Comment Re:Put some content in your damn game (Score 1) 126
That's a dumb argument. I asked you why you would spend $50 for shit like Angry Birds, as the context of the initial comment was:
Put more than 2 hours of content in your game. Your game sucks. Sell your game for $2 and lobby Skype to not refund games costing less than $2 or something.
I suggested a low price for low-content games, and you come back talking about
So, because you prefer an epic gaming experience, all other gaming forms should be ignored?
Would you pay $50 for shit like Angry Birds?
Angry Birds *is* 1/10 the price of what I said. Would you pay $50 for it?
No?
Then maybe these fly-by-night, valueless, contentless game providers should sell their games for $5 and not $50, instead of expecting us to pay $50 for shit like Angry Birds.
Your entire line of argument has been stupidity, up to and including ignoring a propositional question ("Would you pay $50 for shit like Angry Birds?") and instead treating it as a declaration ("Angry Birds is like $50, why would you pay that much for something with so little content?").
I never said any of those things, aside from the last one, you're thinking of Immerman.
Immerman never mentioned "$50" nor "Angry Birds" so I'm not sure where you go them from anyway.
It could be games that are less than $50 and larger than Angry Birds (but not the large epics you originally cite) would be affected by this.
Just because something isn't $2 doesn't automaticaly make it $50, nor does something not being one of the games you cite make it Angry Birds.