All comments

Im amazed at how good Rayman is and i much prefer it to the slightly disappointing Uncharted 3!

played about 5 levels, felt like something worth about 10 quid, tops. just not a main event kinda game, just a mere distraction. i would have bought this if it was 10 quid on PSN. but as a retail game, on a disc...lol, no. and i dont think i'll be alone in that mindset either. i'd be shocked if this game sells even 100,000 copies. but then that's probably good going for a game that was clearly developed on the cheap.

Yeah right.

100,000 sales would amount to ~4,000,000 GBP. i really can't imagine this game costing 4 million to make? do you?

so low sales would still probably see them in the green. assuming they even get close to 100,000 sales?

they should have stacked them high and sold them cheap tho. they may have recieved less money per unit sold, but they would have undoubtably sold much MUCH more.

My problem is with you saying the game was developed on the cheap. It's not because it's not Uncharted 3 that it did not require time and money to create the engine and make the game. I also want to add that this game has more replay value than most so called AAA titles. Not to mention it also takes more time to complete. So well, let's just say that I find what you're saying about the game gibberish. It's not more a $10 game than, say, a Call of Duty game to me. Is it because it's 2D and not highly textured 3D? The only mistake they made was to originally announce it as a PSN/XBL title, which probably had people think it was a cheap game in the first place.

It looks awesome, but I hate that these platform games do not run in Full HD. There is more than enough power in both consoles, but I guess there is no point in optimizing for Full HD when the game is going to sell anyway.

but it obviously WAS developed on the cheap. i'm not denying it's replayability or quality for what it is. but i dont feel the price is justified, but that's just me (and millions of others who wont buy it) but it's development costs will have been a FRACTION of what it would have been if this was a real, 3D rayman sequel/prequel. it's just plain logical thinking.

where ubisoft went wrong was releasing the game at full price (announcing it as digital download didnt do them any favours at all). there are games out there on XBLA and PSN that look better and offer the same amount of content and replayability, and yet they where 8-10 GBP. and they all sold well, they COULD have released at full retail price, but they wouldnt have sold anywhere near as many units and thus would have been stupid to do so.

whatever comparitively small amount of money was spent developing this game, they would have done best to sell it cheaper, cos then the price would match way the game looks, and the price would be far more appealing to many more people.

it's much easier to justify spending 10GBP on a digital quality game like this then it is spending 40. not to mentin a disc based retail release just means it's accessible via rentals. i rented the game, and even then i couldnt shake the feeling that i was playing a 10GBP digital game, on a 40GBP disc. it just doesnt add up to me.

on the plus side, the game will drop in price faster then you can say rayman, and i'll be able to buy it for the price i think it's worth. hopefully the vita release will reflect that price once launched. nothing worse then a 3 month older release of the same game being full price.

But come on, where did you get the idea it was that cheap to make? This game has such a level of polish (and I also mean technically speaking) that it sure is worth its present price, no matter what you might think. Do you really believe Rayman Origins is just another Limbo kind of game? Again, I guess 2D games are now considered cheap, which is just a shame...

As for me, I have no problem with the fact that it is sold at "full" price (whatever that means...) and I even think it's perfectly normal. See, I will never spend a dime on BF3 or COD but I'd buy Rayman without the slightest hesitation.

http://youtu.be/2Z4m4lnjxkY?t=1m58s

@Driftwood - It's because has too much gameplay, it's not 3D and not omfg modern movie-like blockbuster!

I actually paid 40 bucks for Rayman and still refuse to throw the same amount for Uncharted 3, Battlefield 3 and few other ten ''A'' modern games with zero originality.

rayman IS just another "limbo kind of game" they both offer great art, 2D gameplay, low development costs. only difference being that rayman is about twice as long and costs 4 times as much. meh, agree to disagree i guess.

