The King of Collectors: Full Playstation 2 NTSC Library Sealed

[Bojay1997]

I would if I was in the situation I outlined above. I and my loved ones only need so money to get through life and I only need so much stuff (I already have practically all the material possessions I could want, besides the big stuff like a house and car). If I still had a huge excess of money beyond that, I'd be happy to give the rest away. And if someone isn't in that situation and is still spending massive amounts of money on frivolous things, then it is of my opinion that they're being foolish because money like that early in life would go so far in creating security for your family. The way I'm looking at it, what would Suze Orman tell this guy?

I don't think there's anything hypocritical going on here. It's about wanton excess, not about spending any amount of money on unnecessary things. You can even have a large collection of games. I have 1200, but they've been acquired over the course of around 20 years (12 for the serious collecting), I always make sure I'm paying a fair price as to not waste money, and I play and appreciate everything (even if many haven't been played at great length just yet). I've also hit the point that I've slowed down my rate of game purchases because I know I have enough to entertain me for a long time and I value the space in my home too.

Also, by the way, I think you're coming up with scenarios for this guy that aren't really plausible. Even if he completed the PS2 collection right when the interview was done, that means he started his four year PS2 shopping spree at 19. But considering he started an English AES collection which is two games from complete after the PS2 collection was done, I doubt he started as late as 19-years-old, unless you think he pieced together the AES collection in a matter of months. That means he probably started the PS2 collection before he even finished high school. Basically the only plausible scenarios is that he has a very rich family, most likely, or he won the lotto, less likely. Or for a big stretch, you could theorize that he married very young and his wife's family is rolling in it. Not that any of this matters, but it is a little intriguing.

Completely ridiculous and the very definition of hypocracy. Who cares what Suze Orman would say? Does Suze Orman live in poverty? No, she has a net worth of $10 million, a beautiful home and gave almost $30K to the DNC two years ago. She knows nothing about this guy's situation just like you don't.

You are applying a narrow minded moral judgement to this guy when you know nothing about his situation and have what some would describe as an excess of material items with 1200 games yourself. Nobody needs 1200 games just like nobody needs even a single game. Games are luxury items just like anything beyond food, water, shelter and love are. Even if you only spent $5 each on those games (and let's be honest, you probably spent much more on many of them), that's $6,000 that could be feeding the poor, clothing the naked, ending disease, etc...

You also don't need to be rich to give lots of money away or donate lots of your time. In fact, poorer people are typically more generous than the rich as a percentage of income that they give to charities.

Who cares if he came from a wealthy family? Maybe his father or his father's father worked from poverty to become wealthy. Isn't that what many people claim to be the American dream? Are all rich people automatically evil in your book? Should rich parents not share any of that wealth with their kids? Should poor parents present their children with a bill at age 18 for anything beyond the bare basics that they have bought them over the years?

There are a lot bigger problems and examples of waste in the world than this one guy who has only about a third more games than you own and the fact that none of us know his story makes it really disturbing that some people are judging him and assuming facts about him for which there is no basis.

[Gameguy]

It's not really how many games he has, but how quickly he got them all. It wasn't carefully built over a long period of time, it was pretty much instant. He focused on the PS2 for four years, and if I'm reading the interview correctly he had 300-400 sealed games before he decided to focus on the console. Four years has approximately 1460 days, even subtracting the 300-400 sealed games he already had that's about 1 sealed game per day. I'm sure he bought other games for other systems during the same time, and he said after he finished the collection he literally started on the Neo Geo the next day. I'm more worried that he's giving the impression that most "serious" collectors are overly materialistic and are driven by compulsive behaviour beyond their control.

[Vectorman0]

Buying many PS2 games is really no different than buying a nice house, car, clothes, jewelry, pretty much anything; nor is it much different than basically everyone on this site who has hundreds of games.

For those who feel negatively about this collector, I don't understand why you don't feel the same way about everyone else here, or anyone you see out in public with a nice car, purse, etc.

[Eternal Tune]

Buying many PS2 games is really no different than buying a nice house, car, clothes, jewelry, pretty much anything; nor is it much different than basically everyone on this site who has hundreds of games.

For those who feel negatively about this collector, I don't understand why you don't feel the same way about everyone else here, or anyone you see out in public with a nice car, purse, etc.

Agreed, but you know, haters gonna hate and all that.

[kupomogli]

Agreed, but you know, haters gonna hate and all that.

And people on the internet are going to continue using the same cliche quote. Nothing against you, but that's the fourth time I've seen that quote used in the past week or two.

