(28-02-2012 03:21 PM)pekinoua Wrote: [ -> ]Seriously, there is no need of complaining or feeling "robbed"...
Yeah, we've been feeling robbed since we started played Pokémon
Anyway, I've been thinking, since there must be made a remake of the Gen III games in this current generation and as NM2 said there's a ruby and a sapphire in the promo pic, maybe Gamefreak decided to change a bit the tradition and release the remakes now. I know that the titles do not match exactly but still, they may try something different and actually let us explore the secrets of these two new Pokémon/formes/whatever they're supposed to be while roaming Hoenn. Iguess it isn't very likely, but still, we can only guess atm.
(28-02-2012 11:57 AM)Kingnothing412 Wrote: [ -> ]1) NO , NO and again , NO. It's completely defferent if it's two games.every third game missed stuff the other 2 had right? and the other way round. so all 3 versions were equal in a way. However now that there are two versions the previous two won't have Anything better than the nower ones right? that's what i'm woried about.
I can't really understand your point. Do you not want B2/W2 to be better than B/W? Why? You've already bought B/W and chances are you'll buy the next game too, don't you want it to better in every way than the previous one? You shouldn't look for a reason to buy the old game over the newer one, you should look for a reason to buy the new one over the older one.
(28-02-2012 11:57 AM)Kingnothing412 Wrote: [ -> ]2) i personaly am not complaining. ...because it would be unfair to us...
Saying it will be unfair to the players is complaining to me. My point is that you never expected a sequel, the "fair" would be to get a third a version. But now that the possibility of a sequel exists (and is arguably far more exciting than a third version), the third version is considered unfair to the players. I just don't agree with it.
(28-02-2012 11:57 AM)Kingnothing412 Wrote: [ -> ]3) really? explain why. i really want a reason for that one.
A reason for why I won't feel robbed? Because I expected Grey and got Grey. If the games end up not being Grey, then I'll get something better than I expected and I'll be grateful, but if they really are Grey, I'm still getting what I originally expected.
(28-02-2012 11:57 AM)Kingnothing412 Wrote: [ -> ]4) That would be far better really. it would have a better balance. Which is the reason i don't think they're going to be like third versions.
And you lost me. Do you prefer an "upgraded" third version or a game with a whole new story, possibly connected to B/W?
(28-02-2012 03:53 PM)Ninjomewtwo Wrote: [ -> ] (28-02-2012 11:57 AM)Kingnothing412 Wrote: [ -> ]1) NO , NO and again , NO. It's completely defferent if it's two games.every third game missed stuff the other 2 had right? and the other way round. so all 3 versions were equal in a way. However now that there are two versions the previous two won't have Anything better than the nower ones right? that's what i'm woried about.
I can't really understand your point. Do you not want B2/W2 to be better than B/W? Why? You've already bought B/W and chances are you'll buy the next game too, don't you want it to better in every way than the previous one? You shouldn't look for a reason to buy the old game over the newer one, you should look for a reason to buy the new one over the older one.
(28-02-2012 11:57 AM)Kingnothing412 Wrote: [ -> ]2) i personaly am not complaining. ...because it would be unfair to us...
Saying it will be unfair to the players is complaining to me. My point is that you never expected a sequel, the "fair" would be to get a third a version. But now that the possibility of a sequel exists (and is arguably far more exciting than a third version), the third version is considered unfair to the players. I just don't agree with it.
(28-02-2012 11:57 AM)Kingnothing412 Wrote: [ -> ]3) really? explain why. i really want a reason for that one.
A reason for why I won't feel robbed? Because I expected Grey and got Grey. If the games end up not being Grey, then I'll get something better than I expected and I'll be grateful, but if they really are Grey, I'm still getting what I originally expected.
(28-02-2012 11:57 AM)Kingnothing412 Wrote: [ -> ]4) That would be far better really. it would have a better balance. Which is the reason i don't think they're going to be like third versions.
And you lost me. Do you prefer an "upgraded" third version or a game with a whole new story, possibly connected to B/W?
why am i even bothering......anyway i'll try to explain again.
