EA in a Nutshell

There is no way in hell I am paying 60 bucks for a game, more so when I am only a Campaign Gamer... I will just waste time playing something else until such time where I can trade or buy the game I want for a few bucks.

On the other hand, I will try to donate or help developers like Blackfoot studio and the Ground Branch game. Why? because it is a game I have been waiting for ever since I first played the original Ghost Recon.

Oh and, just to clarify... GRAW or GRFS are NOT part of what I consider Ghost Recon either... those games were regular run and guns who happened to used the ghost recon name to capitalize on.

I usually wait until the game goes down to $30. I don't like spending $60 on a game, and it turns out to be total crap. Then I would have to send it back to the company instead of the store. I really don't like doing that.

30 cheeseburgers??? that's still to rich for my blood... you must have a money tree or something!

Seriously though, the only games I like to play are FPS games, and now a days, they all are pretty much console ports or 3rd person view, which, if done right (like crysis2 or CoD), the gameplay does not suffer much but if they suck or done wrong (Vegas 1 & 2 come to mind), it could be very detrimental. Still, the TPV does take away a lot for me so I refuse to pay those people all that money when they didn't care to cater to my needs!

AstaLaVista said:

30 cheeseburgers??? that's still to rich for my blood... you must have a money tree or something!

Seriously though, the only games I like to play are FPS games, and now a days, they all are pretty much console ports or 3rd person view, which, if done right (like crysis2 or CoD), the gameplay does not suffer much but if they suck or done wrong (Vegas 1 & 2 come to mind), it could be very detrimental. Still, the TPV does take away a lot for me so I refuse to pay those people all that money when they didn't care to cater to my needs!

lol Nope. I don't have an income, so me buying games is pretty damn rare.

pparks1 said:

Considering the cost of everything else in the world these days, I guess I don't find $60 for a game to be outrageous in most cases. A 90 minute movie at the theatre is about $10. A tank of gas is ~$60 and lasts me a week or so. As long as I play the games for a long enough period of time, it seems like they are worth it in the end.

As a campaign only gamer (non online), many of these games offer very little and it's hard to get the hours into the game to really get your cost per hour down. I can certainly understand that.

I normally only play the campaign's, too. I'm not much of an online gamer.

pparks1 said:

Considering the cost of everything else in the world these days, I guess I don't find $60 for a game to be outrageous in most cases. A 90 minute movie at the theatre is about $10. A tank of gas is ~$60 and lasts me a week or so. As long as I play the games for a long enough period of time, it seems like they are worth it in the end.

See, all those Millions these Companies spent on Marketing does pay off

pparks1 said:

As a campaign only gamer (non online), many of these games offer very little and it's hard to get the hours into the game to really get your cost per hour down. I can certainly understand that.

Nope... indeed they don't

pparks1 said:

Considering the cost of everything else in the world these days, I guess I don't find $60 for a game to be outrageous in most cases. A 90 minute movie at the theatre is about $10. A tank of gas is ~$60 and lasts me a week or so. As long as I play the games for a long enough period of time, it seems like they are worth it in the end.

I wouldn't mind paying $60 bucks for a game if the game was worth it. Example I feel like Skyrim was well worth the $60 buck price tag due to ength of game, content, and quality. Sure the game had bugs; there isn't a piece of software out there that doesn't have bugs; however no one can deny the content and length of that game. I have better than 380 hours in and there is still more to do…. and this is WITHOUT DLC!!!

Contrast that with say Deus Ex: Human Revolution, that game was overly hyped and extremely short, and had DLC that clearly should have been part of the game. Or Mass Effect 3 with day 1 DLC which clearly screams "I should have been included in the base game but EA wanted to milk the game for more profit!" This is one of the reasons I skipped Mass Effect 3.

My problem, as is most fans, is that we are treated like beta testers who basically get a demo length type game that's been hyped to all heck and clearly not ready for primetime. That "EA in a nutshell" video hits the nail on the head here.

I remember the old days (98 to early 2000's) when games had length, content, and more polish. The only "DLC" in those days were expansion packs that had more length then most of today's games.

60 bucks for a game in today's market is nothing; the problem is we are being used as beta testers to flush out bugs as companies push out un-polished games to meet tight deadlines. They "might" push out a patch.... depending on the popularity of game. And their "Oh BTW, here's some DLC that should have been in the game, but hey.... we can make an extra $10 bucks" policy screams GREED!!!!

Anyway I don't mind paying $60 bucks for a game, but I do have a problem paying $60 bucks to be a beta tester, or getting a 2/3rds or 3/4ths game and paying $10+bucks for the rest in "DLC's".

My two cents.

sygnus21 said:

pparks1 said:

Considering the cost of everything else in the world these days, I guess I don't find $60 for a game to be outrageous in most cases. A 90 minute movie at the theatre is about $10. A tank of gas is ~$60 and lasts me a week or so. As long as I play the games for a long enough period of time, it seems like they are worth it in the end.

I wouldn't mind paying $60 bucks for a game if the game was worth it. Example I feel like Skyrim was well worth the $60 buck price tag due to ength of game, content, and quality. Sure the game had bugs; there isn't a piece of software out there that doesn't have bugs; however no one can deny the content and length of that game. I have better than 380 hours in and there is still more to do…. and this is WITHOUT DLC!!!

Contrast that with say Deus Ex: Human Revolution, that game was overly hyped and extremely short, and had DLC that clearly should have been part of the game. Or Mass Effect 3 with day 1 DLC which clearly screams "I should have been included in the base game but EA wanted to milk the game for more profit!" This is one of the reasons I skipped Mass Effect 3.

My problem, as is most fans, is that we are treated like beta testers who basically get a demo length type game that's been hyped to all heck and clearly not ready for primetime. That "EA in a nutshell" video hits the nail on the head here.

I remember the old days (98 to early 2000's) when games had length, content, and more polish. The only "DLC" in those days were expansion packs that had more length then most of today's games.

60 bucks for a game in today's market is nothing; the problem is we are being used as beta testers to flush out bugs as companies push out un-polished games to meet tight deadlines. They "might" push out a patch.... depending on the popularity of game. And their "Oh BTW, here's some DLC that should have been in the game, but hey.... we can make an extra $10 bucks" policy screams GREED!!!!

Anyway I don't mind paying $60 bucks for a game, but I do have a problem paying $60 bucks to be a beta tester, or getting a 2/3rds or 3/4ths game and paying $10+bucks for the rest in "DLC's".

My two cents.

This is pretty much why I stopped buying their games after BF2 was released. They rush their game developers and then the game's buggy because they spent most of that time creating the game, and virtually have almost zero time to test the game effectively, hence why they put out patches for so many of their games. Not to mention DICE screwed up the AI in the 1.5 patch, and EA isn't going to do anything about it. I lost my faith in EA many years ago when they started pumping out street racing games as "Need For Speed". I'm not really into street racing all that much, even though the developers made Underground 2 an excellent game. Beyond that, most of'em were repetitive and kinda boring.