[Eternal Tune]

And people on the internet are going to continue using the same cliche quote. Nothing against you, but that's the fourth time I've seen that quote used in the past week or two.

Of course. It's the internet, you can not escape cliche quotes and memes. Best embrace and hope you make it out alive.

Back on subject however, personally, I have penis envy. I'd love to have his collection. Granted I would never shell out the money, but to each his own. Plus I'd kill for that Uncharted 2 set. God I love you Nathan Drake.

[98PaceCar]

And people on the internet are going to continue using the same cliche quote. Nothing against you, but that's the fourth time I've seen that quote used in the past week or two.

Says the guy that has had the "you gonna get raped" meme in how many avatars now?

[jcalder8]

It's a nice looking collection but it's not how I would have spent my money. In my opinion it's cool to have but it's not as impressive as say a sealed NES collection with Stadium Events. He might be considered the King of Collectors his age but not the overall king.

[The 1 2 P]

This is the only thing that bothered me -- "I wasn’t old enough for the Atari and don’t care about the Atari so I don’t collect any of them." He said that. I think he is truely missing a piece of this hobby by making that statement - he is young, perhaps in time.

My first system as a kid was the Atari 2600 and I eventually upgraded to the 7800. Today I can't stand anything before the Nes and especially dislike the early Atari consoles. I have no problem with his statement because I feel the same way and I'm much older than he is. So I doubt his opinion will change over time. People who didn't grow up playing Atari systems that try to go play them now after first gaming during the 32 bit(or later) gaming gen are usually bewildered that we once had to endure such primitive gaming experiences.

Back on topic, I'm alittle surprised that people have picked him apart so much. As others have already said, what he's doing is no different from Oprah(or any other rich person) having 4 seperate houses, 2 condos and 6 apartments spread out around the world. Thats what people do when they have alot of money: SPEND IT.

[Baloo]

Instead of helping people do what? Do you give a significant percentage of your hard earned income to other people?

My family goes to church every sunday, and we tithe 10% of weekly income to our parish. And I'm sure many other people do that as well, its sort of a pessimistic outlook on life to REALLY think that everyone is a greedy bastard when there are indeed lots of philanthropists out there in the world who create libraries and hospitals and schools and fund non-profit organizations and police officers and their local communities and many other things. To go and call out others for criticizing this guy for using his money in a non-productive manner might not exactly be the best idea.

And there are actually quite a few members here on Digital Press who have started their own businesses, or put kids through college, or paid for houses, and know the value of roughly $40,000. A 23-year old (Probably) fresh out of college student might not know that.

More on topic, I don't like collectivism. It's a waste of resources, time, and money. Games weren't meant to be displayed on a shelf and bragged about, they were meant to be enjoyed for what they are, a form of entertainment. This guy can show off his stuff and get coverage and pictures of these one-in-a-lifetime games that most of us dream about, but in the end, you can't take it with you all the same.

[Bojay1997]

My family goes to church every sunday, and we tithe 10% of weekly income to our parish. And I'm sure many other people do that as well, its sort of a pessimistic outlook on life to REALLY think that everyone is a greedy bastard when there are indeed lots of philanthropists out there in the world who create libraries and hospitals and schools and fund non-profit organizations and police officers and their local communities and many other things. To go and call out others for criticizing this guy for using his money in a non-productive manner might not exactly be the best idea.

And there are actually quite a few members here on Digital Press who have started their own businesses, or put kids through college, or paid for houses, and know the value of roughly $40,000. A 23-year old (Probably) fresh out of college student might not know that.

More on topic, I don't like collectivism. It's a waste of resources, time, and money. Games weren't meant to be displayed on a shelf and bragged about, they were meant to be enjoyed for what they are, a form of entertainment. This guy can show off his stuff and get coverage and pictures of these one-in-a-lifetime games that most of us dream about, but in the end, you can't take it with you all the same.

Yes, and many of those same philanthropists have amazing homes, expensive cars, eat great food and drink expensive wine, own million dollar art that is only displayed in their homes, etc...Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have pledged the majority of their wealth to charity, but they still live what some would consider to be opulent lifestyles. I'm not assuming anyone is greedy just like I'm not assuming anyone is completely generous in every respect. My point is that we don't know anything about this guy other than the few details in the interview and even if he is some 23 year old living on a trust fund who has never and will never work or do anything positive for society, it's not our place to judge him or dictate what he should buy.