1) no because look. you have pkmn ruby , saphire and emerald right? in ruby you catch zangoose and solrock. in saphire you catch seviper and lunatone but can't catch zangoose and solrock. and the other way round , in ruby you can't catch seviper and loonatone. In emerald you can catch seviper and solrock but not zangoose and loonatone. to make it a bit more special , the creators threw in a little animation for every pkmn when viewing the summary and in the start of every battle. So emerald is better than the previous two right? but it still lacks some things that only the other 2 versions have right? So if someone bought ruby they won't really have any reason to be unhappy right? Now , what if they didn't release emerald and they released ruby and saphire 2 instead. You would be able to cach both solrock and zangoose in in ruby and lunatone + seviper in saphire right? so there would be no change at all , they would have the same advantages as the other 2 versions. now if the creators add the animation effect to r/s2 or generally new features , won't that be unfair for everyone that bought r/s1 ? Well ofc that will change if there is a difference in price but if both r/s and r/s2 cost 50 eyros for instance won't that be unfair for everyone that bought r/s1 since it is identical to r/s2 with the difference that it has less features? That's what i'm woried about , i hope they didn't do that but then again why on earth would they do that? there's no piont really. There would be if it was for the 3ds but now there is no point at all in that. wich is the reason i don't think this will be like a third version.
2) so basically saying "oh that wouldn't be very fair imo" is complaining now? And it's not the way ypu said , it wouldn't be fair. if there was no posibility of a sequel , prequel or r/s remake with distortions to the stroryline i would say from the start that i thought it was unfair.because there are 2 versions. it's going to spoil the balance , as i explained in (1)
3) but that's the whole point if it was like gray you didn't get gray , you just wasted your money on the other version you have. if you don't have b/w then you are really lucky. you get what i mean right? it's all got to do with it beeing 2 games instead of 1
4) ofc i would preffer the sequel/prequel/r/s remake with distortions far mor than gray but i would preffer 1 gray a milion times more than 2 upgraded b/w versions.
Now , don't get me wrong i think i understand what you're talking about , you mean like gray A and gray B right? like gray version 1 and gray version 2. But this does not say gray it says black and white 2. sounds far to much like a sequel to me but anyway. if they are gray(a) and gray(b) that is a name failiure. but whatever , it's still awesome.
1) Wait what. How are you so sure that because they are sequels, they would have every advantage of the BW and even more? I can finally unterstand what you believe but it's wrong! As Arty2 said it could be a total new experience! We can't even be sure if they will take place in Unova or not! Everything we talk about in this thread is hypothetical and theories. It's the first time we see a move like this by GameFreak. What if they are something like GS to RB; GS, at first, was called Pokemon2. But you see they are very different. I would say to wait because we don't know how they are. I think it's impossible to take every advantage of BW and add even more in B2W2. Because for someone, an advantage of BW could be the story and seeing black and White Kyurem as mascots I am sure that they will have a different story.
2) I think that you don't see "complain" as I see it. I've explained it to you how I know it.
3)Umm... A third version always happens. If you want to buy a Pokemon game and a third version has been released, I don't find why you should buy the old games. When you bought BW, you knew that a new better game would be released. It would be better in almost everything. If B2W2 are a grey in two versions(that as I explained, it doesn't mean that they have everythng BW have and even more...) this doesn't change anything.
PS: Don't ever buy a PS3/XBOX 360. Many games there have DLC(which sometimes is really expensive) and after some time (about 1-2 years)they release the game with the DLC in the same price as the original non-DLC game and sometimes cheaper
Either way, it's not honest to say that you (not directed to someone in particular) got ripped off because Gamefreak, or any other publisher, released a game that you've already enjoyed.
Compare this situation to a different product or service, say, you order a steak or hamburger and gladly enjoy it saying it was the best mean you've had in a while, or at least, decent. Would you feel ripped off if the same restaurant offered a new plate that tasted better than the one you ordered?
If you're concerned about your money being wasted, then just consider the amount of time that a particular video game (or just any product) kept you enjoyed. Pokemon games need an average of 20 hours in order to complete the main story, that's 2,5€ per hour, which I believe is an excellent ratio for the amount of entertainment provided. Most gamers' playtime exceeds these 20 hours by far, therefore the price to value ratio becomes even sweeter.
Game creators, like every other good restaurant don't only have to cater for their daily customers, they have to create updated or new experiences for first coming customers as well.
