bchampnd's forum posts

#1 Posted by bchampnd (108 posts) -

I'm trying to demonstrate some restraint after going overboard on last year's summer sale. (To be fair, I was just building my PC at that point so I wanted to have a decent library to test it out and enjoy my first taste of non-console gaming since about 1996.)

The only game I've picked up so far is Witcher 2 for $4.99.

I'm hoping the Skyrim Legendary Edition drops below what it was on the Flash Sale on Day 1. Other than that, Rogue Legacy is probably the only game I actually want. I've been playing the demo and am loving it but I'm going to wait and see if it drops below $11.99. If it doesn't, I'll probably just buy it directly from the developer's website since they have it on sale at that price for another 8 days.

I'll probably grab a few other games if the deal is just too good to pass up on but Skyrim Legendary and Rogue Legacy are the only other things I'm looking to buy.

#2 Posted by bchampnd (108 posts) -

Not cool. Google Reader is one of the two pages that opens up when I start Chrome (the other is Gmail). It's also one the most used apps on my phone. I've checked out the desktop, web and mobile alternatives in the past and none of them are as clean and simple. Also, apparently many of the alternatives use Google's API so they'll be rendered useless as well.

#3 Posted by bchampnd (108 posts) -

There is no reason why companies shouldn't attempt to raise prices next generation because they are always free to lower them if sales are slow, just like they already are doing this generation. Sure, the price of a new release game is $60, but how many games actually stay at that price point for more than a few weeks? People already know that the price for most games will drop soon after release so only the people that have to get in on a game on Day 1 or in that first 2 or 3 weeks end up paying that much.

With certain games - COD, Halo, Madden, FIFA and other big sellers - why not push the price up to $70? There are tons of people out there who will pay it. As a consumer, I don't want to see this happen but, from a business perspective, I don't see why they wouldn't want to give it a shot. They have nothing to lose since they can always drop the price later if the market really won't allow it. The problem is that the market probably will let it get away with the price increase, just like it has with DLC and microtransactions. Until consumers start voting with their wallets and saying no, publishers will keep pushing the envelope to find out just how much people really are willing to spend.

The industry really could use a variable price point structure, as mentioned in the OP, because all games are not created equally and aren't worth the same amount. I, personally, would think that there's a large market for mid-tier games that release at $30 - meaning they're not AAA but also not Indies developed by 2 people - but it seems that everything's been pushed to those two extremes, with no middle ground. How many games have you played or have you read about in a review where the impression was that the game was good, but probably not worth $60? The problem, I've heard, is that publishers refuse to release games below the $60 price point because it would create the perception that the game was of lower quality and that could have a negative impact on sales. Most video games have their best sales in their first month so they might as well take advantage of the initial sales boom and then lower the price after sales numbers diminish.

#4 Edited by bchampnd (108 posts) -

I've been luckier than a lot of people (I've racked up 16 hours according to Origin but I think at least 3 of them consist of me having the launcher open trying to connect to a server) and I really am enjoying the game when it lets me play. Like many others, however, it really annoys me that this game is forcing me to be connected to EA's servers at all times - I don't care about the always online thing to the extent that it requires an internet connection to play because I only play games on my home PC which is always hooked up to the internet (barring some kind of outage) but when the problem is on EA's end, that's garbage.

If it wasn't EA, I'd hope to maybe get some kind of DLC content for free (or maybe even a few bucks credit in the Origin store) for not being able to play a brand new game, but it is EA so I'm not holding my breath since EA doesn't really care about consumers unless it involves squeezing more money out of them.

I should have done what I did with Diablo 3 and waited for the kinks to be worked out before buying.

#5 Posted by bchampnd (108 posts) -

I was working on a pretty boring project a few weeks ago and took that opportunity to jump into the Bombcast time machine to help the day go faster. I downloaded some of the game of the year podcasts because I figured that those would give me a sense of what was going on with the crew back then (I only started visiting the site and listening to the Bombcast frequently in 2011). Project ended though so I'm back to only listening to the current ones.

If the Bombcasts were formatted and archived in such a way that you could jump to the point in the episode where they're discussing a particular game or topic I would be more likely to revisit old episodes.

#6 Posted by bchampnd (108 posts) -

I haven't listened to the Bombcast yet but brushing over what happened with this game isn't that big of a deal. There was a Quick Look, written review, and Alex and Patrick both wrote about it so I think GB adequately covered the story.

The game came out and, according to the vast majority of gaming news outlets, it sucks. It's not the first time that a game has been in development for ages, its trailers and alleged gameplay footage seemed too good to be true and that turns out to actually be the case. The most notable example is probably Killzone 2. While I thought it was a damn good game, its trailer set some pretty lofty goals that it failed to live up to (even though Killzone 2 was probably the best looking console game when it came out).

I agree that there is an interesting story to be told regarding this game but the details about what may or may not have happened during development are murky so it's not yet a story that can be told.

#7 Posted by bchampnd (108 posts) -

@rchen: Thanks for the update. I look forward to the app coming back and the podcast updates to get back to normal.

While on the Roku topic, is there a reason why only the most recent videos in each category remain accessible via the app? I've found workarounds to stream the older content but I was just curious.

#8 Edited by bchampnd (108 posts) -

This is probably about dead last on the crew's list of things to fix (if it's on the list at all) but the Roku app doesn't seem to be working. It worked for me last night but it hadn't updated with any yesterday's content - I think the latest video showing up on the app was I Love Mondays from 2/11/2013. Tonight it just doesn't seem to be launching at all.

(I checked my internet connection to confirm it was working, opened other apps and streamed videos, and restarted the Roku device but Giant Bomb's app still didn't work.)

#9 Posted by bchampnd (108 posts) -

Finally. I had given up on this game coming to Android. I came across this when I got my notification from AppSales (side note: Install AppSales) and saw it was a buck. Really knew nothing about it other than hearing a bunch of people mentioning it being great so picked it up. This game is absurdly addictive. Since most runs last less than 10 seconds for me, it really has that "just one more try" factor going for it.

#10 Posted by bchampnd (108 posts) -

Just picked this up today. Looking to join the guild.

BchampND.8570