全 3 件のコメント

[–]Fiennes 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't honestly feel like /r/GamesWatchdog is the sub for this kind of observation. If either of the games had false advertising or what-not, then yeah - but because one is shit and the other isn't, doesn't mean there's false advertising anywhere?

Sorry - it may be me - just trying to figure out where you're going with this statement from a Watch Dog perspective.

[–]Rebelrbl 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Not really sure how this is something for the sub? I mean pricing is subjective. It does seem silly, but that's a purely publisher decision.

Ghosts was a good game, if they want to keep it full price that's fine, in fact it's likely so people will go "oh, guess I'll just buy the new one since its the same price!"

Plus you are only looking at online marketplaces, look anywhere the games are used, ghosts is much cheaper than $60

[–]TicklishRocket 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If this is how you analyze every game, you're only setting yourself up for disappointment. Just because a game doesn't score as high as the Witcher 3 did, doesn't make it a bad game nor does it make it not worth it.

Look at it this way

You just had some neapolitan ice cream from your local ice cream shack. The next day you walk into that ice cream shack and wonder why 3 scoops of vanilla cost the same as 3 scoops of neapolitan ice cream when you get vanilla, chocolate and strawberry flavors in neapolitan. Turns out, there are people out there that just want vanilla ice cream, and don't mind paying the same price as the guy who likes neapolitan.