By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Wyrdness on 20 July 2018
Edit Thread
DonFerrari said:
Wyrdness said:

No dude Octopath was made using UE4 the same engine as many other AAA games which hilariously shoots down your analogy all together because it's using the same materials essentially.

As for content too bad for you that the majority who have played through it flat out say the 50+ hours are as good as any other good game which again contradicts your argument. PS1 games aren't newly developed which again is another strawman argument.

To me it seems like you're reaching to justify your own stance, I have logical reasoning as well as concrete facts that back my stance you on the other hand have nothing in your argument and seem irritated by people liking the game, if you also want to go the personal route just say because like other so called keyboard commandos before you who have tried I'll leave you as a wreck in the corner rolling around like your name is Neymar.

Using UE4 doesn't make it go to same standard or materials... unless using hammer is all you need for your house to be built with quality.

Majority that bought it didn't though it was too expensive, so that doesn't help your argument at all. Since I didn't say everyone thinks the content is bad or the game is overpriced, did I?

I have no problem with people liking the game or thinking it's price is justified. Don't forget you are the one with pitchfork complaining about people not seeing the same value as you. Have no idea what Neymar have to do with it.

You put content justifies the price, a game being developed for PS1 doesn't make its content any less than if being developed today (still a lot of remasters were revamped and made to a standard above what Octopath reaches and still doesn't retail for 60 usd).

Customer should find reasons to request lower price instead of finding justification to defend devs that charges them.

Your analogy goes on about materials in this case that would be what was used to make the game UE4 which is the same as many AAA games of the same price basically your analogy backfired hard here and the reason why? You never had a viable stance to argue to start off with.

Yes you do have a problem you know how I know and what makes it obvious I didn't come out with any pitchfork like stance to begin with I responded to someone trying to equate budget to what a game's value is which is far from what you're trying to suggest was said, when you bsing and fabricating arguments to try and argue that flat out shows its you who has the issue.

Is English not your first language because if it isn't I highlighted what determines a games value which is the quality of the content, music, story etc... as well as the amount of content you just picked one word in a whole post and decided argue the one word with your strawman arguments, remasters and old ports are not newly developed titles they're titles for an old era and are already available on prior platforms for cheaper this is an example of your strawman arguments. If you admit the content is good why are you even arguing here either English is not your first language and you didn't grasp what was posted or you're looking to reach for an argument.

Customers pay for what they perceive to have value worth the amount they pay for hence they buy what they want as opposed to asking for discounts at every turn.