Very clever. And you're right, I don't own either of those games, yet.

Did almost own Disregard For Gravity, then Steam wouldn't take my GiftCard, so I said fuck em, I'll buy it when I get a debt card.

Now I don't have a PC to play the games on. What the fuck?

I don't own Machinarium, because I am really bad at adventure games, and so even at $10, I was a bit iffy. I do, however, own A Reckless Disregard for Gravity, and have convinced a couple of other people to buy it as well.

So there.

I am actually listening to you complaining about this on Podtoid right this second, and say that I buy very, very few games at full price, and it is always based on quality. I bought Assassin's Creed on the PC because it was $5, and I would buy any quality indie game for five bucks if I had the money (I don't have a real job, so I don't always have cash). Anything over $5 is when I require real quality.

I want to buy VVVVVV, for example. I loved the demo and I really want to get the full thing, but when you're essentially broke, $15 is a lot more to ask (in terms of appearance) than 5 or 9.99. The instant it adds the second digit, it stops being an impulse buy for me. I will get it eventually though.

I'm 100% behind this statement, so much in fact that I just bought Braid three days ago, when it was 7 bucks... AND I'M PROUD OF IT.

If we all start paying 15 bucks for an indie game, won't it just be a matter of time until indie games are $20, $25, and $30? We saw this happen in what is now considered the "mainstream" gaming market, which, I might remind you, was once a much more "independent environment".

What makes the indie market so vibrant is the fact that it is not highly profitable. This forces the developers to keep their production costs low and the level of innovation high.

The indie-market produces niche gems because dev-teams can afford to take risks, because they're primarily collectives of hobbyists who aren't investing others' venture capital into projects. If the market becomes profitable for these teams then you can bet your bottom dollar that you'll be seeing outside investment into the sector, and ultimately the teams will cease to be "indie" at all.

I'm all for rewarding teams of intrepid developers who are bravely fighting the man, but I don't think that advocating we reward a higher price-point is at all the way to do that.

Just my two cents.

Given that indie games on 360 generally go from 1-3 bucks, 15 is completely unreasonable. Thats the only system I really touch Indie fare on, since my PC is meh and I refuse to install Steam.

But how do you not understand the difference between a several hour, open world venture like AC2 and a short, low-budget indie game? Seriously?

Thats like saying World of Warcraft and Pong have the same gameplay value.

Actually I do own A Reckless Disregard For Gravity. It rocks!

Never seen much of Machinarium.

If developer want a $15 game to sell, when people thing indie should always equal very cheap, they need to work out a better way of shipping their product.

Pretty much nailed it, then, Anthony.
Though I'm proud to say I own Machninarium (granted, during the Steam Holiday Sale)... though I don't own A Reckless Disregard For Gravity... I should work on it.

It just taking that leap into the unknown, thats the big thing. Indie games have an interesting connotation to them, probably to the average gamer they don't even know about indie games and if they do, they may think that since its indie it will "be all weird". You know what I mean? It will provide a different experience and thats what people are afraid of. Also, most people are pretty cheap. So 10 or 15 dollars is asking alot. Im not saying its right, that's just the way things are.

I do own "Machinarium." Probably not gonna get Disregard though, my PC chugs while running the original "Half-Life"

I love that infographic. I the sheer, stupid logic people use for getting out of buying indie games can be absolutely ridiculous. In the end, they could just admit that they're cheap but won't.

I just don't understand where people get the right to price games to whatever they want as they see them.

Again, it's that, "how far will this $15 take me" mentality. Some people literally base it off graphics and other arbitrary factors, and it's a shame

I do own A Reckless Disregard for Gravity. It was not good.

You always say the same people who buy assassin's creed 2 for $60 (a generally decently good game with a lot of work put into it's production value), are unwilling to spend $15 on a game like VVVVVV which has virtually no production value at all. Want to know why?

It's easy... why logically would a person who is a FAN of games like AC2 would also be a fan of quirky 2D flash platformers? I think you are assuming the majority of people care about such a niche genre of game and are just simply blinded by AAA titles that they can't bother to spend $15 on another game. That's wrong to assume. Most people who spend $60 on AC2 are not interested in 2D flash platformers, and are not interested in playing indie games. It's not their market, or their kind of game. Even if it is cheaper.

Now there are people out there who like all games, like yourself and myself. But I'd rather pick up a used copy of AC2 for $20-$30 or so (or wait until it's on sale) than buy VVVVVV. Why? Mostly because I don't find massive enjoyment out of 2D platformers, especially ones that just focus on one gameplay element and work it over for the 3 or so hours the game will last. Not to mention the game is a flash game with nothing in the production department - it's literally a game that focues on the gameplay. Not to say that is bad, but I just didn't find it fun from the demo I played. Interesting, but not fun enough for me to want to give $15.

It also helps that I almost never make impulse purchases no matter how cheap. I don't buy VVVVVV for $15 not because it's "indie and that's too much", but because I don't feel it's worth it for me. Hell when Mass Effect 1 went on sale for $5 I didn't even get that. With all the problem I hear about ME1, I didn't want to bother wasting my time (which I value perhaps more than money) playing it for something that wouldn't feel satsifying.

I do agree though, that for the very few out there that actually DO actively not buy any indie games for $15 simply because "it's indie and should be cheaper" and then are actually willing to spend $60 on a single player "beat once" game like AC2 are retarded.

@Renagade Panda
That's kinda weird, considering I'm sure I've invested far more hours into a game like Audiosurf than a game I bought for sixty and rarely touched again like GoW2.

A lot of indie games are worth shit. FACE!

