No it won't, it will be whatever framerate your hardware and your graphics settings give you.
Stop acting like every PC gamer runs games at full settings 60FPS, some do, but your experience is based almost entirely on your hardware.
As a massive fan of Mass Effect I'm also a bit concerned, however as long as it doesn't tarnish the single player experience, and offers something unique and exciting, then it shouldn't be that bad.
For example I was quite worried when they announced multiplayer in Assassins Creed, but the multiplayer turned out to be really fun; and the single player still improved (considering only 1yr dev time)
You might also finally get to play as other races,...
The new Tomb Raider looked really impressive, the extra competition between Uncharted and Tomb Raider will hopefully improve both franchises.
It works out at £307 converted. So likely it will be £350; if it's any higher I probably won't be as interested.
Mass Effect is best if you have played through both the first and second games. That is one of it's main features; it is unlikely that somebody who played the first two on PC, or even somebody who played ME2 on PS3, would change for this feature; losing their character in the process. Just like it is unlikely that anyone on 360 would swap if a similar feature was offered on PC or PS3.
I'm not really aware of the mechanics of Mass Effect on Xbox 360, I play it on PC, but I see your point. However it is an optional thing, and is not present in the PS3 version (which I guess is similar), so I'm not sure that they are freeing up buttons for other functions.
It's a nice feature, and some may want to use it, but I personally would just stick to normal controls.
I know conquest was the original Battlefield gamemode, it's just my opinion that rush is better. I am quite disappointed that it doesn't have jets.
Oh well no jets for me... I only played rush in BFBC2, conquest is pretty boring compared to rush.
I don't think that if I did get the Xbox 360 version I would even use voice anyway. I didn't use voice in Endwar; it just felt awkward, and it wasn't really any better than using normal controls.
A much more entertaining use of Kinect would be finally being able to use those cool holo-deck things, and using the Kinect to control the movements.
Looks like they at least got the Alien right, doesn't look like the stupid little critter Alien from AvP.
You do realise that it will not be "MORE STUFF"; it will be stuff cut from the game so that they can charge you for it later. If you believe it is worth paying: go ahead. Just don't start complaining when the next CoD increases in price, and is pay to play; after you have shown Activision that you are willing to pay anything for CoD, and that ripping people off is acceptable.
While 60FPS would be great, and does improve the game, it doesn't really do as much for a third-person game, compared to first-person games anyway. As long as the devs create smooth animations; it will be fine, just like in Uncharted 1 and 2.
Who was really expecting more FPS in Uncharted 3 anyway? With the exception of a few titles (CoD, GT5, etc), all console games are 30fps. Why would it be any different for Uncharted 3?
If the film and the the game, as you say, are meant to be separate entities. Then why link the two by name? If they wanted to do an Uncharted inspired film; fine by me, but don't directly name a film after an established story and canon, and then change it as you see fit.
I'm not going to debate whether the film David O. Russell (would have) made may have been a great film; the problem is that it was not going to be a great Uncharted film, due to him ignoring the sour...
sorry couldn't resist
Nobody likes Assassins Creed? why are so many disagreeing with Ascalon94, it's like the only game that loads of people disagreed on.
I'm not calling anybody out, I'm just interested to know why there is so much hate for Assassins Creed, especially since it is quite popular with a lot of people, usually anyway.
I don't want to see any other total war game until they make Rome 2.
Despite the fact that I am having problems reading discs after 3.61; these faults seem to be mostly coincidental. If that picture is supposedly the result of this recent fault, then what sort of moron owned that PS3. You can't say that you wouldn't notice your whole PS3 melting like that.
This is ridiculous! Just because of the the media storage limitations of one of the platforms they cut content from the game? Not only that, but due to Microsoft only allowing limited free content to be given as DLC, we will likely have to pay later for this cut content. I am sick of the need for games to be 'equal' on both consoles this generation; if one of the consoles limits the developers decisions: tough. Cut the content from that platform only, don't disadvantage those who ...
Even if they aren't fake it is a terrible comparison. Both screen-shots are at 1280x1440 resolution: way above the actual resolution on both platforms. They are also taken from different positions, despite being in roughly the same area. There is also no visible proof (as far as I can tell) on the platform that each screen-shot is from, apart from the screen-shot with the R2 symbol. It's probably best to wait for a comparison on Digital Foundry,or Lens of Truth, before you choose whic...
I think a few people have missed the fact that they are only discussing banning children playing violent games. They are not discussing banning all games!
Out of interest, can a child purchase any game in the US? that's the way it sounds from the video. Is it not like the UK where there are age restrictions and it is illegal to sell a game to somebody underage?