Re: Starcraft II
Yeah, yeah. I have literally nothing to stand on in this argument, I'm just sniping easy argument points from every direction and running from each post. ![]()
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Friends In Your Head | Forums → Off Topic → Starcraft II
Yeah, yeah. I have literally nothing to stand on in this argument, I'm just sniping easy argument points from every direction and running from each post. ![]()
And others are happy paying for new games
I think we're just talking past each other, and I apologize for upsetting you enough to use italics in your reply. We'll be using all caps soon at this rate!
Nah, not upset. Just confused by you gamer folk.
It has been recently brought to my attention that without video games, comic books, and Star Trek, I'm actually not a geek at all. Identity crisis. You know.
Because "film geeks" are more usually pretentious douchebags and not nerds.
In related news, I'm going to stop listening to Down In Front, because I only watch movies that are in the public domain. I just don't see what the fuss about these new fancy movies is about.
My argument has less to do with how recent a game is, and more to do with what it costs next to what I'd be willing to pay. Incidentally the new ones are too expensive. It's worth mentioning that I don't own DVDs and rarely see movies in the theaters.
Entertainment is not created equal. I'd enjoy an hour of many things more than an hour of gaming, so on.
I would never pay more than a hundred dollars for a piece of art to hang on my wall, but I am in no way surprised people pay literally millions to do so. I recognize that I may not be able to see what they see, and Im not the guy to stare at a piece of art for hours in a museum like some do. But I understand the compulsion to do so.
Any time you spend money on entertainment, its a gamble. This is nothing new. How many movies do you pay for that you regret paying for? Tons. The value of a piece of entertainment is relative to your experiences with it. I spent 50 bucks on Final Fantasy 7 when it came out. My experiences with it are literally clocking 120 hours on it, with 3 other guys in my dorm as we were completists and would not rest until we found every unlockable before we beat the game. Those times remain vivid as a great college memory. That same year, I also spent 3 dollars renting "Star Wars: Masters of Teras Kasi" for PS1, and spent roughly 15 minutes on it before I said, "This sucks," and returned it.
Under Teague's logic, the 3 dollars spent on SW:MoTK is a more sensible cost than the 50 I spent on FF7. I just don't believe you can quantify value that way.
My point being I don't think I understand all the working parts of a compulsion to play games, and conclude I must be missing something, because I'm not about to spend all that money on a game.
We have now come full circle.
Teague doesn't understand 'fun.'
Nonsense. Teague just has a different idea of "fun." His "fun" involves making out with girls.
You've either got mad skills or a deeply disappointed girlfriend.
One of my (super hot and crazy-pregnant) wife's favorite things to do is play Super Mario for Wii on the couch with me.
Hehe... "crazy-pregnant" because she's getting big, or "crazy-pregnant" like OH MY GOD! GET ME NINE DOUGHNUTS RIGHT NOW?!
- Branco
Friends In Your Head | Forums → Off Topic → Starcraft II
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 9 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.