Looks awesome, but I'll wait for a pricedrop

I think this is a case of people confusing great art direction with level of detail. Limbo has great art, but it's confined to grayscales, silhouettes and uses cardboard cut-out animation, of course it's going to be cheap to produce.
Rayman Origins has more in common with traditionally animated shows that are painstakingly handdrawn, frame by frame, cleaned up and painted over for a considerably larger budget and longer timeframe.
If you think both games look the same then that is a very subjective observation and has little to do with the budget they spent on each game.
Origins is not a cheap game by any means, obviously not as expensive as most AAA titles, but if you can't even pinpoint where inbetween black and white this game falls then you're probably not part of their target audience to begin with. Just leave it be and move on.

I can honestly say I would never spend 40 bucks on any modern-day FPS. They all feature exactly the same 3D models, textures, and sound effects as every other shooter to my eyes, like it was all just cut&pasted in. But I know I'm not part of their target audience, I know I'm just ignorant about it because of my limited knowledge of war in general or my overall lack of interest in blockbuster type games. If people like those games and think they're worth the price then I'm happy for them.

I knew KORNdog would mess up this thread! Should there be a new term for people who're stingy with prices for certain games? Price-tards? Because his logic is really dumb, on so many levels. You can't compare this to Limbo or other XBLA games because there isn't as much copy-paste assets here. There's so much more content and variety here. One tiny example: Multiple playable characters with wildly different animations?! (don't bring up super meat boy, because that just borrowed assets from those other games)

I'm off to buy it.Don't know which game you're talking about, Rayman Origins is 1080p and 60 FPS.

Looks great but I can't afford it right now, honestly a digital release would have made more business sense, I bet it happens somewhere down the line.

It's not that it is not worth full retail at all but the (retarded) perception is unfortunately that these types of games are somehow relegated to digital downloads with the exception of Nintendo titles.

Easily the best looking platformer to date though, I have high hopes for more titles made with the tech in the future.

Agreed, this is how i thought Sonic 2D would of turned out, sadly i was wrong.

Could you imagine how amazing a Mario game would be!!!!!

Old Skool Loyal :)

To show you how little you know about how the game was made, here are a few facts: about 80 people from Ubisoft Montpelier worked on Rayman Origins, not to mention those from Casablanca. Hardly the kind of team you see for $10 titles. But well, 2D huh, not worth 60 bucks I guess. :p

KORN wouldn't have this complaint if it weren't 2d.

I'd wager he wouldn't make the same claims with the recent Super Mario Brothers game because it has 3d models. Which this borrows heavily from.

But dude remember if it ain't Uncharted or any other PS3 exclusive it has to be cheap looking or bad lol!

Plus, it has to be super linear, none of this 2D side-scrolling or backtracking allowed!

Hahaha you took the words out of my mouth!

Amen, brother.

if it played the same i would. now if it was 3D, ala rayman 2 and 3, then no, i wouldnt.

but ultimately we'll find out if i'm alone in these thoughts when we see sales figures.

It does play the same. Have you played Super Mario Brothers? Do you even have a Wii?

Sales figures will probably be poor compared to other titles because kids need their games to be 3d. It's why Street Fighter is no longer a 2d fighter, why there really isn't any 2d games anymore.

Sales don't mean anything. The reviews speak plenty.

Which does not change the fact that what you said about the game being "cheap" was just pure nonsense.

It's not because most players out there are narrow-minded idiots (thinking that gaming is just about BF3 and COD :p) that it proves your point, does it? I mean, yes sure, it's quite easy to predict that players can't buy all the good games which have been released and that most of them will go (or have gone) for the usual BF3/COD/Uncharted/Gears of War combo. So in the end, yes, Rayman will surely be left out by most pseudo gamers.

That's pretty much why today's industry is so sad now. And since we're playing the gold old "I told you so" game, I am confident that we will get fewer and fewer original titles in the future because of that. But well, as long as people are happy playing just another first person shooter...

In a world where FPS rule supreme im not expecting an old school 2D platform game to sell well, i dont think anyone would be tbh.

However sales dont make a great game...Look at Uncharted 2...that never sold as well as it should and it's the best adventure game this gen, Dead Space 1 & 2 never sold as well as they should have....see where im going with this?