Should Be Free

[QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"]

It's become very apparent that most of you just don't care about being screwed over your hard earned cash either that or you just don't know it or don't want to believe it and think we live in one big happy world where everything is fair and just. Sorry no. If your being ripped off then complain away. It makes perfect sense to be annoyed at this type of thing. Trying to defend it just makes you look all the more a coward. A coward for not accepting the truth. The truth is your all pawns in the developers little game to make money. Milking machines if you will. They win at the end of they day, you don't.Yet defend away.

I earn my money and I choose what I want to spend my money on.

If I choose to spend it on some DLC, then that's my call; nothing was forced down my throat.

So, if you would, please explain to me how exactly I am being "screwed over".

[QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"][QUOTE="Verge_6"]It's become very apparent that you have no idea of the very existence of terms like "subjectiveity". Really, it's good to be knowledgeable of such things in today's world.

Verge_6

[QUOTE="VideoGameGuy"]I miss the days when developers actually had to make a flawless feature rich game from the get-go.. heretrix

I have also never seen gamers more spoiled than in these last 2 generations. People complain about EVERYTHING. And while some complaints are valid, most are utterly ridiculous. Such as the one that inspired the TC to create this thread. Nothing SHOULD be free, but it is excellent when it is. It's really sad that people seem to not realize this.

[QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"][QUOTE="Verge_6"]It's become very apparent that you have no idea of the very existence of terms like "subjectiveity". Really, it's good to be knowledgeable of such things in today's world.

Verge_6

Now thats just you convincing yourself that your lowly opinion is better than the facts. The fact is you are the reason XBOX Live has a subscription in the first place. Because of easy to please people like yourself. That goes for the TC and anyone who agrees with him. They are all the reason.

[QUOTE="Verge_6"]

[QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"] Oh please that is such a "false choice", ofc gamer's value playing online, that's why they pay, it should be free. This whole value arguement is pathetic, it's free everwhere else, it should be free on the 360, they should charge for extra features, then I'd understand that arguement, but not for simple online play that's also been free everywhere else.Eddie-Vedder

[QUOTE="Verge_6"][QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"] Get better taste is all I can say to people with a lesser opinion. Either that or theres simply no hope.FloWeN-UK

Now thats just you convincing yourself that your lowly opinion is better than the facts. The fact is you are the reason XBOX Live has a subscription in the first place. Because of easy to please people like yourself. That goes for the TC and anyone who agrees with him. They are all the reason.

Ofcourse if your smart enough not to buy it then your not being screwed over. But for the people that do and accept it they are the ones that are being screwed over. Some are just completely in denial on the subject, such is the case in this thread. Huge denial. Huge. I don't know the cure for denial. If there is no cure. Then It's pretty inevitable that these people will just serve as milking machines for years to come.FloWeN-UK

Let me try and understand:

If I make the choice to not buy DLC, I am not being screwed over, because I was smart enough to choose not to buy it

If I make the choice to buy DLC, I am being screwed over, because I was not smart enough to choose not to buy it.

So, to sum things up, if I choose to buy any DLC that you think is a rip-off, then I am being screwed over, because my buying something that you think is a bad deal means that I am not smart enough to make an intelligent decision about what I want to spend my money on.

...the hell you talking 'bout?

[QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"][QUOTE="Verge_6"] So, me finding a monthly $4 insignificant holds no water, but someone who finds it as the worst thing since the crucifiction cannot be wronged. Clearly, there are no double-standards present here.

Verge_6

[QUOTE="Verge_6"][QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"] Typical "I have money so I don't care about the people that don't" stance. You know it's wrong, why you guys defend it is beyond me, I understand perfectly why you pay for it, you wanna play your games online, you have the dough, so go for it, but to defend it?PoppaGamer

[QUOTE="Verge_6"][QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"] Typical "I have money so I don't care about the people that don't" stance. You know it's wrong, why you guys defend it is beyond me, I understand perfectly why you pay for it, you wanna play your games online, you have the dough, so go for it, but to defend it?PoppaGamer

[QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"]

[QUOTE="Verge_6"] You're right, there IS no hope when people start convincing themselves that their opinions and views are somehow above everyone else's. Quite a scary and sad phenomena, that.Verge_6

Now thats just you convincing yourself that your lowly opinion is better than the facts. The fact is you are the reason XBOX Live has a subscription in the first place. Because of easy to please people like yourself. That goes for the TC and anyone who agrees with him. They are all the reason.

