I thought they've had a blooper with Reggie before. Plus if it was Live they'd have a lot more mistakes and goofs than the few things they say wrong on accident.
So my parents couldn't get me Conquest because its out of stock. They insist on trying it again on sunday before they come back to my place the day after instead of me simply buying it from play asia.
Now the game being sold out and me being left out isn't the problem that I have but rather the issue being that they are trying to force me not to buy anything online as they think its more expensive than the usual stores. I call that BS there. If the game itself is going to cost the same amount as it would in play-asia, what's the huge difference?
Besides, Play-Asia is awesome as you not only get stuff there but you also get loyalties, discounts from coupons that they give you and most of all, its very reliable. I got Azran Legacy thanks to them as I just couldn't get it anywhere else.
I'm worried that at this point, I may never be able to play either conquest or birthright since there's a very good chance that it'll be out of stock as it is right now.
^ but really, what's the point. Retail stores don't offer loyalties that much as Play-Asia and the stores sell them at more prices compared to online. Sure, delivery wise, it'll be expensive but then again, if the game isn't going to be sold out like that, online stores atleast make it possible to get it at your convenience.
My worry is that if they don't get it on Sunday, they will keep saying that they themselves will buy it forcing me to ignore the online option. Thing is though, I like Play-Asia as its got my trust just for getting one game from them. So I'll never get the chance to get the game because whenever my dad goes to the stores, its gonna be sold out or that the game won't be there which kinda sucks and was something that I got very used to until now when I finally got a job of my own and can pretty much get games by myself.
Their biggest issue is that they want everything cheap and don't want them expensive which can never happen because the cost of the game reflects on the amount of content that's in it.
@Socar: I've played games with about 4-5 hours of content that are fully priced. I've also played games with a hell of a lot more content that are also fully priced. The price you pay doesn't solely reflect the content of the game.
@Socar: I've played games with about 4-5 hours of content that are fully priced. I've also played games with a hell of a lot more content that are also fully priced. The price you pay doesn't solely reflect the content of the game.
Have you considered observing from the graphical point of view? 3D graphics for a AAA game are pretty expensive to make so that too counts. There is no way that Battlefront will cost 10$ for that kind ofg graphics because its unrealistic to think of before five years have passed.
@Socar: I've played games with about 4-5 hours of content that are fully priced. I've also played games with a hell of a lot more content that are also fully priced. The price you pay doesn't solely reflect the content of the game.
Have you considered observing from the graphical point of view? 3D graphics for a AAA game are pretty expensive to make so that too counts. There is no way that Battlefront will cost 10$ for that kind ofg graphics because its unrealistic to think of before five years have passed.
Graphics aren't in this equation of yours, your argument was that the more expensive a game is, the longer it is. To this point you are wrong, consider the original Xenoblade and the original Gears of War. Both games released at the same retail price around the same time, one is 8 hours long with little replayability, the other is around 70 hours.
LaserdiscGal
3DS Friend Code: 0688-5519-2711 | My Nintendo: pokefraker | Nintendo Network ID: pokefraker
So I've been pondering a thought lately, and I would really like to hear some other views on it. My question is: If a game is meant to be judged on its gameplay, design, plot and characters, why is it that games such as Ocarina of Time is considered to be superior to a game such Twilight Princess?
The way I view it is that since TP has the overall better plot, gameplay, design and characters it should be considered the near-objectively better game. After all, it basically improved on almost all of OTs aspects.
I assume that it must be because of nostalgia, or is it that I'm missing something. I'm really interested to hear the thoughts of others.
@Socar: I've played games with about 4-5 hours of content that are fully priced. I've also played games with a hell of a lot more content that are also fully priced. The price you pay doesn't solely reflect the content of the game.
Have you considered observing from the graphical point of view? 3D graphics for a AAA game are pretty expensive to make so that too counts. There is no way that Battlefront will cost 10$ for that kind ofg graphics because its unrealistic to think of before five years have passed.
Graphics aren't in this equation of yours, your argument was that the more expensive a game is, the longer it is. To this point you are wrong, consider the original Xenoblade and the original Gears of War. Both games released at the same retail price around the same time, one is 8 hours long with little replayability, the other is around 70 hours.
So what's your point? Obviously if the game is going to have less content, it has to have something that compensates for that like replayability which solely depends on how much of effort the game has been through. You like to see the games visuals over and over again, well that's content. You like to listen to the games sound effects and audio, well that's content. You like doing other things like 100% games, guess what? That's content.
Undertale costs 9 bucks and can be beaten in just five-seven hours. It really isn't something worth looking it as a game but rather something worth looking as an experience. Earthbound costed more than Undertale and yet that game lasts for more hours.
Why do you think the games back then were extremely difficult? Is it because of technical limits that can't allow saving or is it simply because it was done intentionally so that the player can play it over and over again? As short as those classics were for their time, it doesn't matter because it reflects on the content you get which is amazing gameplay, awesome audio and an extreme challenge.
If price doesn't reflect on the game's content, then why is it that people rant so much of the games being incomplete? Street Fighter V barely has anything and the same goes for Phantom Pain. if those games were to be beaten in 1-3 hours, then what's the point of them being 60$?
If price doesn't reflect on the game's content, then why is it that people rant so much of the games being incomplete? Street Fighter V barely has anything and the same goes for Phantom Pain. if those games were to be beaten in 1-3 hours, then what's the point of them being 60$?
You've just answered and unproven the point you were trying to make with that paragraph.
IT FINALLY GOT HIM. THE CANCER KNOWN AS UNDERTALE HAS REACHED TO GAMEXPLAIN AND MADE A VIDEO ABOUT IT.
....Sorry for the caps. I been trying to stay away from undertale for weeks, but Andre made a gameplay video of the game. Gamexplain is the last place I expect some gameplay footage of undertale.
Anyway, as far as I know it's just an Earthbound inspired RPG with moral choices and multiple endings that generated a big fandom rather quickly.
But, I suppose I forgot that big crazy fandoms only come out of the worst of the wost. The quicker and bigger they grow, the eviler they are. <spooky sounds>
Forums
Topic: The Chit-Chat Thread
Posts 13,201 to 13,220 of 96,530
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic