Search results

There's really no need for this.

Damn dude, played a lot fps when I was a kid, but my kill death ration is like 1/50 -- and that's when the other guy gets bored and uses the nailgun or whatever. Would like to think everyone is cheating but pretty sure I just freaking suck. Kind of depressing.

Exactly, AAA games charge more than indy games, and why shouldn't they? So lets just call destiny a AAAA game and the logic follows. So, this is a retro gaming website so no one will agree with this, but pretend for a minute that you care about graphics. Pick your favorite AAA game, and now...

1. Well, consumers don't have much say in the matter, other than not buying the game. Videogame purchasing isn't a bartering or auction type event, prices are set by the manufacturer. 2. Don't you think that's odd? If I spent $1,000,000 to build a house, wouldn't I sell it for more than if I...

Um, ok, I had no idea where you lived.

As I understand it, no, it wasn't spent on the game we see now. According to the rumor mill, the original game is much larger, but has been "butchered" in order to create DLC. This was done for economic reasons, i.e. some suit was getting scared at the enormous pricetag attached to the project...

paying extra for the most expensive game of all time seems pretty justifiable to me. This is a pretty specific argument I'm making anyway, I'm not suggesting this as a future strategy; the novelty of "omg, dude, this game cost so much to make they're charging 90$ for it" would wear off after...

It's good if they don't release a butchered game...

Oh, less than b greater than, b in echo chamber is less than greater than. Of course, of course, forgive me for being so silly.

Get mad at your countries shitty infrastructure, not steam.

Yeah, I don't get it.

To be fair, Vikings aren't entirely common in fantasy settings. In lots of ways the fact that Morrowind was in a temperate climate makes it more generic.

That's what I'm saying, 500 million includes the DLC; so instead of releasing a 60 dollar game and 30 dollar dlc, just don't butcher the game and release a 90$ game and include the part that would otherwise be dlc. Am I dumb?

I think an interesting strategy for destiny would have been to just charge more for the initial game, and not butcher it -- maybe 90$ or so. It's the most expensive game ever made, why charge the same price for it as every other slag out there? Plus if it cost more then that would have...

I don't see how this is SEA's fault... it's not any different than releasing a beta version, ala Wasteland 2, is it?

I think you've found your calling man.

I watched the original, and didn't see what the big deal was. Then I watched the remake and it seemed like a virtual carbon copy, only with better production values. What exactly makes the remake a disgrace, and what makes the original a masterful work?

Damn, it really is the 21st century isn't it? This sounds just like something you would hear a couple of day traders talking about at lunch...