SegaXtreme

Home	Forums	What's new	Resources

is gamestop ripping me off?

Berty - Oct 16, 2004

Next>

		Berty		Oct 16, 2004
			G'day, Some of you may know that gamestop is taking orders for a limited edition version of resident evil 4. Myself being the capitalist pig that i am decided that i may just get myself a copy. Now here is where the problem lies, gamestop are charging $59.95 for the game,... reasonable? yes. But when i went to confirm my order i found that i was being charged $31 for postage to my home in Australia. Fair enough that they are sending it via express post, but that rate is bullshit. It would be cheaper for me to order it and have it sent to a friend in the us and then have them send it to me via express post even though i would have to pay for two lots of shipping. Do any gamestop employees feel like grabbing me a copy and sending it to me?

		ExCyber		Oct 16, 2004
			Flat-rate envelopes are cheap, parcels are expensive. If it's the size of a regular game it should probably fit in a Priority Mail envelope, but if it's larger it would have to be shipped in a parcel.

		Curtis		Oct 16, 2004
			$31 sounds reasonable if you're expecting it in under a week. Economy airmail is much more reasonable, if you're prepared to wait 2-ish weeks for a parcel from the US. It sounds like that's about the price you'd pay for EMS delivery here in Aus.

		Cloud121		Oct 16, 2004
			Wait... There's a RE4 Collector's Edition? Hm... RE4 RE4 Artbook RE4 Laser Cell RE and RE2 Movie Soundtracks RE4 Red Tin Case Hm... Personally, I wish it was Pre-order only ala Halo 2.

		lordofduct		Oct 16, 2004
			Come on, its just Resident Evil... SO WHAT! Your getting ripped off just paying the 60 bones for it.

Cloud121

Oct 16, 2004

	
	
		
		
			Originally posted by lordofduct@Oct 16, 2004 @ 06:29 PM



Come on, its just Resident Evil... SO WHAT! Your getting ripped off just paying the 60 bones for it.



[post=121159]Quoted post[/post]

Come on, it's just Game of The Year 2005. Not too mention the best GameCube game ever, starring one of the coolest characters ever, also part of one of the best game series ever.

Hell, RE4 gets my vote for best game of this generation.

But then there's Shenmue...

Okay, make that RE4 second best game of this generation.

		lordofduct		Oct 16, 2004
			OK, best game of the year 2005... That is total bullshit (not that its not true in some magazine) its total bullshit because HOW THE F*** can you call a game the best of the year when the year hasn't even STARTED. next: the games not OUT... you have NOTHING to judge this on except movie clips of programmers, debuggers, and CRITICS (the most awful people in the world) who played it. These are people PAID to hype a game like this. DRRRRRRRRRR. Now being the best on GC i could maybe see, i have not been to pleased with the selection yet... some greats, but the good ones are also on other consoles with the exception of say pikmin. But still you can't make this judgement because the game has NOT been released. The thing is; I can make my judgement of the SERIES based on the fact I have NEVER been pleased by any of the games yet to date which causes me to not give two flying pig dogs about its release.

Alexvrb

Oct 16, 2004

	
	
		
		
			Originally posted by lordofduct@Oct 16, 2004 @ 09:56 PM



Now being the best on GC i could maybe see

That's what popped into my head too when he wrote that, but you posted it, not me.

		Cloud121		Oct 16, 2004
			It was originally Game of The Year 2004, but since it got delayed to Janaury, it's now Game of The Year 2005. Trust me.

		lordofduct		Oct 17, 2004
			I said i bet it was MADE game of the year... I'm just saying thats stupid of them to do... the year isn't here yet and the games not released, its not fare to give it this title before anyone can compare it to anything else. THATS WHY ITS BULLSHIT.

		Cloud121		Oct 17, 2004
			Yeah well, my saying that show just how hyped I am for this game. I NEED this game!

		Berty		Oct 17, 2004
			Well i have played it; the demo that is... Although I'm not going to speculate as to whether this game IS game of the year for 2005, you can bet that it will be up there with the best.

		IronMongeR		Oct 17, 2004
			It does look awesome... ^_^

		CrazyGoon		Oct 17, 2004
			Meh. My opinions regarding this un-RE-like title are over at NX....

Cloud121

Oct 17, 2004

	
	
		
		
			There will be a choice of three views, a distant over-shoulder third-person view, a closer over-shoulder third-person view and, amazingly, a first-person view - quite astonishing news.



Strike 1

Give me a fucking break. OH NO! THEY CHANGED THE CAMERA VIEW!. What the hell's the problem?!

	
	
		
		
			Another significant change in the basic structure of the game comes with the news that the entire game will be powered by the game engine in real-time. There will be no FMV and, thankfully, the tedious door animations, something of a trademark for the series, have been scrapped.



Strike 2

The hell is so bad about that? That's a GOOD thing, as it should save some disc space. Besides, the graphics are so damn good, that you don't need any fucking FMV.

	
	
		
		
			In slightly more vague news, the levels are said to be more expansive and less on rails, which, again, is a dramatic shift in focus for Capcom. There will be more of an element of exploration in the game, similar to that seen in titles such as Silent Hill, indicating not only an evolution for the series, but a dramatic up-scaling of production values.



Strike 3 - RE is out.

So let me get this straight. You'd rather have Mikami and Capcom pull an Activision and fucking do the same thing over and over and over ala THPS? Or how about EA and all their games?

It's people who think this game "isn't RE" that makes me wanna kill someone.

