Is KSP too expensive?

[Enkiel]

Look at it this way ;

40$ is the buy now.

with all the sales there is on Steam, anyone interested in the game but not willing to invest 40$ will just wait for one of those sale. Hell, i have 30-40 games on my wishlist that i'm just not willing to pay top price, and wait until they are 50% or more to buy,....

Which means ; more money for the company, and everyone's happy.

[Orbital Vagabond]

The demo updated when 1.0 was released, it is currently a subset of KSP 1.0.0. Perhaps after 1.0.3 if they decide they've finished with hotfixes they'll update it to current.

Thanks, this was addressing this posters comment (Emphasis mine):

40€ is by far too much to ask (paid 27$ on the squad website ). I am guessing that the current demo is running on the same principal as the 0.18 (?) demo. If that is the case, I wouldn't be compelled to pay 40€ for KSP.

[Rickenbacker]

think of whether it's a turn off to new players. Is $40 too steep for a game they might not like?

No. There's a demo, and most games out there give you less for more money.

[BDelacroix]

I've had much more entertainment from KSP than from many AAA games that sell for more.

[Caelib]

TBH, we have huge publishers like EA and Activision to thank for the $60 price point standard. The reason they charge that much is because of the huge, inefficient development and publishing process coupled with RIDICULOUS marketing budgets. They create sales based on over-hyping a game. As Squad has demonstrated, you don't need to hype a game for it to be successful ... you just have to make it great and charge a reasonable price.

[softweir]

I've recently rediscovered my adolescent passion for Lego Technic. Show me a decent Technic kit that costs less than £40! I would say that (for me) the replayability of KSP is greater than even the replayability of Lego, and doesn't require a potentially endless round of Real Life parts purchases to enable those ever more ambitious designs - once you buy KSP, you have all the parts, and a pretty good chance that Squad will continue to plug holes in the parts list.

[LitaAlto]

Outside the Civilization series of games, which I dust off now and then for nostalgia purposes (LOVE YOU ALPHA CENTAURI/ALIEN CROSSFIRE!!!) I've never played a game so much without being more deeply invested in it financially. There are MMOs I took up, played enthusiastically, handed over a couple hundred dollars in DLC, and then eventually burned out on, feeling like there's nothing more to do.

I've got hundreds of gameplay hours into KSP. Yet I've never landed on Moho, Gilly, Ike, Dres, Bop, Pol, Vail, or Eeloo. There are tons of easter eggs in the game I have yet to visit. And there's whole types of craft I have yet to build, like a proper spaceplane. The replay potential here is so massive, and I have yet to grow bored of the game. If anything, all the options available make it harder to decide what to do next.

I've got a lot out of my initial $30 (what I paid for 0.23.5 over a year ago).

[waterlubber]

They are thinking ahead, though---KSP has a limited community that's in the demographic of buying it, and having a steep price now to lower later will ensure that they can continue to have income throughout the ages.

[DestinyPlayer]

Darn it, now I feel bad. Why? Because in my country, KSP in Steam costs less than 12$ RIGHT NOW, without any discounts or whatever. And overall, almost every game on steam costs like that where I live. And I'm not in any low-level countries. Now I also feel sad...

[Ravenchant]

As Squad has demonstrated, you don't need to hype a game for it to be successful ... you just have to make it great and charge a reasonable price.

If KSP hadn't been early access, that approach likely wouldn't work though. There is a ton of hype. It's just us hyping it instead of Squad!

[T.A.P.O.R.]

Where I come from, a bug riddled aaa release costs around 3 times the price and will be in over in less that 40 hours.

KSP keeps giving, totally worth the price of entry in my opinion.

I think I paid $26US not on a steam sale, so I'm about 0.017 US cents per hour (1518 hours) logged on steam.

Edited June 3, 2015 by T.A.P.O.R.
added calca for value

[Ringkeeper]

Where I come from, a bug riddled aaa release costs around 3 times the price and will be in over in less that 40 hours.

KSP keeps giving, totally worth the price of entry in my opinion.

GTA 5 .... nice game, sure, but through (Singleplayer) within 20-40 hours. Costs 60€ . KSP , i don't know how many hours i have, don't use steam. But 500+ hours for sure.

The good thing on games like KSP: they can be modded till death, so they get never boring. Well, latest with 64bit you can mod them to death

[Rfmeijboom]

GTA 5 .... nice game, sure, but through (Singleplayer) within 20-40 hours. Costs 60€ . KSP , i don't know how many hours i have, don't use steam. But 500+ hours for sure.

The good thing on games like KSP: they can be modded till death, so they get never boring. Well, latest with 64bit you can mod them to death

The 32-bit version can also be modded to death, it just dies quicker .

On topic:

I think KSP is by far the best game purchase for me ever.

I have also enjoyed over hundreds of hours of KSP and consider $40 a low price to pay for that amount of fun.

The only problem is that you need to convince people that it will be fun before they are willing to spend $40 on it.

And the steap learning curve (or wall) people will run in to can be daunting.

So I think it is well worth the money, but it might be a bit expensive for new players.

But this might be mitigated by the demo.

[peadar1987]

Wow, people are entitled!

"KSP cost me £0.04 per hour of gameplay, but there aren't any clouds on Kerbin and the tech tree's a bit funny. It's not worth any more than £0.025 per hour!"