There are many people in the world who think playing games is a waste of time and bad for society. You could be using that time to start a business, volunteer, or do any of a million other things. I personally don't agree, but having $40K in games on a shelf is no more or less positive for society in my opinion than owning $500 worth of games and playing them. Heck, at least spending $40K on games gets that money flowing into the economy and helps to create additional jobs and growth at a time when our economy can really use it.

[camarotuner]

His E-Penis is definately larger than mine but I'd personally have dropped the money on a vette or something more entertaining that a pile of sealed games I obviously wasn't going to open and play. But hey, good for him if he's happy. Do a sealed WII set next, no one else will ever do one I'm sure... god I hope no one does a sealed wii set that'd be depressing in a way.

[Tempest]

His E-Penis is definately larger than mine but I'd personally have dropped the money on a vette or something more entertaining that a pile of sealed games I obviously wasn't going to open and play.

That's the part I don't understand. A complete PS2 collection is VERY cool in my book, but why sealed? I guess that makes it more of a challenge or something along those lines (or maybe he's just into minty freshness?), but now it's become something you can't play with. It's just a 'looking at' thing which doesn't make sense to me.

Tempest

[portnoyd]

That's the part I don't understand. A complete PS2 collection is VERY cool in my book, but why sealed? I guess that makes it more of a challenge or something along those lines (or maybe he's just into minty freshness?), but now it's become something you can't play with. It's just a 'looking at' thing which doesn't make sense to me.

One of the arguments against collecting sealed. It's basically a conflicting mentality.

[Baloo]

Yes, and many of those same philanthropists have amazing homes, expensive cars, eat great food and drink expensive wine, own million dollar art that is only displayed in their homes, etc...Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have pledged the majority of their wealth to charity, but they still live what some would consider to be opulent lifestyles. I'm not assuming anyone is greedy just like I'm not assuming anyone is completely generous in every respect. My point is that we don't know anything about this guy other than the few details in the interview and even if he is some 23 year old living on a trust fund who has never and will never work or do anything positive for society, it's not our place to judge him or dictate what he should buy.

There are many people in the world who think playing games is a waste of time and bad for society. You could be using that time to start a business, volunteer, or do any of a million other things. I personally don't agree, but having $40K in games on a shelf is no more or less positive for society in my opinion than owning $500 worth of games and playing them. Heck, at least spending $40K on games gets that money flowing into the economy and helps to create additional jobs and growth at a time when our economy can really use it.

Well I don't think anyone is completely in that aspect of giving everything away and living a life where you still work hard. As much money as some of these people do have, you do have to give them credit for the money they give away. Interesting way of looking at that 40K circulating in the economy, which really is needed.

I find it sad that those video games will never be played though.

[TonyTheTiger]

I don't understand why it all being sealed means anything. What? Do you think if he had 1,800 opened games he'd be playing them all?

I'm sure he has a solid collection of opened duplicates of the PS2 games he actually cares to play but I'm going to guess that number pales in comparison to the console's total library. Even something like the NES with roughly half the total number, people who have full CIB collections aren't amassing them for the playing experience. That is, unless NES collectors want Action 52 for the greatness that is Cheetahmen.

So if people are going to lambast this guy for having a collection he's never going to use...well...why not rage against anybody who has humongous collections, opened or otherwise?

[calthaer]

Heck, at least spending $40K on games gets that money flowing into the economy and helps to create additional jobs and growth at a time when our economy can really use it.

My thoughts ran something along these lines when I heard all these pious-seeming pleas crying out for this monied bub to use his supposed silver spoon to alleviate the purportedly Dickensian suffering of our day and age in America. "Wanton excess" is a matter of perspective, and like Bojay pointed out, it matters much more how the guy got his money, not really that he has it and how he spends it. I'd much sooner despise a con artist making a modest living ($40k / year) than a hard-working business owner (or even the owner's kids) who built up a profitable and productive business that provides gainful employment to others and nets a million annually.

Who's to say that this spendthrift isn't, by his purchases, helping some poor sod(s), down on their luck either because of their own poor spending habits or the vicissitudes of fate, to pull themselves out of the doldrums of monetary despair and set themselves on the path to fiscal rectitude?

[Oobgarm]

That's the part I don't understand. A complete PS2 collection is VERY cool in my book, but why sealed? I guess that makes it more of a challenge or something along those lines (or maybe he's just into minty freshness?), but now it's become something you can't play with. It's just a 'looking at' thing which doesn't make sense to me.

