I would honestly recommend Dark Souls to anyone and everyone, over Skyrim. Don't get me wrong, Skyrim was fun, but in my honest opinion, Dark Souls is such a better game, with just as much, if not MORE replayability.
honestdiscussioner said:
Let's solve this with MATH!
P = Price
AGT = Average Gameplay Time
V = Value
The equation will be:
(AGT / P) = V
So if a game costs 10 dollars, and you get 10 hours of gameplay, that's a value of 1.
Psychnauts: (16.5 / 20) = 0.825
Just Cause 2: (20 / 10) = 2
Skyrim: (200 / 60) = 3.3333
Yes, 200 hours is probably underestimating the amount of time you'll want to play this game. I just finished my second playthrough . . never really finished everything in either playthrough, but I still want to start a third game.
It's seriously, the best game ever. Not even the Assassin's Creed series stands up, and I called Assassin's Creed 2 a perfect game.
Not every game has to be played for 200-300+ hours for it to be considered good. I'm quite the contrary, because I haven't sunk even 100 hours into Skyrim, nor do I want to sink that much into Skyrim. I don't have enough fun with it to sink that much time into that game. I could say the exact same thing with Dark Souls, by your logic, considering I've sunk maybe even more than 450 hours into it divided between 4 different 90+ hour characters, and several more 30-40 hour characters that I deleted.
If you could, please don't claim such things like they are fact, as "best game ever" is quite subjective.
When someone says "it's the best (insert thing) ever", it's generally understood to be communicating an opinion. I have enough respect for people's intelligence to be able to know the difference and not take everyone who says something along those lines as expressing objective fact.
At no point did I claim that length of game play by itself made it a better game. I specifically said value, as in you will get more entertainment from a quantitative standpoint for your dollar. If you are on a limited budget, it is generally better to get a game that will last you longer.
As for my estimate, you may not have sunk in that much time, but we're speaking averages here. Given that the game never ends, and unlike other sandbox games it is designed to played continually, virtually never running out of content, my estimate was rather conservative. Over two playthroughs I have sunk in over 200 hours, and in each playthrough I've gone through less than half the content, and were it not for other games I need to get through so I don't fall behind I'd have already started a third playthrough. A SINGLE playthrough of all the content getting to level 81 is likely to go 300 hours. Add in that there are numerous styles of game play and choices to make, the fact that your choices would require you to do at least two playthroughs to see all the content, and 200 hours becomes a laughably low estimate. My original contention that the better value is in Skyrim remains valid.
Hm. I seem to have misspoken, and for this I apologize. I take no issue with Skyrim being a better value, as it does indeed take some time to do everything you want. I agree and even support your argument that Skyrim is the better value because of the bang for your buck. However, you saying it was seriously the best game ever came across, to me, as you speaking like it was fact, purely because you combined it with mathematics. Otherwise I would've seen it as an opinion, so my apologies for this.
"Yes, 200 hours is probably underestimating the amount of time you'll want to play this game. I just finished my second playthrough . . never really finished everything in either playthrough, but I still want to start a third game." It was with this that I made an inference that you were saying longer games were better, because of "amount of time you'll want to play this game." I don't particularly want to go into greater details on my own reasoning, as I'll only bore you with an essay on the deeper machinations of my mind more than you would probably care to read, I'm sure.
==================================================================================================================
I'm going to stand by my belief that Dark Souls is a better value. It has just as much replayability, and to some(like me), even more. And it's a vastly better game than Skyrim, by my own account. :x Unless you've got a short fuse and have a habit of breaking things when you get angry. [sub]Then get something else, like White Knight Chronicles.[/sub]
Honestly, I got more hours out of Skyrim than a few other older games combined and I'm still not done with the game (it's just on the backburner with TOR and BF3 being my main focus atm).
That said, all of those games are great. Psychonauts is definitely something you'll wanna play through and Just Cause 2 has some great fucking-around potential.
The choice is really down to you, but I can wholeheartedly recommend Skyrim as a fantastic option if you're into TES games. No, it's not perfect, yes, it has bugs, but it's a one of a kind (which is both sad and surprising) game and nothing can beat it if you enjoy the mechanics and the vast world that come with it.
