Forums

Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions

Posts 1,081 to 1,094 of 1,094

BowTiesAreCool

@nessisonett not sure what it's like in America (? just guessing with the dollar sign, apologies if not). So if we're chraged £70 you'd be charged $70?

I get what you mean and it is a luxury, albeit less of one as per the mega increased popularity since, but I'm still paying the same amount of physical money for a game as my mum paid for me thirty years ago.

BowTiesAreCool

TheFrenchiestFry

@Constable_What I'm pretty sure that was the general consensus at launch lmao

It's a fun game with cool gunplay but the content it actually offered was extremely meager considering other looter RPGs like Borderlands or even Bungie's previous games.

TheFrenchiestFry

PSN: phantom_sees

nessisonett

@BowTiesAreCool I’m in the UK too, it’s more that America get a much better deal! Sony have put prices at £70 and $70, which just isn’t the same price. We’re paying almost £20 more in terms of value, which is an absolute disgrace. I understand that VAT is included in our price whereas they have to bizarrely calculate their own but even then, we’re paying £6 more. It’s nonsense. And then physical games are often cheaper despite physical games having production overheads and digital games don’t. There are so many problems with the current system already and it’s just being exacerbated by this price increase. The point about it being a luxury isn’t trying to say that only rich people can play games, it’s that it’s an optional purchase, therefore is classed as a luxury product under UK law. The thing is, the video game industry in the UK is worth more than film and music combined, and that’s at the current pricing system. To still increase it, that’s just greedy considering that many families will be struggling for the next few years due to Covid. Especially since Nintendo have abandoned their affordable reputation with the Switch. My GameCube was roughly £130 at launch which even now is an incredible deal. The Wii as well was under £200 and that was before the financial crash. You can maybe get three Switch games from the eShop for the same price that the GameCube cost, taking inflation into account.

Socks before or after trousers, but never socks before pants, that's the rule. Makes a man look scary, like a chicken.

Black Lives Matter. Enough is enough.

Kidfried

@nessisonett I made a point out of never complaining to not live in the USA. I'd rather pay 10 euro more for a video game than live in a third world country like that. Heck, with everything going on, they probably need games as an escape from reality more than we do

Comparing prices for one thing with something in another country doesn't make sense anyway. There's a lot less poverty here, eating healthy is less expensive over here compared to the USA, healthcare stuff, etc.

Brydontk

@nessisonett Sorry to interject but this is a really interesting topic and I agree with @BowTiesAreCool's unpopular opinion; but I also agree that the price rise comes at an inconvenient time, but I don't think either are mutually exclusive.

I honestly believe the way AAA game development works now, is not sustainable. Consumers are content with the $60 price tag, but think about the poor developers who undergo constant crunch and a lack of job security due to numerous employees being laid off once the games are finished; and this is just treated as the norm. Part of this is the tech keeps getting more and more advanced which means that it requires more time and resources to give us the longer , more visually appealing games that we (not us specifically, but consumers) crave. Like, it's no wonder that CD Projekt Red, as an example put their employees under crunch because they put out very few games, they're all long, high-quality and pretty technologically advanced, and the company probably really needed the money and couldn't afford to delay the game for another few months. They need to sell the games to pay the employees.

But at the same time, the wealth gap is increasing so there's a constant sense of socioeconomic anxiety about paying anything more than the comfortable $60 and that puts the gaming industry between a rock and a hard place. In all honesty, games at this point should probably cost $100 to make game developing financially feasible for the poor lower tier workers.

But I disagree with @BowTiesAreCool in the sense that it makes consumers "crying babies". People are struggling and they're broke. And honestly, the system has screwed both the consumers and video game employees. What needs to happen is a shift in our economic systems to make it financially feasible to raise game prices to what they need to be while also ensuring more people have more money in their pockets so they can stimulate the industry and their respective nation's economies. It's really more a societal issue that just so happens to have leaked into the gaming industry and the lives of gamers.

Edited on by Brydontk

Brydontk

Thrillho

@Kidfried The skill tree in Zero and the Kiwami games also sucks as it means you have to unlock loads of rubbish you won’t use to get to the good stuff.

Y3 has a weird system where you have to unlock level 1 in a specific area to get to better moves which was even worse but Y4 gives you combat points (or something similar). Unlocks cost one to four points and some do require you to unlock other things first but it was the best system so far.

Thrillho

TheFrenchiestFry

The Insomniac Spider-Man games in my opinion have the worst box arts I've seen so far for any Spider-Man game and I genuinely don't get why people like them so much

They're fine looking and serviceable, but they're just so bland and uninspired and do barely anything to represent the game outside the bare minimum

Thank you for coming to my ted talk

TheFrenchiestFry

PSN: phantom_sees

nessisonett

@TheFrenchiestFry Both versions of Web of Shadows’ box art beg to differ. Oof, they’re a rough photoshop job.

Socks before or after trousers, but never socks before pants, that's the rule. Makes a man look scary, like a chicken.

Black Lives Matter. Enough is enough.

Jaz007

Honestly, I never played Web of Shadows, but it always looked like it had some cool ideas. I'd play a Web of Shadows if it had the proper web-swinging mechanics that Insomniac's does. I could never bring myself to play Web of Shadows because it lacked that. How Spider-Man 2 did it right and then (Ultimate Spider-Man aside, 3 too maybe...) threw out the best mechanic that made SM2 so popular for so many games I will never understand. Insomniac literally took the most obvious idea to make Spider-Man a hit. And that's to their credit too, it was what needed to be done and refined.

Jaz007

TheFrenchiestFry

@Jaz007 Web of Shadows is honestly extremely underrated

It also still has the best combat of any Spider-Man game in my opinion. The way the symbiote suit actually changes mechanics in gameplay is very refreshing after SM2 and Ultimate Spider-Man were basically cut from the same cloth. It also has plenty of cameos from the wider MU like Luke Cage, Wolverine and even Moon Knight

TheFrenchiestFry

PSN: phantom_sees

Jaz007

@TheFrenchiestFry How was the story in it? The way it could go with characters keeping normal or getting corrupted by the symbiote seemed like a good idea. Same with you balancing using the Symbiotic suit.

Jaz007

TheFrenchiestFry

@Jaz007 Now I could get all comic book nerdy and say that from a comic perspective it makes absolutely no sense how the symbiotes are actually utilized, but for what it is, it's probably my second or third favorite of the Spider-Man games that had symbiotes as a plot element

Although I will say the voice acting, especially from Peter himself, left A LOT to be desired. At least Venom was actually legitimately badass in the plot

TheFrenchiestFry

PSN: phantom_sees

Top

Please login or sign up to reply to this topic