View Single Post

Default 

April 26th, 2009, 10:48
bkrueger and others, there's one thing that's consistently puzzling me. It's what I call "single-issue gamers."

"I'll never buy a game if it has timed dialog [no voiceovers/doesn't display the full text of the dialog]."
"I'll never buy a game if it has first-person [third-person/isometric] perspective."
"I'll never buy a game with real-time [turn-based/real-time with pause] combat."
"I'll never buy a game if it's a console port."
"I'll never buy a game if it's from Bethesda [BioWare/Atari/EvilCorporateEntity]."
"I'll never buy a game if it doesn't have decent graphics [decent writing/decent AI]."
"I'll never buy a game if the DRM requires me to connect to the internet [have the DVD in the drive/has limited activations (that I can free up somehow)/kills kittens in its spare time]."

I mean, there are a very few of these that legitimately make sense (to me), such as "I'll never buy a game if it doesn't run halfway decently on the iron I have, which I can't afford to upgrade right now," of "I'll never buy a game if its DRM installs malware on my machine" or "I'll never buy a football game, because I don't f-ing LIKE football."

But, from where I'm at, the above list is more like minuses or annoyances or questions of taste; I can't see how a reasonable person could consider them to be actual dealbreakers — things that so much impact your enjoyment of a game (or your politics) that they're what I'd call "legitimate" reasons to boycott it.

Anyone care to enlighten me?
Prime Junta is offline

Prime Junta

RPGCodex' Little BRO

#16

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,540