just saying.

Pass. I'll watch for a physical release then wait for it to drop to €10 or €15.

Since when have we looked at developer team size to determine the value of games? It's the end product that is valued and paid for, not the amount of resources and time that went into the product.

My car doesn't cost more than yours because it had 100 extra people working on it for 50 more hours! It's the perceived value that gives it its price - the equilibrium of the amount the seller wants for it v's the amount the buyer is willing to pay...

If the game gives 100 hours of fun gameplay (not saying it does just an example) then surely it's worth $/£60 irrespective of the number of people that created it?

Not sure about this game at all. Will definitely wait for a while for some user reviews before coughing up that sort of cash. Will be doing the same with The Division. I've ridden on the hype express too many times in the past

The price is a bit of a shock to be honest. I appreciate the supposed scale of the project. However, aside from "It's big and you can fly", we haven't had much information about actual "gameplay" and ways to keep the player engaged. The graphics look pretty good and the premise is exciting. Just a little cautious waiting for the suits to come and say "Well, you paid £50 for a game with a very small team and low overheads. Ass Creed 10, or whatever, has to be £80". If its not the team or the cost of goods we are paying for, then are we supposed to be paying for quality and enjoyment?" In that case, every game would need its own RRP based on metacritic or something. Be smart, be wary.

@themcnoisy
"Blockbuster films which have taken years to make with a cast of hundreds are released on Blueray for £15. We dont expect this of games - but why is it beyond the realms of possibility to ask for a similar price point?"

Films are paid for via tiers - firstly, initial release (Opening Weekend). Secondly, international release. Thirdly, BluRay/DVD release. Most films have covered their costs back by international release (either middle or end-of), and BluRays are where studios generally start making a "true" profit. (Ignoring any dubious Hollywood accounting practices).

Games, it should be obvious, don't have this tiered release system, which is why publishers take so much interest in pre-orders and pre-order incentives - once a game is released, that's it (excepting for HD re-releases, which a lot of people decry as a money-making scam. See, for example, Dark Souls 2: SotFS Edition). Games also don't (generally) have tie-in merchandise like Marvel comics, toys, bed-spreads, socks, etc, to raise awareness. A lot of games are just released into the void, unless they have a lot of hype (like GTA or No Man's Sky). Note, also, that console games have the second-hand-market to further squeeze publisher/developer revenues.

It should be fairly obvious, then, that any game that has cost a good amount of money to produce should aim to recoup that costs by releasing at a high-price-point, since it's easy to reduce the price in the future, but impossible to increase the price once released. You say "$60 is crazy money for a 6 man team over 3 years." yet minimum wage for someone over 21 in the UK is equivalent to $20k a year. That means - at the awful minimum wage we have in the UK - they need to clear ("turn a net profit of") $360k just to have earned the same as someone stacking shelves in Tesco.

Think about that, when you complain that an indie game shouldn't be priced too-high.

I always kind of assumed it would be full price considering the sheer scope of the game, especially if it has the rumoured VR support. This is one of games I'm looking forward to most this year and as we go forward I think the lines are getting blurred between Indie and AAA developed games. Especially when you have the likes of The Order with its very short campaign and half of it is a walking simulator, or Battlefront with its missing campaign and just a few mp maps both releasing at full price. Yet here we have a game with near limitless amounts of planets to explore and people complain that it's not £20 just because it's an indie, which itself is a very general term. The simple reality is that if this had a full retail release published by a big developer we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place

I don't have a issue with it really l, was expecting full price for it anyway so this is no surprise... Nice to start hearing a bit more about it won't be long till we're finally playing it....

@themcnoisy
By bigger risk I really mean that a small team investing all of their time and money is a big risk for them if the game doesn't do well. Imagine putting everything into a game only for it to be a massive flop and make no money, a small team would personally have lost on that but developers working on a salary for a large studio and publisher would merely move onto their next contract while the companies employing them take any financial hit.

