Conversation

Notices

  1. itt; people complain about the evil companies that dare to make them *gasp* pay /money/ for games

    Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:00:01 UTC from StatusNet Android
    1. @redenchilada Not as much as "pay money" as "pay a stupidly high amount of money". $60 for a game I'll beat in a night is just too much.

      Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:01:54 UTC from web
      1. @nerthos Or if a game is so bad it's not worth $10. (Aliens)

        Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:03:02 UTC from web
        1. @wafers I regularly buy physical copies of games sold at fair prices. It's just that they can't expect me to pay /so much/ for a game.

          Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:04:12 UTC from web
          1. @nerthos If I can buy a game I want, i'll buy it. That's my mantra.

            Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:05:00 UTC from web
            1. @wafers It's funny 'cause I was willing to pay up to $100 for Diablo 3 before it launched, just because I loved 2 so much, but then they made it always online and I literally told them "haha f*** you, you're not going to see a dime"

              Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:08:44 UTC from web
              1. @nerthos Same here

                Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:09:56 UTC from web
                1. @critialcloudkicker Always online is the breaking point for me. Unless it's an MMO, I'm not going to pay for one of those.

                  Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:11:00 UTC from web
                  1. @nerthos The only instance I will ever accept always on DRM is if the main or only income for the game is by microtransactions. There is no need to play a game for months with stuff you need to buy to make it quicker ( EXP boosts ) when you can go into the save game file and edit the [level 1] into [level 99]. D3 had the misfortune of becoming the grand champion of real money auctionhouse... Which in turn pretty much meant that all the items needed to be carefully monitored or else all the endboss most treasured loot would be availible for next to nothing and 3 cents on the real money AH.

                    Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:14:57 UTC from web
                    1. @critialcloudkicker Yeah, I was tempted to start playing it with a bunch of guys and power-farm bosses just to break the economy, charging 5 cents or just giving away stuff.

                      Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:17:02 UTC from web
          2. @nerthos I have no problem buying a "good" game for 60$. But a game that was rushed, and is full of game breaking glitches, and that charges you afterwards for stuff that's already on the disk and calm it dlc

            Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:08:33 UTC from web
            1. @archon Same for me. I also have a funny taste in my mouth right now of Duke Nukem Forever. and Colonial Marines.

              Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:09:12 UTC from web
            2. @archon accidently sent that, stupid phone, but I think its wrong charge 60$ for a game that was rushed, is broken etc

              Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:09:41 UTC from web
              1. @archon I got what you meant. Sadly EA called this "entitlement" ... Hmm, I do not think so. As a gamer I entitle myself to any and everything that is made for the game when I buy the game. Anything that is developed afterwards, yea you can charge me for that. But unlocking a single bit so I can have the alienwhatnot in ME3 ? Yea lets say I am happy I did not get that game

                Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:11:58 UTC from web
            3. @archon That's when you go all "haha no communism"

              Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:10:16 UTC from web
      2. @nerthos I gladly spend $60 on games I really like because they're not over after an hour and a half like movies are. The last time I bought a game for that much, I beat the main game in six hours and then spent a good ten or twelve beating the extras.

        Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:05:11 UTC from StatusNet Android
        1. @redenchilada For $60 I expect 300 hours of fun, like with Oblivion or Age of Empires 2.

          Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:06:32 UTC from web
          1. @nerthos So you think a good game is only worth 20¢ an hour. I don't understand that viewpoint. When you consider how much work and money goes into making triple-A titles, a good game is easily worth $15 per hour of game play on the first playthrough. (Granted, I wouldn't pay that much for something like Super Hexagon, but those games are usually sold on digital download services for <$5 anyway)

            Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:11:54 UTC from StatusNet Android
            1. @redenchilada For $60 a night I literally can pay a prostitute.

              Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:13:02 UTC from web
        2. @redenchilada Like people complain MGR "is a four hour game". I'm literally 31 hours in and I still haven't done everything.

          Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:07:16 UTC from web
    2. @redenchilada Hasbro is taking down websites that host My Little Pony episodes it's not fair whyyyyy D:<

      Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:03:43 UTC from web
    3. @redenchilada *GASP* you knicked it. Well sort of. How would you like to recieve a mug of endless liquid from me, for free, but everytime you want to sip from it, or otherwize directly or indirectly drink from it you owe me 3,50. That is sort of what it feels like to me. Especially with the prospect of me keeping that mug and all of it's delicious content locked away in a drawer for which you have no key, so everytime you want a sip of whatever you fancy the most from the mug of allknowing liquids you can not without me standing direcly over you gazing and smiling "does it taste good ? I hope so because now you owe me 3,50. Also now Immagine that one day I would die, and the mug is still locked up in a drawer somewhere. Would you go look for the key ? Oh I am sorry graverobbing is ILLEGAL

      Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:06:43 UTC from web
      1. @critialcloudkicker But that's bringing in different issues. I don't like subscription models and the whole licensing deal either. But the price of games is a non-issue and people really like to over-exaggerate it.

        Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:16:08 UTC from StatusNet Android
        1. @redenchilada Not really. It is the essence of piracy to an extent. If someone offers you X for as long as you use service Y you can happily make use of X for as long as Y is alive. If Y were to stop existing you are not able to use X. If you would bend some rules so you could still use X you would technically be a pirate.

          Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:19:11 UTC from web
          1. @critialcloudkicker The price of games literally has nothing to do with the model of "you get a license to this game and not full ownership". I'm talking about the former.

            Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:23:19 UTC from StatusNet Android
            1. @redenchilada A properly priced game is for example Guild Wars 2. It's like, $30, and it's massive.

              Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:25:17 UTC from web
            2. @redenchilada The issue I have with games as a whole if you buy them from a digital distibutor is that you essentially lose the games should the distributor stop existing. Steam has promised us that our games will remain our games, Origin has not. I do not really know what you are talking about then I must admit.

              Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:25:35 UTC from web
    4. @redenchilada While I agree with you that people whine far too much about video game publishers, the whole $10 one-time use code to unlock half your game is ridiculous.

      Sunday, 24-Mar-13 20:08:03 UTC from web