Got it! You're right, it's quite good. I should get a Xbox controller for this one. Just heard it got a VR version, but that seem to be Quest only, not PC VR.


That sounds kind of interesting, actually, albeit a bit punishing. Has been attracted to this one due to its wacky visuals. But how did it enter this conversation?

Unless you do plan to play the games later and they are super cheap at the moment when usually way higher priced .. I ain't full on disagreeing her but ya buying games super cheap one wants and plans to play later is usually not a waste unless never getting to it.. After all when one can get a game thats usually say for example 29.99 usd and get it for say 6.99 abd they wanted the game but not willing to pay anywhere near full price for while wanting it not wanting a game that bad or not interested enough to pay anywhere near the full price despite busy and/or has other games they wanna play before getting to that game.. it makes sense to snag that one cheap

You might spend all your money on games, have no money left for food and starve to death.

If you can afford it, it's not unhealthy. Impractical and wasteful, perhaps. But few of us humans are driven exclusively by practicality, and none of them play games, I imagine. And if you can't stand incompletion, well, 0,5 euro is not that high a price. I liked Fallout Tactics a lot back in its time, even though developers were clearly forced to rush it out way too fast and cut every planned feature other than combat (and publisher wanted it turn based and real time, which tightened already short timeframe even more). If you like post-apocalypse and can stomach tactics, it's well worth at least one playthrough.

I buy games for completion sake. I probably own a few hundred I've never played and have little intention to play.

Hm, not sure. You can spend $1 on game you're never going to play, or a lot more on a game that turns up to be a complete and utter disappointment, and it's too late to get a refund. For the latter, you've wasted your time as well. And time, unlike money, isn't replenishable.

Provided you have the funds, I don't see anything morally wrong with it (a la Would You Eat Your Cat). Sure, I might not agree (most of the games I own under the guise of "I'll get to that later"), but really, it's your money. On the other hand, I'd be a bit worried if it was encouraging bad spending habits or negatively impacting your financial literacy (which probably isn't the case, but still a possibility).

Some tangent: if "cheap" is the price you're willing to pay for satisfaction or the avoidance of dissatisfaction, the go for it. I don't see much difference between that and buying those cheap bubble figures you can get dispensed from some game stores--you do the exact same thing: look at it.

So you don't spend time for money (=a job)? Good for you!

Fair point, I overlooked that (I do spend time for money, but was blinded by idealism).

That's not true, the part about wasting time with a game you're not enjoying still applies, because it's relating to your free-time.
Most people spend the same time at their workplace whether they're spending the money earned or they're saving it on their bank account. You're not "saving time" by not spending money, you gonna work those hours regardless.

if it is cheap and you want it yes that could be a good buy , but most of these sales will repeat within months , even if you wont get the same huge discount you will surely get something close
but this only good if you actually will play the game , not just put it into the list play this later , how many games did you buy you havent played them more than a hour ?

Hundreds. Most of which I didn't buy digitally, but the actual physical game. I enjoy going through my collection and, from time to time, pick one out and play for a while. If I combine everything I paid for my collection, I'm still thousands of $ away from the amount of money people are willing to spend to fly to a beach at the other end of the world and slab themselves into the sun for a week.
I don't understand how anyone can enjoy that, but I don't have to. In return, people don't need to understand how I can spend time with old PC-games that I don't need to play all the way through to get enjoyment out of.

Probably healthier than buying the most expensive game for the sake of it.

But seriously this is something I fall prey to, if the game is the type of thing that typically interests me. This means that soundtracks never make the cut, even at 90% off.

But there are limits to my cheap == grab mentality.

I purchased Crystal Caves HD in the new year sale. I will not be purchasing the original, for the sake of having every Apogee game on GOG. This I view as particularly pointless since offline installer of the original Crystal Caves is provided as a bonus featur.

I honestly don't know why they bothered coding up a special discount for owners of the HD version to buy the original.

"Unhealthy" is trying to eliminate all psychological quirks. We all have a regnancy splayed across whatever axes of psychosocial phenomena you wish to measure. Some are dangerous. A few are antisocial. Most are completely harmless.

If the habit starts to control your life then you should start to be concerned —— such as skimping on food to save for more games —— otherwise indulge it, lest you create more stress trying to repress an otherwise harmless pressure valve. If you are concerned the best strategy is to sublimate the habit into something positive. (You could try philately, because the collection should appreciate over time and be a valuable commodity to someone else, but isn't that the same as a game collection? The only conceivable difference is that your Gog collection value assumes the legal transference of ownership is never in jeopardy, thus you may potentially sell off the collection at a later date to recoup some of the investment. But that assumption is the only fundamental difference between the established market in postage stamps and your digital library.)