Space exploration games are not yet prevalent on consoles really so perhaps there's an element of niche filling there but the real ambition is in creating something on such a scale in the way they have. Everything they're doing may have been done before but I think No Man's Sky is taking legitimate steps forwards and I hope it pays off.

Also, regarding your other points about game quality and feeling robbed. I would feel robbed if I paid full price for the shallow likes of Battlefront or Titanfall; or the dreadful quality of Aliens Colonial Marines, Assassins Creed Unity or Duke Nukem and yet nobody questioned their price point at launch.
You don't know for sure that any game is going to justify it's price but that decision should be made entirely based on the game itself and what it offers, not the amount of people and financial backing involved in making it.

@xMEADx a ridiculous comment, how is quantifying this for one game any different to all the other games that sell for the same price.
I could equally say 20 tanks of fuel and you would have enough cash to buy a second hand car....

To me, full price = retail only. If I have to spend € 60, at least I wanna claim some rights on what I buy.
Can someone explain me if this game can be played offline?

@Pixieking no actually the 'living wage' is £14040 a year if the min wage worker works 37.5 hours a week.

The poor blighter can buy a throwaway game for working 10 hours (12 after tax) woo hoo get working in sports direct chumps.

Rocket League has made over £50mil being free with cheap dlc. NMS price point is obscene.

@themcnoisy

"no actually the 'living wage' is £14040 a year if the min wage worker works 37.5 hours a week."

£14040 British Pounds is $19543 US Dollars, at today's exchange rate. That's less than the $20k I quoted. Thanks for correcting me.

"The poor blighter can buy a throwaway game for working 10 hours (12 after tax) woo hoo get working in sports direct chumps."

You do realise games are a luxury item, right? I've been on minimum wage jobs, and I can tell you now that games are the first thing to be dropped from my shopping list, because of that. No-one should expect a luxury item to be priced so low. It's like demanding Harrods stock PGTips alongside the hand-picked Ceylon.

"Rocket League has made over £50mil being free with cheap dlc."

If you honestly think Rocket League is the rule and not the exception, you need to look at this industry long and hard.

Oh, and let's not forget that that continued DLC support costs money, and may be attacked for being money-grabbing, depending upon who you talk to (it's DLC, which some consumers take exception to in all its forms).

"no actually the 'living wage' is £14040 a year if the min wage worker works 37.5 hours a week."

Also, point-of-order - "minimum wage" and "living wage" are not interchangeable.

People who thought this was gonna be less are delusional. It's clearly gonna be one of the largest games on PS4 in terms of both content and the work gone into it. If you're interested in the game but think that's too much it will go on sale at some point like every other game so it's no biggie at all.

@themcnoisy movies get 2 releases, they make most of their money (aka millions) in the cinemas then you have blu-rays

@Pixieking haha boom you saw the trick, well done. Nice comeback, fair points too. I do think its too much though.

Hey everyone! Why don't you wait to see how much it actually costs when it is released, and how well it gets reviewed before getting angry? Then you can make a decision about whether you're willing to buy it. Until then, calm the hell down.

The reason there has been very little details about the game has been stated by Sean. That it would ruin the game experience, as its about making your own story making new discoveries that no one else will make and to have an experience that no other game offers.
The price is what I expected it to be from day one. GTA was charged at full retail price when that was first released that was a top down view game and made by an indie company, no one complained then and now it's a massive franchise that's grown exponentially over the years with more and more money being poured in to it each time. Infact every games company that comes along will be defined as an indie company wether they are a 1 man band or 200 strong, it's not until they have proved themselves and backed by a large company that this changes.

@Nifty As Nifty points out....it's been on Amazon at £50 for a long time

It's a game from indie studio BUT with Sony funding its development. It's a hybrid between AAA/indie game but still it should be close to 40 dollars. I am currently not sold on this game entirely - some games like Space Engineers do seem to be on the same level. And those games are not hyped as much as this.

@SonyInfinity I'll definitely still consider buying on release. A lot of triple A games these days all feel like super generic clones of each other. This looks fresh, different, quite a different experience. That alone makes it all the more interesting.

