sudo TPK

Yes pl0x

阿木跡

arigato

Also, that's not weeb speak, THIS is weeb speak: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRiZe8TfiKI

Of course it's hot diarrhea, it's Southern California.

It just feels like games are either, like, yearly releases that change very little or nothing, and could function just as well as DLC instead of full-priced games, or if they're not yearly releases, they try to reinvent the wheel too much when the core systems were completely fine and dandy and try to deviate from what it is way too much.

And with the latter, more often than not, it comes out poorly.

I'll reserve judgment for Pokemon Legends until it's released and I see actual gameplay, not just a trailer, but I'm not hyped.

I absolutely hate GAAS for pretty much everything besides MMOs.

Oh, sorry, I misunderstood

You mean like, the Xbox Game Pass thing?

For me, that's more like, giving a place to rent games after rentals died and PC games stopped having demos without having to torrent

I've never seen a physical DS game released at less than $30, but the point does stand

I'd much rather pay $60 for Mario Golf or Mario Tennis than $60 for Pokemon Sword/Shield, $30 for the two expansions, however much it is for Pokemon Home to be able to transfer shit, etc

But I view money differently than other people, it seems

good* spritework

I can design dozens and dozens of sprites that are meant to be used with the stock RPG Maker 2003 in an hour. 😛

I think the reason I'm not wholly bothered by games being priced as they are is because 1) my view of money and relate it to how much value I give it to entertainment, and 2) how I spend money on games. When I stopped buying tons of games on sale(not playing or even installing most of them), stopped buying bundles with tons of game(not playing or even installing most of them), and compared how much time and enjoyment I get out of my money versus other forms of entertainment, it doesn't bother me nearly as much as it used to.

Like, I spent $60 on Spider-Man on PS4, I spent like ~30 hours getting the platinum, enjoyed it the whole time, and even if I didn't go for the platinum or play it more after, I would've been fine with it

When fucking tickets to go see a 2-3 movie in a theater is like $15

I'm speaking for myself personally.

Sorry

if you want

me to type

like a fucking tard

like that person above

so I don't get a wohle taught out

Sorry that I try to put a single coherent thought in one message.

The problem is, is that if I don't, and the chat is active, then

^

you get

shit like this

where if I put one sentence

it gets segmented

and hard as fuck to read.

Anyway. What I was saying, is that I feel personally that I get more enjoyment and value out of $60 for a video game, that lasts 20-30 hours, than I do out of spending $15 for a movie ticket for a 2-3 hour movie. I'm not saying companies should shaft players or anything, I was just saying that I have less problem paying full price for a game after comparing my personal enjoyment between different forms of entertainment.

If you want to get into the fucking bullshit, let's look at a game that you pay $60 for, then $30-40 for a season pass for 3-4 pieces of DLC that would individually be $15-20 each, pre-order bonuses to ensure more people buy a game that may not actually be good or have to shell out additional money for the bonus 6 months later, "deluxe edition" bonuses that you always have to buy the deluxe edition for, then they add MORE DLC or ANOTHER season pass further down the line.

Agreed. That's why I stopped weighing games on the dollar per hour scale.

Depends on the indie game. I'd rather pay $60 for Bloodborne 2 than $10 for Shower With Your Dad Simulator 2022.

If games were 100% complete upon release and there was zero extra monetization, then I might give some credence to that idea.

But prices as they are? Like, why would they be going down when they've been $50 minimum for console games since the 80s?

Atari 2600 games in the late 70s/early 80s were released at $20-30. If we account for inflation, let's take 1982 as the year because that's right before the crash, that's $57-86 for a game.

Even if we're not calculating for inflation, I've spent $80 on Nintendo 64 games, MSRP.

Are we talking about expectations from an optimistic perspective, or from a realistic perspective? Because if we look at trends, expectations should rarely be anywhere near as high as people hype games up to be, but not so low that a $60 game should be $20 cheaper.

I disagree.

This is where subjective opinions come into play.

I'd get a lot more fun and playtime out of Mario Tennis than Cyberpunk 2077.

So a game that is large and complex should be more expensive than a game that is simple but much more fun, just because it's large and complex?

...