Compared to pretty much any other form of entertainment, KSP comes out as by far the cheapest. And is probably more fun.

[Requia]

A Steam study from last year ( or was it 2013?) found that games that sold at lower price-points more than make up for it in total volume, increasing Gross Income (often times drastically!) Based on this finding, I might be inclined to say "yes!" it might be "over-priced."

There's one slight error with this analysis, they can lower the price later. It's the long-standing sales model for books and video games, start the price high and grab the people willing to pay it, then drop it later to grab the people who want it cheaper. Or keep it high and put it on sale all the time, which is the new model courtesy of digital stores.

[T.A.P.O.R.]

To put it another way, $40US is still less than four pints of the crappiest beer at the local.

KSP wont give you bad breath or a hangover, though you may well be very very tired

[Red Iron Crown]

TBH, we have huge publishers like EA and Activision to thank for the $60 price point standard. The reason they charge that much is because of the huge, inefficient development and publishing process coupled with RIDICULOUS marketing budgets. They create sales based on over-hyping a game. As Squad has demonstrated, you don't need to hype a game for it to be successful ... you just have to make it great and charge a reasonable price.

Cost doesn't really determine price, other than to set a floor for it. Business school types use mathematical tools to analyze demand data and set prices that maximize revenue, sometimes you can earn more revenue by pricing lower, sometimes the opposite.

The $60 price point has been around for much longer than EA and Activision have been huge players; it's what the market has determined new games are worth, for better or worse.

[Caelib]

The $60 price point has been around for much longer than EA and Activision have been huge players; it's what the market has determined new games are worth, for better or worse.

That is simply untrue. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (Activision) came out in 2009 and was the first $60 PC game: http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/19/modern-warfare-2-bringing-60-price-tag-to-pc-games/

This article sums up the whole thing pretty well:

http://www.gamersnexus.net/gg/736-the-60-dollar-game-is-a-ripoff

[Red Iron Crown]

I stand corrected. I blame our weak Canadian dollar (games before then were CAD$60).

[En_Dotter]

A lot of ppl here mix two things - real value and market value. Im not sure if those are the english terms for those 2 things but thats the best i can translate. I believe this game has a real value of at least 200$. Reasons for this value are obvious to me: high quality product, high educational value (i know the game isnt 100% correct representation of rocket science and space but its one of the best (if not the best) interactive educational tool ive ever seen), no micro transactions, repetition in the game is rewarding (if u screw up something you usually learn something and grow the desire to perfect stuff), its not punishing when u fail (im excluding player lol fails: screwing up the staging, forgetting all the equipment, but im talking about unplanned rescue missions and similar situations).

On the other hand when it comes to market value i do think the price is ok, but squad isnt EA or Blizzard or some other big companies. That being said i think the price is a bit high. If it were up to me i would make it 20-25$. Again, im not an expert on the subject so this is my unprofessional point of view.

[Zild]

To answer OP's original question:

At $40 it is totally worth it every way I look at it: fun had, originality of game, hours enjoyed (NOT the same as hours spent - no pointless grind added just to push up the total playing time!) Yes there are still some issues and some things that do not feel finished, but the same can be said of many AAA games, whilst KSP offers something many of those do not: something new and different.

To answer OP's edit:

Too expensive to buy based on the demo. I played the demo a lot, then put it away and forgot about it for maybe a year. It was only when I saw my brother playing a later alpha version that I saw how much extra they had added. Then I bought it straight away.

Solution: Release a new demo with different restrictions (limited number of playing hours, no ability to install mods, low restrictions on part counts and ship size, etc.) The game offers so much more that is not in the demo which easily pushes it over the threshold of being worth the RRP.

[abowl]

I dont think i would pay $40 for this game considering its very niche. Its a game you can pour hundreds of hours into. But it still doesent feel right to cost $40 bucks for some reason. I am surprised to see that it is among the top sellers on steam. Congrats to squad i guess. I will now go take a look at the reviews. Maybe people get disappointed considering how much they paid. Who knows.

[LittleBlueGaming]

I am surprised to see that it is among the top sellers on steam. Congrats to squad i guess. I will now go take a look at the reviews. Maybe people get disappointed considering how much they paid. Who knows.

I didn't know it was so high on the top sellers list, wasn't expecting that.

98% positive reviews out of over 22,000. 93 out of the most recent 100 reviews positive.

[Vahal]

Considering all the ....ty games at 50 or even 70€/$ that flood the videogames market 40€ for a game that is smart, makes you learn stuff, use your brain, not plagued by facking DLC or cash shop, a game with an active and friendly community (well, unless you talk about mechjeb or who is the best between Karbonite or Kethane but hey, nobody is perfect ) with dozens of talented and devoted modders and nice dev team in comparizon of what you'll find almost everywhere else who do an excellent job keeping in mind it's their FIRST game.

About the demo and tuto they enhanced them.

TL DR, yeah, this game worth every single cent and the more you will play, the more you'll find it worth. I bought this game less than 10 bucks and feel ashamed that I've paid so little and thrown 50 through the window for games that I uninstalled after less than 20 hours. So I bought it for a friend

[Loerelau]

Just no! Am around 2 cents for each hour of gameplay... That is not much.

Edit: And getting less every day!