{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
12/30/2014 6:36:05 PM
17
Get a job, worthless leech. You shouldn't be playing video games if you can't support your hobby. Stop being lazy and start contributing to society.
English
-
I know right? I don't understand how people get this mindset they should get everything for free. Feeling content should have been included with the disc is an opinion and not one the company shares, you are not owed or entitled to it. It's as simple as that.
-
I would say that contributing to society is inclusive of much more than working. You know, things like not being a disrespectful prick to your fellow human beings.
-
False. Bleeding hearts and the coddling of the lazy are much more detrimental than calling out societal parasites. The world isn't all puppy dogs and hugs, some lessons are painful to learn, but pain causes self-reflection which in turn leads to development of the self.
-
It appears to me that it causes loathing and bitterness. You are a miserable person, aren't you ? It's all good though. I offered to buy it for the guy, but someone else already beat me to it. His post showed a great deal of civility and introspective.
-
Apparently someone hasn't lived on the butt end of society, where no matter how hard you work or how involved you are there is no gain, only stagnation and debt.
-
Edited by Betwixt138: 12/30/2014 7:04:21 PMI understand socio-economic limitations hinder many people from advancing in society. I guarantee those people are not pissing time away playing this game, considering it requires a gaming system, a $60 game and a steady internet connection, which are considered luxuries to those living in poverty.
-
Edited by Baron VonNapalm: 12/30/2014 6:56:38 PMPerhaps you simply lack perspective. Would you rather he spent the money he DOES have on a DLC that he can't afford? At least he is responsible enough to recognize that he shouldn't get the DLC without a job.
-
Yet he's still playing video games and posting on forums.... If $20 breaks the bank, you shouldn't be wasting your day playing video games. Period.
-
It's pathetic to think that just because someone isn't well off that they are then not entitled to seek enjoyment in their lives. Humans need activities and entertainment to keep themselves mentally healthy and happy. In regards to how much is spent on such activities, gaming is one of the cheapest you can take part in, a single lump sum for a system and $60 that can last some gamers thousands of hours. With society developing the way it has, Internet access is almost a necessity, where so many job searches and applications take place electronically now. Also if you want to stay informed and connected in this world you take to the Internet, tv, or other broadcast media. Gaming just happens to be the one form of entertainment that falls right in the middle of it all. If there is any sense of entitlement in this debate I would say it is yours and your belief that you are solely allowed to entertain yourself in various ways and this individual is not, simply because of your socio-economic status.
-
Everyone is entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. No doubt. But that doesn't mean that you don't have to live within your means. If gaming is too expensive for you, then too bad. Suck it up. Socio-economic status has everything to do with the types of activities any one person can enjoy. For instance, I've never traveled out of the US, I've always wanted to, but my parents could never afford to take such lavish vacations. I guess I should complain to the airline and resort industries for not being more accessible to low income families...
-
Edited by ClockworkSoldier: 12/30/2014 8:54:41 PMI definitely agree that people must still live within their means, and that limits what many are able to do. But I know quite a few people who have only had luck finding minimum wage jobs and saved the little extra they had to get themselves an Xbox one or ps4. It goes back to my point that they already have a tv and internet which have become a necessity, and overall a gaming system is cheap entertainment when you already have those. And not that this is necessarily part of this debate, just an interesting topic. To your comment on international travel, you and me find ourselves in the same boat. The only traveling I've done outside the country (besides a few couple hour drives to Canada) has been with the military. I've never had money to travel, but I wish I did, especially as a semi professional photographer.. Considering the rampant globalization in the last two decades, I'd say there is actually a good debate for finding ways to lower the cost of international travel and making borders easier to traverse for lower income individuals.
-
I agree that in terms of cost games are an ideal form of entertainment, but really I can't fathom the argument that $20 is too much. If they can't afford to buy the DLC that sucks, but these DLCs were planned and priced before the game even dropped, there were no surprises. Any content that was accessible previously is still accessible, just weekly update content favors DLC purchasers, as it should, they're the ones that payed to keep the service going. People that did not buy the DLC are not contributing to the cost of running the service, but they still get to reap most of the benefits. On the vacationing side of things I too wish it was more affordable, it's unfortunate, hopefully when I'm done paying off my student loans I can take a nice one :)
-
I'm actually in complete agreement in regards to how they've catered the DLC and the current price point. That $20 can easily give many players hundreds of hours of additional play, whereas $20 can be gone in 2 shots at the bar. My disagreement was mostly in the more aggressive stance you took against people who questioned how the DLC was marketed and priced. Your original argument seemingly lumps all low income individuals into one category without regard to whatever their unique situations may be.
-
My original argument has an example that includes pointing out that my family was of low income. You brought up socio-economic stating as an argument, essentially stating that even if you can't afford video games you should be able to play them. I argued the corollary that yes you can play video games, but if you cannot afford them then I guess you're shit out of luck when it comes to buying them. This has nothing to do with lumping in all low income individuals and everything to do with living within your means, which was what my original argument was all about. My example was about my low income family, but even rich people have to live within their means.
-
Oh, that was actually in regards to Betwixts comments, not yours, haha. Your profile images had me confused for a minute there. It was his first comment, which lumped all low income individuals together, that I was responding to and spawned this whole debate. May I say that I also hate the way that Bungie's forums organize their responses to comments. You and I are in complete agreement.
-
Judge not on appearance, but judge with good judgement. -John 7:24
-
-blam!- off dude
