@schlanz.
There's a BIG difference between homosexuality and pedophilia. Only an idiot would compare the two.
Couple weeks, more often than not lol.
Yes and no. There are some games that should never have been released at $60, $40, or even $30 (looking at you, Ground Zeroes) for one reason or another. What a game is worth and how someone values it are two totally separate things.
If you enjoy a $10 game enough that it was worth the $60 you paid, more power to you but that doesn't override the fact that the game is objectively worth $10.
The genre doesn't matter, what matters is the quality of it. I can name one game in each of those genres that were worth it (minus sports, not into sports games), one worth more than the $60 I paid, and several in each that were not worth it at all. More often than not, they're not worth the price tag.
Every time an episode is released, I wind up having to fight buying them rather than waiting until it is released as a physical combo like Season 1 was.
Godzilla vs either a Reaper or a Leviathan (Mass Effect). I think that might be interesting.
Stop having Beenox do it. The Amazing Spiderman 2 made it blatantly obvious that Beenox is simply sick and tired of this license. Understandably so since Activision is constantly trying to cash-in on the license rather than pushing for a game that rivals Rocksteady's Arkham games. Not to mention the fact that Spiderman is all Beenox has worked on for over a decade.
I want Fallout 4 for N64 =p
A company has several teams making different games, it isn't just one team making one game after another. One team makes TES, another makes Fallout. Skyrim had a team of 70 people on it prior to Fallout 3's release, then it was revealed that the number of people went up to 90-100 after Fallout 3 was completed.
Way too soon for TES6... and Fallout 3 is already released =p
I share this sentiment though. I don't care about any other game they might have up their sleeve; I want Fallout 4.
They don't release TES games but once every six years. That's the only reason why TES games are so great, a shorter dev time would likely break TES.
Some can't get into third-person games in some genres. Survival is one of those where, for some, third-person can kill their immersion because THEY want to be the one surviving. I personally prefer third-person but would appreciate the ability to switch in and out of first-person in a way similar to the Elder Scrolls series does. Admittedly, I do tend to play TES in first-person more often than not anyway lol.
It's only on PC, PS4, and XBox One. Last-gen isn't getting a version.
Main reason for it is because remastering, say, FF7 into HD is will make it look ugly and so a remake is the only option. I've played FFX on my 1080p HDTV and it looks like crap, which is why many wanted a remastered version and why many HD collections are made.
This might put a fire under their ass to do a remake, however. Isn't this remaster selling fairly well better than any of the FF13s, or several of SE's games with few exceptions? Either way, I do agree. I ...
Yep, and that's the first thing I do every time. Every time it roared (taking its breath), I usually wound up backing off before it's next turn. My problem is it constantly wound up using its Swooping Scythe attack to close in and then petrifies my last guy.
@Scroggz.
Nope, don't have Chocobo Wings.
I had to stop at Evrae >_< My highest leveled character was Tidus, who had just gotten Slow. No saves prior, so every time it casts Haste on itself I am pretty much dead. Pisses me off because I remember my last playthrough a few years back, I decimated him and I did nothing different.
I like the romances, it can add to the story if you're the type that likes to make characters with different personalities rather than simply playing a character in a story. Best way I can explain it lol.
Beat me to it lol.
When you're under contract to make something, what you make belongs to the company. You provided the labor and idea, you do not get ownership of it. That's how it works when you come up with ideas for a corporation. That said, if the company didn't patent it, then they likely have no grounds unless they had fine print in the employee's contract. A form of no-compete clause might be possible.
If it exists, it is natural. "Immoral" is the word you're looking for, and even then you'd be wrong.