(28-02-2012 05:21 PM)pekinoua Wrote: [ -> ]1) Wait what. How are you so sure that because they are sequels, they would have every advantage of the BW and even more? I can finally unterstand what you believe but it's wrong! As Arty2 said it could be a total new experience! We can't even be sure if they will take place in Unova or not! Everything we talk about in this thread is hypothetical and theories. It's the first time we see a move like this by GameFreak. What if they are something like GS to RB; GS, at first, was called Pokemon2. But you see they are very different. I would say to wait because we don't know how they are. I think it's impossible to take every advantage of BW and add even more in B2W2. Because for someone, an advantage of BW could be the story and seeing black and White Kyurem as mascots I am sure that they will have a different story.
2) I think that you don't see "complain" as I see it. I've explained it to you how I know it.
3)Umm... A third version always happens. If you want to buy a Pokemon game and a third version has been released, I don't find why you should buy the old games. When you bought BW, you knew that a new better game would be released. It would be better in almost everything. If B2W2 are a grey in two versions(that as I explained, it doesn't mean that they have everythng BW have and even more...) this doesn't change anything.
PS: Don't ever buy a PS3/XBOX 360. Many games there have DLC(which sometimes is really expensive) and after some time (about 1-2 years)they release the game with the DLC in the same price as the original non-DLC game and sometimes cheaper
it seems you understood
nothing of what i said. prease read my post again. then delete this comment or just leave it as a facts comment and reply to me properly. you are talking about completely different things and implying i said things i never did with this post.
1. Using your example, let's say we got Ruby and Sapphire 2 instead of Emerald. They do come with the same exclusives as the original R/S did but they also come with new features as you said, the expanded Safari Zone, the Battle Frontier, the bigger story concerning Magma/Aqua and all those things that Emerald brought. You still able to get the original Ruby and then Sapphire 2, that way you get all the exclusives and all of the new features, something that even Emerald can't give you.
About the prices now, you're not comparing them correctly. Let's take Black for example, it's price was €46 when it was launched, when the game was new and the demand for it was high. As demand for a game (or any product) decreases, the price goes down as well. You can easily find brand new and unused copies of Black nowadays for less than €30, that is because most people have already bought Black and the quantity demanded isn't as high as it was during its launch. Now, once Black 2 is released, demand for it will be sky-high so the price will obviously be around €50 again. So you shouldn't compare Black's launch price to Black 2's launch price, but instead Black's price in Autumn 2012 to Black 2's price in Autumn 2012. And at that point, you'll be looking at something like Black: €25, Black 2: €50.
You may argue that since games like Emerald and Platinum are just rehashes of R/S and D/P, Nintendo should be offering them at a lower price. While I would like that as a consumer, I completely understand them offering the games at full-price. From their standpoint, it's a good move, they are promoting them as new games and people are willing to pay. You can keep replaying Diamond if you want, no one is forcing you to by Platinum, but if you want those extra features, you'll buy a new game and play it from the beginning. And to be honest, I prefer paying full-price and replaying the story than having a, say, €10 DLC patch that adds 5 formes and a Battle Frontier to my already existing game, but that's just me.
2. Already answered you-know-where, I can't find a better verb than "complain".
3. Refer to the second paragraph above. You didn't waste your money. You bought B/W when you wanted it and, if you want, you'll buy B2/W2 when you want it. If you are willing to wait, you can buy B2/W2 3 years later for €20, it's up to you to decide.
4. I can understand that. The only real negative I can think about two "Grey's" is that those Kyurem formes won't be available to both but we've learned to deal with exclusives by now.
And once again, I wasn't blaming anyone for complaining, I was just asking why.
(28-02-2012 05:32 PM)Arty2 Wrote: [ -> ]Either way, it's not honest to say that you (not directed to someone in particular) got ripped off because Gamefreak, or any other publisher, released a game that you've already enjoyed.
Compare this situation to a different product or service, say, you order a steak or hamburger and gladly enjoy it saying it was the best mean you've had in a while, or at least, decent. Would you feel ripped off if the same restaurant offered a new plate that tasted better than the one you ordered?
If you're concerned about your money being wasted, then just consider the amount of time that a particular video game (or just any product) kept you enjoyed. Pokemon games need an average of 20 hours in order to complete the main story, that's 2,5€ per hour, which I believe is an excellent ratio for the amount of entertainment provided. Most gamers' playtime exceeds these 20 hours by far, therefore the price to value ratio becomes even sweeter.
