Cosmochoria Blasts Out Of Early Access At Half-Price

A naked guy in a helmet meandering around the vacuum of space. Finally, a video game that relates to my day to day life.

Long-time RPS readers will remember we spoke about Cosmochoria [official website] when it first entered Early Access last year. At that time we were already comparing it to Edmund McMillen’s Aether, which is still right on the money. Both are 2D games, both set on or around small planets, one largely an ode to being naked in space which I reckon McMillen would approve of.

And boy howdy, the game is now live. For the next day [sorry, we’re a bit late to this -ed.] it’s going for 50% off on Steam, so it’s £3.49 and not £6.99. You can check it out in action below, in all space platforming glory.

It’s worth pointing out to those of you who’ve already been playing, the game’s high scores have been reset for the full launch.

15 Comments

  1. yhancik says:

    For a moment I thought Planeter link to ditto.itch.io had radically changed its look and gameplay :O

  2. NotToBeLiked says:

    So as a reward for the people who bought this in Early Access and helped out by being free beta testers and funding more development, the developer thank them by offering the game at half price for new customers.
    OK Then…

    • Chaoslord AJ says:

      That’s why noone should do early access. No product – no money.
      Strangely people have no problem stealing movies and music then throw away their money on kickstarters.
      Anyway got the game now and it’s fun but I’d be somewhat square too.

    • yhancik says:

      It’s not unusual. Prison Architect is doing the same right? Although they announced it right away. I have no idea if that’s the case for this one.

    • lomaxgnome says:

      It had the same sale several times during early access. And guess what? Most games get cheaper over time. People who bought it six months ago got to support development and have it for the last six months. People who buy now get to have a “complete” game at a discount from the base price. Each has merit.

      Pay what you think a game is worth, when you want it, and support the developers to the degree you feel is appropriate or that you can afford. Game prices ALWAYS GO DOWN.

      • Emeraude says:

        Game prices ALWAYS GO DOWN

        They have so far, but mostly because of the crazy tech-related obsolesce of the products, not necessarily because of any intrinsic quality of the games themselves.

        I mean compare with board games. I don’t think the price of Scrabble or Monopoly or Diplomacy went down that much.

        • yhancik says:

          Because of all that damn cardboard

        • Kitsunin says:

          Frankly, it makes sense for the prices of games to go down. It allows even the poorest of individuals to play whatever games they’d like, provided they show an amount of patience most of us lack. From the perspective of the people making games, it allows them to keep making money even after public interest has fallen away…not after the product is “obsolete”.

          It doesn’t happen with board games because the price of printing is typically enough that if you go any deeper than a 33% discount you won’t be making any profit at all. Scrabble and Monopoly also don’t need to discount because they are in that lovely “culturally timeless” club (for now) unlike just about every other game. You can still find them on sale by the choice of the retailer sometimes, though.

          • Tacroy says:

            This is actually something you see a ton of in economics – if your product is even slightly appealing, then for everyone who knows of your product there exists some price at which they will buy it. By having a price drop structure that’s staggered over time, you ensure that everyone pays the highest price they’re willing to pay, thus maximizing your profits.

            The only downside to this is that people tend to feel that by taking a risk on the product early on, they should have paid less than someone who came in on a more mature product; but on the other hand, the publisher loses money if they don’t continue with a staggered price drop scheme, particularly at major milestones like 1.0, because customers have come to expect that sort of thing.

            It’s like what happened with Distant Universe: it’s definitely worth the $60ish price, but if they cut that in half they’d probably quadruple their customer base.

    • Premium User Badge

      Phasma Felis says:

      Okay, seriously, who gives a fuck? Is the fun you had with this game retroactively ruined by the fact that some people were allowed to save five entire dollars on it?

      Nobody forced you to buy on early access. You chose to pay money to be a beta tester in exchange for getting to play the game early. You knew that was the deal going in. Nobody ever said “and also I promise I will never ever discount this game and will provide you with bi-weekly handjobs.”

      Jesus, gamers can be entitled whiners sometimes.

      • ButteringSundays says:

        Agree wholeheartedly. It’s completely irrational.

        The method they’re using fit Dirt is interesting though:

        The cost increases throughout early access as the game develops.

        Of course it’ll still be in a summer sale eventually and that will void all the fun I’ve already had with it /s

    • Akbar says:

      They chose to buy the game at the original price, so I don’t see what you’re complaining about. Other people not having to pay more money for a game?

      • Akbar says:

        That was phrased poorly, my apologies, let me clear it up.
        My point is very similar to Phasma Felis’. Let us imagine two scenarios. In the first, they choose to put the game on sale as they did in reality. In the second, they leave the game at full price. Now, your post is an appeal to sympathy for those who bought the game in early access, however, these people wilfully bought the exact same product for the exact same price in both situations. They suffer no loss, and it seems rather ass backwards, or even cruel, to say that other people not losing more money (which would be of no benefit to anyone at all) is an injustice.

  3. ephesus64 says:

    Kaiba! Well, superficially similar.

  4. roya152 says:

    up to I saw the draft that said $4785 , I have faith that…my… brother woz like actually receiving money in their spare time on there computer. . there friends cousin has been doing this for under 6 months and recently cleared the loans on there house and purchased a great new Dodge . browse around this website… http://www.netcash99.com