Your analogy is off. What I'm semi-saying is, if you're gonna gouge me I'll take my business elsewhere.
Actually, I think it was right on the money (pun intended). But you're perfectly right in that if you don't want the Cadillac, you are very free to bypass all GM products. There are always used Yugos for sale.
"Lose" is the opposite of "win." "Loose" is the opposite of "tight."
Why is he a troll? He just gave his opinion, and because you guys don't agree, he's a troll! For what it's worth, $90 is alot for a game, no matter how you guys rationalize it. For cryin out loud, let people give their opinions!
Yea I agree, one mans opinion, isn't trolling, it appears if we speak out against any Grigsby title, the person is a troll. Sadly GG is not god and there is room for improvement in all his games, and we all have the right to make comment on any of Matrix games on this forum and the moderators respect all opinions for and against. On another very well known forum, from a company that mass produces games by the dray load,if make what they consider adverse comment, see how long it lasts, and see if the poster is banned or not. The reason life is so good at this forum is the developers associated with matrix actually listen to all negative and positive posts and adjust accordingly. A good example of forum power is the adjustments to pricing of the WItPE product when it was first announced.
Ron
I remember when wargames first came out. Strategic Simulations was the first and only publisher for the first few years starting in 1980 or 81. Games were on 5 1/4 floppies, had horrible graphics and not much to them. Ram and storage space was minimal so what did you expect? Anyhow, they cost $60 in 1980 dollars. How much would that be today? I won't be buying WitE because it's not my kind of game but after paying $60 for several games (you're welcome Joel), $90 is a real bargain imo.
In the early '80s SSI games were generally $40 & $60 list price. Mail order I consistently bought them for $27 & $40 respectively. A couple were higher. War In Russia (1984) was $80 list but I bought it for $60. All told I purchased at least 35 SSI games for the Apple & Atari. However, SSI had one thing that you don't see much nowadays - every game was backed with a "satisfaction guarantee" or your money back.
Why is he a troll? He just gave his opinion, and because you guys don't agree, he's a troll! For what it's worth, $90 is alot for a game, no matter how you guys rationalize it. For cryin out loud, let people give their opinions!
It's true. $90 is a lot for a game and there is no way I would ever spend that much on one. But why the temper tantrum that he is throwing? Matrix has a ton of affordable games.
2010 I bought Distant Worlds and Storm over the Pacific. If I go to a resturant and the most expensive plate is beyond my finances I get a cheaper one.
There is no reason to throw a hissy fit because 2 or 3 games out of the ENTIRE library is over $60. He came out mean after people started not agreeing with him. That;s more than him giving his opinion.
After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!
It seems the time for control of the PC gaming industry has come. All modern nations should add a Cabinet level Director of PC Gaming. This clearly needs to be done to assure fair pricing so all gamers can enjoy games with equal opportunity.
Of course, the new position would be meaningless without an appropriately sized administration. As few nations could afford such a new heavy burden at this time, a special one time tax on all PC game publishers could be applied as soon as possible. To gain the funds necessary, this tax should be made retroactive for 5 years. Again, this would be done only once-any more than that would not be fair.
The new government department would be charged with insuring proper pricing based on game content. Each game would have be be tested to determine which price group it could be allowed to join. Further, it would need to be established that a particular game was actually worth much more that the average game. In these special cases games would have a special grognard levy. This added fee, which should not exceed 50% of the games agreed price will be necessary to fund expansion of the department of PC Gaming to better insure accurate pricing of all new and re-released games.
It should be a goal of the new department to attain a surplus in revenues within 5 years to enable the purchase of the most expensive games for anyone who may want it, but does not feel they should have to pay for it-as it is too expensive-this is only fair.
It does not seem fair that PC game publishers should be forced to fund this entire new service. Game developers should also pay their fair share. Perhaps some sort of value added tax should be applied as each game changes from alpha, to beta and thence to finished product. After all, the investment is really quite minimal, while vastly increasing the value of the proposed product. Of course, the publisher should also be charged with the value added tax as son as the new game receives its publishers logo.
With this approach all gamers will be happy. [;)] I know I will.
Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.
Why is he a troll? He just gave his opinion, and because you guys don't agree, he's a troll! For what it's worth, $90 is alot for a game, no matter how you guys rationalize it. For cryin out loud, let people give their opinions!
Troll does seem a bit harsh. $90 is a lot for a game. I'm still on the fence over WitE because of the price. However, if I were more sure of whether I will like the game or not, I would buy. Heck I think I jumped on WitP for close to $80 and never had a regret over it. It sounds like WitE may not be quite the game the OP is looking for. If you are that unsure, I'd wait for a while and maybe the price will come down if it goes on sale.