Damn. I remember when I thought $10 was a lot for the game when it first came out. I didn't know it rose in price.
10 bucks for the pc version i think that was fair... it's a cool game you can have plenty of fun on it however it's built on shitty java by a lazy team.. and the stock game looks like shit and gameplay is shit...
i only played it with mods, the vanilla game is crap...
as for consoles.. well.. they are all greedy mofos... 5 bucks would for the console versions would be fair, but yeah, sony and microsoft wants extra 5-10 bucks, while nintendo raises it even more cuz "our games are "premium", you will buy them anyway"
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
I admit I do get kinda confused over the graphics vs gameplay debate, but I realize some games need graphics like Assassin creed since it is based around buildings and such.. Games like that merely couldn't just have a touch up or polished look to it. It would need to have a details like no other.
don't worry about it, amish is still a thing apparently..
there is this new era of "game-amish" people who say it doesn't matter if the game is just 1 monochrome pixel as long as you have gameplay...
theese people refuse to understand that when a game really looks amazing, it's something valuable as well...
i am not "ho yeah graphics are the shit" guy, but however, i agree that graphics have an effect.. with all theese technology, why should i be ok with a voxel pixelated game because the developer is lazy and wants to save money\time and put the "retro" bullshit tag