Why, with a console that has no region locking, are we still getting fooled about by publishers who have only an interest in one or two territories?
Still waiting on White Knight Chronicles and Yakuza 3
I'm confused :|
[...]referencing it as a 'very dark tale to tell'.
Has he actually seen Titanic?
Devs and producers need to just STFU and let their games do the talking!
I'm game!
Dammit!
With my (admittedly) limited knowledge of cars, I knew something like that was going to come up!
Curse you!
Apparently people who don't "get" halo, aren't allowed an opinion of it.
"a conclusive and satisfactory ending" sounds better than some other games to you?
You know what would be even better, if they just said it was going to be a great game. "a conclusive and satisfactory ending" sounds like a back-handed compliment at the end of a review. "As if the game sucked, but I liked the ending."
It's akin to Nintendo "announcing" Mario Galaxy 2 will have "90% new content". Why would you say that ...
Here's to Alan Wake 2 in 2017!
I can't help but wonder why the lensoftruth seem to skip many of the games that play/look better on the PS3? They skipped The Saboteur, shortly after the Digital Foundry discovered (and confirmed by EA) the PS3 version had an alternative AA superior to AAx16.
And if they do analyse it, they'll have a vote at the bottom by the three analysts, where they tell us which platform they prefer it on, regardless of graphical fidelity. Darksiders, whilst being better on PS3 also lacked th...
It's going to get an Ending?!
GOTY! I'm calling it right now!
Why do you believe it now?
I mean it's pretty much team death match, right?
Kind of like Ford making fun of Jaguar for releasing their car first.
Speculation speculate chance to speculate ahead of ourselves.
So what if MS have a head start, they've had one since 2006, and according to most sales figures, they're loosing ground in all regions, having been overtaken by the PS3 in Japan and EU.
Of course you want that, but what you want and how development actual work are two different things.
You start off with a design document, and as development goes on, you cross-off features you aren't going to finish in time.
DLC allows for developers to get those features back in - they're making a game they would want to play, after all.
It's only now that there's:
a) Decent widespread internet to make it possible to have the games the developers originally intended.
b) A market for people who can't get enough.
You can't please some folk. Imagine a world without the DLC, that stuff just gets cut and you never hear of it. So which would you rather - paying full price for half a game, or full price and a half for a full game?
Guess it depends if you see the glass as half empty or half full....
Hyped Before Release? Check
Accessible to new players, not just the existing fanbase? Check
Glitches and Exploits galore, despite being CounterStrike with a fresh coat of paint? Check
Surely anybody could see this coming?
Chains of Olympus is the second best after GoW2, in my opinion, though it was shorter than either of the PS2 games.
More of he same would be very welcome :)
True, however fanboy arguments start somewhere, and I feel the media plays all all too cruel game of throwing the masses some flamebait (as I don't see an article about a 360 exclusive trying to convince us of it's greatness), then sitting back and tut-tutting them as they squabble.
GOTY used to mean something you could pick up years alter and still enjoy as much as you did the first time.
Now it's applied to any game that gives you a cheap thrill for a weekend, and is forgotten just as quickly! Assassin's Creed 2, Red Faction: Guerilla, anybody?