These guys are just full of logical fallacies today. He has some non-sequitur going with a touch of ad hominem thrown in. But hey, if that's all they have left.....

sounds like the people who pay for it have more of an excuse to be more defensive about their value than the people who are conservative enough with their money to understand value

it's like the person buying the more expensive console.. ofcourse they're going to defend it, they made the purchase already

[QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"] Ofcourse if your smart enough not to buy it then your not being screwed over. But for the people that do and accept it they are the ones that are being screwed over. Some are just completely in denial on the subject, such is the case in this thread. Huge denial. Huge. I don't know the cure for denial. If there is no cure. Then It's pretty inevitable that these people will just serve as milking machines for years to come.jethrovegas

Let me try and understand:

If I make the choice to not buy DLC, I am not being screwed over, because I was smart enough to choose not to buy it

If I make the choice to buy DLC, I am being screwed over, because I was not smart enough to choose not to buy it.

So, to sum things up, if I choose to buy any DLC that you think is a rip-off, then I am being screwed over, because my buying something that you think is a bad deal means that I am not smart enough to make an intelligent decision about what I want to spend my money on.

...the hell you talking 'bout?

sounds like the people who pay for it have more of an excuse to be more defensive about their value than the people who are conservative enough with their money to understand value

it's like the person buying the more expensive console.. ofcourse they're going to defend it, they made the purchase already

voxware00

I think you got lost when you considered the rip-off being just my opinion. Which it isnt. FloWeN-UK

Let's talk facts for a moment:

Live is a fee based service and always has been a fee based service. The fees involved support the overall Live architecture including servers, technical support, content creation/publication, licensing, bandwidth, corporate profit,etc.. Obviously, none of the previously mentioned items are free (with the possible exception of corporate profits assuming MS has plans to go non-profit in the future :roll: ) so the service, from the outset had a fee attached to insure long term viability.

Enter PSN, the "free service". Like Live, PSN has all the same costs involved, but is free. Why is this? For simplicity, I will assume that the quality of PSN is identical to Live (just to remove yet another argument from the thread). Given this, Sony is opting to take a loss on the operational cost of their network service in order to increase market share. Most likely this is due to the fact that PSN is a generation behind on the actively networked console market coupled with the PS3's late launch time compared to the XBox 360. So, technically, the service is free to you but at cost to the manufacturer and such a cost will be passed on to the consumer in other fashions (probably not directly from a gaming standpoint).

So, in principle, PSN should not be free as it is not a sustainable business model unless you work under the assumption that at some future point (most likely when the service population reaches a critical point) the service will subscription based. For now, PSN members are enjoying a benefit that future subscribers will not have.

Welcome to how the world works. There is no reason for either service to be free.

[QUOTE="voxware00"]

sounds like the people who pay for it have more of an excuse to be more defensive about their value than the people who are conservative enough with their money to understand value

it's like the person buying the more expensive console.. ofcourse they're going to defend it, they made the purchase already

[QUOTE="voxware00"]

sounds like the people who pay for it have more of an excuse to be more defensive about their value than the people who are conservative enough with their money to understand value

it's like the person buying the more expensive console.. ofcourse they're going to defend it, they made the purchase already

Enter PSN, the "free service". Like Live, PSN has all the same costs involved, but is free. Why is this? For simplicity, I will assume that the quality of PSN is identical to Live (just to remove yet another argument from the thread). Given this, Sony is opting to take a loss on the operational cost of their network service in order to increase market share. Most likely this is due to the fact that PSN is a generation behind on the actively networked console market coupled with the PS3's late launch time compared to the XBox 360. So, technically, the service is free to you but at cost to the manufacturer and such a cost will be passed on to the consumer in other fashions (probably not directly from a gaming standpoint).Padfoot-Live

[QUOTE="heretrix"]

[QUOTE="voxware00"]

sounds like the people who pay for it have more of an excuse to be more defensive about their value than the people who are conservative enough with their money to understand value

it's like the person buying the more expensive console.. ofcourse they're going to defend it, they made the purchase already

FloWeN-UK

WRONG. He's the guy that I'm not thinking about when I got that shirt, and his opinion or the fact that he got the same shirt cheaper doesn't mean squat to me. That's who he is.

[QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"] I think you got lost when you considered the rip-off being just my opinion. Which it isnt. IronBass

[QUOTE="IronBass"][QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"] I think you got lost when you considered the rip-off being just my opinion. Which it isnt. FloWeN-UK

[QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"][QUOTE="heretrix"]If I spend 80 dollars on a T shirt and it doesn't bother me, who are you to tell me I'm getting ripped off if I like the shirt and it has value to me?

heretrix

WRONG. He's the guy that I'm not thinking about when I got that shirt, and his opinion or the fact that he got the same shirt cheaper doesn't mean squat to me. That's who he is.

[QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"]

It's become very apparent that most of you just don't care about being screwed over your hard earned cash either that or you just don't know it or don't want to believe it and think we live in one big happy world where everything is fair and just. Sorry no. If your being ripped off then complain away. It makes perfect sense to be annoyed at this type of thing. Trying to defend it just makes you look all the more a coward. A coward for not accepting the truth. The truth is your all pawns in the developers little game to make money. Milking machines if you will. They win at the end of they day, you don't.Yet defend away.

I earn my money and I choose what I want to spend my money on.

If I choose to spend it on some DLC, then that's my call; nothing was forced down my throat.

So, if you would, please explain to me how exactly I am being "screwed over".

[QUOTE="heretrix"]

[QUOTE="voxware00"]

sounds like the people who pay for it have more of an excuse to be more defensive about their value than the people who are conservative enough with their money to understand value

it's like the person buying the more expensive console.. ofcourse they're going to defend it, they made the purchase already

PoppaGamer

The PC is not a closed platform. There is no one company that controls the space. MS tried that and failed with their first iteration of GFWL

PSN is like a hybrid of XBL and the PC platform, it's sort of a closed platform, but Sony decided not to handle the R&D or maintanance for the online, therefore they do not have to worry about a full featured infrastructure. They let the developers handle the costs of creating and maintaining an online component to their games.

XBL is a completely closed platform. MS completely controls the content and everything else going on within that space. They handle the R&D and maintainence costs of a complete online platform instead of passing the costs on to a developer. They provide a complete service as every one of their games benefit from the intergration of XBL and the 360.Neither the PC nor the PS3 has this. There are multiple applications on the PC that prvice a certain level of intergration between games but there is no one app that handles this on a PC fresh out the box.

Would I love XBL to be free? HELL YES. I make a lot of money, but I LOVE free stuff. But it isn't and there are still things that XBL does that others don't. And a long as that trend continues, I don't have problem paying for it.

[QUOTE="Padfoot-Live"]Enter PSN, the "free service". Like Live, PSN has all the same costs involved, but is free. Why is this? For simplicity, I will assume that the quality of PSN is identical to Live (just to remove yet another argument from the thread). Given this, Sony is opting to take a loss on the operational cost of their network service in order to increase market share. Most likely this is due to the fact that PSN is a generation behind on the actively networked console market coupled with the PS3's late launch time compared to the XBox 360. So, technically, the service is free to you but at cost to the manufacturer and such a cost will be passed on to the consumer in other fashions (probably not directly from a gaming standpoint).HuusAsking

The "loss leader" principle doesn't really work in this case as the loss is based on a per unit basis and the profit potential via game licensing cuts has no such limit. As such, there is no operating loss involved in the console market, but the console network market is another beast entirely. So your point boils down to leveraging market share to generate revenue via advertising and/ordistribution of non-game IP licensingin a non-fee based system (the later, honestly, Sony is in a better position to do as they have a large media stake to begin with). I'm not saying that such a model can't work, but it probably would not be sustainable from a core-gamer only perspective. Furthermore, the competition outside the core-gamer only perspective becomes intense as you're no longer just dealing with MS, but also broadband providers as well who have devices with a much lower cost of entry point.

[QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"][QUOTE="IronBass"] Wrong. The term "rip-off" depends on "value" (or the lack of it, better said), which is subjective, making what's a rip-off and what's not also subjective.IronBass

I couldn't care less that you couldn't less because I know you don't agree with this thread. Judging by how you agreed to me that RE5 Versus content is a rip-off therefore you don't need educating in this aspect like the others do.FloWeN-UK

[QUOTE="voxware00"]

sounds like the people who pay for it have more of an excuse to be more defensive about their value than the people who are conservative enough with their money to understand value

it's like the person buying the more expensive console.. ofcourse they're going to defend it, they made the purchase already

heretrix

That's my point.. you paid a ridiculous amount of money for a shirt, ofcourse you're going to defend your value on it.. why trust your opinion on if it's worth it if you're going to be biased not to mention you say you make a lot.. i'd rather trust the guys opinion who cares about buying bang for buck value.. someone who makes less and is more concerned about being conservative with their money has a better reasoning with value

The main arguement here is it's convenient for this service, it's not a practicality issue

Doesn't mean it's not funny that you're defensive about being ripped off.. it's like you're paying for a brand, meanwhile the company should be paying you for advertising their brand.. whether you care what I think is irrelevant to the fact that the shirt is overpriced in General.. not in your opinion.. your idea of value is keeping the shirt prices high for everyone because the companies say hey.. we're still making money at a high price, why lower it?