I'm not into indie games that much I didn't like Braid but I also stop buying games on release dates fucking ass creed 2 is already down to $40 I'm not gonna buy it though cause it sucks balls >.> $60 is way too much for a game although I will get White Knight Chronicles on release day cause I loves me some rpg

"The customer is ALWAYS right. No matter how idiotic they sound."

http://notalwaysright.com/

Just browse it for a while and learn how wrong you are.

There is not real, tangible logic behind "quality," "length" and price. It is worth what the creators decide.

I bought Trajectile and Dark Void Zero for $5 each this month, they're worth a bit more than that in my book, but I'm not going to argue with Nintendo, Q-Games and Gapcom on the matter.

5$ may seem like a lot to you, but it's a LOT to the developer.

Think of it this way. His game is 15$. If his game was 10$, he'd have to sell 150% of his present sales. 2-D platformers, especially difficult ones, are a niche market. Sure, there's a bunch of you, even perhaps enough to satisfy the 150%, who say "It's too expensive, we don't want to pay 15$ that guy's a bastard!" but...if it were 10$ I'd bet 75% of you would say, "Oh, it's 10$, for that piece of shit game? It looks like ass, and I hate 2-D platformers!". If it were 5$, you might, *might* buy it instead of pirating/ignoring it, but...there aren't enough of you to make it financially viable for him to make games and not program databases.*

Also, @those people who say that this price increase thing is exactly like with "retail" releases, you are either too young or too forgetful to remember that SNES games (little old SNES games you could beat in 20 minutes, or 1/15th the amount of time it took me to beat VVVVVV) cost significantly over 60$. It's not a curve so much as an upside down bell curve.

*Jeff Vogel of Spiderweb Software wrote a great article on this a year ago, that I don't feel like finding.

Different strokes for different folk. If everyone LOVED indie games they would cease to be indie.... and then the new indie games would be really fucking stupid

Do you know what kind of good beer I can get for $5?

REALLY REALLY good beer.

As someone who bought three out of the four games mentioned at bottom of the infographic (Braid, World of Goo & VVVVVV) at full price I find your whole attitude about this really annoying and isn't going to make anyone more sympathetic to your stance.

You make the major assumption that the same people who complain about the price of VVVVVV are the same people who buy games like AC2 at launch. Even if we take this assumption as fact there are many reasons why people would prefer to buy Assassin's Creed II (a game I haven't bought yet as I am waiting for the price to go down) over something like VVVVVV. For one, the latter takes 2 hours or so to beat while AC2 takes fifteen hours. From a technical standpoint AC2 is much more visually impressive and a lot more time and money was clearly put into it. I know that you will say that quality is more important than either length or the visuals/cost of production, which I would agree with, but with no objective measure of quality gamers pften rely on those other factors to decide if a game is worth their money.

Another reason is that with a retail game like AC2 you're getting a tangible physical product in a box with a manual and all that jazz. It's often a point of complaints with Steam or games on the Playstation store for the PSPGo or even just iTunes that downloads shouldn't cost the same as the physical equivalent of the same product as they cost less for the seller. Why should indie games be left out of this argument?

Having a physical copy also gives you the option to resell the game when your finished or even if you just don't like it. Someone may buy AC2, Army of Tutu or the Saboteur for $60 at launch but once they're done they can trade it in making the net cost of the game more like $20-30.

Also, at $15 VVVVVV goes past the psychological $10 price point barrier where people consider purchases to be inconsequential. Sure $5 isn't that much more but it seems like it is. When we still have things priced at $XX.95 or £XX.99 because of their psychological price point does it surprise you that people complain about an extra $5?

Out of the three indie games mentioned in the infographic that I own I would say that Braid was the only one worth the price I paid (£9.99). World of Goo at £16.99 was a great game that I finally gave in and bought on Steam after playing the demo and holding out for ages for the price to drop. Ultimately, I don't think it was worth that price and it was especially annoying when I found out that the Wiiware version was 1500 points. I didn't really consider VVVVVV to be worth its cost (£10.60) before I bought it but I had already played through the demo three times and because it wasn't on Steam or any other distribution platform I doubt the price was going to drop anytime soon and I didn't feel like holding out for a year for the possibility of a birthday sale. Also, I was in a generous mood and wanted to support an indie developer but frankly there are a tonne of great free flash games out there that I've put almost as much time into.

The only game I've bought at close to full price this generation was an import of Demon's Souls at £40. I buy all my games new and my recent purchases include Space Invaders Extreme 2 (£8), Ratchet and Clank: A Crack in Time (£17.95), Wipeout HD (£16.98), GoW Chains of Olympus & Daxter (£7.50 each) and Disgaea 3 (14.95) and that doesn't even include the games I bought in the Steam sales. So I think am well justified in my complaint of the cost of games like VVVVVV when I buy games that offer more and cost more to make for approximately the same price.

Years ago, I spent $50 on Kid Niki: Radical Ninja. $15 on VVVVVV is a bargain.

I couldn't agree with you more, Anthony. :)

BTW, I own all the games mentioned. I regret absolutely nothing.

Goddamnit, reading the comments on that post, as well as this one, pisses me off so much. There are some real idiots on both of these sites. Also, anyone who says $15 is too much for VVVVVV hasn't played it. Anyone who has played and beaten it knows that it's worth at LEAST $15. I mean, I understand if you don't like that genre of game, but for those that DO, it is well worth the money.

Indie games for 10+ USD? Why bother when you have lots of incredible, critically acclaimed, proven games for 5-10 dollars on GOG?