I think I get what the OP is stating. It is an argument that I have used when speaking with people who do not game or think it is a waste of time/money. I normally explain to them that if I play a game for 20 hours at a cost of $50 and I enjoy 15 hours of that 20 hours, then my enjoyment value is at $1.33 per hour. The same can be applied when going to a movie. If the movie costs $12 to see and it is 2 hours long and I enjoy it, then my enjoyment value is at $6 per hour. Due to these calculations, I can easily show a person that does not enjoy gaming or see's it as a waste of money the true value of it to me. Oh and MMOs can easily get a very low Enjoyment value but people tend to calculate their entire time playing, not just their actual enjoyed time. As for 5 hours games, yes they are normally not much better then the cost of a theatre ticket for the amount of money you spend for the amount of hours of enjoyment. Do this make it wrong to purchase it? No, it is just dependent on what a person values in a game.
I thought it was fun for the first few hours and then ran into boredom.
I don't understand why really, I mean the game consisted of a plot of find a stash full of treasures and weapons......to get there you had to shoot things with creative guns....but to get those guns you needed to do side missions to make money....
Ok after thinking about it, the only main reason to continue to play this game was to get better and more interesting guns and to me, that should never been the main sell for a game.
I'm mad. I hope at least they make the PC version first and THEN strip it down for a console port - the way they should make all games.
snover2009
So you think they should make a game for PC then "strip it down" for a console.
Heres an Idea, how about the next big FPS is made for Consoles and then ported to PC with 1/3 of the content removed.
It pisses me off when game developers do this, they make one version of a game an then strip content from it when porting it to another system.
What pisses me off more is when people complain when a great game that was available on only one system has a sequel available on multiple systems. I played both Crysis and Crysis Warhead on the PC, but will be playing Crysis 2 on the PS3. The only possible complaint I would have with Crysis 2 coming to consoles is that Crytek didnt bother releasing Crysis 1 first on the consoles so people actually know what is going on in the game.
See a lot of people tend to get annoyed that the console becomes the limiting factor when developing a game. Such as the amount of AI on the screen at a time, capped Frames per second, smaller map sizes, and limited player counts for multiplayer games. They are not stating that they should strip it down just for the sake of stripping it down. They are just expressing their wish that the systems that have potential get used to it's full potential, instead of just limited to the lowest denominator.
I don't understand why many people like Steam. After my experience with it when I bought MW2, I don't want to ever have to use it again.
The games are not even cheaper on Steam. Why would anyone want to pay $10 more for a game they will not have a hard copy of?
I just went on their site and they rekon they have two million users online.:shock: I do not see why so many people would want to use it.
And also, why are developers/publishers now deciding to make their games run with steam? (MW2, Mafia II)
C_Rule
How can you say games are not cheaper ? Kane and Lynch 2 is $44.99 right now, EB has it for $54.99. I got Dragon Age for $25, Red Faction 3 for $5, Borderlands for $25 and much much more.
Well they have MW2 for $90US, it is $70AUD in the shop at the moment. BC2 on Steam is $69US, $59AUD in store. Regional Prices for Australia is atrocious when it comes to steam but that is entirely the publishers fault, not Steam the platform. Basically the publishers get to decide what to charge for the game on Steam and they always mark up 30 - 60% more for the Australian audience.
...Then I will never buy from Rockstar again. By that I mean optimization, it's just ridiculous.
Constant framerate drops, constant stuttering, constant bugs and glitches, it's just impossible to appreciate the game when there's so many problems with the port.
GTA IV is the only game I've had problems with playing on the higher settings, and these are major, major problems.
Resistance_Kid
OK.. GTA 3, Vice City, San Andreas, and GTA IV all ran perfectly for me. Maybe it's not Rockstar and it's your **** rig.
Maybe you should go troll somewhere else. GTA IV is a bad port, deny it all you want, it's a fact. I've never had any problems with any game up till now.
Don't worry about him. Everyone is aware that GTA 4 can run great on one system and then run absolutely horrible on another system with similar hardware. I know that my GF's system had a ton of issues with GTA 4 while mine ran pretty smooth. The only difference she had versus myself was a 4850.
Still does......RDR was MUCH better, So you thought GTA IV sucked... period? ... okay. I wouldn't say that GTA IV sucked but it was by far the worst GTA of the 3D series.....It isn't as bad as GTA: London but we can easily push that under a rug. Why may you ask? Well GTA 4 brought in a bunch of features to give better immersions and go closer to a real life experience. The problem is this killed a lot of the fun aspects of the game that were present in previous iterations. My biggest beef with the game is it's driving mechanics. Sure, I don't expect to be able to drive a sedan like a Corvette but for the love of god don't make it feel like I'm driving a brick....a brick that wants to hit indestructible lamp posts. Also add in the "friend" missions in where you have to interrupt your main quests to help an friend enjoy a visit to the strip club or go bowling.. Add in the cops that you can outrun in 5 seconds and it creates a game that is trying to be grittier at the sacrifice of fun.
My biggest problem with the game were the infinity respawn guard posts and the most annoying feature of even when doing work for a certain faction, they still fought you. Why do they say? It's due to the faction not knowing you are working for them as they want to keep you hush hush....aka, the programmers never heard of a thing called faction based AI system....
Log in to comment