Developers want multiplayer to be free(not only because it extends the value of multi games creating larger sales), it's easier to develop multiplayer DLC and they want a larger audience, and rather than supporting them, you're supporting MS.. less money for you means less money spent on other things

I like my idea earlier that multiplayer should just be on a game by game basis.. no online fee, just pay to download multi per game, then publishers wouldn't force devs to tack on multiplayer and lose focus of singleplayer for bulletpoint multi(ie darkness, dark sector, stranglehold).. plus the game would be cheaper if you just want to play the singleplayer

That's my point.. you paid a ridiculous amount of money for a shirt, ofcourse you're going to defend your value on it

voxware00

"What? 10 dollars for a salad? That's a RIPOFF!"

Actually it isn't because I'm not being tricked into buying it. It's simply the set price in that place. Love it or get the hell out and go to a cheaper place.

Online play should be free because we have companies out there that are giving it out for free.

[QUOTE="voxware00"]

That's my point.. you paid a ridiculous amount of money for a shirt, ofcourse you're going to defend your value on it

heretrix

"What? 10 dollars for a salad? That's a RIPOFF!"

Actually it isn't because I'm not being tricked into buying it. It's simply the set price in that place. Love it or get the hell out and go to a cheaper place.

Why defend it at all if opinions don't matter.. I care about opinions of value, but it trust it more coming from someone who is tighter with their money

I can afford Live.. but why should I care if someone else who isn't as tight with money as me thinks it's worth it..

Bill Gates can buy jeans for $1,000 and to him maybe it's worth it.. doesn't mean I'm going to start accepting jeans at a higher price because he sees a value in it

what you can afford doesn't tell me much about whether a service is overpriced or not

the salad isn't a rip off to you because it's convenient.. when I ask about value, i'm asking about practicality

Online play should be free because we have companies out there that are giving it out for free.

W1NGMAN-

Why defend it at all if opinions don't matter..

voxware00

Opinions do matter in general. But an opinion, by it's very definition, can't be debated objectively.

Not once have I told you that you are wrong in your decision to not pay for XBL. Why? Because that's your opinion and your decision. I can't argue your against preference. That would be equivalent to us debating about our favorite colors.

The converse applies.

If the converse does not apply, then that's what we call a double-standard.

Online play should be free because we have companies out there that are giving it out for free.

W1NGMAN-

[QUOTE="heretrix"]

[QUOTE="voxware00"]

That's my point.. you paid a ridiculous amount of money for a shirt, ofcourse you're going to defend your value on it

voxware00

"What? 10 dollars for a salad? That's a RIPOFF!"

Actually it isn't because I'm not being tricked into buying it. It's simply the set price in that place. Love it or get the hell out and go to a cheaper place.

Why defend it at all if opinions don't matter.. I care about opinions of value, but it trust it more coming from someone who is tighter with their money

I can afford Live.. but why should I care if someone else who isn't as tight with money as me thinks it's worth it..

Bill Gates can buy jeans for $1,000 and to him maybe it's worth it.. doesn't mean I'm going to start accepting jeans at a higher price because he sees a value in it

what you can afford doesn't tell me much about whether a service is overpriced or not

the salad isn't a rip off to you because it's convenient.. when I ask about value, i'm asking about practicality

[QUOTE="voxware00"]

Why defend it at all if opinions don't matter..

Opinions do matter in general. But an opinion, by it's very definition, can't be debated objectively.

Not once have I told you that you are wrong in your decision to not pay for XBL. Why? Because that's your opinion and your decision. I can't argue your against preference. That would be equivalent to us debating about our favorite colors.

The converse applies.

If the converse does not apply, then that's what we call a double-standard.

[QUOTE="VideoGameGuy"]I miss the days when developers actually had to make a flawless feature rich game from the get-go.. heretrix

I have also never seen gamers more spoiled than in these last 2 generations. People complain about EVERYTHING. And while some complaints are valid, most are utterly ridiculous. Such as the one that inspired the TC to create this thread. Nothing SHOULD be free, but it is excellent when it is. It's really sad that people seem to not realize this.

