How comes gamers are "entitled" when they don't get what they expect from a product?
- Thread starter endtherapture
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yeah....I wasn't happy with it even as I was typing it but it was the first thing that came to mind.endtherapture said:
Still though, you can't say that completing a game you think is fantastic only to look for money back simply because you didn't like the last 10 minutes isn't acting a tad entitled/spoiled/whatever.
If you buy a fantastic meal and then find a bit of rabbit poo or something at the bottom of the plate it will leave a sour taste in your mouth and ruin the entire meal, no matter how good the rest of it was.anthony87 said:
Every part of a game is a core part, isn't it? The very fact that it exists and is being sold separately means that there was a part of the game that wasn't included in the original purchase. I don't see any game publishers/developers saying about their DLC, "This DLC is a completely pointless and unnecessary addition to the game that doesn't fundamentally change the core game!" Of course they're not going to say that. They're going to make a DLC that expands the game significantly (one would hope, at least).anthony87 said:
But when they do so, the "core part of the game" changes. A game experience should encompass everything that is a part of it, just as a book is a completed story which is then edited, revised, tied off, and published. You can publish a sequel to a book but each is meant to be its own encapsulated story, and needs to stand on its own merits. You don't keep going back to the same book and selling additional chapters for more money. That's like saying you never finished the book to begin with.
Yeah, every part of the game is a core part.....which is why it's all in the game when you buy it. Anything bought separately is additional, I.E. not a core part of the game but extra content that you have the option to purchase to expand on the already core experience.dobahci said:
A game that costs more should be worth more. That includes a longer game time, because, frankly, playing the game for the polygon count is like watching porn for the story.anthony87 said:
So, what I honestly believe is that if a publisher charges me 60 bucks for a game, the length of the game should damn well reflect that. Another reason I'm glad I didn't buy ME3.
For example, I logged over 50 hours on one ME playthrough, and on one ME2 playthrough. I logged 40+ on one playthrough of DX: HR. And that's just some "recent" games, go a decade back and the games were even longer then.
I'll agree with you when you say that a game costing more should be worth more, unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world like that. We can always dream eh?Vegosiux said:
Also, where exactly do you buy your games? I got ME3 on PC for ?36 or so, in fact I can't remember the last time I paid ?60 for a game.
Debit card ftw perhaps?
Except The ending to a game does not PHYSICALLY harm/repulse you in any way.endtherapture said:
"I DID NOT QUITE LIKE THE ENDING, GIVE ME ALL TEH MONIEZ BACK FOR MY 40-HOUR EXPERIENCE!"
Seriously, if you played to the end you obviously liekd the rest of the game.
Eventually it might get to the point though that inventory management are "extras". Buy the option to change your armour for £5!! Change your weapon for £4. You can get through the game otherwise so it doesnt matter!bahumat42 said:
I mean in Mass Effect 2, apart from Miranda and Mordin, no characters were plot essential. What would stop Bioware selling every extra character as DLC.
If you ate to the end of the meal, you obviously liked the rest of it, the poo in your food means nothing as long as the rest of it was fine okay?Smeggs said: