Hollow Knight Sequel 'Silksong' Crashed Game Stores, as $20 Price Irks Competitors (screenrant.com)
- Reference: 0179214662
- News link: https://games.slashdot.org/story/25/09/13/2212239/hollow-knight-sequel-silksong-crashed-game-stores-as-20-price-irks-competitors
- Source link: https://screenrant.com/hollow-knight-silksong-price-controversy-explained/
> SilkSong 's release triggered widespread outages, with thousands of users reporting issues trying to buy the game in the first few hours of its release. Many were unable to complete purchases, with error messages persisting for almost three hours after the launch... Despite the technical hiccups, within 30 minutes of going live Steam reported more than 100,000 active players, suggesting many had managed to secure their copies.
Aftermath says the "bug-tastic" phenomenon [2]displaced everything except Counter-Strike 2 and Dota 2 on Steam's list of most-played games. The Guardian notes that "At least seven other new games have [3]delayed their launch in the past two weeks to avoid a clash..."
"People have been spamming the chat and the comments of every single game showcase or news event with the words 'Where's Silksong?' for years," [4]writes the Guardian's video games editor :
> I've never seen another indie game achieve this level of notoriety before it was even released... As [5]VGC points out , Atari released a similar game on the same day as Silksong (Adventure of Samsara) and it had only 12 concurrent players on Steam.
They add that "the hype is justified". Eurogame called Silksong " [6]beautiful, thrilling and cruel ." PC Game said Silksong "glows with a level of [7]precision and imagination that's hard to find anywhere else " and "will beat you, burn you, rub your face in the dirt, and then dazzle you with another piece of a haunted clockwork world."
But at least some of the demand also came from the game's low price of $20 in the U.S., suggests Slashdot reader [8]UnknowingFool (with variable regional pricing). "At [9]5.2M wishes , it was the most wish listed game on Steam. In Brazil, the local price was 74.95 Brazil Real or 13.94 USD."
> In the age of $70+ AAA games with additional costs, not everyone celebrated the consumer friendly price. Some independent game developers have expressed concern that their games may not sell as well compared to Silksong and cannot afford to charge less.
[10]From ScreenRant :
> Hollow Knight: Silksong's unbelievably low price point of just $19.99 is exceptionally good value for the consumer. It is an incredibly lengthy game that is only marginally more expensive than its predecessor... it is proving to be a source of controversy for other indie developers who believe it will distort players' expectations.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/games/2025/sep/05/hollow-knight-silksong-launch-crashes-online-gaming-stores-popularity-demand-australian-game
[2] https://aftermath.site/aftermath-hours-podcast-silksong-launch-gta-vi-elden-ring
[3] https://aftermath.site/silksong-indie-delays
[4] https://www.theguardian.com/games/2025/sep/10/hollow-knight-silksong-has-caused-bedlam-in-the-gaming-world-and-the-hype-is-justified
[5] https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/atari-launched-its-own-metroidvania-on-the-same-day-as-silksong-but-its-only-hit-12-concurrent-players-on-steam/
[6] https://www.eurogamer.net/hollow-knight-silksong-review
[7] https://www.pcgamer.com/games/action/hollow-knight-silksong-review/
[8] https://www.slashdot.org/~UnknowingFool
[9] https://www.reddit.com/r/HollowKnight/comments/1n0qfli/new_data_silksong_now_has_52_million_steam/
[10] https://screenrant.com/hollow-knight-silksong-price-controversy-explained/
Protect your install (Score:3)
I have an offline installation of Silksong from GoG, and I don't have to patch it if I don't want to. Allegedly Team Cherry has decided to make the game a little easier by changing how many enemies can do additional damage and by lowering prices on shop items (among other things). Not sure if they're gonna lock these changes behind an "easy mode" or if the base game will be affected, but those of us who have no need to patch the game will never see those changes.
The game runs flawlessly and doesn't crash or bug out (well, unless it's supposed to because . . . everything's an insect or slug or arachnid or whatever), so there's no immediate need for a patch to make it run.
If you're into that (Score:2)
> "will beat you, burn you, rub your face in the dirt, and then dazzle you with another piece of a haunted clockwork world."
That is exactly what I am into, getting beaten, burned, and my face rubbed in the dirt. I see why people like this.
Priced too cheap - boo hoo hoo (Score:2, Interesting)
Its predecessor "Hollow Knight" sold 15 million copies, mostly at a similar price ($20), which adds up to a total revenue of $300M. Indie games aren't supposed to cost $70 a time. $20 is low enough that a casual gamer like me will drop $20 to see what the fuss is about.
Denuvo, accounts, and always online (Score:4, Interesting)
I personally don't care how much games cost. I probably would pay $100+ for a game that I consider interesting and $250 for a ground-breaking title (Skyrim, etc.). However, I refuse to buy games (and simply would not pay, I have no time and moral objections to piracy) if it is bundled with invasive DRM like Denuvo or requires me to create an account (e.g. EA). I've missed out on a lot of games in the past 5 years, but I have no run out of things to play. I am really glad to see Hollow Knight doing well all without invasive crap that infects your PC.