I hear you on that one heretrix. Gamers today are so spoiled about graphics and overall game quality like never before. You see them all the time scrutinizing every texture, every polygon, spotting every little jaggy, complaining when the game isn't native 1080p, not photorealistic enough for them, the environments aren't big enough, not enough enemies to fight, the stories aren't cinematic enough.... and apparently every game even outside of an RPG should be a 40hr campaign.

They all want to think technology somehow met their expectations. And I am pretty sure every one of these spoiled complainers haven't been gaming for very long, beyond say PS1, and don't know just how GOOD we have it today. Games are as good as the current technology allows for and as best as the talented developers can make them with the tools they have. And things will advance and progress further, but at it's own pace, not how some gamers sitting on their couch thinks they can dictate.

[QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"][QUOTE="Verge_6"] So, me finding a monthly $4 insignificant holds no water, but someone who finds it as the worst thing since the crucifiction cannot be wronged. Clearly, there are no double-standards present here.

Verge_6

[QUOTE="voxware00"]

[QUOTE="heretrix"]I'm not defending it if I tell you that your opinion means nothing to me. The amount of money I paid for it is ridiculous to you, but if I can afford it and the expense doesn't bother me, why should I care if the price is too high for someone that doesn't wish to pay it? Especially if they have the option NOT to buy it? The problem with this "ripoff" mentality is that people seem to feel that they are entitled to everything and the minute they disagree with a price or pricing structure, they scream RIPOFF. It's really ignorant. And it's something that I have admittedly been guilty of doing myself on several occasions.

"What? 10 dollars for a salad? That's a RIPOFF!"

Actually it isn't because I'm not being tricked into buying it. It's simply the set price in that place. Love it or get the hell out and go to a cheaper place.

heretrix

Why defend it at all if opinions don't matter.. I care about opinions of value, but it trust it more coming from someone who is tighter with their money

I can afford Live.. but why should I care if someone else who isn't as tight with money as me thinks it's worth it..

Bill Gates can buy jeans for $1,000 and to him maybe it's worth it.. doesn't mean I'm going to start accepting jeans at a higher price because he sees a value in it

what you can afford doesn't tell me much about whether a service is overpriced or not

the salad isn't a rip off to you because it's convenient.. when I ask about value, i'm asking about practicality

The point to this discussion being "MS doesn't owe you anything and we don't want to discuss it because we don't care what your opinions are" sounds valid

Does this exist simply so we can hear how the entitled believe everyone else is over demanding and spoiled.. that's the main point of the OP

[QUOTE="heretrix"]

[QUOTE="voxware00"]

Why defend it at all if opinions don't matter.. I care about opinions of value, but it trust it more coming from someone who is tighter with their money

I can afford Live.. but why should I care if someone else who isn't as tight with money as me thinks it's worth it..

Bill Gates can buy jeans for $1,000 and to him maybe it's worth it.. doesn't mean I'm going to start accepting jeans at a higher price because he sees a value in it

what you can afford doesn't tell me much about whether a service is overpriced or not

the salad isn't a rip off to you because it's convenient.. when I ask about value, i'm asking about practicality

voxware00

The point to this discussion being "MS doesn't owe you anything"

I don't get everyone's beef of paying for X-Box Live. It's only $50 a year. That basically equals to between $4.16-$4.17 a month (13 months w/card would equal to $3.84-$3.85 a month). Very chump change that you're paying them for. Wouldn't it be nice if internet services would charge you for that the same way?

[QUOTE="voxware00"]

[QUOTE="heretrix"]You keep bringing up defense when there is none. If someone doesn't care what you think, then they don't have anything to defend.

heretrix

The point to this discussion being "MS doesn't owe you anything" sounds valid

that's not a discussion, it's a monolog, ie: "MS doesn't owe you anything, period"

pointing out how people are spoiled is kind ofcondescending and demeaning

I especially appreciate the "you can afford a next gen console and games but why not online" approach.. this "discussion" falls on deaf ears

defending value with simple convenience, can anyone defend it on practical merits?

putting XBL in terms of monthly fee doesn't make it seem like any more of a value either.. for pennies a month you could feed a starving child but you aren't justifying that with value

how is that for spoiled and entitled.. online gaming is a priority over the feeling and benefits of saving a life.. but we don't owe that kid anything so why care, and even though we made MS a success.. they don't owe us anything either

