It isn't expensive at all I bet you could easily get 30 hours of gameplay minimum from all the dlc thats a dollar an hour, quit being a cheap skate.Originally Posted by nuclearbroccoli Go to original post
Then don't buy it! Seriously! In this day and age complaining about the price of a game/expansion is bonkers. Of course it's about VALUE not about price. Am I going to get enough value about XXXX$? No? Then pass. That's how a real purchasing decision is made for small outlays.Originally Posted by nuclearbroccoli Go to original post
You're looking at it differently. I'm looking at the dlc price compared to the value that I would get if I bought a new game. If $80 worth of dlc doesn't give me at least a full games worth of content, then I consider it to expensive.Originally Posted by Nopvedz4you Go to original post
purchasing games or expansions is not just about the size of the updates...it's about the hours you play them.Originally Posted by nuclearbroccoli Go to original post
most of us put enough hours into underground alone to justify the $30 or $40 that we spent on the expansion. If you didn't, perhaps re-evaluate how you make those purchases.
But dlcs have never been like 50% of a game so I don't know why you would think like this. Plus I know I've bought alot of games where I'll play them for a week and then put them down, at least dlc has the core gameplay of a game you already enjoy, if you see what I mean. Another way of looking at it is with the 30 dollars you could go to the cinema for a couple of hours or you could buy the season pass and have months of fun. Season passes are no brainers for me if it's a game I really enjoy as having a variety of options is always a good thing.Originally Posted by nuclearbroccoli Go to original post
Or I could just spend $80 on a new game and get hundreds of hours of play out of it...Originally Posted by Nopvedz4you Go to original post
Or you could only play it for a few hours n hate it. Each to their own but I personally don't care for money spent on gaming as it's my main hobby and if I buy a dud game or season pass so be it, I waste my money on alot worse so no big deal.Originally Posted by nuclearbroccoli Go to original post
I've played it twice and hated it twice.
That said I applaud the art team, the map design team, the visuals team, environment team, the audio team but sadly the gameplay design team let it all go to waste. As it stands in it's current form I'll never play it again, such a wasted opportunity to help the main game flourish.
I actually quite enjoy Survival. I haven't played TD since finishing the Underground trophies several months ago. I came back to check out Survival and despite my disliking of the fact that the map is the same every time (survival games are about exploration and tension, not speed running!) I'm having fun. Though I admit it is wearing a bit thin and the game will go back on the shelf once I've finished the "Extract 100 items" trophy.
Yea, I noticed this too. Survival would be much more interesting with random map modes. Perhaps randomly placing the areas on the map somehow would work. Would need to change the "connecting areas" but it would mean more random location based maps.Originally Posted by googlebright Go to original post
But since it's mainly just "Loot here, loot there" without objectives I think it's probably more hassle then it's worth to do that. Xcom 2 does something quite similar but it focuses on every objective being in random-ish locations. Closest the Division gets to doing that is in Underground. And even then only barely.