I get the point... (Score:4, Interesting)
This is a run to the bottom with people on prices. I mean I get it, paying $70 for a AAA game with DLC's and a battle pass is outrageous. Paying full price for No Man Sky is worth it only because its been out 10 years and you know your going to spend the hours in it. But what about the guy who makes a decent 2D game, not as good as SilkSong, but passable with a good 20 hours of play? You cannot even judge your enjoyment by price either. Look at Undertale. Its not the kind of game for everyone, yet its loved by those who grok it. On the other hand, SilkSong took 7 years and after a few months the hype will die out. They made enough on the last game they could take their time and not worry about the profits.
Meh I am just confused on what I should or shouldn't pay now. You got Steam sales, thousands of games in the market, great gems with like 20 reviews because they were never featured yet want $30 bucks. It's a mad house I tell you.
Re: (Score:2)
The #1 question when buying a game is whether it's worth your time. Only if that answer is yes, does the price matter. There are a lot of games out there, so a game must either be really good or do something unique to stand out. A metroidvania that's just okay isn't going to be successful commercially, no matter what it's priced at; the competition is just too stiff.
I don't think the $20 price point matters much for the competition. People into this genre are going to play Silksong first and only look for o
player expectations NEED to be distorted. (Score:5, Interesting)
"it is proving to be a source of controversy for other indie developers who believe it will distort players' expectations"
GOOD
$100+DLC+lootboxes+pay-to-win should NOT be normal player expectations.
Re: (Score:2)
Other INDIE devs. Indie devs aren't charging $100 + loot boxes. Team Cherry are in the unique position of being like 3 guys whose previous game blew up and are basically guaranteed to sell 10M+ copies of the sequel. They can afford to spend 7 years on Silksong and then sell it for $20.
Other teams that aren't already set for life are worried because they will need to charge more for smaller, less polished games in order to afford to eat.
Re: (Score:2)
No indie is charging that. That's part of the appeal already.
If anyone is upset about this, it's triple A publishers... but not because Silksong is successful. Just because they have launched so many major entries into major franchises that have absolutely flopped over the last few years. They're just looking for a reason why their formula isn't as popular as the expect while they rely on the majority of the market being naive about their practices.
Just do like EA (Score:2)
Back in the day NFL 2K had their final release put out at $20. This was a calculation to compete with EA's John Madden football. They basically figured out they could outsell Madden by so many copies that the lower price point would be worth it.
So EA just went to the NFL and paid them for an exclusive deal and we have not had another NFL football game besides Madden since.
Gabe isn't going to live forever. When he dies steam is at a high risk of being sold to somebody like EA. A benevolent King is st
IDK where this narrative comes from (Score:2)
Indie game devs already expect their games to be unnoticed by the vast majority. They don't tend to get mad about another indie's success.
This seems like a narrative that is just being pushed by people unfamiliar with the culture.
Well, that's new...I think (Score:3)
Video games competing on price. That seems new to me.
Re: (Score:2)
They kinda need to. Some game segments (e.g. anything not mobile/casual) are losing sales. Dev houses are firing people and going out of business. It's rough out there.
Meanwhile Team Cherry had all the time in the world to work on Silksong and can make bank at a price of $20/copy since their dev costs were low-to-non-existent. The entire team that worked on Hollow Knight is already rich enough to retire. They're basically using the same game engine as before (probably).
Re: (Score:2)
Why are their costs so much lower, with no overhead? Are there no other such outfits around?
I don't know much about gaming, other than the big dev houses are making billions.
Re: (Score:3)
Team Cherry's core is [1]three guys [teamcherry.com.au]. They pay themselves and some contractors to help out (the list of credits on Hollow Knight was much longer than three guys). In any case it's a small indie shop where they handle the vast majority of the work. Their output is pretty basic 2d stuff. They don't need expensive development systems, voice actors, mocap, extensive engine licenses, etc. They self-publish.
There are plenty of small indie shops that do essentially the same thing, albeit with generally worse resu
[1] https://www.teamcherry.com.au/about/
Re: (Score:2)
The game engine is Unity, so... in one sense you're absolutely correct and in another there's been a 3rd party team developing it in the background the whole time.
The comparison isn't even, but it's not like triple A games ever ship without a large amount of middleware these days.
Re: (Score:2)
The production costs of "Silksong" are obviously not quite as high as those of graphically opulent, almost photo-realistic 3D games. So they can compete on price, while of course only attracting an audience that is interested in the kind of 2D platform game with cartoon graphics they make. Nothing wrong with that, but just a very different market segment.
Re: (Score:2)
I see.
So I guess the question then becomes, if there is so much "bank" to be made in that segment, why are other dev houses not pursuing that segment? Or are they, and they're not not successful with it, and if so, why not?
It sounds a lot like a South Park, or Family Guy, Beavis & Butthead or similar type situation. The animation and graphics of those shows are just HORRIBLE, compared to stuff from Disney or Pixar. But "animation houses" are competing in that market and making bank. Is that not happeni