Wow didn't see it coming - I love the art direction of this one but I always thought it was going to be around 40, don't know why.
I perceive the game as interesting technologically and artistically but kinda bland on the gameplay (I could be totally wrong), so I'll wait and see...a physical edition with that nice cover art would help.

@themcnoisy You are full off it mate how can you something that stupid. I would like to see do something like this. I did not see a game like this before or on the same scope by such a small team time is money you know.

I certainly didn't expect this price. We don't know anything about this game. How long it will be or even if there are other people. In all the videos, I haven't seen a single person. More information is needed. I understand people being annoyed at the price. The game looks shoddy. I know its stylised but it looks nothing like an Assassins Creed game. As gamers we're used to paying big money because of the amount of people it took to make 1 game look, play and sound amazing. Recently Firewatch came under fire for being broken on PS4 and people demanded their money back so I can understand the reluctance to pay these indie developers when they have made a new game. As someone pointed out, Hollywood movies cost millions yet they only charge about £15 a dvd. Why do we settle for paying more for a game? People argue about the amount of hours that you get out of a game but I still have my VHS tapes from years ago that still give me gratification as do some of you I'm sure.

@Flaming_Kaiser that made no sense, what are you saying man? Get over myself - for what pointing out that fools such as you are parted easily with your (parents) cash.

@themcnoisy the movie industry and the gaming industry are 2 different markets, when you play a game do you just sit and watch it for 2 hours? no. video games make you use your brain and make you get involved that's why its a "game". now i don't believe that the order 1886 should have had a $60 price point because it was only 2 hours of gameplay, but this? dude this will be the biggest game ever created, bigger than eve online, bigger than star citizen, when you put 1000's of hours into a game that's why it's 60 dollars

I'll never pay full retail price for a digital version. I'll not be in any rush.

7 out of 10 movies make a loss the 8th breaks even the other 2 make a large profit money.

I have NO issue with an 'indie' developer charging a AAA price for a game that competes with AAA in terms of content, production values etc. Personally though, I don't think this looks like a AAA game from a purely 'visual' perspective BUT that is only one aspect of game. I certainly can't see it competing with games like Uncharted 4, Horizon: Zero Dawn or even remastered games like Uncharted: Nathan Drake Collection, the Last of Us etc. O don't think it looks as visually impressive as games like BioShock, Dead Space, Red Dead Redemption etc from last gen either but like I said that's only one aspect.
The problem is though, that visuals are generally all we have to go on. Its not like we have first hand experience of everything the game offers. Most of that is still a bit of a mystery and all we have is a brief outline of what the developers are hoping to deliver but that doesn't tell me how the game 'feels' to play.
Whilst I can't deny this game seems very ambitious - especially for an 'indie' game - something that would be considered very ambitious for a AAA game too, I can't help feel though that it could get very repetitive, maybe even tedious. The procedurally generated planets all look very similar in essence and after a while could feel like deja vu. Slight variations in colour and life-forms aren't enough for me.
Rocket League has 'sold' less than 4m copies, around 7m people downloaded it for free and the game has already generated $70m. Most 'indie' games don't need to sell very many copies to turn a profit. AAA games with big studio's, big overheads etc also don't need to sell many copies to turn a profit. By 'many' copies, I mean as a percentage of potential gamers. PS4 has 40m users and if only 10% buy a game, it can still make a profit for a AAA title. 1-2% for 'some' indies is more than enough to be profitable.

Hard to tell with this game, I was real excited. But changes from the very promising first teaser to reports of "not meeting up to expectations in gameplay" to delays, to 'everything on track", and now a full 60 bucks (I was expecting 40-50)for possible download only? I just don't know if it's a day one buy for me anymore, might have to wait it out.....but if others feel like this now, waiting longer may end up losing interest and the game revenue suffers.

I do not have concerns about the price tag it is what it is indie game or not. The problem is that people are expecting AAA title when really that was never what it was going to be. Its been hyped so much that expectations are now too high.

