MikeRox said:
spemanig said:
MikeRox said:
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.
|
I didn't ignore or misunderstand anything. That's wrong. Value absolutely is be quantifiable.
I never dismissed quality outright, but person preference is not quality. Halo 1-4 are games made with quality. TLOU is a game made with quality. How much quality isn't subjective. How much time, effort, and money spent for each game isn't even equal. For the MCC, you have the T, E, and $ spent on the 4 original games, then the T, E, and $ spent on the remaster of Halo 1, then the T, E, and $ spent on the Re-remaster of Halo 1, the remake of halo 2, and the remasters of halo 3+4. TLOU just has the original game and it's light remaster.
You absolutely can quantify value. You paying $60 for a five hour "masterpeice" doesn't suddenly make the game worth $60. It just means you were willing to pay for something with shit value. It's like when people try to defend that MGS $30 demo. It's not worth $30 just because you liked the game.
|
This shows that you only value cost of production and duration as opposed to enjoyment of finished product.
a 10 hour movie with $1bn budget, is not automatically better value to anyone than any other film ever with the same ticket price at a cinema. The film they enjoyed the most is the best value. That applies equally to games.
I couldn't give a flying f*ck how many hours and dollars went into a game. I care how much enjoyment I get out of it. You clearly have misplaced priorities in your gaming if you view it that way.
|
So you could care less about Konami charging $40 for MGS Ground Zero as long as you enjoy the game? To you it has the same value as a game like skyrim that has 100+ hours of content and no doubt cost a lot more money to make?
I mean I'm just saying, I don't care how good a game is, if its only a couple hours long, I expect it to be $20 or less simply because it has less content than other games.
The same thing can apply to HD remasters, if there is not a lot of effort involved in making the remaster, I expect to pay less for it than for a remaster of a game that took a lot more effort to port over and has a lot more content.
Your cinama example also is not very good as every movie offers around the same amount (time wise) of entertainment, in this case though, the MCC clearly offers a ton more content than TLOU remastered.
