| ▲ | bluefirebrand 4 hours ago | |
> Video games aren't standardized sizes or materials and you don't somehow download 20% less content today than you did downloading the same game 5 or 10 years ago 20 years ago you bought a disk and the entire game was on there. 10 years ago you bought a disk and you have a massive day 1 patch to get the rest of the game. Today you buy a physical box with no actual disk in it, only a download code! I'm exaggerating a little bit about today's situation but not by much... | ||
| ▲ | xingped 4 hours ago | parent [-] | |
That's not the same and that's what I'm trying to point out. A Mars bar is still a Mars bar. If you're paying more and/or getting less than you did X number of years ago, that is a simple apples to apples comparison. Since games are all, by nature, different, any comparison is apples to oranges. You can talk about specific features such as the existence of battle passes, microtransactions, loot boxes, etc., but every game's implementation is different. If I pay $10 for a game and play it for 400hrs and pay $40 for another game and only play it for 50hrs, is one necessarily worse or better than the other by that metric? For example, I've played Outer Wilds significantly less than many other games that I've enjoyed far less, but I would still rank Outer Wilds as one of my all-time top favorite games. However that's very subjective to my experience. Others would disagree. The point is, video games is a very bad point of comparison here and very obviously not the kind of product the OP is referring to. | ||