Look guys, I believe you when you all say that Gone Home is deeply moving, and very well written, and has this super detailed house and everything.

But 20 bucks is a lot of bucks. I'm not made of bucks. Even at the current discounted price of 18 bucks, that seems like a lot. Other non-games-that-are-a-couple-hours-long-where-the-writing-is-the-focus-and-there-is-little-gameplay have rarely been that much.

To The Moon? 10 bucks. The Path? 10 bucks. Dear Esther? 10 bucks. Other arty games with little gameplay but solid writing and atmosphere? 10 bucks (or maybe 15 if they think they've got some really hot shit).

I like to play as many indie games as possible, but I'm not made of money, and I certainly can't afford to buy them all at full price. Making your game $20 all but guarantees that I don't play it for months, until it is at least 50% off (which it likely will be during the Steam Holiday Sale). I think the game's price is a little steep for what it is, and it is doing the game a disservice to launch it at that sort of high price.

So then wait for a sale, that's your choice, just do yourself a favour and avoid any and all spoilers, the game deserves a clean slate when you come to it.

I'm in the same boat, gonna wait for a sale like 10ish but if the word of mouth is too much or a fear of spoilers from Patrick in a AM show or during GotY, I'll pay full price. My reasoning is I have way to many games to play currently and thought this sounds like I could beat it in one sitting at a night shift, I gotta try and beat other games first before I add it and then never get around to it.

@bisonhero: That's a fair concern. With that in mind, I don't really see any discussion here. It's up to you. If you personally feel it's too expensive for you at this time, then buy it when it's on sale. Or don't. Different people have different perceptions of value, and that can change depending on your circumstances. At one time in my life, I might delight in a small plate of very expensive sushi, but at another time, I might rather be able to afford groceries for a few days.

It all depends, and it's perfectly fair for different people to take their personal perceptions of value into account when purchasing a game.

Yeah, my general recommendation is hold off if you think the price is too much. I thought it was a bit too much at first, but I really wanted to play the game. I bought it and the experience was so great, that I don't have any problems with the price anymore. If you are on the fence about getting it, wait for a sale. If you really want to play, then go for it.

I just bought and played through this game. First I'd like to stress that I really enjoyed it. That being said it is definitely not worth 20 bucks for what you get.

@hunter5024 said:

While I have you here: did you play Antichamber? That game is $20, and I'm trying to decide if I'm a hypocrite for thinking that's kind of fine. It's a particularly good puzzle game, and it either could've been an above average $15 game, or tolerable at $20.

Though they're quite different games, Gone Home and Dear Esther are both basically "explore a place, learn some things about some characters you never meet" simulators. Dear Esther (and other games like it) is $10. So the way I see it, Gone Home could've been an above average $10 game, or tolerable at $15.

Granted, I still didn't buy Antichamber until it was 66% off in the most recent Steam sale, but nonetheless, I'm fine with it being regularly listed at $20. Antichamber took me about 8 hours, as some of those puzzles are real headscratchers. Gone Home being like 2-4 hours and being 20 bones, even if it's a really interesting 2-4 hours, is kinda weak.

Unfortunately I haven't played Antichamber yet, so I can't really compare the two. Though 20 bucks for an 8 hour game seems reasonable. This game on the other hand I beat in 117 minutes. I felt I was taking my time, I unlocked all the journal entries, and I explored pretty meticulously. So I don't think it could possibly take anyone 4 hours, I would even be pretty surprised if it took someone 3. So yeah, if I were you, I'd hold off for a while. It's a very pleasant experience, but kind of a terrible value.

@bisonhero: There's definitely more game to Gone Home than Dear Esther, but Antichamber is a lot bigger than Gone Home. They're very different games.

I can understand feeling like breadth of the actual playtime is more important for you right now, and that makes the value proposition seem out of line. In that case, as you did with Antichamber, you can just get it on sale. You don't need anyone to agree with you or to even discuss it, as your feeling is not off-base. It's just your own personal perception of value, and everyone has their own. Right now, if you feel it doesn't look worth it, then it isn't. Just get it when you feel the value makes more sense.

It is actually pretty ironic how people fight for their consumer rights against evil entities like Microsoft, yet not only knowingly overpay for games like Gone Home because of an "interesting premise" but in fact encourage others to do so as well. This game while clearly novel and a breath of fresh air, is very clearly priced way higher than its contemporaries.

I applaud the devs for the hard work but at the same time respect me enough as a consumer and price your product accordingly.