Bottom line... I dont need to convince you. I need only tell you that if you are an RPG fan, you will regret NOT buying it. Its the best game of the year, hands down. Yeah, thats just my opinion, but I am definitely what you would call a well-versed RPG fan. I've been playing them for thirty years. Simply put, its a must have for any fan of the genre, and the game sells itself.
You don't need RPG experience when playing Skyrim. It's easy if you want it to be and it's hard if that's what you want. You can play almost however you want. Skyrim is fun, but it's fun in the mindless sort of way--at least to me it is. I don't see much dept in the game, but it's got me hooked on it (even though I'm not playing it right now).
I think that you should wait. You're on the edge and, like you said, you have a rare $60. Spend it on something that you know you'll like. There's a chance that you'll like Skyrim, but it's better to be sure.
(*Cough*BuyitusedfromGameStop(ifpossible)andplayit,ifyoudon'tlikeit,saythatitfreezesatsomerandompointgetyourmoneybackandbuysomethingelse*cough*) Sorry for having you read all that.
You have to be more specific about that. I played lots of weird games and couldnt get Spychonauts back then (Dungeon Keeper, Populous 3 the Beginning, MDK 2, Sacrifice, Messiah, Earthworm Jim, Legacy of Kain, Heroes 3 of Might and Magic) So i cant get punished for not buying Spychonauts
However after seing a lets play of that game i think its a pretty good game on its own and the dedication the developers had to make each mind unique is quite impressive for the age of copy pasta everything and make sense into the plot of why you cant leave this brown place.
Dangit2019 said:
I've noticed that Skyrim has been receiving the "you must buy or die" stamp by all of those who have played it; and while I am heavily considering it, I've been considering other, cheaper games such as Psychonauts or Just Cause 2 instead.
My question is (with only $60), should I spend my rarely acquired money on Skyrim, or should I spend it on something like Psychonauts (which Yahtzee punished me for not buying)?
How about spending money on The Binding of Isaac or Bastion for the PC that are more cheap and you can technically spend a bit of money and regain it later while you play these so you can have a very clear definition of how a game can be fun even at such a low budget, and maybe you can see Skyrim in another light that the marketing and the fans dont see.
Hell, why not download a free game while you are it?? a game that combines Deux Ex 1 + Super Metroid into one game perhaps?? like IJI. After all, there is no hurry to buy Skyrim, you may even get a copy of that game just in time when the prices drop and maybe a patch that fixes most of the bugs will be available.
Skyrim is meh. Slow, bad UI, samey quests/dungeons/towns/characters. Ive stopped playing after about 16 hours (enough to finish the mage quest, thief quest and a part of the main quest).
Psychonauts is INCREDIBLE. Fun to play, great characters, and something different in every level. Sure it's about ten hours, but in those ten hours you'll do more varied things, and have more FUN than in twice that amout of time in Skyrim. And like a good book, you can replay it every once in a while and still be amazed.
I didn't buy it Day of Release (I had just bought Uncharted 3 and 4 days after the release of Skyrim was AC: Revelations) but got it two weeks later (£22.50, thank you game!)
I have not stopped playing it since (all the games I was bought for christmas are still sat there... looking sad!)
seriously, buy the game, buy the game, buy the game, buy the game, buy the game, buy the game!
I would honestly recommend Dark Souls to anyone and everyone, over Skyrim. Don't get me wrong, Skyrim was fun, but in my honest opinion, Dark Souls is such a better game, with just as much, if not MORE replayability.
honestdiscussioner said:
Let's solve this with MATH!
P = Price
AGT = Average Gameplay Time
V = Value
The equation will be:
(AGT / P) = V
So if a game costs 10 dollars, and you get 10 hours of gameplay, that's a value of 1.
Psychnauts: (16.5 / 20) = 0.825
Just Cause 2: (20 / 10) = 2
Skyrim: (200 / 60) = 3.3333
Yes, 200 hours is probably underestimating the amount of time you'll want to play this game. I just finished my second playthrough . . never really finished everything in either playthrough, but I still want to start a third game.
It's seriously, the best game ever. Not even the Assassin's Creed series stands up, and I called Assassin's Creed 2 a perfect game.
