Gaming...
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /v/ - Video Games
You are currently reading a thread in /v/ - Video Games
Gaming in 2000
>Get a CD for $30
>Comes in a box with a booklet, has some interesting things about the development of the game in there
>Might come with some extras
>Usually a single player game with online co-op play
>If a game was shit, the orders flopped and the company would go broke
>There wasn't all these companies around to hype up shit games for money and review sites were genuine
>Games are created by young and passionate developers just trying to make really cool games
Gaming in 2015
>Game is $60 and is a digital purchase with no extras
>The booklet and other stuff is the "deluxe" for $80-100
>You can pre-order or get "early access" for $60 plus a bit extra
>The game will be broken into a sequel for $60 a piece instead of one game
>There will be micro-transactions for cosmetic shit at least
>Games only come with online play now
>Reddit will defend the game no matter how shitty and how shady the financial part is
>People will continuously keep buying the same companies games every year
>9.5/10 IGN "MINGBLOWING!"
>Games are made by CEOs and directed by board members/investors
>>320135664
you just described xcom 2
>>320136424
It's every major game now.
>Starcraft 2 is announced
>Fucking finally
>It's going to be a three part game for $60 a piece... what?
>Robert Kotick (CEO) wants to add in-game advertisements
>UMS feature is butchered and turned into shitty arcade
>Last expansion finally released
>Now they're going to start selling DLC pack missions
>>320135664
actually it was back the same shit pretty much the only thing that changed is we used to have x-packs and now we have DLC-s
Review sites where never genuine.
Source I am 28, also I remember Final Fantasy 8 costing 61.40 euro (120 DM at that time) when it came out and, so the base game was actually even more expensive.
>>320135664
ITT: Delusional nostalgia thread
>>320135664
You're completely off on game cost. The average price for vidya in the late nineties was equivalent to 75 dollars in today-money
>>320136761
UMS feature?
>>320136825
>>320137012
>>320137175
Are you guys really that attoned and used to today's current state of gaming that you've forgotten how it used to be?
>>320137747
A single NES game used to be $60
A single N64 game used to be $70
Adjusted for inflation that's around $100 per game
There were no real reviews except for a handful of very shady magazines that were basically advertisements so you often bought games just on the box art and blurb on the back hoping it was good, which is a big risk to take for $100
Things weren't always peaches and cream
>>320137747
nope but I remember I had to pay for every new game 100 to 120 DM thats now 52 to 62 euro
x-packs used to be from 30 to 40 euro, sometimes 20 euro
DLC where non exist-ended and if you didn't have internet or fast net you had to buy game magazines who have a CD with demos and patches.
God I remember how much I hated Fallout 2 , the game was full of broken quest a and bugs when it came out and when you installed the patch it made your old save files unusable.
I am 28 now and when I was a kid money was a problem now its more about using time efficient so I value time over money now.
>>320137012
>It's delusional that i have to spend far more for games people used to pay far less for
>It's delusional that a third of content is purposely left out to be behind a pay wall so it can be downloadable content
>It's delusional to even so much as speak out against this nowadays
Jesus Christ, don't be a fucking moron.
>>320138681
but you have been debunked by 2 guys above you how much the games costed.
>>320136761
I agree with most of this thread, but you guys are fucking autistic sometimes.
Starcraft 2 has a proper campaign for each expansion. I have played both starcraft 1, warcraft 2 and warcraft 3 recently. I'll take warcraft 3 as an example because it's the most recent one.
> WC3 - 37 missions and ~20 hours of playtime
> WC3: frozen throne - 22 main missions and 3 for rexxar, main missions are less than 15 hours of play time. rexxar campaign is 3-5 hours depending on how relaxed and completist you are
> SC2: WoL: 22 required missions, 1 optional and 3 alternates, at least 20 hours of gametime
> SC2: HotS: 18 missions, most of them pretty long, 15-20 hours of game time
> SC2: LotV: 25 missions, again, at least 20-22 hours of game-time
Not to mention tons of cinematics, interactions and customization. The story is bad and cheesy, yes. But the gameplay itself is still very good.
I bet that if Blizzard had two expansions with ~8 missions each like they did with WC3 you guys would still have sperged online.
And also, it's the only remotely competitive RTS out there with proper balance.
OP status
> #REKT