Its a game that has an end but whether anyone finds it is another matter you could spend 100's of hours or a lot less. If you do not like space then best avoided

I expected it would cost this much, and you know what? I'm stoked man! The mystery and intrigue of No Man's Sky has me sold, as does Shawn Murray's approach in talking about the game. I'm ready for an adventure on day one!

@kyleforrester87 im not assuming anything they have put out dev videos explaining how the universe works and how their will be an infinite amount of worlds to explore and the worlds are so big that they are like actual worlds you could keep walking and end up in the same place eventually because you could go all the way around. now take that and put an infinite amount of planets inside solar systems in galaxies in a whole infinite universe. now tell me that this game deserves anything less than 60 bucks when that's what people pay for call of duty

@Turtlecaper Being the Devils Advocate for a second, I can make a big empty room that you can walk in for an infinite amount of time. Should that be worth $60? Just because you can wander around forever, doesn't mean that its going to be enjoyable doing so, or that there is going to be enough actual substance to make the other 990 hours different than the first 10 hours.

I have been following this game for a long time, and I am excited to play it, but they have not really shown off enough that I feel confident that there is more than 10 hours of actual content, and just roaming an empty, procedurally generated universe for no real purpose other than just cuz, is not content.

That being said, even though the $60 price surprises me, I don't really mind it, assuming there is some actual content, rather than just an empty sandbox. If I wanted to use my imagination and invent a game in my head, I would not be paying $60 for it. I want there to be more than just "exploring" because all of the games you compared it to, all have a lot of actual content (as in, more than just exploring the world and shooting things). Story, progression, quests, tasks, etc...this is what will make the $60 worth it (or not, if these things are lacking)

I'm 99% sure I won't buy this BUT I think that price is more then fair. Just because it's indie doesn't mean the price should be set at >$20. I think this harkens back to the Broforce topic of "why ANOTHER pixel art 2D indie game". Games like that, that are less then original copy and pastes of any of the 100 other indie 2D pixel art games out there, wouldn't be worth more than $20 IMO (like I said before, not taking anything away from their efforts). This game is vast, original for the most part, and is breaking a lot of molds so I can see why it's $60. That doesn't shock me.

@thedevilsjester what about call of duty? your first 1 hour in that game will not be any different than your next 100 hours

Why not? These people worked hard. It's a huge game.
If I pay 40 quid for 100 hours of gameplay, I get my money's worth. I've played games I spent a lot less time with that I paid just as much for, and I'm fine with that.

@Turtlecaper You are comparing Apples to Oranges. I assume you are talking about the multiplayer component of the Call of Duty games, which falls into the repetitive multiplayer competition category, which you cannot measure in gameplay hours. If you tried to measure "replaying the same content over and over again" in gameplay hours, then every single game would have an infinite playtime, since you could just replay the game over and over again. So those types of games, games designed around short repeated matches (which No Mans Sky is not) cannot be measured that way.

I have high hopes for No Mans Sky, it looks amazing, but it also looks empty, like a galactic hiking simulator. I am hoping that the core game/content mechanics have just not been shown off yet, and there is more to it than that.

The people excited for this remind me of the people excited for brink and spore for some reason, no logic just a sensation people will not have expectations met.

Having been burnt by a few games this gen, i'm waiting to see how it fairs when released. Dont mind the price IF it offers the open world game we have been promised.

Couldnt give a monkeys if its Indie or AAA, so long as its great and has lasting appeal..

In other words, tomorrow, when the No Man's Sky pre-orders go live, we find out the release date for PSVR?

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. No

The price worries me. Simply because the game universe is so massive I wonder how quickly we'll tire of the inevitable grind. Are the developers setting the high price point to get as much as they can as quickly as they can before the mundane nature of the grind dawns on the gaming world

@Grawlog I think people take who makes a game into the cost equation for a reason - the cost. 3 guys making a game, that's 3 salaries. 30 guys making a game, that's 30 salaries. Plus 2 people in HR. Plus several mid level managers. Plus a VP, his assistant, CEO, CFO, COO chairman and all of their assustants. Plus all 40 of those people need PCs, so then you need a dedicated IT dept to take care of them.*

The 3 guys making an indie game have much much much much lower costs associated with making the game. And I haven't even started with overhead yet. Larger office space, higher electric bills.

