black and shiny
I can see you like to dissect quotes and use only the parts that help your case. God knows why, it obviously won't work on anybody who can remember what they posted last, i.e. anyone who ISN'T suffering from Alzheimer's. Either that, or you just didn't bother reading past where I said 'what Doomuk said,' and went on to elaborate myself. Short attention span, maybe.
Clerly? Oh, sorry, i didn't see that in:
Just like i wouldn't see it in
What Doomuk said.
I usually don't have to do this, but I'm going to re-iterate what I said, AND demonstrate it visually, since maybe you really don't understand.
Here's the part you left out(or didn't bother reading):
Note the italicized part, it was referring to these two quotes:
if you bothered to take the time to see the common subject thread between the two posts.
I guess it's just enough money for one day's worth of food to survive on, maybe two or three if you stretch it.
I hope it's clear enough for you now. You see what you can do when you stretch your attention span to the point where you can finish reading 2-3 sentence blocks of text?
Caffeine Freak said:
Really, what else can you buy for $5? A good sized sandwich, maybe.
And what do you do to progress through most levels? Shoot monsters, right? That's the core of the game. Racing(not simply driving through the wasteland between levels, competitive racing) is a side attraction, as is multiplayer.
What about shooting the monsters and racing and multiplayer?
What's your 'objective' argument? That $5 isn't justifiable for all this? You do realize that really isn't 'objective' either, right?
and shooting monsters and racing and multiplayer. Not a single objective argument.
It's all subjective when it comes to prices, so no, I'm not going to come up with an objective truth proving this to be worthwhile DLC. It's all relative to what the customer values, and the way prices on similar items are generally set up(hence my explanation above about the cost of triple-A games.) By the same token, you can't come up with an objective argument proving that it isn't worthwhile. Don't use an argument that your own side can't support, it makes you look ridiculous.
Really, do I have to explain this too? Wow. No, restaurants don't charge for time spent there, my point was that, once your lunch is gone, your enjoyment of eating it is gone as well. Once you finish playing through some DLC, your enjoyment of playing through it is gone as well. The difference is, one of them takes maybe 15 minutes, and the other (the DLC in this case) takes maybe a few hours. $5 for each. Same price, different amount of time spent on enjoyment.
This wasn't in his post and don't tell me it was implied. And seriously, time? What, restaurants charge for time you spent there?
Anyway, I never said it was in his(Doomuk's) post, but thanks for answering my rhetorical question(it obviously didn't occur to you).