d21lewis said:
Johnw1104 said:
For me, as long as it's clear a good amount of manpower and a lot of passion went into a game and I'm able to have lots of fun with it for 40+ hours, then it's easily worth $60. Really, we gamers have it easier now than ever in regards to price even when considering the introduction of DLC.... Never have we gotten more bang for our inflated bucks.
I think specifically of Splatoon and dying light, both of which I played recently. I really enjoyed both and was fine with the $60 price, but while Dying Light seemed like the resources to justify that price were certainly invested into development more so than Splatoon, I find there's more fun to be had in Splatoon in the long run than dying light which has little to nothing to do once you've completed it.
I think we sometimes focus too much on our subjective concept of what's required to constitute a "AAA" title and not enough on simply how much fun there is to be had in the game. That's really all that matters, after all. |
What a crazy confidence! A friend of mine gave me Dying Light, yesterday (same guy gave me CoD Advanced Warfare). I didn't even want it. Never even planned on playing it. Guess I should give it a try.
|
I thought it was pretty fun, though it can get repetitive as most games do. The main problem is once you get the best weapons you'll find you're essentially invincible and there's nothing really to do, but you should have enough fun before that.