I'm fucking sick and tired of listening to people bitch and moan over the game changes.

		schi0249		Oct 17, 2004
			See, I think there is a natural evolution to video games. And RE is handling that very well. Is it the same RE people started playing, hell no. But does that mean it sucks?? Hell no. I'll reserve my final jusgement for a finished copy. IU remember people thinking Metroid Prime was going to suck. It was changing the style of the series. I was one of them. However, after giving it a try, I found I enjoyed it. I'm sure the same will apply for RE IV.

		lordofduct		Oct 17, 2004
			This was my call that schi is saying... YOU CAN"T JUDGE YET. It should not be the greatest game of 2005. Now the changes in the game sound like its for the good, YES, but its nothing new. This is ALL crap people have done before in games... RE continually rips off every other game like it and takes the prize for being the originators. PLEASE!

		CrazyGoon		Oct 17, 2004
			Heh, my post had more of an effect on you this time round, eh cloud? Oh and just to avoid confusion, check out this... post aswell - It says that I would have liked the game to have it's own series (because of the dramatic changes), rather than kill the old one (if it does well). The main point I'm trying to get across, isn't "RE4 sucks because of all the changes". It's more "RE4 isn't RE, and Capcom are just slapping the RE title on it". Like I said in that post I just linked to, the problem with doing this is that it can kill the old formula if it is successful - which means no more old RE (the gameplay of the originals which made the series popular in the first place). And it's also bad if it's not successful, because then Capcom may trash the series altogether. Like I said before, what should have been done, was give RE4 it's own new series which can be marketed along side the old series. This is better for a couple of reasons: 1). It allows Capcom to monitor the sales of both series simultaneously, getting a more accurate idea of what the audience likes more (based on the sales of the two series - which are in direct competition). 2.) More people are happy - two series' to choose from (as opposed to one), more games made for the old series (who doesn't want more games ). I really good example of what I'm saying is the different Beatmania series'. The first series (the original) has five keys, rather slow gameplay (compared to IIDX) - you can speed it up, but it's not as smooth/ friendly to the speed, like IIDX is. It has the blue/ black (top) keys appear as notes which lay on the bars, and the white notes which lay between the bars. It has the scratch on the right hand side (only). The second series - IIDX - makes many changes to the gameplay, which results in a different 'feeling' game, compared to the original. Changes such as 7 keys (instead of 5), fast gameplay, blue/ black (top) keys appear in their own column, just like the white keys, resulting in more columns on screen (IIDX has 8, whereas the original has 4). The 1P scratch is on the left hand side, and the 2P scratch is on the right hand side. And finally, the songs themselves are of a different 'style'/ 'flavor' (when compared to the songs of the original) - made by many different artists which didn't do songs for the original series. Now, I'm a fan of both series' - I've come to enjoy what both different series' have to offer, and I am appreciative that Konami kept the old series alive for so long. If Konami had ditched the original when they began making IIDX, then we may have only seen 3 or 4 Beatmania (5key) games, instead of 13!! Many of the really good (fun) Beatmania (5key) games were made during the IIDX lifespan (which is still going strong, mind you) would never have seen the light of day. Now, another example is Abe's Oddysee This series was supposed to be a quintology (5 games in the series), the first two were amazing... the 3rd (Munches Oddysee) probably broke the series (which could have been avoided if the game got it's own series..). Now with all that I have said, wouldn't you agree that dramatic changes in a game series' gameplay should result in that game getting it's own series?

Berty

Oct 17, 2004

	
	
		
		
			Originally posted by CrazyGoon@Oct 17, 2004 @ 10:57 PM







Now with all that I have said, wouldn't you agree that dramatic changes in a game series' gameplay should result in that game getting it's own series?  



[post=121243]Quoted post[/post]

Then should have mario had a new series name when it changed the series into 3d?

I think that capcom is wise to keep the re title for this game. We all know that when you see the "survivor" tag after any resident evil game to stay the hell away.

I have played bohazard 4 and it does still very much feel like any other resident evil game. Anyway this topic is getting a little too far detached from what i initially started it off as.

CrazyGoon

Oct 18, 2004

	
	
		
		
			Originally posted by Berty@Oct 17, 2004 @ 11:46 PM



Then should have mario had a new series name when it changed the series into 3d?



[post=121250]Quoted post[/post]

Super Mario 64 doesn't have any sequels (as of yet) - and it's not a sequel to any other Mario games. There is the "Super Mario Bros." series, and the "Super Mario World" series. There is a Mario Party series, and I think a Paper Mario series. And if "Mario & Luigi: The Superstar Saga" is officially the sequel to Mario RPG, then there is another series. Out of all these series', the only games which the gameplay is dramatically different compared to the rest of thier series', is "Super Mario Bros 2 (USA version)", and "Super Mario World 2") - those two games don't really fit in with the others of their series', and should have had their own series. Btw, there is a good story behind the reason why the gameplay in SMB2 (usa) was so obscure, compared to the others - read here...

Oh yeah - "Super Mario Land" series, shouldn't be a series, since all the games gameplay is dramatically different. As you can see, the third title of the "Super Mario Land" series, sparked the creation of the "Wario Land" series.. in which the gameplay of each "Wario Land" game is pretty much the same. Though bad game design was apparent in Wario Land 2 and 3, resulting in a drop of interest in the series - Wario Land 4, on the other hand was a magnificent game!!

So Nintendo did a couple of no-no's, but it could have been worse. Much worse.

Next>