Game creators, like every other good restaurant don't only have to cater for their daily customers, they have to create updated or new experiences for first coming customers as well.
quite right , i agree there. you do have a point but i do not really see things the same way when it comes to the food example. You see , in this situation (or the one i fear) a better example would be this one: You go to a restaurant and order a souvlaki that costs 10 eyros. On your plae you get a souvlaki and some potato chips. now once you've finished the restaurant anounces that from now on it will be giving a double amount of chips + rice with every dish of suvlaki for 10 eyros. won't you feel it's a bit unfair? (still is a bad example because that is a cheap consumable and what we are talking about here is a 50 eyro cartridge that we'll probably keep forever) but anyway you get my point. that's all i'm saying. For me personally the game does not stop when the story stops. there's alway stuff to do on a pkmn game every day.so it's not like it will be a very small difference......
but as i've said milions of times before , it's a sequel. it can't be what i said earlier. i would suspect it if it was for the 3ds. but now i'm pretty sure it's a sequel why are we even talking about this so much........?
(28-02-2012 05:32 PM)Arty2 Wrote: [ -> ]If you're concerned about your money being wasted, then just consider the amount of time that a particular video game (or just any product) kept you enjoyed. Pokemon games need an average of 20 hours in order to complete the main story, that's 2,5€ per hour, which I believe is an excellent ratio for the amount of entertainment provided. Most gamers' playtime exceeds these 20 hours by far, therefore the price to value ratio becomes even sweeter.
Game creators, like every other good restaurant don't only have to cater for their daily customers, they have to create updated or new experiences for first coming customers as well.
Exactly, and this is why I really appreciate the value of good multiplayer games. Games like DotA, TF2 or LoL (even if I dislike the last one), offer literally countless hours of gaming, are competitive and pretty balanced and they are always even better when playing with friends. The best part? They're free.
Now, about Nintendo and their products, it's not that I feel that they aren't worth of their prize, this is why I bought many Pokémon games so far even if I started playing just one year ago. What bothers me is that the company itself aims for their own profit a bit too much. Ok, of course they are after profit, Nintendo is nothing more than a company after all, but still, there are many other gaming corporations that seem to consider money less important. At least this is how I see it.
Coming to think of it, I can't complain now since they didn't announce that the games will only be for 3DS, so we will see the actual value of the games once they are released.
@nm2 i'm sorry , i'm too tiered , i'll read your reply later.
(28-02-2012 06:15 PM)Kingnothing412 Wrote: [ -> ]You go to a restaurant and order a souvlaki that costs 10 eyros. On your plae you get a souvlaki and some potato chips. now once you've finished the restaurant anounces that from now on it will be giving a double amount of chips + rice with every dish of suvlaki for 10 eyros. won't you feel it's a bit unfair?
Not quite, even in this case, I knew what I was paying for beforehand and since I paid for it, I thought it was a good deal. This deal, a purchase, is without exception, an event that happens in a specific portion of space and time. Both the location and timing matter.
In the case of Pokemon B/W, it's been over a year, why should I feel a purchase I made a year ago is unfair since I've been enjoying it for all that long? Even if I bought it last week, would it make less of a 20-100 hour game?
I'm afraid this is a classic example of consumerism, no matter if one's needs are fulfilled or whether they feel happy about their purchase, they just
have to have the latest installment of a given product.
Of course you don't have to feel like you're defending yourself. I like how this thread evolved into such a nice conversation, antilogies included. Such a discussion is public because it concerns an audience greater than the ones that participate in it.
KN412, I think that you haven't understood nothing from the beginning. You based what you disagree about on what you believe. You have sticked to your opinion and you just can't change it. Most of our arguements(especially most of NM2's) are rational and correct. You ignore them and you try to explain yourself with hypothetical exemples.
Giratina88 Wrote: "You know, I'm pretty sure that most of the changes they will make are gonna be cosmetic changes, like maybe a different gym leader but using the same type or different pokemon you can find. That's generally what happens with these kinds of games. However, given that pokemon has never done a double sequel like this in the same generation, it is possible that some great changes will be made in terms of gameplay and plot events."
Kingnothing412 Wrote: "if they are like a third game t will really be unfair for us really. it's like , what we already have but better. I mean theres no point having the previous ones if that's the case right? no point at all since the 2nd version has all the original versions features + new ones"
This is how all began. G88 says about minor and cosmetic changes, but he isn't sure if they would surely be like this because it's the first time we see sequels. This is true. You said, that if they are like a third game they would be unfair for us, because they will have all the advantages and even more. Then there won't be a reason to have the originals.
