Spoiler:Hmm...are we getting less for more?
Maybe its because I remember when games were beatable in two-four hours and cost like 70 bucks but I really don't believe so.
Hell, if anything publishers have been focusing on a lot of stuff to increase the life of their products stuff like multiplayer(which people complain about) and DLC(which people also complain about). Then you still have your games like Skyrim and such which are bursting with content.
>_>...so I don't know if its really a case of getting ripped off as its a case of people never being satisfied.
It depends when you draw your baseline from. And probably if you were a PC gamer or not.
But games definitely got longer for quite awhile and then began getting shorter again.
You say Skyrim, what's Skyrim like compared to Morrowwind or Daggerfall?
Pretty good actually. Though I can't say I ever played Daggerfall.
I will say as far as Skyrim and Morrowind goes my main complaint is that the guild quests in Skyrim weren't as good as the ones in Morrowind and that's more of a question of quality rather than quantity.
Using Elder Scrolls as an example.
I played Morrowind for maybe 230 hours.
I played Skyrim for about 180 so far. Also, I fast traveled a lot...something that wasn't available in Morrowind mind you.
I played Oblivion for 80...because I got bored with it.
In none of those cases did I feel like I was getting ripped off. Not only as far as hours played go but because I had a decent amount of fun playing the games(becauser I don't care how long a game is if I don't enjoy it I'm not going to go through it).
I guess in the end I really don't understand this mentality because as a consumer I can't say I feel much like a victim. I bought what I paid for and if the asking price is too much I either wait for a price drop or go without, I'll live.
Take Dishonored for example. From everything I've heard its a pretty awesome game, its also pretty short. So, it isn't worth 60 bucks for me but its worth 40 or so. So...I'll just wait a month or two when its more around the price I'm willing to pay. No sweat.
Guess what I'm saying is that 1. I don't believe all this talk about how we're somehow getting ripped off with content and 2. If the asking price for games is too high for you...all you really need is a little patience.
Skyrim had Dawnfire and Hearthfire.
Dawnfire is a handful of new areas reusing old resources on the same map, a couple of mob reskins, and some skill trees for already existing effects.
Hearthfire is a house.
Morrowind has Tribunal and Bloodmoon.
Tribunal adds an entire giant city and a multi level underground maze type thing with various new models and such.
Bloodmoon adds an entire new island with lycanthropy and several new enemy models.
At least in this comparison, the idea of Expansion vs DLC looks less rosy.
I was curious about this so I ran the dates..
From release of Morrowind, took about 6 months for Tribunal to come out, and then 7 months from that for Bloodmoon.
From Skyrim's release, it took 7 months until the Xbox release date, and then 2-and-a-bit months for Hearthfire.
So either the workload is a lot bigger, the teams are a lot smaller.. or Expansions definitely seem to be the way to go here to get more content faster...
what reeks of power relationships, eddy, is you using the same phrase to demand academic credentials as you would to demand verification of identity from a soon-to-be political prisonor
because it's the same thing
you curséd instrument of hegemony
I think "confusing academic insult or uncommon / rare black M:tG creature?" could be a game.
Orthodoxian Conformist Monstrosity
Deceptive Nihilist Engine
Yawning Maw of Capitalism
The Spectre Over Europe
Derridean Différance Engine
oh jeez, I really need to avoid communicating with strangers on twitter about politics.
#Biden laughed at the idea that an Iranian nuclear weapon incinerating our children. I can think of nothing more unfunny than that
is what i had to respond to because it was at best willfully ignoring not only facts but also anything that actually happened during that segment of the debate to spread some bullshit boogeyman fear. I called him out on speaking for 'our children,' which is still my generation for another year before my demographic changes.
he followed with
I have children and their incineration is what worries me the most of all the things out government can prevent
I then stopped responding because this is frankly insane and I've realized that regardless of what the media has said, the bases will take what they want from this and only a few people will change their stances based on logic ever.
apparently he's an actual journalist/actor/attempted politician in S.Cal.
Anyone with so tenuous of a grasp of reality that they think Iran is developing a nuclear weapons program in order to incinerate American children is not worth listening to.
And you know, considering Iranian history, I cannot blame them for one second for attempting to build a "don't fucking invade us" machine.
Yeah, wtf lesson were the Iranians supposed to take away from the Iraq war?
Besides, A) Iran still doesn't have missiles to reach the US anyway, so America getting nuked is a moot point
and, B) Iran isn't a bunch of crazy revolutionaries, they know that if they launched a nuke against someone their whole country would be flattened to dust
What the Iranian government cares about is staying in power, not religious war. And Iraq showed them that there's only one obvious rule there: If America doesn't like you then you need WMD, and then never give them up
Well see, the thing you're missing is that we need to care about Israel more than we care about our own security.
I like Israel as much as the next guy, but some of the rhetoric coming from these guys is fucking treasonous.
This Libya thing is looking bad for Obama and seems to be getting a lot of play. That plus the debate worries me. I know w always say the debates can't decide the presidency, but I'm starting to wonder if Romney could actually win if he keeps this momentum.
While I don't think Romney has the momentum he seems to (I think the polls over the next few days are going to normalize to pre-conventions and we'll get a closer election-just as I was saying in August and early September than we had hoped over the last couple weeks), I do worry about people who don't pay attention taking this Libya shit at face value.
A competent candidate could absolutely cream the president. Romney is not that candidate. Everything he talks about Libya he shits the bed, so I'm not as worried as I might be with literally any sane person.
FTFY. "Any other Republican" includes Santorum, Palin, Bachmann and a beastiary of madmen and ne'er-do-wells.
I know, and I think that they'd all be better at this than Romney.
I have absolutely no respect for that man or anything he does.
God dammit, AMFE. You're making me defend Romney, of all people. He's better at this than any other opponent he had at the primaries. Obviously, this is like a one-legged man saying he can play soccer better than a double amputee, but the point still stands
Respectfully I disagree. He was not better at this than any of them. He simply had more money and was more palatable for the party elders than the rest of them.