![]() Originally posted by Tyrant (My Vision is Augmented):Value is always subjective, but when it comes to video games, I'm always really confused when people say something is worth less because it is old. and I'm willing to bet for most) new Fatal Frame game appeared for $50 with the guarantee that it looked and felt like the titles I loved 15 years ago, I was pretty excited. ![]() Tl dr: I'd happily pay $60-$70 for a new Fatal Frame game - especially if it played like the old-school titles. To be perfectly honest, that makes me more inclined to see it as valuable - not less. The game isn't less fun just because the core of it is 15 years old. We finally got the Fatal Frame holy grail - the one that was remarkably difficult to play for the majority of the world, and we got it on PC, with a graphics update. Have you seen what original copies of Silent Hill 1-3 are going for on Ebay today? You know if Rule of Rose or Eternal Darkness or any of the other "Horror Hard To Gets" got a PC release (HD upgrade or not) people would be throwing money at the screen. If Clock Tower 1-3 got an HD update and a release on PC, I'd be spending the same kind of cash on any of them. If Dino Crisis got a quick HD coat of paint and was available on PC for digital download with modern controls, I wouldn't hesitate to spend $60 USD on that bad boy. Especially when so many gamers today bemoan the practices and features of newer titles. ![]() Value is always subjective, but when it comes to video games, I'm always really confused when people say something is worth less because it is old.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |