Hunter Grant Connor character worthwhile?

ZennGlenn

Usually 130donuts & lower are certainly decent deal on character w/bldg... just curious on opinions if seems worthwhile w/ activities & so forth?

Castiel19x

A building and a character for that price is not bad at all and he's voiced but its a gunshot sound when you click on him. He helps with the mini event, he gives 8 pelts per 3 hours.

happyfellowjon17

I'd like to know too. I'm about to dump a bunch of my early Xmas money into the game

Brooklynight

I think he's worthwhile, but then again I also have a ton of donuts to burn, so picking him up wasn't a big deal.

parkna1234

His benefits to the game work out well, for personal moral disgust at hunting I wouldn't buy him myself, but his game benefits (at least for this event) are good.

ZennGlenn

Thx... agreed on 'hunting / animal morals', but has solid satire & uniqueness so may go for it after reading decent opinions over on Addicts as well

parkna1234

The satire in the main event storyline so far is quite funny

stinkbugger

Brooklynight wrote: »

I think he's worthwhile, but then again I also have a ton of donuts to burn, so picking him up wasn't a big deal.

I like how you qualify your recommendation.

I kinda wish someone's amount of donuts could be automatically listed next to a person's name etc. when they post here. A "buy it!" recommendation from someone with 200 donuts can carry a different weight than the same words from a person with 3000 donuts.

stevedilge752

I had to get just because he's a hunter .

1ahackamacka

I have 2300 donuts and I'm passing. It would take a lot for me to buy a season 15 character

1pillform

I'm against hunting. So I really hate this event. In fact I skipped the entire thing. I already got the park. And I do like the RV and the Tent which goes great in the wooded area I got. But I won't ever get that hunting supply crap....and I never seen or heard of that character anyway. I rather spend double that amount of donuts just getting white fences.

stevedilge752

For everyone that is so adamantly against hunters for your sake I hope you're all vegans.

evant13579

stevedilge752 wrote: »

For everyone that is so adamantly against hunters for your sake I hope you're all vegans.

i didnt see anybody complaining about hunting aliens and zombies!

btw i wouldnt buy him just for the event, as there is no difficulty completing this event and no advantage once the event is finished early (i.e. no bonut rounds)...get him if you want him

heyababy47428

I wasn't going to buy him, but when people started saying he was "morally objectionable" he became a MUST HAVE!

Snakeyees

parkna1234 wrote: »

His benefits to the game work out well, for personal moral disgust at hunting I wouldn't buy him myself, but his game benefits (at least for this event) are good.

heyababy47428 wrote: »

I wasn't going to buy him, but when people started saying he was "morally objectionable" he became a MUST HAVE!

What do you think people ate and did for food a hundred years ago I mean it's a video game and you're not going to buy something because you don't like hunting, hunting is one of the ways we keep the animal populations in check. The other would be survival of the fittest.

168sean168

It is not entirely all bad about this character. During his questlines, there is some good written for him. I am against hunting and fishing for fun and entertainment and for trophies. I cannot imagine why would anyone want an animal head for decoration.

heyababy47428

Snakeyees wrote: »

parkna1234 wrote: »

His benefits to the game work out well, for personal moral disgust at hunting I wouldn't buy him myself, but his game benefits (at least for this event) are good.

heyababy47428 wrote: »

I wasn't going to buy him, but when people started saying he was "morally objectionable" he became a MUST HAVE!

What do you think people ate and did for food a hundred years ago I mean it's a video game and you're not going to buy something because you don't like hunting, hunting is one of the ways we keep the animal populations in check. The other would be survival of the fittest.

A hundred years ago people ate mostly rocks and fruit smoothies. The rocks were hunted to near extinction and you can still see teeth marks on some of them. Fruit smoothies became overpopulated and had to be culled by famous American hunter Julius Orange.

stinkbugger

Snakeyees wrote: »

What do you think people ate and did for food a hundred years ago I mean it's a video game

Most of the meat consumed in the U.S. 100 years ago was from farms, not from hunting.

daved7637397

stevedilge752 wrote: »

For everyone that is so adamantly against hunters for your sake I hope you're all vegans.

Funny I was wondering the same thing.

sideshowdan9

daved7637397 wrote: »

stevedilge752 wrote: »

For everyone that is so adamantly against hunters for your sake I hope you're all vegans.

Funny I was wondering the same thing.

there's a difference between hunting for pleasure and hunting for food. If you are going to hunt for pleasure and do nothing with the animal - except maybe keep it as a trophy - like those people who make news for shooting elephants and lions - that is the problem. Hunting and eating is as old as time and not a problem.

You don't have to be a vegan to see the distinction.

I eat meat, I just like to know where it has come from so I can make the choice of whether to be a part of the chain.

But yeah, it's just a game.. so..

p3bowman

Snakeyees wrote: »

parkna1234 wrote: »

His benefits to the game work out well, for personal moral disgust at hunting I wouldn't buy him myself, but his game benefits (at least for this event) are good.

heyababy47428 wrote: »

I wasn't going to buy him, but when people started saying he was "morally objectionable" he became a MUST HAVE!

What do you think people ate and did for food a hundred years ago I mean it's a video game and you're not going to buy something because you don't like hunting, hunting is one of the ways we keep the animal populations in check. The other would be survival of the fittest.

That's not really what "survival of the fittest," or natural selection, does. The short version is that it can change the genetic traits of a population over time, which doesn't necessarily reduce the population.

I don't really have an opinion about a hunter as a character in a game, but I don't think hunting only for sport is OK in real life.