@humanity: I'm sorry, Humanity, but there's a big difference between a company trying to threaten consumer rights and an indie dev possibly offering their game at a price you don't agree with. This is an issue of perceptions of value, not consumer rights. If it's priced too high, it's not going to be bought. What reviewers and other gamers may be saying with "Buy it!" is that they feel it -is- worth that price. You are free to feel it isn't worth that price, but people aren't being anti-consumer by suggesting that they may feel something is worth that price.

This is like saying a fine wine is anti-consumer just because it might be more expensive than a 24 pack of beer. Someone drinking that wine might consider the value of its quality worth the difference in amount; while someone else may consider the beer more worth the money they have. That's a difference of perceived value, not something to do with consumer rights. I've played a good number of $30+ games that I almost immediately stopped thinking about, and if a game can really make me think about it for a while, I'd say that's worth more even if it's a smaller experience. That's just how I perceive a game's value. BisonHero and anyone else is free to feel it is overpriced and wait for a sale, and others are free to feel it is worth the price and recommend it.

It is a lot of bucks, I'm waiting for a sale for now. I'm sure if it's as good everyone says it's worth the price of admission, but man there are so many huge titles peering at me around the corner that I just can't bring myself to pay 20 dollars for something with very little in the way of re-playability. When it's around that 10 dollar mark I'll bite, until then I'm going to steer clear of spoilers.

The game is priced as it is because the developers believe that they're making a good value-for-money proposition. I and several others happen to agree, but I've been very fortunate with money recently, and so it's less of an issue than it would have been even three months ago.

If $20 is too steep for you (which, as it goes without saying, is entirely understandable), then don't buy it, but I don't believe that the game itself should be looked upon negatively for its price point, and the idea that independent games must follow a general pricing schema because asking for more would be - what, greedy? Delusional? Overconfident? - is dated, and likely harmful to the growth of the "scene" (ugh) in the future.

As long as you play it and give the fullbright company some money later you don't need to play it now. Or you could just play counter strike and sell like 4 crates. My recommendation would be to save it for a rainy day. (Like a real one) (A real actual day when it's raining)

@truthtellah: I'll have to respectfully disagree. The whole argument about perception of value is just a way to justify the rather large cost for a short, one off experience, that while good in of itself is not deserving the price of admission. If we're getting into food comparisons then I'll tell you this - if you have a Mars, Snickers and Butterfinger and they all cost $5 and then you have a Gone Home bar and it costs $10 then it's overpriced compared to the rest of the selection - because at the end of the day it's just another candy bar on a rack of candy bars.

I'm not saying your consumer rights are being infringed upon. I'm not even saying that you're being cheated. What I am saying is that you are actively paying more than what you should be, and you know it. However much you liked the game, deep in your heart when you compare it to other titles out on the market, their lengths, their message and their price, you know this costs more than it should. What I will agree with is that it is very much up to the individual to decide how much they are ok with getting overcharged for it.

@humanity: I think quality comes into it though. I would have a problem with paying $20 for Gone Home if it was poorly made, buggy or if the devs clearly hadn't given it their best. But I think the quality of the game justifies the cost. The number of handwritten notes, the fact that you can tell people apart from their writing styles, the sound design etc. They could've cut corners on these things so easily and the game wouldn't have been that much worse off for it. But the fact that they went the extra mile made the game really stand out for me as one of the most unique experiences I've had in a long time.

I don't think that the game is worth less money because it's shorter, or isn't as mechanically complex as some other games at its price point.

It's a really great game but I can understand if you think the price is a bit much. I would recommend holding off and waiting for a sale.

Same boat. Don't know the sales figures but really seems like the dev did themselves, the game and the prospective audience a disservice by charging essentially double what the market came to expect from games of this scale. Maybe it's worth it, I haven't played it, but at this cost it kind of priced itself out of the impulse purchase that we don't even have to be concerned with category. The game definitely looked interesting, and I am hopeful for the experience it can deliver but now that positive mind share it earned is really rubbing up against the fear of getting burned on it money-wise, and that just can't be the best mindset to go into a game like this with.

My feelings are this: Yes $20 seems like a lot. But we also spend $10 to $15 dollars on movies, which average out to 2 hour experiences. Compare that to 'Papers, Please' which contains many more hours of experience than a movie for $10.

But wait! Comparing the length of Papers Please to a movie isn't really fair! PP is mostly a game loop. That length comes from playing that game loop over a long period of time. With a movie, every second is "handcrafted" so to speak. A movie gives us a really tight, specific experience instead of giving us a game loop.

