The problem with Pachter though is that half of the crap he says is common sense. I think most people I've seen who've commented on this topic have stated that it's highly unlikely because it would really turn people off of the product.
Well, screw it. Now I'm not getting this game. YOU DONE EFFED UP UBISOFT, YOU DONE EFFED UP!
This is shaping up very nicely. Ubisoft has managed to get me excited about the series again.
This is one reason I'm glad I'm a gamer. If my kid asks me to buy a game I will be aware of the games and aware of what I'm ok with them playing. Some M rated games I wouldn't have a problem with them playing, and chances will be I've already played it and can determine if it is ok for them.
My 9 year old son has been getting more and more interested in the games I play, so he's been wanting to play Assassin's Creed, Uncharted 2 and Oblivion.
I understand that people are unhappy with the ending, but is all of this really necessary? Can't everyone just be disappointed and move on? How entitled has society become, really? It's a video game. People need to move on and play a new game already.
The wrong message has already been sent if these guys are going to redo the ending based on the entitled cries of their "fans".
Ha, disaster? Really? Let's grow up and remember this is a video game now.
I'm not convinced that 15 minutes is enough time to properly evaluate a game. Maybe it just wasn't for you, but unless a game were truly trashed by EVERYONE who played it, I can't imagine 15 minutes would be enough time to properly evaluate a game.
When Arkham Asylum came out I played the demo, and afterwards thought "Meh, it was ok. I don't think I'll ever pick it up though." After hearing tons of my friends tell me how awesome it was I fina...
I'm expecting it to show up in the mail from Gamefly this week and I'm hoping it isn't as bad as some are making it out to be. However, I enjoyed RE5 while everyone was trashing it, so I may like it.
I would rather pay for longevity. $600 for 7-10 years is pretty good considering. You can't buy a PC for that amount and expect it to last more than 2-3 years.
Think about it. If $600 lasts you for 10 years, and $400 lasts you 5 years, at the end of that 10 years you are paying more. Like the iPad. I would rather pay to get all of the features in one iPad rather than get yearly new releases with a few new features and have to buy it all over again.
I agree that good games are necessary for success, but the whole point of a new generation is to provide improvements. The whole reason I buy a new system is because it can do what my current gen system can't. Be it graphics or whatever. If the games themselves were the only consideration, there wouldn't be a point to putting out something new. Just keep making really good games on the current systems. No, the next gen needs something the the current gen can't do.
<...
So I take it you're not likely a fan of the Vita's main interface requiring touch either? It was a little off putting to me at first, but I've gotten pretty used to it. It is tough though because the natural way I hold the Vita has my fingers right on the joysticks and buttons, so I instinctively want to use them to navigate.
Someone has bubble envy.
Other than the swipes during melee or saving yourself from a fall, they really didn't force the touch that much. In terms of the puzzles they made total sense when cleaning off an artifact or doing a charcoal rubbing. The rest of the touch controls were optional. I found the ability to use motion for precision aiming useful.
Looks all pretty when it's static, but how would it perform with dynamic things added like people and gameplay?
The director also plays a big part in how a performance is given or deciding when a given performance is adequate.
At least with the PSP you could use the memory in other devices that took Pro Duo sticks. We had a Sony camera that we could swap cards around with.
"So far, our major gripes with the PlayStation Vita have to do with Sony's decision to use proprietary media/cabling and the price of AAA games ($70+)."
Where are they getting $70+? I haven't seen a game over $50. Must be a typo?
Looking at Omi's comment history he is having a blast bashing this game because it's set in America. It has nothing to do with the setting, and everything to do with the fact that he doesn't like that it's set during a time period where the Brit's were being assholes.
This is about the equivelent of him claiming the sky is blue. It's not hard to agree with a statement that is pretty obvious. I mean, they could decide to go down this road, but I don't think anyone can argue that anyone will be pleased with the results and they'll lose console sales over it.