Games you have bought on Day 1 or soon after?

Status
Not open for further replies.

BabyTyrant

Est. Contributor
Messages
2,852
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
Just wondering what games/game series you tend to buy on day 1 or soon after that, or even pre-order if you are into that (sometimes you get cool exclusive things you cant get without pre-ordering).

In the past there have been 2 games/series I have bought brand new, 1 of them was Mass Effect 3 (because the original trilogy was amazing and I got connected to the story and wanted to play it through to the finish ASAP), and the other was God Of War 3 (I'm a huge GoW fan and will buy the next one probably on day 1).

How about you guys?

I also typically diaper up when gaming because sometimes I get so into it I could play up past midnight and when you really get into a game, why would run to the bathroom a lot instead of being diapered up?

So much more convenient (until you need to change that is, but really good diapers last a long time)
 
I "might" pre-order a game every now and again, but that usually has to do with IF I'm in a good financial situation at the time than it does with whatever game I'm wanting. I consider it good forethought and planning ahead. Especially given I have no idea if I'll be able to afford a certain game when it's released. And if I don't, well then I just wait until I can afford it.
 
I have only pre-ordered twice, usually I wait for reviews on games I am unsure of because some games don't get reviewed until after they are actually released and some games seem like they will be great, but end up being a disappointment instead.

And if I really cant afford a game, it's not a big deal for me because I usually have a lot to keep me busy, including several different games.

Plus all the more reason to wait a few months and save a decent chunk of cash off the brand new price.

It's just that some games I can expect will be brilliant and I trust them to be good enough to be worth getting as soon as they are released, and I'm really looking forward to the next God Of War as IGN already reviewed it, Perfect 10/10.

Even Mass Effect Andromeda wasn't as bad as people act like it is.
 
Monster Hunter World, and Mass Effect Andromeda have been the only games I've bought day one.

Mess Effect Andromeda wasn't nearly as bad as it's made out to be, I actually really liked making all my weapons and armor. The story wasn't amazing but it was still enjoyable.

- - - Updated - - -

BabyTyrant said:
I have only pre-ordered twice, usually I wait for reviews on games I am unsure of because some games don't get reviewed until after they are actually released and some games seem like they will be great, but end up being a disappointment instead.

And if I really cant afford a game, it's not a big deal for me because I usually have a lot to keep me busy, including several different games.

Plus all the more reason to wait a few months and save a decent chunk of cash off the brand new price.

It's just that some games I can expect will be brilliant and I trust them to be good enough to be worth getting as soon as they are released, and I'm really looking forward to the next God Of War as IGN already reviewed it, Perfect 10/10.

Even Mass Effect Andromeda wasn't as bad as people act like it is.

lol IGN "Reviews" are a sham. They're paid to give certain scores.
 
I didn't know IGN was paid to give a certain score, I just thought they would get games in (some before release date), review it and give it a score and I've never been disappointed with games that they give good scores to.

And lots of games they review actually get average or worse reviews, you would think everybody would be bribing them if they were corrupt like that.
 
Games I plan on getting when they come out: Smash Bros. 5 on Switch, One Piece Pirate Warriors 3 on Switch, DK Country Tropical Freeze on Switch, and that's it for now.

Games I've gotten on release date: Pokemon (starting from ORAS), Smash Bros. 4 on 3DS, Fire Emblem Echoes, Mario Party The Top 100, Zelda Majora's Mask 3D, and Super Mario Oddesy.
 
I jumped on Bayonetta 2, Hyrule Warriors, Pokken Tournament, and Splatoon. All great calls.
 
BabyTyrant said:
I didn't know IGN was paid to give a certain score, I just thought they would get games in (some before release date), review it and give it a score and I've never been disappointed with games that they give good scores to.

And lots of games they review actually get average or worse reviews, you would think everybody would be bribing them if they were corrupt like that.

Oh yeah. They get paid all right. It's for faster or more favorable reviews, as well as front page coverage. Don't pay the kick backs, and the review will likely be more average and on page 10.
 
I always try to get the newest Pokemon games day 1, same with Zelda, those are two of my favourite video game franchises so I always want to get the latest entry as soon as I can.

It certainly helps that those games are released at opportune times as well. The Pokemon games always come out around Christmas here so I always have a couple of days off to really get into them. The last Zelda game was released in March I think and March/April is when University courses start to wind down a bit so I have more time on my hands.
 
Slomo said:
Oh yeah. They get paid all right. It's for faster or more favorable reviews, as well as front page coverage. Don't pay the kick backs, and the review will likely be more average and on page 10.

What I seemed to have found out is it's less of getting bribed to give the game a certain score, like "give it a 10/10 and we will pay you $10,000", and more like favorable treatment and negatives not being included in reviews.

So more or less the scores seem to stand as fair, but their treatment with certain games is a bit unfair, but it also seems to be pretty standard in the video game industry to favor companies that pay extra money and give them better treatment.

So I guess a site like Metacritic would be more fair and reliable, as it's based on average score of a ton of different reviewers?
 
I never pay attention to reviews, and I find I often enjoy games that receive low scores. After all, reviews are just opinions, even if collective like metacritic. But I also have weird tastes in games compared to the mainstream gamers.

I don't normally pre-order most games, but have been pretty faithful with getting a lot of NIS and Final Fantasy games day one or soon after. Same with the Tales series and Star Ocean. Others, I usually wait for pre-owned games, cause I've always been a thriftyhoof.
 
Well I haven't gone out for a midnight release of a game since the first Call of Duty:Black Ops I believe, that was a really good night.

(Sorry if not a game, game console though)But I went to the midnight release for my Day One edition XBox One.
Was pretty cool, lots of cops around to keep thefts from happening.
The police told everyone "Don't hang around and talk, please take your purchases, return to your vehicles and leave."
It was nice having them to keep an eye out, felt a little safer walking out with my Xbone.
 
BabyTyrant said:
What I seemed to have found out is it's less of getting bribed to give the game a certain score, like "give it a 10/10 and we will pay you $10,000", and more like favorable treatment and negatives not being included in reviews.

So more or less the scores seem to stand as fair, but their treatment with certain games is a bit unfair, but it also seems to be pretty standard in the video game industry to favor companies that pay extra money and give them better treatment.
It's not quite so explicit as "Here's $15 mil, give Title Q at least a 8.5." No, it's more things like "You rated Title H a 6.0. On an unrelated note, we've had to cancel your trip to see Title Z in pre-production and we're revoking your release to publish the data we previously provided. Oh, also, your reservation for the Title W pre-release party was canceled."

BabyTyrant said:
So I guess a site like Metacritic would be more fair and reliable, as it's based on average score of a ton of different reviewers?
Depends on the reliability of the underlying data: if most of the reviews are from publications that are being implicitly extorted for better scores, then no, it's not more reliable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top