Value proposition. MCC vs. LoU remastered

[MikeRox]

spemanig said:

MikeRox said:

spemanig said:

That should be the only definition of value. You get exponancially more for your money. This shouldn't even be up for descussion. 4 games vs 1. The end.

Surely by that logic, RPGs are always better value for money than anything else though?

You can't quantify value. It's purely subjective, 4 games someone isn't interested in, in one compilation, isn't as good value as Daytona USA on PSN/XBL to someone who loves Daytona USA.

Surely by your logic, games like Little Big Planet and anything with a level creator offer by far the best value for money???

You can't be serious. This post pretty much destroys everything you just wrote in one sentence:

How do you figure?

The argument is MCC gives 4 games for the price of 1, so is better value for money.

This suggests that quantity is the definition of value for money. Ergo, any game with "infinite" replayability due to constant user generated content (quantity) is the ultimate value for money and nothing else is ever needed.

I'm deadly serious, I'd rather have quality any day. If a game I love lasts 5 hours. It's still better value to me than a game (or 4) that I loathe purely because they take longer to finish. (this is not referring to MCC, the or 4 is purely to help you understand the similarity).

Again, the bit you either ignored or didn't understand, You can't quantify value. It's purely subjective.