@DashRender619 While I see where you're going with your argument, it's in your best interest when making one that you don't assume anything about the person you're speaking to. It's a logical fallacy, and immediately invalidates anything you say. It would be a cold day in hell before I spent that kind of money on a TV, and I waited until my PS3 was on sale for $200, down from its 400+ original price-tag, before I bought it. I also very, very rarely purchase games on a first-day basis, knowing within 3-4 months I can get them at the very least 10-20 bucks cheaper, if not far more.
It's only the games I truly feel are deserving of that price tag that get it, the most recent being Skyrim, Guild Wars 2 and Torchlight 2. But those situations are very rare. Furthermore, I'll be damned if I cave in and buy a system knowing years from now, when I decide to go shopping for that game I always wanted to play but didn't get around to/didn't have the money for at the time, I'll have permanently missed my chance because the only copies sitting on the shelves are haggard and used.
@swamptick Isn't it lovely how they say gamers are "entitled", all the while assuming they are "entitled" to our money? Hypocrisy at its finest. And then I'm supposed to feel bad when Studios lose all their money and go belly up.
@nubianninja There is however, a difference in your analogy. The Mona Lisa wasn't flawed, it was done to a specific taste. But regardless of its unique qualities, it still functioned as a completed, artistic piece up to the standards of the paintings of its era. It was "whole". Now, if the Mona Lisa had been submitted with a big gash in the canvas across her face, this is clearly another story. That would be its flaw, not that it lacked the smile. Likewise, broken gameplay =/= "unique" gameplay.
"That these changes are being made at all is an admission that the original works are not inherently valuable." Nonsensical trash by someone who stands outside the medium attempting to speak for it. Critique and revision are an essential part of any artistic process, and yes video games are an art form. Furthermore, that the revision of something in no way removes the original work's intrinsic value, if anything it's the opposite; something to improve upon is by far the better alternative to having produced utter trash that no one cares enough about to want fixed.
Creating new systems, being bold with storylines, etc., are all incredibly important for the developer and, indeed, at some point they must put their foot down and "challenge their audience". But there is a distinct difference between something that is new and unusual, and something that is fundamentally flawed. There is a difference between bold game play choices (Demons Souls, Minecraft, Diablo 3) and outright broken mechanics and plot holes literally the size of whole galaxies (Mass Effect 3, Doom 3). Saying otherwise is suggesting games like Daikatana were all they were ever meant to be, that they weren't horrid but rather meant to "challenge the audience". Put in that context, it sounds ridiculous, doesn't it? There's a reason for that.
Great review. I have some reservations about this game but overall, I think its worth the price. I'm hoping lots of additional storyline DLC is on the way, and I also hope it develops into a franchise.
@Janpieterzun Nothing admirable about it. He repaid himself that 4 mill he invested and RA Salvatore took 5 mill in royalties from that taxpayer money when the company was going down. It would have been admirable if he took the hit, the man's worth 60mill, but he effectively jumped ship when he realized it was taking on water. Meanwhile the people that worked for him are going into debt and losing their homes.
Curt's a pig, I hope he keeps his nose out of the industry and goes away.
nathangray's comments