Before CAG: Spent $60 on 3-5 games per year. No backlog. Probably saved more money. Enjoyed the games I have more.
After CAG: Spent on average $10-$20 per game. Big backlog. Definitely spent more money than before CAG. Feels like I'm rushing through each game I play to get to the next one. I rarely even play multiplayer in games now due to the backlog.

Summary: The cheap in Cheap Ass Gamer is a lie.

The good thing is that even though you may not enjoy some games as much, I do feel like I get a wider variety of games to play now and more game time than I would have in the past with only buying 3 to 5 full priced games versus buying about 20 games a year that are $5 to $40.

Originally Posted by htz Summary: The cheap in Cheap Ass Gamer is a lie.

Hee hee! Very true.

At the same time, some of us actually enjoy this. When I talk about how big my backlog is, I'm not whining. I'm bragging. I like having more games than I can effectively play through.

Even I will have to stop hitting the sales quite so hard though. There are limits, especially when it comes to my shelf space.

Originally Posted by TimboSliceGB um alot of gamers lol. Some games for me are a must on release date.

Any game with multiplayer that I want to play online you pretty much have to buy in the first month or two otherwise you totally miss out on the online play.

Originally Posted by Richard Kain Hee hee! Very true. At the same time, some of us actually enjoy this. When I talk about how big my backlog is, I'm not whining. I'm bragging. I like having more games than I can effectively play through. Even I will have to stop hitting the sales quite so hard though. There are limits, especially when it comes to my shelf space.

I feel this way until I look back on my shelf and see 20 Xbox games sealed, 15 PS2 games sealed, and 10 gamecube games sealed! :(

Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

Originally Posted by Richard Kain Hee hee! Very true. At the same time, some of us actually enjoy this. When I talk about how big my backlog is, I'm not whining. I'm bragging. I like having more games than I can effectively play through.

you really should brag about something else. you arent impressing anyone

Originally Posted by Richard Kain Hee hee! Very true. At the same time, some of us actually enjoy this. When I talk about how big my backlog is, I'm not whining. I'm bragging. I like having more games than I can effectively play through. Even I will have to stop hitting the sales quite so hard though. There are limits, especially when it comes to my shelf space.

Shouldn't you brag about the games you've actually played though? If you haven't played them yet, they may as well still be in the store or on Gamefly...

Originally Posted by htz Before CAG: Spent $60 on 3-5 games per year. No backlog. Probably saved more money. Enjoyed the games I have more. After CAG: Spent on average $10-$20 per game. Big backlog. Definitely spent more money than before CAG. Feels like I'm rushing through each game I play to get to the next one. I rarely even play multiplayer in games now due to the backlog. Summary: The cheap in Cheap Ass Gamer is a lie.

Sounds like a problem with your attitude toward gaming.

Do we know for sure if our PSN IDs are even going to carry over to PS4?

Originally Posted by ShockandAww Do we know for sure if our PSN IDs are even going to carry over to PS4?

Considering PSN IDs are tied to Vita, and Vita is a big part of the PS4 it would be rather stupid to junk it and put in a new online service you have to sign up for.

Originally Posted by guardian_owl Considering PSN IDs are tied to Vita, and Vita is a big part of the PS4 it would be rather stupid to junk it and put in a new online service you have to sign up for.

Yep that's true. I'd assume they will but I was just worried since I hadn't specifically heard anything about it. I don't want to buy a year of PS+ in a couple of months only to find out I can't use it with PS4 or something crazy.

Originally Posted by ShockandAww Do we know for sure if our PSN IDs are even going to carry over to PS4?

They better...I could see some turd making as many accounts as possible of names of people he's played online, then trying to sell the accounts to people who originally used those names.

Originally Posted by ShockandAww Yep that's true. I'd assume they will but I was just worried since I hadn't specifically heard anything about it. I don't want to buy a year of PS+ in a couple of months only to find out I can't use it with PS4 or something crazy.

http://kotaku.com/5987406/a-small-de...g-implications

This implies it, but doesn't out right say so.

I don't really like the whole non-anonymous thing - I don't want people to know who I am in the real world.

However, all of my PS3 friends list are people I actually know and know who I am with or without my real name being displayed, and I rarely play online.

Originally Posted by waldo21212 http://kotaku.com/5987406/a-small-de...g-implications This implies it, but doesn't out right say so. I don't really like the whole non-anonymous thing - I don't want people to know who I am in the real world. However, all of my PS3 friends list are people I actually know and know who I am with or without my real name being displayed, and I rarely play online.

they better have a option to turn the real name junk off. I'm not sure if i add a random person on my friends list to know my personal info.

From what ive read, only people that some how actually know you will see your real name etc. So people that have you on facebook or twitter or something like that.

the strange thing is if stuff like fb and twitter and ustream is built into the system what happens if those services die during the life of the system then the share button is useless and what not. Sony could have very well done like xbox 360 has now with all the fb and twitter stuff which is just software and not a button for it.

I think its safe to say Facebook won't be dying anytime soon. Twitter likely the same.

Originally Posted by Deader2818 I think its safe to say Facebook won't be dying anytime soon. Twitter likely the same.

these systems will last for at least six or 7 years im sure by then something new and better will be here

Originally Posted by TimboSliceGB these systems will last for at least six or 7 years im sure by then something new and better will be here

You should look into how much Facebook and Twitter is actually worth.

Hint: They are both in the billions.

Even if Facebook/Twitter go down, they could always just patch their system to support some other social networking site. It's not like people are going to stop sharing videos and pictures any time soon.