4 ms·

It seems like Playdate reviews fall broadly into two categories: people that got it for free or stand to make money off it via their readers/viewers really like

It seems like Playdate reviews fall broadly into two categories: people that got it for free or stand to make money off it via their readers/viewers really like it. People who paid their own money for it and don't have a large audience think it's mediocre and mostly not worth the $180.

zitterbewegung 5y ago
I’ve watched reviews about it and the biggest problem is the lack of having a backlit screen . Only having 12 games is another issue (but anyone can develop the device ) but not having a backlit screen in 2021 is a huge problem because people play with handheld devices when it’s dark sometimes .
- surewe 5y ago
  It comes with 24 games (this was announced before preorders opened -- it was previously 12).
  - kemayo 5y ago
    They've also been recently promoting some third-party games you can sideload: https://twitter.com/playdate/status/1516864373473480705 https://twitter.com/playdate/status/1516864373473480705
airstrike 5y ago
$180??? That's highway robbery. I hadn't heard about it until I read this article and I was guessing it cost around $40
- esrauch 5y ago
  Just 24 indie games from well-known indie devs would need to cost more than that
- ngngngng 5y ago
  That's pretty insulting to the people that spend the better part of the last decade making this happen
  - airstrike 5y ago
    How is a free market insulting? I find it insulting to suggest I can't have an opinion that disagrees with the people who conceived the product.
    - _lx4l 5y ago
      It's insulting to call a product you haven't ever seen or used "Highway Robbery"
- olliej 5y ago
  Stop. Think about how much you would want to be paid to work on this. Ballpark how many units you think it will sell. Divide how much you would want to be paid by the number of units you think it will sell. That would be the minimum cost simply to cover your own part. There are two ways to make a return on a product: * Sell absurd numbers with a small profit (race to the bottom) * Sell small numbers at a price point actually includes the cost of running a business Panic is an old and established business. They recognize that developing commercial software (and now hardware???) is something that people should be paid for. One of the most depressing things of the modern era of software dev is how the various “app stores” have turbo charged race-to-the-bottom and spyware/free economics.
  - ziml77 5y ago
    The race to the bottom is depressing and shows no signs of changing. Hell, I was at an event more than a decade ago where one of the panels discussed monetization of games. They discussed how there's no cost to distribution which means that there's no floor to the price. And even back then they'd basically resigned themselves to the fact that freemium was the only way to compete. Personally, I pay for lots of applications. I understand that people need to be compensated for their work and I don't want them to switch to shady tactics to get that money.
    - olliej 5y ago
      I can see the misery that devs targeting the various app stores are stuck with. If you charge an actually reasonable amount of money for an app, or worse: a game, you will get review bombed for "charging too much" or "being greedy". Meanwhile PC games that are no more challenging get to charge >=$60 for the high end, but a still reasonable $20 for indy. Then, even if you do get momentum at a reasonable price, that app stores seem to, if anything, promote rip offs and clones that are just racing to the floor.
  - airstrike 5y ago
    > Think about how much you would want to be paid to work on this. How is that relevant at all? I'd love to be paid $1M / year for what I do, but that's not how my wages are determined. That argument is DOA.
- jrootabega 5y ago
  The demographics they're aiming for are conspicuous frivolous tech spenders. People with more money than they need, who would pay for the privilege of owning a product as much as the product itself. It would be sensible to wait for non-early-adopter user reviews before buying this!
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
tapoxi 5y ago
I mean, there's a third, the video game nerd who can afford a $180 toy. The fact that you get 24 games from well known indie developers makes it an easier pill to swallow. I might get a second revision of this. It's neat, but it needs a backlight.
skocznymroczny 5y ago
Sounds like it might appeal to what people think they'd like. Kind of like basic phones or Linux phones sound fun in principle and many people might declare they'd want one, but they might not be willing to spend money on one. Similar here, it appeals to the fantasy of a low tech game console which doesn't buy into the latest fads and doesn't shove microtransactions your way like a smartphone would.

zitterbewegung 5y ago

I’ve watched reviews about it and the biggest problem is the lack of having a backlit screen . Only having 12 games is another issue (but anyone can develop the device ) but not having a backlit screen in 2021 is a huge problem because people play with handheld devices when it’s dark sometimes .

surewe 5y ago
It comes with 24 games (this was announced before preorders opened -- it was previously 12).
- kemayo 5y ago
  They've also been recently promoting some third-party games you can sideload: https://twitter.com/playdate/status/1516864373473480705 https://twitter.com/playdate/status/1516864373473480705

airstrike 5y ago

$180??? That's highway robbery. I hadn't heard about it until I read this article and I was guessing it cost around $40

esrauch 5y ago
Just 24 indie games from well-known indie devs would need to cost more than that
ngngngng 5y ago
That's pretty insulting to the people that spend the better part of the last decade making this happen
- airstrike 5y ago
  How is a free market insulting? I find it insulting to suggest I can't have an opinion that disagrees with the people who conceived the product.
  - _lx4l 5y ago
    It's insulting to call a product you haven't ever seen or used "Highway Robbery"
olliej 5y ago
Stop. Think about how much you would want to be paid to work on this. Ballpark how many units you think it will sell. Divide how much you would want to be paid by the number of units you think it will sell. That would be the minimum cost simply to cover your own part. There are two ways to make a return on a product: * Sell absurd numbers with a small profit (race to the bottom) * Sell small numbers at a price point actually includes the cost of running a business Panic is an old and established business. They recognize that developing commercial software (and now hardware???) is something that people should be paid for. One of the most depressing things of the modern era of software dev is how the various “app stores” have turbo charged race-to-the-bottom and spyware/free economics.
- ziml77 5y ago
  The race to the bottom is depressing and shows no signs of changing. Hell, I was at an event more than a decade ago where one of the panels discussed monetization of games. They discussed how there's no cost to distribution which means that there's no floor to the price. And even back then they'd basically resigned themselves to the fact that freemium was the only way to compete. Personally, I pay for lots of applications. I understand that people need to be compensated for their work and I don't want them to switch to shady tactics to get that money.
  - olliej 5y ago
    I can see the misery that devs targeting the various app stores are stuck with. If you charge an actually reasonable amount of money for an app, or worse: a game, you will get review bombed for "charging too much" or "being greedy". Meanwhile PC games that are no more challenging get to charge >=$60 for the high end, but a still reasonable $20 for indy. Then, even if you do get momentum at a reasonable price, that app stores seem to, if anything, promote rip offs and clones that are just racing to the floor.
- airstrike 5y ago
  > Think about how much you would want to be paid to work on this. How is that relevant at all? I'd love to be paid $1M / year for what I do, but that's not how my wages are determined. That argument is DOA.
jrootabega 5y ago
The demographics they're aiming for are conspicuous frivolous tech spenders. People with more money than they need, who would pay for the privilege of owning a product as much as the product itself. It would be sensible to wait for non-early-adopter user reviews before buying this!

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

tapoxi 5y ago

I mean, there's a third, the video game nerd who can afford a $180 toy. The fact that you get 24 games from well known indie developers makes it an easier pill to swallow. I might get a second revision of this. It's neat, but it needs a backlight.

skocznymroczny 5y ago

Sounds like it might appeal to what people think they'd like. Kind of like basic phones or Linux phones sound fun in principle and many people might declare they'd want one, but they might not be willing to spend money on one. Similar here, it appeals to the fantasy of a low tech game console which doesn't buy into the latest fads and doesn't shove microtransactions your way like a smartphone would.