fat check from Sony, I have no clue where you went after point A, that sounds like jumping from point A to point Y. How does a high score mean a payoff? Are MS's gift bags "payoff's" even though Halo 3 is a great game? Does that mean MS sent one for Fable 2's rating? Or the first Gears? Perhaps there are actually good, fun games out there.
that's so sad I will have to do research to come up with a more severe word for pathetic. I would love to own both, not much missed then (actually would like a Wii and a gaming desktop too)
but if you want to get close to something akin to a "payoff" lets start with the fancy shmancy gift bags given out when Halo 3 was reviewed. You know why we shouldn't bring up either, is because it is a moot point. We can go back and forth, about the 360 having RRod issues so your experience is hampered from worrying about playing 100 hours of an RPG, then counter that with a few textures are more crisp in the horizon on the 360's Fallout 3 version, and then we can........(where doe...
Just another troll who's like the others. If gaming isn't your thing, don't sign up for a game news site.
but sometimes a set of numbers laid out for the masses is more impactful than speculation and rumors. A rumor can be wishful thinking, whereas the article (with bad grammar and all) gives cold hard facts, and lets the rumors go off those facts, so at least there's a basis, better than another Surfer girl or "This dev didn't deny a sequel, so that means it's true"....
but for all the times I see fanboys rag on Sony for the sometimes not-so-great numbers and stats, I have to wonder (I wonder, not making a concrete claim here) just how this would have been impacted, had the entire PS2 base been dropped like a bar of soap had Sony killed the PS2 the way Microsoft killed Xbox (due to varying theories)...Really, if you think about it, 360 got a good jumpstart, nobody's denying that, but in the big picture, we all have to keep in mind, if you were "pro-Sony...
and has no words to back up such emotions. Care to elaborate?
how the hell are installs a thing of the past if PC games still have them, and they're bigger than ever, even my own copy of Gears for PC has a 12 GB requirement. Get over it, and stop trying to spin things fanboy.
remember that BD's contain up to 50 gigs of data (lots of play room for devs, MGS4 anyone?), imagine 5 games installing the entire game on there (not all are 50 gigs, but it could be heading that way slowly)...that would be up to 250 gigs of installs alone. In the other scenario, like pc's, you have a DVD with install info and a play DVD (your scenario), that's 2 discs, and publishers have a bit more of some fees to deal with then, which is what John Carmack was complaining about with his Rag...
that "native resolution" is not usually something the average person even knows about. If a couple numbers are higher on one box than the other, 'upscaling' and 'native' are not what the average consumer thinks of. Mainly hardcore gamers and techies are the ones who can bring this to mind.
As well, many multiplats on the 360 do look a bit better, but that is not what "the more powerful console" is about. It's what can be done on one that makes it. 360 has it...
SOCOM, speak for yourself.
you answered a couple things I was still curious about. Thanks
"out of the box" upscaled, just as the PS3 ones are. Halo has 1080p on the back of it, and Bungie themselves explained it's really 640p. Both are upscaled in most instances, it's rare to have a true native 1080p, but there's a handful.
which are not "excuses", you'd see it's been blatantly explained, "tech talk" and all...there's a difference in how Microsoft has the design on packaging from the way publishers will print on some of Sony's. Native vs. Upscaled. Halo 3 is not 1080p natively, but it's on the back with the other resolutions. You don't look at the back of a 360 game, get excited for it's Live features, then go all fanboy on the PS3 because it doesn't have Xbox Live, do you? Different consoles...
to see a cumulative idea of what's going on, this all very well may be valid, but to me, it's jumping the gun. Again, I could be wrong, but for me to make up my mind on "Epic fail!!!111!!" I need more proof than pre-released copies that are touted as being identical to what I could purchase in a month.
a good slew of features, I only have a 1000 still, but was thinking in the future of getting a 3000. My 1000 has no video out, and the other 2 have it. I read Sony gave the new 3000 a better screen with less glare, put a mic on it, and also made movies AND games playable via video out (sounds all good to me), but this is the second story on an interlacing issue I've seen, so I dunno...I'll wait it out, but I know they're discontinuing the 2000, so I'm not sure what to do...
blood to cheetos index, awesome, lol
are thinking it could NOT be fanboys, that it's "chance"....the OWNER, I say again, owner, of Metacritic says he knows it's fanboys and will eventually amend the issue. I'm not distraught so badly on the fact that the user score is that low (IGN's user scores do that too), it's that people are saying "well maybe it's just a sh*t game", why are so many people buying/playing extensively (you have to play it all to legitimately review it) a game that they'd give a 2 out of 10...
and I don't know why you're saying "there's no story", most of us know the basic story premise. It's not Bioshock or Mass Effect, but it's not supposed to be. How do you know there's no reward, have you beaten it? You keep alluding to these "crap levels that kids make", and the games not out yet, so such assumptions are futile.
don't read them. I rarely see bias in their reviews, which is not something I can often say. This is all conjecture as to why a review was changed, it's not like IGN has a history of being fanboys to either side.