People don't buy games in a vacuum, there are certain pre-conceived ideas that come into play about why we expect games from large companies to cost more than games from small companies.

• Apologies for all of the male pronouns, I am well aware that females work in all facets of the gaming industry, it just typed out that way.

@themcnoisy The price of new AAA es have stayed static for MANY years now, as long as I can remember it had been 60. If you are thinking of this as an INDY along the lines of Axiom Verge or something similar, your probably wrong. Sony reportedly stepped in to help with lroduction, server issues, publishing, funding, marketing and on and on. This is not your typical indy my friend, this the SUPPOSED price tag. It's not even official BTW.

@Churchy Totally agrred, I think I would be gutted if it was only 20 bucks. Then I would know it is a smallish, simple game that can rightfully only charge a twenty. At 60, that tells me this has full production values and is a massive game. Someone said the visuals don't look AAA, I say they look BETTER then most AAA games these days. It's not all about realism imo.

@thedevilsjester I think they haven't shown alot for a simple reason. They don't want to spoil what they have and let leak to other devs what they are creating. Yes it is procedural, but this isn't your granddads procedural game. I know any are skeptical but I think it will really live up to the expectations it has garnered.

@rjejr Except that Sony reportedly stepped in awhile back to help with production, among other things. That's got to be more than just 3 people, right?

Honestly, I think we all should calm down on this price point. This isn't even offical, lol. Could have been wrong, since it was taken down. I will pay 60 if that's what it os, but alot of conclusions being jumped to here. I am of the opinion that the size and length of the game lends itself to a full priced AAA title. Small teams back in the day made tons of games that were full priced, and Noone bothered to complain then. Team size and development company size should not determine whether a game should be full priced or not. Quality, polish, depth, originality, visuals etc. should be what determines a price. If they think what they have ever created deserves that price tag, I am OK with it personally

@themcnoisy Your logic is a total joke. The team has worked there butts off on this title. They had a flood wreck there office and repairs cost money. Plus the added team members to get the game finished. Honestly this game has more creativity in it than a lot of triple A titles from big developers. Also you are seriously saying elite is worthy of being compared to this? That's messed up. No man's sky will be released with what elite has only "promised". Have fun paying money over and over for crappy updates mate.

@SonyInfinity I wasn't really talking about this game specifically, more about why people in general expect to pay less for a game made by a few people in a garage than a game from an entire company of folk. Costs matter.

@rjejr Sorry about the misinterpretation there. I understand what you are saying and it makes sense, but I also think every now and then an INDY cess along that can't be categorized with its peers. Take Witness for example. It's a puzzle game, and it's 40 dollars. Many were outraged before it released that an INDY game would cost that mucj, especially only being a puzzler. After releasing most realized how great it was regardless of its indy status, and that it was definitely worth its asking price. Maybe NMS won't live up to its AAA price or our expectations, but it sure seems to be doing everything right thus far and it must be something special the way Sony has paraded it, and cradled it, along the way.

I've always said this game was going to flop... this confirms it

@wolfspiderzx what are you saying? Elites been released In 4 guises. Elite 1984, Frontier Elite 2, Elite 3 and Elite dangerous.

Funnily I was looking at reviews of ED last night, I've got it here but my PC struggles (its 8 years old) I found it to be fantastic and difficult. Its also too big to comprehend. A lot of the reviewers found the game too difficult and didn't get what Elite is / was. A space SIMULATION game. To be honest if NMS ends up being a bit childish with negligible challenge Im gonna buy a better PC.

