D:R is a brand new game, specifically built for iDevices, only available on the app store. Sure it uses some "assests" from Doom 3, textures and whatnot, but that doesn't make this an "old" game. Not arguing, just pointing that out BTW this game is super fun, I'm loving it!
Let's say we're talking about a movie, deckard, one based on a book you've read. You can take a look at the trailer, check out the director's and writer's previous films, read the reviews: all that information, combined with your knowledge of the source material, will help you decide whether you want to spend $11.00 to see it. But without actually seeing the film, you won't be able to tell if the movie is any good, or whether the experience of seeing it is worth the money. To say otherwise (that is, to claim that your opinion of a film you haven't seen is just as valuable as the opinion of those who have) is to engage in the worst kind of internet jackassery: judging things from context and not from experience. It is also, by implication, to define those who spend the money as dupes. To be fair, you're getting a bit of blowback from the inane of comments of other posters on this thread -- you're tone has been generally respectful. Can't disagree with you on that.
squarezero thanks and I agree with you regarding movies but the loophole there is a movie costs the same to go see at the cinema whether its budget was $50 or $300 million so there really isn't any 'wait until it goes on sale' thing going on there as with this app store mentality. Good example of that too is Terminator Salvation. I'm a huge, HUGE, H U G E Terminator fan and have loved all the Terminator films up to now (even the 3rd which most panned). Main reason was they kept the story flowing in an interesting way. After watching the trailers/clips but especially reading reviews, I decided not to go see it as I felt like my expectations of it advancing the story in a meaningful way wouldn't be met and I'd just be seeing the 'summer action movie'. So, instead I'll wait until it hits on Blu-ray and rent it from Netflix. Detaching myself from my bitterness with id's creative-challenged output over the last decade, I've no doubt I would find DR fun to play. The argument is probably unresolvable though as most people feel that you have to play the game before you can determine whether it's worth $10 but that's a paradox given people who for their own reasons just don't feel it worth that amount. Now I'm reading id has confirmed no lite version of DR, claiming they tried it with Wolf and it didn't affect sales, which means they really aren't interested in the fence-sitters at all and are going straight for the 'Doom center' of our brains which I admit is still a powerful thing, diluted as id has become over the years. However, I think id won't be able to keep doing this forever as eventually not just me but lots of people will tire of id recycling their power trio (Wolf, Doom, Quake) and demand something truly new.
You could say that waiting for the Blue-ray/Netflix version is similar to waiting for an App to drop in price -- though, of course, the wait is much longer. Frankly, I don't think we're far apart here. We all are constantly making decisions as to what's worth our money and time. You have very good and valid reasons not to pick up Doom Resurrection at the current price. My guess is that you would enjoy it if you gave it a chance, but I can't argue with the proposition that the game is not worth $9.99 to you. By the same token, you can't make the argument that a game you haven't played is only worth $3.00 in absolute terms, which, by implication, defines those who paid the full price as dupes. You do make a good case about id's business and creative practices. I would add that we're doing a disservice to the platform if we automatically pick up every lazy port that the "big boys" publish and pass up the indie gems (Bionic Surfer, for instance, which is a freaking steal at $.99). I happen to believe that Doom Resurrection is an honest effort from Carmack and Co., but the same can't be said for many, many other games in the App Store.
No, there isn't. And some devs have charged more. But even market forces go by prior history. During the opening of the app store, what company was the 800 lb. gorilla as far as game software was concerned? Sega. And Sega set the price of Super Monkey Ball at $9.99. Other publishers followed suit. Actually, I point to Sega and Vivendi for how big publishers have more than those 3 tiers to work with (and that's why I still think Gameloft dropping price as drastically as they did for HoS was unnecessary). Monkey Ball and Crash Nitro Kart both were released at $9.99, then after quite a long stretch at that price lowered down to $7.99, stayed their for a bit, then went down to the price at which they currently are at ($5.99). If Sega or Vivendi ever lower the prices further, I don't think they'll go down to a buck knowing that they can go down instead to, say, $3.99 or $2.99 and still get a pretty sizable bump in sales. Very true. You are right in that developers have to do their due diligence in determining (say that 3 times real fast ) what the market for their game will be, and letting that help determine the investment cost for development. But I'd say they do have more leeway and maneuverability than most are letting themselves have. Gameloft needn't have gone down to $5.99 from the original $9.99 and thereby skip the $7.99 price point where they would have gotten some sales. They really didn't need to go down to a buck after being at $5.99 because look at all the possible price points they skipped along the way which carried with them potential consumers for whom such price points would have proved attractive. Hell, I'd even go so far as to say EA didn't need to drop price on Need for Speed down from $9.99 to $6.99, and instead could've charged an extra buck (so, $7.99) and would've had just a hint more maneuverability with that product.
