Eh. All for this. As kkslider alludes to in his first post, I think it's a good thing when publishers and developers get money from the sale of their games, as it means that'll actually get to make another one.
well yeah...but, it isn't like Arkham City isn't gonna be a HUGE hit anyway. I mean, if something less likely to make a profit did this(Bulletstorm?), I could get behind it more, in a "rooting for the underdog" sort of way and be like "yeah, screw you Gamestop!", I dunno.
So a developer and publisher is only entitled to make money if their game is unsuccessful?
no, it just means when they're gonna get a huge profit, I kinda don't care about it. Good for them, but it's hard for me to care about the rich getting richer, but I also don't think it's particularly offensive, especially considering how hilariously over the top greedy some companies are.
Yes, prevent the developers from receiving any more money once they make the game. I like DLC and passes like these, if it's a good game and I can further support developers then two parties are happy.
QUEEN OF SASS
It's like, I just love a cowboy
You know
I'm just like, I just, I know, it's bad
But I'm just like
Can I just like, hang off the back of your horse
And can you go a little faster?!
Eh. All for this. As kkslider alludes to in his first post, I think it's a good thing when publishers and developers get money from the sale of their games, as it means that'll actually get to make another one.
well yeah...but, it isn't like Arkham City isn't gonna be a HUGE hit anyway. I mean, if something less likely to make a profit did this(Bulletstorm?), I could get behind it more, in a "rooting for the underdog" sort of way and be like "yeah, screw you Gamestop!", I dunno.
So a developer and publisher is only entitled to make money if their game is unsuccessful?
no, it just means when they're gonna get a huge profit, I kinda don't care about it. Good for them, but it's hard for me to care about the rich getting richer, but I also don't think it's particularly offensive, especially considering how hilariously over the top greedy some companies are.
In that case every publisher should be calling you up before every game release to see whether it's going to be a HUGE hit, and based on what you say to them, they can either put in DLC and online passes (if it's not going to be a megahit), or just accept that they're not going to make as much money as they should (if it is going to be a megahit)?
I'm being sarcastic, yes, but your attitude is exactly what's wrong with gamers - they have this fairytale concept of what business should be, which utterly ignores reality.
Then again, gamers are entitled enough to think they have a right to complain about paying $10 or $20 for an online ticket to play a game that they didn't even buy from the publisher, and which cost $40 or $50 million to make, and on the publisher's expensive to maintain servers to boot. Amazing logic.
Yes, prevent the developers from receiving any more money once they make the game. I like DLC and passes like these, if it's a good game and I can further support developers then two parties are happy.
Problem is. Most DLC is way overpriced. And a lot of it could of been in the original package. Like when Rockstar released an extra L.A. Noire mission the day of release. I think passes are fine. It's a lot better incentive to buy new than some games
Yes, prevent the developers from receiving any more money once they make the game. I like DLC and passes like these, if it's a good game and I can further support developers then two parties are happy.
Problem is. Most DLC is way overpriced. And a lot of it could of been in the original package. Like when Rockstar released an extra L.A. Noire mission the day of release. I think passes are fine. It's a lot better incentive to buy new than some games
Free. geeze, complaining about free stuff
QUEEN OF SASS
It's like, I just love a cowboy
You know
I'm just like, I just, I know, it's bad
But I'm just like
Can I just like, hang off the back of your horse
And can you go a little faster?!
yeah Arkham City will be awesome, can't wait to play it. Also I've heard there's 400 Riddler challenges this time, which will waste my time...and still be awesome. I hope there's terrible puns and, not even a real pun, puns from him.
Bleh. Got it today but because the release date is the 19th the online codes can't be activated. Do I start now without Catwoman or do I wait...
QUEEN OF SASS
It's like, I just love a cowboy
You know
I'm just like, I just, I know, it's bad
But I'm just like
Can I just like, hang off the back of your horse
And can you go a little faster?!
Yes, prevent the developers from receiving any more money once they make the game. I like DLC and passes like these, if it's a good game and I can further support developers then two parties are happy.
Problem is. Most DLC is way overpriced. And a lot of it could of been in the original package. Like when Rockstar released an extra L.A. Noire mission the day of release. I think passes are fine. It's a lot better incentive to buy new than some games
Free. geeze, complaining about free stuff
FREE STUFF STINKS!!!! My bad....I could get other examples but I'm too lazy.
This game is epic. Shame about the catwoman stuff atm, but I'll happily play through the first hour again.
QUEEN OF SASS
It's like, I just love a cowboy
You know
I'm just like, I just, I know, it's bad
But I'm just like
Can I just like, hang off the back of your horse
And can you go a little faster?!
Yes, prevent the developers from receiving any more money once they make the game. I like DLC and passes like these, if it's a good game and I can further support developers then two parties are happy.
But you do realize how anti-consumer these passes are right? I were the only industry that has theses types of problems when it comes to milking cows and paying for content that should be otherwise free. No way advertise the hell out of playing with catwoman and just because I buy the game used or don't have internet then I can't play the game.
Was going to get this for my cousins that I've been getting into comics lately. But they don't have internet so even though we got the game new they can't play with Catwoman which is daft. I'd have to bring their whole 360 over and do it from my house.
Also just to be clear online passes aren't bad its just how they're used. The gears 3 is an example of a good one. For 45 dollars you get all the gears 3 mutiplayer maps and the single player side story for free when they come out. Its cool as its optional for those who really like gears. won't pay for it as Idon't care for mutiplayer but i will pay for the single player content gladly.
Kind of, maybe, sort of, might pick this up tomorrow. If it comes down to it I'm definitely going to play as much of this as I can tomorrow. And since I just finished the first season of Dexter I'm really bored. :l
Just for you. "I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear." - Freddie Mercury
Forums
Topic: Batman Arkham City
Posts 21 to 40 of 81
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.