And a tight specific experience is exactly 'Gone Home' gets you. It's both as long as you make it and as long as it has to be. It kept me completely engaged the entire time, there wasn't really a point I said "whatever, I'll play more gone home later." In that way it was like a movie. The experience is not long, but the quality of your minute to minute experience is super high.

Oh course, you have to decide If that is worth 2 movie tickets to you. I'm certainly happy I played it.

I totally get people being unwilling to shell out 20 bucks for something that's only a 3 hour experience and I think Fullbright probably did themselves a disservice with the price. For me, personally, I'm willing to take the chance with it but I wouldn't disparage anyone who thought $20 was too much. The best advice I would give is to wait for the next Steam Sale. I'm sure you'll be able to find it for $10 sometime soon.

I have to say I felt disappointed to pay nearly £15 for what ended up being an hour and a half long experience, so I do wish they'd chopped it down a little. That said, I don't regret buying the game, so I guess they did their job right!

Well, I bought it for 12.50.. :O

If you are a cheap ass gamer, maybe there is a website out there for you that has forums dedicated to getting games for the best price.

I got more enjoyment and personal resonance with Gone Home than the last 20 $60 games I bought put together. Ipso facto, Gone Home should cost $1200.

@humanity: I think you're still not taking quality into account. Try to have an open mind. Different people have different perceptions of value, and those perceptions of value change, as well. A nickel today doesn't have the same value it had 20 years ago. Not because the object itself has less value but because the perceived value is less. Perceived value is a big part of this and any other purchase.

When you're comparing candy bars, this is more like the difference between buying a homemade candy bar and just buying another candybar off the shelf at Walmart. I know for a fact that I'll be paying a lot more for the homemade candy bar, and that's not a ripoff or something that's out of line. It's something that I value differently than something else. I may pay less for a mass-produced candy bar, but I would value a homemade candy bar more. Now, I know not everyone is in a position to buy that candy bar, as the value proposition is less understandable for some, but for someone who looks to get a few choice candy bars a month instead of a few random candy bars a week, even a more expensive candy bar could have enough value in it to justify the purchase.

I don't blame those who feel this game is too expensive for them right now, and I'd say that's fair. But for others, it can certainly be considered worth the cost if they feel it is. Different people have different perceptions of value, and that's what we have here. If you think it's too expensive, more power to you; for you, perhaps it is. But please don't condemn or dismiss others for thinking that it is worth what they paid for it. Your disagreement with people doesn't make their recommending the game "ironic", and others can feel it is priced appropriately even if you feel differently.

@koolaid said:

Are you factoring in popcorn and stuff to the cost of a movie, or is it just way more expensive elsewhere? In my town new movies cost $7.50, and you can get a ticket for $5 if you go to the first showing of the day. The only way you'd pay ten bucks is if you went after 6 on the weekend, or were seeing something in 3d.

That's super cheap. I don't even live in a big city and matinee is 7 or 8 bucks. Anything after 6 is like $10 and then Imax/3D is like $15+.

It really depends on the person. The really unfortunate thing is that the game's story might cause someone to think that that price is absolutely worth it but you can't really be told what about the story makes it meaningful without ruining the experience. But that is part of the reason why I like Dear Esther so much. The story in that game spoke to me personally. In terms of real gameplay experience and presentation this game is worth more than Dear Esther or To the Moon. But not by a lot. I think $15 is the perfect price for this game. $20 is too much for me personally. I'm happy I played it but I couldn't help but think that that experience wasn't worth the price of admission.

And I know it's only $5 but for a lot of people $5 more is meaningful.

I'll count my blessings then. Suckers.

what would you pay for 2 tickets to a movie shorter than this? how about after a drink and popcorn? ever buy 2 beers and a hot dog at a baseball game?

(i typed this before reading the whole thread - but SERIOUSLY)

@spookytapes:

There's a different expectation for films. For books and TV shows for that matter as well.

Exactly why I'll be waiting to buy it. I was going to get it after seeing all the praise but I don't have $20 and that's to much for a game less then 2 hours anyway.

I played and enjoyed it. Definitely not worth 20 dollars though.

Well worth the price, given the quality of the product. Completely happy with it.

I played it on hardware that could barely handle it on the lowest graphical settings. There were nasty-looking textures all over the place and the framerate was total garbage. I still loved it.

Hell, I'm even comfortable calling it one of my favorite game experiences so far this year.