[QUOTE="Verge_6"][QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"] Typical "I have money so I don't care about the people that don't" stance. You know it's wrong, why you guys defend it is beyond me, I understand perfectly why you pay for it, you wanna play your games online, you have the dough, so go for it, but to defend it?Eddie-Vedder

[QUOTE="heretrix"]

[QUOTE="voxware00"]

The point to this discussion being "MS doesn't owe you anything" sounds valid

voxware00

that's not a discussion, it's a monolog, ie: "MS doesn't owe you anything, period"

pointing out how people are spoiled is kind ofcondescending and demeaning

I especially appreciate the "you can afford a next gen console and games but why not online" approach.. this "discussion" falls on deaf ears

defending value with simple convenience, can anyone defend it on practical merits?

putting XBL in terms of monthly fee doesn't make it seem like any more of a value either.. for pennies a month you could feed a starving child but you aren't justifying that with value

how is that for spoiled and entitled.. online gaming is a priority over the feeling and benefits of saving a life.. but we don't owe that kid anything so why care, and even though we made MS a success.. they don't owe us anything either

Xbox Live not being free has nothing to do with being a view from a moral stand point for me. It should be free because I see no reason why I should buy it. Other companies offer this for free, what makes it worth paying for? They don't have a monopoly on online gaming services and they are the ones that exclusively charge for it. I think it's fair to say it should be free on the grounds that it seems logical at first. Of course it shouldn't because of the amount of money it brings in. When I say it should be free I am saying "I don't think this is worth money and hence I wont buy it. I can get this service for free so I will." However if I were to buy it again I would be agreeing that Live is worth money, which I don't think it is. I am essentially declaring that I think it is worthless rather than making any real logical argument as to whether or not they should charge for it. If I were to attempt to do that I would be shot down simply because Live is mega profitable and to make it free would be complete idiocy. Really what I should say is "Don't buy this, it's not worth your money."

[QUOTE="heretrix"]

[QUOTE="VideoGameGuy"]I miss the days when developers actually had to make a flawless feature rich game from the get-go.. AdobeArtist

I have also never seen gamers more spoiled than in these last 2 generations. People complain about EVERYTHING. And while some complaints are valid, most are utterly ridiculous. Such as the one that inspired the TC to create this thread. Nothing SHOULD be free, but it is excellent when it is. It's really sad that people seem to not realize this.

I hear you on that one heretrix. Gamers today are so spoiled about graphics and overall game quality like never before. You see them all the time scrutinizing every texture, every polygon, spotting every little jaggy, complaining when the game isn't native 1080p, not photorealistic enough for them, the environments aren't big enough, not enough enemies to fight, the stories aren't cinematic enough.... and apparently every game even outside of an RPG should be a 40hr campaign.

They all want to think technology somehow met their expectations. And I am pretty sure every one of these spoiled complainers haven't been gaming for very long, beyond say PS1, and don't know just how GOOD we have it today. Games are as good as the current technology allows for and as best as the talented developers can make them with the tools they have. And things will advance and progress further, but at it's own pace, not how some gamers sitting on their couch thinks they can dictate.

[QUOTE="heretrix"]

[QUOTE="VideoGameGuy"]I miss the days when developers actually had to make a flawless feature rich game from the get-go.. AdobeArtist

I have also never seen gamers more spoiled than in these last 2 generations. People complain about EVERYTHING. And while some complaints are valid, most are utterly ridiculous. Such as the one that inspired the TC to create this thread. Nothing SHOULD be free, but it is excellent when it is. It's really sad that people seem to not realize this.

I hear you on that one heretrix. Gamers today are so spoiled about graphics and overall game quality like never before. You see them all the time scrutinizing every texture, every polygon, spotting every little jaggy, complaining when the game isn't native 1080p, not photorealistic enough for them, the environments aren't big enough, not enough enemies to fight, the stories aren't cinematic enough.... and apparently every game even outside of an RPG should be a 40hr campaign.

They all want to think technology somehow met their expectations. And I am pretty sure every one of these spoiled complainers haven't been gaming for very long, beyond say PS1, and don't know just how GOOD we have it today. Games are as good as the current technology allows for and as best as the talented developers can make them with the tools they have. And things will advance and progress further, but at it's own pace, not how some gamers sitting on their couch thinks they can dictate.

[QUOTE="Verge_6"][QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"] Typical "I have money so I don't care about the people that don't" stance. You know it's wrong, why you guys defend it is beyond me, I understand perfectly why you pay for it, you wanna play your games online, you have the dough, so go for it, but to defend it?Eddie-Vedder