I just bought Remnant from the Ashes.....at least it was on sale I guess

Title says it all. Im interested in doing some free lance video editing work for streamers or youtubers.

Feel free to message me on here if you are interested

Skyward Sword is mediocre at best, it's really hand holdy, and doesn't give the player a lot of room to explore and experiment. Tacked on motion controls are really bad too.

To me BOTW was so good because it did everything opposite of Skyward sword. It was a complete 180.

Skyward sword is a 5-6 Nintendo game from a franchise that is better than that, I really feel that people saying they like it or that it's actually one of the better Zelda games are lying to themselves.

It's ok for Franchises you like to miss the mark sometimes.....as long as they learn from it the next time around (Which Nintendo did with BOTW)

Exactly, and it's a lower cost of entry into the PS4 eco system when your "Greatest Hits" lineup is $20 or less.

GOW was $60 for a while, same with Bloodborne, and HZD and all those games are $20 or less now. The publishers made their money back during their launch window, so if lowering the price gets more people to buy and play the games that's great, and it gives the developers some extra revenue as well.

Recently I would say Days Gone and Remnant from the Ashes, with Remnant being a hidden gem in my opinion

If it's a PS3 that's backwards compatible with PS2 games, then I wouldn't play ANY ps3 games on it. Go get a slim or a Super Slim to do that with.

Your phat ps3 will last longer just playing ps1 and ps2 games on it

Ive been saying this for years, there's a problem with gaming culture where we move on to the next big thing before we complete what we are currently playing.

There's a few reasons for this.

1. FOMO - you get a game then a month later another game comes out and you jump on the hype train and play the new game and never go back to the other.

2. Games losing their Value through too much choice - With GamePass, PS Now, Games with Gold and PS Plus there's tons of free games available to play, or cheap games to build a back log with. The problem is too much choice actually devalues every game that is available. If Doom and an indie game are available at the click of a button to play, they are both the same value. I'm guilty of playing a game for 10 minutes, losing interest, and going on to something else.

3. Games are TOO BIG and TOO LONG - Sometimes you don't need a 100 hour plus game. To me a quality 20-30 hour game is the sweet spot. Most people aren't going to pour 100 hours into a game.

Back in the day if you rented a game for the weekend you played that game as much as you could until you had to take it back! Same goes if you bought a game at a store. If you paid for a new game, there was no game pass or steam sale, you played your new damn game until you could afford to get another one!

Have you actually played HZD?

I keep seeing people say this, but I just played Valhalla and HZD poops all over it. It makes AssCreed look terrible

@goldenelementxl: Those are some valid points, and I agree with just about all of that.

And you are 100% correct, console fanboys would love to have all the SSD, 4K 120FPS that some PCs can do, and I would say more so than an audiophile comparing a Sony to a Marantz (Since the difference in quality is really small today)

BUT

There is still a "Is this worth the extra cost for X amount of performance gains and Windows headaches" (I know a PC is easy to maintain and play games on today, but there's still issues, it's Windows dude)

Is a $500 console with an SSD, 4K 30/60FPS comparable to a $1300 PC with 4K 120FPS SSD? Yes....and no considering the gap in performance will widen as the console ages.

BUT

Considering people still buy consoles, there is still a perceived lack of value in performance gains for that extra money.

For me personally, I'll stick with consoles. I really hate Windows

Cars yes, that would be a silly argument.

There are some hobbies where this argument can work, like audio set ups and home theater. Technology for Home Theater has gotten so good and cost efficient a $400 AV Receiver can sound almost as good as $2000 one, with the $400 one having more features. (Companies like Yamaha and Sony can sell their AV Receivers in bulk, so it gives them an advantage to pack in better quality equipment VS a company like Marantz who can't sell nearly as many units). Back in the 90's this wouldn't be the case.

So the argument is really "Is spending an additional $1600 on an AV Receiver going to get me $1600 of extra value in sound quality?" And TODAY the answer is no.

So the argument WE GAMERS should be having is this "Does Spending $1300 on a gaming PC give me an $800 increase in value compared to a $500 console?" This is a lot more tricky to answer. For some yes....others no.

Trying to say a $500 PC is as good as the equivalent console is not the point, and it's not the reason people game on PC in the first place. They see it as increased Value over a console because they have all the things Windows allows them to do, plus better performance in games and a potentially bigger library of games to play. BUT the downside can be time spent on maintaining and troubleshooting issues on your PC.