Bioshock and Bioshock Infinite are better in every way than anything Peter Molyneux has ever made.
And nothing Levine hyped is comparable to the "seed to tree" aspect of Fable that Molyneux is most infamous for.
It's a Fools Day thing.
And new hardware designs for consoles start at the beginning of the previous generation. All a patent for dual APUs from last year means is that they're considering it for next generation.
(If consoles even last that long.)
You sir, are master class troll.
*tips hat*
Took me 3 tries.
Though, I will say they screwed the pooch on enemy design. I mean, it's nice that most of the enemies were new, but it's like they all had one switch that would either be flipped in the direction of overaggressive or in the direction of over defensive.
And you couldn't stunlock most enemies either or, easily, use power attacks to break their block.
In GOWIII, The Trial of Archimedes would have been much a breeze....
Fans compensated for a delay?
What an absurd premise.
Imagine if that'd been the case for DNF.
Dark Souls 2: Death Eternal
@th3n00bg4m3r
I'm sorry but that couch scene in 2 was just perfect. Perfect characterization between two guys.
I felt the "good" ending made sense given how things worked out with Citra.
The bad ending made less sense in light of the late plot twist regarding you know who. That altered the path of Jason's characterization.
Things would have made more sense had it come earlier in the game. It would have been better motivation for Jason to leave for the southern island than a generic desire to kill Hoyt.
And that would have given the wri...
This is such a non issue. Far Cry 3's end was it's strongest part.
If I were to take issue with anything it would be the "boss fights" with Vaas and Hoyt and the fact that Vaas was underused.
Perfect, I love how unconventional this cover is.
I'm caught between the anxiousness created by these two new directors taking the game in a more mainstream direction, and the acknowledgement that games need to grow and evolve to stay interesting.
Far Cry 3 is more fun than Far Cry 2
But Far Cry 2 was more ambitious and tightly constructed.
3 trades immersion and long drive times for arsing around on hunting and racing quests.
Honestly outside of the open world and the name they have very little in common.
Far Cry 3 is more conventionally good, while Far Cry 2 is more of a flawed masterpiece, but a masterpiece nonetheless.
I believe if you use enchanted items to reduce magicka use by 100% then you no longer have to recharge staffs with soul gems.
At least I don't have to do it anymore. I have unlimited magicka for everything and pretty much plow through enemies.
Unremarkable, yes, hideous, no.
It's not about the difficulty, it's about how the game plays.
Which, unsurprisingly, is pretty close to Heavenly Sword. You even have the same weapon system, light melee standard, heavy and ranged melee mapped to the shoulders.
It's not bad, and under certain circumstances it would be welcome, but functionally it just dumbs down the game.
Wait, how will that work?
I guess each disc would have the same, or similar, world map but different missions?
Good!
Spec Ops may not have had the best budget or gameplay, but it shows bigger games like MOH and COD for the superficial, jingoistic kill fests they really are.
Just by looking at these numbers I can tell Blops 2 is more balanced than Blops 1 or MW3, but not as balanced as MW2.
That said, this only applies to the weapons, not the perks.
I like how the protagonist sounds like a wimp. Too many games begin and end with the character being a total badass. It's nice to see that this game will have a character arc.
Heard this same hype about BF3 two years ago.
The campaign was a lifeless bore.