Tempest

This is what rubs me the wrong way about this collection. If I had the funds, PS2 is the second machine I'd go for a full set, right after NES. No doubt about that.

But all of them, sealed, just sitting on the shelf for all eternity? I know that perceived value is a completely subjective thing here, but I have to question it.

[TonyTheTiger]

This is what rubs me the wrong way about this collection. If I had the funds, PS2 is the second machine I'd go for a full set, right after NES. No doubt about that.

But all of them, sealed, just sitting on the shelf for all eternity? I know that perceived value is a completely subjective thing here, but I have to question it.

But, again. If the idea is to play the games then why go for a fullset at all outside of tiny libraries like the 32X?

It sounds to me that the criticism of "the stuff just sits there unused" is a backdoor argument since it can apply to a ton of collections, not just sealed stuff.

[Aussie2B]

Completely ridiculous and the very definition of hypocracy. Who cares what Suze Orman would say? Does Suze Orman live in poverty? No, she has a net worth of $10 million, a beautiful home and gave almost $30K to the DNC two years ago. She knows nothing about this guy's situation just like you don't.

You are applying a narrow minded moral judgement to this guy when you know nothing about his situation and have what some would describe as an excess of material items with 1200 games yourself. Nobody needs 1200 games just like nobody needs even a single game. Games are luxury items just like anything beyond food, water, shelter and love are. Even if you only spent $5 each on those games (and let's be honest, you probably spent much more on many of them), that's $6,000 that could be feeding the poor, clothing the naked, ending disease, etc...

You also don't need to be rich to give lots of money away or donate lots of your time. In fact, poorer people are typically more generous than the rich as a percentage of income that they give to charities.

Who cares if he came from a wealthy family? Maybe his father or his father's father worked from poverty to become wealthy. Isn't that what many people claim to be the American dream? Are all rich people automatically evil in your book? Should rich parents not share any of that wealth with their kids? Should poor parents present their children with a bill at age 18 for anything beyond the bare basics that they have bought them over the years?

There are a lot bigger problems and examples of waste in the world than this one guy who has only about a third more games than you own and the fact that none of us know his story makes it really disturbing that some people are judging him and assuming facts about him for which there is no basis.

You are making more assumptions and judgements in this topic than anybody else. You're trying to twist my words into things I never remotely said, and I think the members of Digital Press are smart enough to see through it.

I never once said anything bad about the guy. No one did, for the most part, but, for some reason, when a topic like this comes up, certain people absolutely flip out and overreact if anyone does anything other than bow down and kiss the collector's feet. People are entitled to their opinions. All I ever said about this guy and his collection is that I'm more impressed with collections that were built with heart and determination rather than bottomless pockets and eBay, that I'm more interested in collections that people actually play, and that I find his spending habits questionable. I'm entitled to those thoughts, just as anyone is welcome to question aspects of my collection, like, for example, some people think it's pointless importing text-heavy games from Japan, when I have lots of them. Even if I made a topic to show off my collection, I would accept comments like those, but, as I said earlier, if this guy simply made a topic here to show his collection, then he probably wouldn't get any negativity. However, he chose to do an interview and make his collection a subject of discussion, and if he or anyone else can't handle a discussion with anything but praise and worship, then I don't think you're taking our community in the right direction.

I brought up Suze Orman because I believe she's very savvy about finances and usually gives people good advice. My point was simply that I believe his spending habits could be foolish if he's neglecting to use that large amount of money to secure his finances first, and I think Suze Orman would say the same. But maybe he is completely set for life, I don't know.

Again, there's nothing hypocritical about my comments because my spending habits aren't remotely similar. I just don't get how you and some others in this topic don't understand that not all unnecessary spending is alike. Even if I looked only at the 12 years in which I was seriously collecting, that would break down to an average of 100 games a year (obviously the real number is less than that given the 8 years of gaming prior). Most of those games were bought at $3 or less, so we're talking about an insignificant amount of money over the course of one year. Plus, unlike this collector, I don't sit on big hoards of duplicates. I resell a fair number of games each year for more than I bought them at, so my financial investment in my collection is diminished further yet. And beyond games, I don't do much unnecessary spending. I was raised according to the old saying "Waste not, want not", and I'll use most things until they wear out or break.

Lastly, I never said anything about rich people being evil or that I think it's bad for someone to have a rich family or any nonsense like that. You completely made that up. You were the one coming up with all these hypotheses about what this guy's life is like, so I simply responded to that by saying your ideas weren't plausible given the facts. I presented NO judgment in my assessment of what his situation most likely is.