For $25, sure!
ThatOneDudeNick's forum posts
I'd rather a patch allow the game to work on day 1 than for it not to work. Games go gold before they're done. I'd rather them fix issues quickly than not. Games will still have issues and bugs, but they have to make release date, press and distribute discs, ramp up advertising, etc. We rage when games are delayed, we rage when they are broken, and we rage when there are patches. What's the solution? Letting it remain broken is unacceptable. Would you rather a delay of over a month or a few hours downloading a patch on launch day?
It's a non-issue for me personally (reliable fast internet connection), but I know it's an issue for other people. Games get patched. Day 1 or not, you're going to have to download patches. The "when it's done" policy of game development isn't realistic for most developers and publishers, especially when discs are still involved. If you've got millions of dollars tied up into a project, you need to get it out there and making money. Release dates are for investors, not us.
Because warm drinks are gross and iced coffee has too much ice taking up valuable cup volume.
If I'm using chemicals to keep me awake, I no longer care about what's good for me. I don't care enough about my body to get a good night's sleep or eat an apple for an energy boost, so whatever horrible stuff is in energy drinks don't concern me.
I have a general rule not to back any Kickstaters. However, I backed one because it was a cool dude. Some game called ROAM. He gives an update once a month. Still waiting on beta, which was supposed to start in January. Not trippin though. (yet).
I play games for fun. So no. If I'm playing a game and it doesn't get good within an hour after the setup/tutorial, then I'm done with it. I barely have time to play the games that I enjoy. The last game that I completed while disliking was Walking Dead Season 1. Each episode was short enough that I would play it and hope that it was about to get good or interesting.
Bad? Or do you mean not AAA?
I think the majority of the games have been fun enough. I stock up on PS+ time during Black Friday. I'm spending $30 per year. That's $2.50 per month. I get more than $2.50 worth of entertainment out of each PS+ game. That's where I stop thinking about it. It gets me to check out games I wouldn't otherwise try. I don't want to play some crappy launch games just because they were once $60 and have higher production value. Anything big game that I want to play, I will have already bought before it hits PS+. So no, I'm not expecting $30-$60 games for $2.50 (or $4 if you pay full price).