I'm sure they knew that not everyone was going to buy it at launch price. But it's also perfectly fine to set it at $20 to see who you can get at that price point, and then lower it later. They're well aware of how much more money Steam Sale prices bring in.

I finished it in 80 minutes and I thought it was worth the price. Very unique experience.

I have piles of $60 games that I haven't finished and I played through Gone Home twice over the weekend. Then I made my husband sit down and start it last night. I feel like I got my $18 worth.

It goes back to a conversation the Bomb crew had recently (I think on the Bombcast?) on how price isn't a good metric for reviews. It's relative. I look at it as I gave a developer $18 for a unique experience and hopefully that enables them to go on and create more. I could on about the cost of things that aren't actual goods and how we gladly shell out the bucks for those, but like I said, it's relative. At this point in my life, I enjoy games that I can sit down and complete in a couple hours that are low pressure as far as game mechanics. Plus the story it told, I just loved everything about it.

Better than a trip to a movie theater.

I finished it in about 90 minutes. I kind of regret buying it full price. The only reason I did was because I wanted to play it before it got spoiled for me. I finished it in one sitting, went online and read some discussions about it, and now it's uninstalled. At $10 I would have been extremely happy with the experience. At $20 I'm left wanting a little bit more. I feel like being able to keep track of the discussions on the game will add more value to it though. I don't think I'll ever load the game up again, but I'm excited to be able to read about the things that others discovered that I didn't.

Journey is a 90 minute game that costs $15, it was also the most satisfying game I played last year.

There are some people out there, like me, who just don't do that. I don't go to the movies because its overpriced, and at baseball games I only buy something if its $1 hot dog night. It's $1 hot dog night tonight. Can't wait to go see some baseball!!!

@spookytapes said:

"I spend money frivolously on overpriced things therefore everyone should"

my local cinema (out in the countryside of the UK) is around £7 roughly $10 so I rarely go to the cinema anymore unless im super excited about a film. Im very on the fence with this as I dont want to spend £15 (it will go up by the time I make my decision I bet) on such a potentially short game (I think I got antichamber for £12 on release and I feel that was very worth it). Saying that, im sure theres a very high chance this game and its themes will get spoiled before a sale arrives and once that spoil alert is achieved my feeling on the game diminishes significantly almost to the point where I willl just watch someone else play it and that doesn't help the company at all.

I will never really understand the money divided by time equals value concept. It's taking a really arbitrary fact about a game and makes it the sole metric for it's value. Not taking anything else into account. I also don't really like the notion that a smaller team or a smaller game couldn't be worth similarly to bigger budget games or vice versa. For example, Deadly Premonition is a long game but it's length is by far not what makes it's money's worth.

That being said, everyone apply some level of self-reflection regarding how to spend one's money. And if things doesn't feel worth it, simply don't get it. It's perfectly acceptable.

Just because *you* can't afford something doesn't mean *it* is too expensive.

Judging art by how much time it steals from your life seems backwards to me.

@bisonhero: @humanity: Hey! Just in case you haven't listened to the new Bombin' the AM with Scoops and the Wolf! 08/19/13 yet, I thought you both and everyone in this thread would be interested by Patrick and Alex's discussion of Gone Home and reviews. I enjoyed it, and I think it really adds to this discussion.

@truthtellah: I listened to it and in fact responded with my lengthy opinion on his take on the review system in the comments section of that video.

In short, I understand where he is coming from but don't agree with his viewpoint. My opinion was that reviews are there to inform and guide the customer. When you start writing for yourself more than for your audience then that is, in my opinion, getting away from the entire point of a review. If Patrick won't challenge his own viewpoints and will simply award high scores to games he liked despite any shortcomings then thats his right but I don't think it makes for better reviews, it simply narrows down his audience. If Patrick plays a shooter game with lackluster gameplay and a short campaign but falls in love with the story and gives the game a high score that doesn't do anyone any good, it just plays into a stereotype which as he said himself, he's quite happy to be.

@humanity: I think it was interesting to hear Alex's take, as well. Maybe you don't feel that someone like him or Patrick represents you, and that's okay. Then you can go find someone else who does reviews more like what you like. There are plenty out there. No reviews are going to be completely objective, and subjectivity is just a greater embracing of the reality without added artifice. If Patrick doesn't seem to like or dislike the kinds of games you like and dislike, then find someone else who does and read their reviews instead. You can do that, and it's a great part of the age we live in.

I guess it goes to show how we as gamers judge a game's value by how much "game" there is and how long the length is and not by the quality of the story.