But... a mate had a spare ticket, and there are potentially worse ways to spend a Monday night.
It had its moments, though I can't say I really engaged with the show. I didn't buy what they were selling - and selling is exactly why U2 were doing.
What stood out most for me - whether it comes from the band as individuals, or as an organisation - is how brilliant U2 are at branding. The games industry could learn a lot from them.
Watching last night's show, it struck me that U2 might be the most corporate band of all time.
It's little wonder that they've worked so closely with Apple in the past, because they're every bit the music world's equivalent of Apple; a massive organisation that talks about personal experience and connecting the world, while actually being an aloof, untouchable, tax-dodging, money-making monolith. U2 is a business more than a rock band.
The current U2 tour adopts a loose theme around the band's origins, footage of Bono's parents playing out on an enormous, transparent, screen - which Bono then climbs inside, as he walks along stylised footage of the street he grew up on. At other points, the entire band play from within the screen, overlaid with giant, graphical versions of themselves.
It was impressive, but for a show that supposedly touches on some very personal themes for Bono, I found it remarkably unmoving. It strives for intimacy, but was too impersonal, too calculated - as if everything, from the between-song banter to The Edge's stupid hat, had been thought through, analysed, dissected as to how it was serving the U2 brand. U2 - the U2 that the world sees - are portrayed as icons, not as people.
They clearly learned a lot from Steve Jobs, and the applause and singing along from the crowd seemed to me - sober and unmoved as I was - to come from the same font of corporate brainwashing as those who line up outside Apple Stores for a week before the launch of a new iPhone.
Yet, as with the marketing campaigns of Apple, it succeeded in what it set out to do, and I don't doubt most of the audience went home thinking they'd had the night of their lives. We'd been successfully sold the idea of the rock band U2 giving us a big Saturday night on a Monday evening. Even Noel Gallagher showed up on stage for one of the encores.
Where am I going with this? I'll tell you where I was going with this...
You may have read that Assassin's Creed Syndicate debuted in the all-formats games charts at number one this week, but that sales were down significantly on the previous instalment or two of the franchise. People seem tired of what has become the tradition of an annual Assassin's Creed game.
Plus, Halo 5 is out today for the Xbox One, and the sense I'm getting is that there isn't the same level of hype and excitement as there might've been in the past for a new Halo. I might be wrong - let's face it, it's not like a new Xbox One exclusive comes along that often. But still... I know I don't feel particularly excited about the game... I'm just going through the motions.
Maybe it's just me, but it seems like the feeling spreads through all of the major releases this Christmas. The disappointing sales of Syndicate suggests that this tradition of releasing annual instalments of familiar franchises might be backfiring, that the games aren't sufficiently different from one another. Fatigue might finally be settling in. People might want something familiar... but they also want something new.
It just struck me at last night's concert that while I may have issues with U2's corporate approach to rock n' roll, the band successfully rebrands itself with every concert, while still being distinctly U2. Mullet Bono, Wild West Pioneer Bono, MacPhisto Bono, Fly Glasses Bono, and now Weird Blonde Quiff Bono... Innocence & Experience is the name of the new tour, and they've made it feel like an event. As they have with all their previous tours.
Musically, U2 appear these days to strive to sound like U2, but they tweak the visual language, and the soundbites - "Oh, with this one we learned to become a band again" etc. etc. - around that, so it feels like they're moving forwards.
These identikit video game sequels no longer feel like an event. They get the familiar bit right, the iconography - the Assassin's Creed peaked hood, Master Chief's golden faceplate, Lara Croft's pout - without giving us anything new. Syndicate's London looks too much like Unity's Paris. Halo 5 looks like all the other Halo games. Call of Duty Black Ops 3 looks like Call of Duty Advanced Warfare.
It's all becoming interchangeable to a degree that I've never before seen in the games industry. I know this is a drum I keep banging, but I'm finding it a massive issue. I want video games to excite me like they once did - with the sense of possibility, and new experiences - not elicit a sigh, and a shrug. I've never been more bored by a Christmas release schedule.
So anyway. Yeah. What I appear to be saying - looking back over all that - is that I want my video games to pay lip service to the notion of new ideas, while repackaging and rebranding the same old stuff.
Which isn't entirely the case, but if you are going to repurpose gameplay and characters, making it at least feel new - finding ways to make the branding of your games, the iconography, feel fresh - is a step up from making everything feel exactly the same as before.
There's a real fear that pervades the industry right now, a reticence to take risks, to break out of comfort zones. Maybe in Halo 6 they could have a moment where Master Chief pauses to talk about his dead mother, whips off his helmet to reveal a new hairstyle, before a number of ambiguous, pseudo-compassionate slogans flash up on the screen: "SAVE EVERYONE!", "THE WORLD IS A PLACE FOR PEOPLE", "IMMIGRATION IS A THING!".