KN412@NM2: "NO , NO and again , NO. It's completely defferent if it's two games.every third game missed stuff the other 2 had right? and the other way round. so all 3 versions were equal in a way. However now that there are two versions the previous two won't have Anything better than the nower ones right? that's what i'm woried about. "
You say that two third versions are different of only one third version. And there comes my first objection. You ask that now that there are two versions, the previous two won't have anything better. That's just an hypothesis and you based many thing on it. Can we be sure that they would be upgraded versions of BW? No. They could be like a third game but with the only difference that this third game has two versions.
Now, let me use one of your exemples.
Ruby: Zangoose, Solrock
Saphire: Seviper, Lunatone
And then:
Ruby 2: Zangoose , Lunatone
Saphire 2: Seviper, Solrock
This means if you have Ruby and then you get Ruby 2 you will still need someone to obtain Seviper. So, it still lacks some Pokemon. They're going to have some extra features like the animation you mentioned. However they would still lack some things. They won't be perfect and they won't replace the originals. They will continue them. That's probably what 2 means. I think that it was probably a more "unfair" situation when we had 1 third version even thought it was equal. And no, they don't have the same price. Don't see what happens in Greece. In some English eShops White is for 25 pounds. It was released for about 40 pounds I think. When B2W2 will be up for pre order they would probably even cheaper and they will cost about 15-20 pounds. If you disagree with something I said, state it. Don't tell me to read your posts. My answers are based on what I read. And what I read had plenty of contradictions. I'd like an answer to what I said with justification.
PS: Just in case, everything I say isn't in an offensive manner. It's for discussion's sake. And sorry for possible grammar mistakes.
(28-02-2012 06:01 PM)Ninjomewtwo Wrote: [ -> ]1. Using your example, let's say we got Ruby and Sapphire 2 instead of Emerald. They do come with the same exclusives as the original R/S did but they also come with new features as you said, the expanded Safari Zone, the Battle Frontier, the bigger story concerning Magma/Aqua and all those things that Emerald brought. You still able to get the original Ruby and then Sapphire 2, that way you get all the exclusives and all of the new features, something that even Emerald can't give you.
About the prices now, you're not comparing them correctly. Let's take Black for example, it's price was €46 when it was launched, when the game was new and the demand for it was high. As demand for a game (or any product) decreases, the price goes down as well. You can easily find brand new and unused copies of Black nowadays for less than €30, that is because most people have already bought Black and the quantity demanded isn't as high as it was during its launch. Now, once Black 2 is released, demand for it will be sky-high so the price will obviously be around €50 again. So you shouldn't compare Black's launch price to Black 2's launch price, but instead Black's price in Autumn 2012 to Black 2's price in Autumn 2012. And at that point, you'll be looking at something like Black: €25, Black 2: €50.
You may argue that since games like Emerald and Platinum are just rehashes of R/S and D/P, Nintendo should be offering them at a lower price. While I would like that as a consumer, I completely understand them offering the games at full-price. From their standpoint, it's a good move, they are promoting them as new games and people are willing to pay. You can keep replaying Diamond if you want, no one is forcing you to by Platinum, but if you want those extra features, you'll buy a new game and play it from the beginning. And to be honest, I prefer paying full-price and replaying the story than having a, say, €10 DLC patch that adds 5 formes and a Battle Frontier to my already existing game, but that's just me.
2. Already answered you-know-where, I can't find a better verb than "complain".
3. Refer to the second paragraph above. You didn't waste your money. You bought B/W when you wanted it and, if you want, you'll buy B2/W2 when you want it. If you are willing to wait, you can buy B2/W2 3 years later for €20, it's up to you to decide.
4. I can understand that. The only real negative I can think about two "Grey's" is that those Kyurem formes won't be available to both but we've learned to deal with exclusives by now.
And once again, I wasn't blaming anyone for complaining, I was just asking why.
i see. this whole thing makes sence if we know that you think we hate third versions. it's not that , i'm speaking about absoloutely no change at all to the games apart from eg. a battle frontier. about the price i hope it's that way. Anyway this won't be what we are talking about anyway........Anyway i can't say i agree with everything you said but you are right. same things are just opinions anyway.
(28-02-2012 08:11 PM)Kingnothing412 Wrote: [ -> ]i see. this whole thing makes sence if we know that you think we hate third versions. it's not that , i'm speaking about absoloutely no change at all to the games apart from eg. a battle frontier. about the price i hope it's that way. Anyway this won't be what we are talking about anyway........Anyway i can't say i agree with everything you said but you are right. same things are just opinions anyway.
loool That's something that even I would complain about. In your posts you've given us the impression tha you were talking about a third version. I think "Problem solved". This would be very bad from GameFreak. It's almost impossible to happen, don't worry.