Not every game has to be played for 200-300+ hours for it to be considered good. I'm quite the contrary, because I haven't sunk even 100 hours into Skyrim, nor do I want to sink that much into Skyrim. I don't have enough fun with it to sink that much time into that game. I could say the exact same thing with Dark Souls, by your logic, considering I've sunk maybe even more than 450 hours into it divided between 4 different 90+ hour characters, and several more 30-40 hour characters that I deleted.
If you could, please don't claim such things like they are fact, as "best game ever" is quite subjective.
When someone says "it's the best (insert thing) ever", it's generally understood to be communicating an opinion. I have enough respect for people's intelligence to be able to know the difference and not take everyone who says something along those lines as expressing objective fact.
At no point did I claim that length of game play by itself made it a better game. I specifically said value, as in you will get more entertainment from a quantitative standpoint for your dollar. If you are on a limited budget, it is generally better to get a game that will last you longer.
As for my estimate, you may not have sunk in that much time, but we're speaking averages here. Given that the game never ends, and unlike other sandbox games it is designed to played continually, virtually never running out of content, my estimate was rather conservative. Over two playthroughs I have sunk in over 200 hours, and in each playthrough I've gone through less than half the content, and were it not for other games I need to get through so I don't fall behind I'd have already started a third playthrough. A SINGLE playthrough of all the content getting to level 81 is likely to go 300 hours. Add in that there are numerous styles of game play and choices to make, the fact that your choices would require you to do at least two playthroughs to see all the content, and 200 hours becomes a laughably low estimate. My original contention that the better value is in Skyrim remains valid.
Hm. I seem to have misspoken, and for this I apologize. I take no issue with Skyrim being a better value, as it does indeed take some time to do everything you want. I agree and even support your argument that Skyrim is the better value because of the bang for your buck. However, you saying it was seriously the best game ever came across, to me, as you speaking like it was fact, purely because you combined it with mathematics. Otherwise I would've seen it as an opinion, so my apologies for this.
"Yes, 200 hours is probably underestimating the amount of time you'll want to play this game. I just finished my second playthrough . . never really finished everything in either playthrough, but I still want to start a third game." It was with this that I made an inference that you were saying longer games were better, because of "amount of time you'll want to play this game." I don't particularly want to go into greater details on my own reasoning, as I'll only bore you with an essay on the deeper machinations of my mind more than you would probably care to read, I'm sure.
==================================================================================================================
I'm going to stand by my belief that Dark Souls is a better value. It has just as much replayability, and to some(like me), even more. And it's a vastly better game than Skyrim, by my own account. :x Unless you've got a short fuse and have a habit of breaking things when you get angry. [sub]Then get something else, like White Knight Chronicles.[/sub]
I cannot speak as to whether Skyrim is better than Dark Souls as I have not played Dark Souls. The "best game ever" was meant to be separate from the math, an add on in my excitement to talk about the game. You'll note that I mention believing that Skyrim is a better game than Assassin's Creed II, despite believing that ACII was indeed a PERFECT game by my own account. My reasoning is that while Assassin's Creed II was executed flawlessly, and Skyrim is often buggy with various other flaws, they go above and beyond what perfect would mean in so many other areas that the experience is superior despite its shortcomings.
Seriously, never buy a Bethesda game so close to launch. They never work and take a while to get patched...even then, the only working version will probably only be the PC version after the modders have had their way.
Why should I convince you of this? While Skyrim is full of wonderful novelty, it's a massive sidequest-filled timesuck, and as such, you should decide whether you want more plot or more freedom or what. That will tell you whether you do or don't want Skyrim right now.
Yep because we all know nobody is allowed to have a different opinion on a game then you, nope no sir. It couldnt be possible that some people just thought the game was complete crap. Its not like it had a very large number of extremely glaring flaws. Oh wait it did.
If you need to be convinced to buy a game, don't get it. Just because it's what everyone else is playing doesn't necessarily mean you will like it. Especially not a 60$ game, because if you end up not liking it, you'll be flushing 60$ down the toilet.
In order to be more helpful, here's a question: Did you like Oblivion? If not, what things didn't you like about Oblivion?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
