2013 VGX Awards (Formerly known as the VGAs)

It definitely wasn't better than Fire Emblem though.

Broken Age was the only game that impressed me.

Oh, and game prices are absolutely unreasonable. If I actually bought all the games that piqued my interest, I'd probably spend about five grand annually.

I didn't hate NNK, it was just very forgettable. I realize most people like it, that's why I said I was in the minority.

I am liking Fire Emblem quite a bit though, only thing I don't like is the weapon system where everything breaks and the RNG for stat gain.

Sean_sl said:

Impossible, I probably bought WAY more games than anyone this year + a Vita + a PS4 + a 3DS XL and probably spent around $2600 and that's including all of the CE/LE's I bought.

Game prices are fine. Stop blowing money on eating out and drinking and going to dinner and all that crap. There's a game there every night that you do one of those things.

Click to expand...

My god you are nerdy

Grumpus_sl said:

My god you are nerdy

Click to expand...

Well, he said it in a silly fashion - but realistically even on a drastically fixed budget (His is about $700 a month from his quotes - in line with the SSDI minimums of $730 for 2013 [$738 next year I think?]) if you prioritize gaming it's trivial to afford.

Hell, I was paying almost half that for my bowling league out of my own allowance as a kid because I loved bowling back then because that $25/wk adds up over the year. (Note: We're talking 25 years ago and I adjusted for inflation as a result, it was $15/wk back then)

And in Sean's case he buys almost everything he has interest in Day 1 - I probably spend about half that and have a similarly long list as him because of PS+ titles and having a shorter "Day 1" list than him getting many titles 2-3 months down the line once they get their first price drops.

Gaming is absolutely affordable if you prioritize it and are smart enough to budget it appropriate to the level of priority you want to give it. Unless you're literally in a position that's completely financially untenable. If you CAN'T afford $2500/yr in gaming IF YOU WANTED TO PRIORITIZE IT ($200/mo roughly) I'd reevaluate your income versus expenses because there's something wrong if you can't spend that little on something you enjoy each month.

It's easy to bleed yourself on stupid spending - saw something during a show that said 60% of grocery items purchased in the US actually get wasted for example - I know I'm nowhere near that we're close to 5-10% waste (mostly breads) here - if we did waste that much it would be like $150/mo thrown away each month and would inflate our food budget from $300/mo for the wife and I (although we almost always come a smidge over we're suckers for good steak (ribeyes being the fave during non-ulcer times) being a 2-3 times a week thing) up to $450/mo.

But anyhow, to end the tangent - if you don't think you can and YOU WANT TO - work on a budget and stick to it, I'm sure it's possible barring bizarre circumstances that you should fix if so.

man. all i could think was "...that was the year's RPG's?" man was it really that shitty of a year in RPG's that final fantasy 14 made the list? it's not even an rpg. it's a damn morepig.

Along with Wasteland 2 and Project Eternity. Too bad Torment got pushed to 2015, would have been one hell of a year.

Vorph_sl said:

Along with Wasteland 2 and Project Eternity. Too bad Torment got pushed to 2015, would have been one hell of a year.

Click to expand...

Whaaaaaat? 2015?!? You just ruined my day Vorph.

Sean_sl said:

Impossible, I probably bought WAY more games than anyone this year + a Vita + a PS4 + a 3DS XL and probably spent around $2600 and that's including all of the CE/LE's I bought.

Game prices are fine. Stop blowing money on eating out and drinking and going to dinner and all that crap. There's a game there every night that you do one of those things.

Click to expand...

Grats on spending money on heaps of garbage.

Entertainment or any other "consumable" expenses are by default a waste of money. Your choice of flavor is all that matters.

Vaclav_sl said:

Entertainment or any other "consumable" expenses are by default a waste of money. Your choice of flavor is all that matters.

Click to expand...

Actually, no: there is accounting for taste. It's like comparing a Picasso to an etch-a-sketch by a retarded monkey with parkinson's disease.

There's nothing wrong with playing video games just like there isn't anything wrong with going to the movies. And the issue isn't whether or not you can fit video games into your budget. It's whether or not video game prices are exorbitant and I think most people would agree that they are. 20, 30 bucks seems like a reasonable price for a new PS 4 or PC game.

Depends entirely on the game - I only try to buy games I know I'll get 50+ hours out of at full price myself ($1/hr or less) for the reasons you talk about supertouch.

I try not to even touch games where I'd be spending $10/hr to play something for 6 hrs and then shelf it. Even then at that ridiculous figure, that's close to what most people spend at the movies. (Two tickets, usually a guest with them of some sort - 2 hr film + some snacks - add a dinner to it and get another hour for $40+ most likely further reducing the "efficiency per dollar")

Dumar: So you don't think there's any value in interactive versions of entertainment? I have to assume you're just trolling now because interactive versions of things do absolutely have value, often greater and more engaging value than just appreciating something as it is. Art is wonderful (god knows I have enough of it - plus make some of my own in my stained glass projects) but as something to actually occupy your time a Picasso is good for only a few minutes a day of direct appreciation and the general good vibe of being in a well tended to aesthetically pleasing place - very few people can just zone out and waste their entire day sitting in a room staring at their Picasso without mental illness of some form at play.