Sounds like an excuse; if it does well, great. If not, "well, it wasn't powerful enough to do what we want, so we settled for this."
There's a reason it's a low number. This is similar to the Resistance 2 co-op missions, so it's not PvP, it's human vs monsters. The difference is this is supposed to be a scary game, and I'm guessing having 8 or 10 or 40 humans on a side kinda takes away from the scare factor. Remember, Left4Dead only has 4 players on a team; any more than that, and the fear factor drops considerably.
Let's see, Neverwinter Nights, Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, all 3 had an online or multiplayer component. Want to try again?
Who is this dummy and why does his word mean anything? So, he's a the CEO of a free to play gaming website, and that means that The Old Republic should suddenly be free, just because he doesn't think a subscription fee is the future? Why isn't he spouting this nonsense to the publishers of World of Warcraft, Aion, or many other MMO's out there who charge a fee?
MMORPG's are not my thing, not by a longshot, and I can't see myself ever paying for one, bu...
"... but in the end, Microsoft paid us a lot ... er, I mean, in the end, Kinect is good."
Simple fix: release it for the ps3 (and maybe the 360) and NOT for the Wii. The saddest thing to me is that there's LOTS of good games that don't sell because they're on the wrong system. The few people who have a Wii and want to actually play mature games will suffer, but they're far in the minority on that system. If you release No More Heroes on the ps3 and 360, the developers will do a lot better, sales wise.
Oh thank God.
@gcolley
WTF, are you serious? It sounds like a mix between a role playing gme and sesame street.
I guess Peter M's idea of a role playing game differs from the likes of Bioware, Bethesda, ... and pretty much everyone else.
Completely agree. I'll be taking my time with Gears 3 instead of buying day one, like I did with 2. I'm not even talking about reviews, I'm talking about lurking on the forums, just to see the complaints about the multiplayer. If there's a ton of bugs, I'll wait and buy it used.
I would appreciate the "support" more if it was in the form of patches fixing the major, major bugs that plagued the multiplayer. I'd rather see that then instead of the events, dlc, more events, xp bonus, etc. Instead we have the latter, and patches that really didn't fix much of anything that mattered; it wasn't until like the 5th title update that even the 2-piece was fixed. Maybe after all that they could have done some events FOR the player base, instead of now tryi...
How is it a better game than when it started? I'm asking honestly; I played it when it launched, but got bored of it pretty quickly. That could have been because I'm not used to console shooters (PC shooters is what I do) but I've been following this game for a while. How would you say it is now compared to launch?
I think it's amazing that the system is still pumping out games that look better and better. Around the time of Killzone 2 I thought it wouldn't get any better looking on the ps3 (how could it right? I mean, it's got such a dated video card in there). Then you have Uncharted 2, which is amazing looking in its own right. And now, how in the world are they still getting better? Killzone 3 is freakin' amazing looking, and they're just NOW getting to what the ps3's potenti...
The only people I hate more (gaming wise) than Kotick and Activision are software pirates. Pirating games is never a good thing.
It's clear, like you said, but nowadays people will try to attack or poke fun of Square any chance they get. And they are right to do it; until square starts to make quality games again, I'm going to be critical of them just like everybody else :)
For example: WAS THAT TRAILER LESS THAN 30 FPS!@!??
I seriously hope you're joking. FF13 does NOT have "some of the best in game graphics ever." It's pretty good, but nothing special. And I'm talking about the ps3 version. Some close to launch titles for the ps3 had much better graphics.
First it's an entire article based on a rumor. And even if it's true, I'm still happy with the ONE system that is still doing its best to come out with good games (especially exclusives) and improving on the ones that are already here (3d, move support, etc) instead of trying to turn it into a family centered casual gaming device.
"whereas Wii had good launch titles"
And what have they had since then? Shovelware doesn't work for me.
I'm pretty sure he did give it a chance. He did say he played it for dozens of hours. Now, if he found tons of problems after dozens of hours of play time, do you think that's any incentive for him to keep playing? It obviously is broken and not fun, so that's what his review is saying.
That's ubisoft having good business sense to realize what the system is: a game for casual people. They would not sell assassin's creed on the system because they know it would not sell, ignoring the fact that it might not even run well even with toned down graphics.
But I can't see how you could EVER say inefficient security measures is a net positive. I can understand your logic about the shovelware, maybe you're right; that could possibly fund some actual ...
@ASTAROTH:
"I suffered a ban for a refurbished 360. After that I decided to pirate it. To hell with them as I lost almost a year of LIVE GOLD."
You realize that pirating games doesn't affect MS in any way, right? Unless you only pirated a MS studio game, you haven't cost them anything. In fact, you might have given them more money in your other 360 console purchase, as well as box live gold on that system. So if you were out to hurt some inn...