(28-02-2012 06:34 PM)Arty2 Wrote: [ -> ] (28-02-2012 06:15 PM)Kingnothing412 Wrote: [ -> ]You go to a restaurant and order a souvlaki that costs 10 eyros. On your plae you get a souvlaki and some potato chips. now once you've finished the restaurant anounces that from now on it will be giving a double amount of chips + rice with every dish of suvlaki for 10 eyros. won't you feel it's a bit unfair?
Not quite, even in this case, I knew what I was paying for beforehand and since I paid for it, I thought it was a good deal. This deal, a purchase, is without exception, an event that happens in a specific portion of space and time. Both the location and timing matter.
In the case of Pokemon B/W, it's been over a year, why should I feel a purchase I made a year ago is unfair since I've been enjoying it for all that long? Even if I bought it last week, would it make less of a 20-100 hour game?
I'm afraid this is a classic example of consumerism, no matter if one's needs are fulfilled or whether they feel happy about their purchase, they just have to have the latest installment of a given product.
Of course you don't have to feel like you're defending yourself. I like how this thread evolved into such a nice conversation, antilogies included. Such a discussion is public because it concerns an audience greater than the ones that participate in it.
well yes you have a point there as well. now i don't really have anything to counter this with (i don't really disagree with anything) so i'll just say that if they are going to do that it would be nice if they provided a patch of some sort for everyone with b/w for the price of however much b/w2 cost more.
(28-02-2012 08:19 PM)pekinoua Wrote: [ -> ] (28-02-2012 08:11 PM)Kingnothing412 Wrote: [ -> ]i see. this whole thing makes sence if we know that you think we hate third versions. it's not that , i'm speaking about absoloutely no change at all to the games apart from eg. a battle frontier. about the price i hope it's that way. Anyway this won't be what we are talking about anyway........Anyway i can't say i agree with everything you said but you are right. same things are just opinions anyway.
loool That's something that even I would complain about. In your posts you've given us the impression tha you were talking about a third version. I think "Problem solved". This would be very bad from GameFreak. It's almost impossible to happen, don't worry.
lol i should say what i'm saying in a clearer way next time......
sorry to cause all this. i seems everyone understood wrong
sorry about that again. Anyway , in your previous post you said some things i just can't leave like that so.......yeah.
(28-02-2012 07:49 PM)pekinoua Wrote: [ -> ]1) KN412, I think that you haven't understood nothing from the beginning.
KN412@NM2: "NO , NO and again , NO. It's completely defferent if it's two games.every third game missed stuff the other 2 had right? and the other way round. so all 3 versions were equal in a way. However now that there are two versions the previous two won't have Anything better than the nower ones right? that's what i'm woried about. "
2) You say that two third versions are different of only one third version. And there comes my first objection. You ask that now that there are two versions, the previous two won't have anything better. That's just an hypothesis and you based many thing on it. Can we be sure that they would be upgraded versions of BW? No. They could be like a third game but with the only difference that this third game has two versions.
3) Now, let me use one of your exemples.
Ruby: Zangoose, Solrock
Saphire: Seviper, Lunatone
And then:
Ruby 2: Zangoose , Lunatone
Saphire 2: Seviper, Solrock
This means if you have Ruby and then you get Ruby 2 you will still need someone to obtain Seviper. So, it still lacks some Pokemon. They're going to have some extra features like the animation you mentioned. However they would still lack some things. They won't be perfect and they won't replace the originals. They will continue them. That's probably what 2 means. I think that it was probably a more "unfair" situation when we had 1 third version even thought it was equal. And no, they don't have the same price. Don't see what happens in Greece. In some English eShops White is for 25 pounds. It was released for about 40 pounds I think. When B2W2 will be up for pre order they would probably even cheaper and they will cost about 15-20 pounds. If you disagree with something I said, state it. Don't tell me to read your posts.
4) My answers are based on what I read. And what I read had plenty of contradictions. I'd like an answer to what I said with justification.
1) (yeah..........no comment needed
)
2) you are talking about them beeing gray a&b versions i mentioned earlier. it's exactly the same idea.
3) but that is if it's a sequel.
4)