I don't really understand the issue with this, I always assumed it would around this price anyway, it just confirms the developers think it's worth the price and judging by what we all seen of it, I say I think it does too! I mean most people pay £45 for these triple a games that come out each year, most of which are just rehashes of the same game last year! Eg far cry primal, ac syndicate... Call of duty. So when a developer comes along and builds this completely different game that looks awesome and says we want full price because it seems they've put everything they have in to building it, everyone kicks off.... Crazy!

@DualWielding so because of its price this game is going to flop? That makes no sense. The amount of hype surrounding this games is mental so I don't think price is going to matter surely people will still buy it regardless of it price which is still the normal price for a game...

I don't understand all this fuss about. As usual, you can VOTE with your WALLET. Wait for the game to be released, inform yourself and then decide if it's a good value for your money.

Personally, I won't judge by the amount of people that made it, but about the ration price/playing hours or level of enjoyment it gives to you. That's all should matter to us.

It is not a lazy remaster with small texture update and nothing else like Twilight Princess....

I was already going to await the reviews. $60 seems a bit too high for what I had in mind. I'm still not sold on precedural generation and I don't think it's as good as they make it out to be. If it is, then it's great, but I fear we'll see a lot of repetition.

@Octane this is one of my fears... "Random" environments can be a right pain in the arse but I'm definitely keen to how it's gonna turn out

@SonyInfinity I want to believe this is the case, and I hold out hope that it is, but there are quite a few things that prevent me from accepting this.

First: If another developer wanted to copy each of the features exactly, it would still take the copy cat a year or two for them to get a game released (anything less and it would just be a pile of crap that wouldn't sell anyway). Seeing as how the lions share of game sales happen within the first 6 months of a games launch, this would not impact the sales of the game by any measurable amount. By the time the copy cat released (playing catch up with a game that already came out) No Mans Sky would have already sold to almost everyone willing to buy it (and the sequel, if any, would already be well underway). For this reason (among others) developers feel safe announcing features sometimes years in advance. Giving out demos, and betas, often times over a year before a games release. You can be certain that they are not "not announcing features for fear of copy cats".

Second: They just told the world that they value their game at $60, which seems like an ideal time to also tell your target audience why they should value the game at $60 too. From all I have seen (and its quite a nice looking game) I wouldn't pay more than $30 for it. If they expect $60, tell us why its worth $60. If they remain silent, thats your answer. I hope that they are in the process of preparing their statement (the one that should have accompanied the price announcement) but I am not holding my breath.

This is a game that I am following very closely because I think it looks amazing, hoping that it would be more than just a sandbox, but its a little disappointing that they announced the price at $60 without any hint about other content, which is a pretty strong indicator that they don't actually have anything else to offer.

I would pay full price for this game, just coz its made by a indie team doesn't mean it cant be a AAA game, i am very excited about this, and will even more so when they confirm PSVR support, we all know its coming. Like from when Yoshida was playing it, i was half expecting the camera to zoom out and shows Yoshida playing it with the PSVR

If it's a great game with a lot of enjoyable content then there is no reason they can't sell it for $60. I do suspect though that, even if it is a good game, the amount of hype that is surrounding this title will be impossible to live up to leaving a good few people upset come the release.

My main problem with the price is that $60 seems to translate to £55 here in the UK which is about £20 more than you can get a new AAA physical release without really even looking that hard.

@SonyInfinity "but it sure seems to be doing everything right thus far"

Really? Which comments are you reading? All I see are people complaining abut lack of things to do in the game, taking forever to release, and now the price. What have they done right?

"and it must be something special the way Sony has paraded it, and cradled it, along the way.

Sony invested in it, they can't abandon it, th phrase "tooting one sown horn "comes tomind. Do you remember how much Sony paraded their 3D "monitor" around? How they lauded 3D in gaming? How did that turn out?

Sorry for all the negativity, it isn't directed at you or the devs, I'm just sick of hearing about this game, and I'm even looking forward to it a bit. Probably get delayed yet again before it releases, nobody releases in June, that's E3.

Edit - oops, sorry for the double reply, you may get 2 emails now, no idea how that happened.