I think Vita would be a better proposition if it WAS a handheld PS2 with a nicer screen...what a library of games that would have been available on the go.
This game is great BTW...so much charm and variety, and tons of loot to scavenge for. If you have a 3DS...buy it. If you don't, seriously consider getting a 3DS to play this game...then also get Mario 3D Land. And Professor Layton. And Ocarina of Time. And Mario Kart. And Fire Emblem in a little while, and the new Pokemon later in the year.
Just get a 3DS and enjoy the games...forget smart phones and tablets, handheld gaming doesn't get better than 3DS.
Hell, get a...
There's a lot of decent games on the Wii U - I own 4 at the moment with a few more still to get - but there's none of the big Nintendo hitters that will sell the console at it's current price.
New Super Mario Bros. U is a big name, but it's not a main line Mario title like Mario 3D Land on 3DS or Mario Galaxy on Wii.
New Mario, New Zelda, New Mario Kart and Smash Bros. and to a lesser extent the likes of Pikmin 3, Wonderful 101 and Bayonetta 2....those are the...
Aliens was sold off the back of a pack of lies and opened a lot of people's eyes up to just how poorly run the industry actually is.
Walking Dead was crapped out as quickly as possible to promote the new series of the show rather than waiting for the next season and giving the developers more time.
Both exposed the cynical nature of the industry, both are crappy licensed games...but of the two, Survival Instincts is the worst, IMO, because of the potential that was there...
That came out last year, not this year.
There are degrees to these things though...slapping someone in the face is violence, so is chainsawing an enemy in half.
There's cartoonish ultra-violence, then there's more gritty and realistic violence which is understated, but a lot more disturbing.
Hell, the Lego games feature violence....but it's all about degrees.
I haven't played Infinite yet, but perhaps some of the more graphic moments could have been more appropriate to the tone/messa...
It's got little to do with "not living in the past". PS1 and PS2 titles will work on PS4 as they are emulatable, and will no doubt still be available for purchase from PSN.
Make no mistake, Sony would have had PS3 BC in the console if they could as it's a great selling point, but changing the architecture so radically when compared to PS3 removed the option by default. I understand why they had to do it, but it's not as easy as just telling people to &...
You misspelled convenient. No, it's not an essential feature, and changing the internal architecture was important for Sony, but it'd have been a nice option to have and would have perhaps seen more sales at launch as people would be more inclined to get the new console if they could have taken their PS3 games/PSN purchases with them and been able to trade in their old console to offset some of the cost of the new one.
Space and free inputs on the TV are concerns for people, especially as more and more have the console set up in their living room rather than a bedroom or whatever. Cluttering up the TV with extra consoles simply may not be possible for some, so backwards compatibility would have been extremely handy for them. People have large game collections, maybe even a lot of PSN purchases, and it kinda sucks to not be able to transfer those over to a new machine.
I agree with you in ...
Unless they have PS3 chips inside the PS4, then backwards compatibility is simply not going to happen on PS4 unless it's via streaming. They've completely changed the internal architecture....PS3 games cannot possibly run, and I doubt the PS3 will be emulated any time soon like the PS1 and PS2 currently are.
Next gen hardware is pretty much off-the-shelf PC components, slightly re-jigged and customised. I don't think it'd be as hard as you think...certainly not in the way that PS3 conversions were often difficult.
Is it coincidental that the kick for "accessibility" comes at the end of the generation, juuuust before the start of the new one, and the new game has had previous features removed ("streamlining"), fewer multiplayer maps (less effort upfront, can sell more for DLC later...possibly recycled ones from the other games) and fewer skins for players and guns.
What I'm driving at is, it's a fairly blatant cash-grab game with recycled assets, less effort ...
Oh iGAM3R-VIII....way to make yourself look amazingly ignorant.
Please, look stuff up before commenting because now you just look silly. Look up sli and crossfire....should tell you all you need to know about hooking up GPU's in those configurations.
Also...
http://www.geforce.com/opti...
43.57 FPS on GTX 560 (2 in SLI) on Ultra...
Like anything, there's good and bad ways to do things. Seems like, for many, this guy did it badly. Just saying "it's satire" isn't some blanket defence. And yes, he is indeed trolling for hits because he knows a large portion of people online have trouble differentiating real idiocy from the fake kind.
Good satire leaves you in no doubt.
The gameplay will be the same old thing, it'll just look nicer. People need to get through their heads that the next gen is not going to be some big revolution in how we play games - unless MS pull something pretty spectacular out of the bag.
The Wii U offers asynchronous multiplayer that offers genuinely different experiences depending on what you're doing, and yet gamers are overlooking it and seem desperate to trash the thing in favour of "the same thing, but nicer lo...
How do these companies expect the console to sell if they're not going to support it properly with big name games? Nintendo can't do it all you clowns. There's over 3 million consoles sold worldwide so far, that's a decent install base for a 4 month old console with few big name Nintendo franchises.
If you release the games, they will sell....especially on a console that has little competition at the moment amongst games on it's own format.
I'd take t...
Oh man.....I'd pity you if you weren't a horrible symptom of the type of gamer that is a publishers wet dream. No standards whatsoever, just slap a recognised name on the cover and you're guaranteed several thousand sales to people with more money than sense.
Thanks for helping to ruin gaming, you're a peach.
All opinions are biased on matters of taste you clown....by their very definition. Yes, everything is moving digital, including reviews. If review scores were really as unimportant as you claim, why do so many publishers plaster them all over the cover of their game? Why do PR guys grease the wheels by sending out free swag to certain sites and magazines, taking them to fancy press events where the free food and booze flows all night long?
The fact that games sell despite poor revi...
And you are the type of gamer they target with crap like this...one that gets all indignant about reviews giving them advice.
Oh, and good luck listening to reviews from people who are desperate to justify the $60 they just wasted, or are actually publisher planted reviews in the first place...not uncommon on Amazon. In short, you only like hearing positive noises about something you quite fancy playing...any criticism sends you into full blown "I'll make up my OWN MIND!!!&q...
Mainstream gamers WILL care the second that one of their games doesn't work due to a network snafu that isn't on their end - eg Diablo 3 and Sim City.
Mainstream gamers just don't take to the internet to bitch about it...like everyone else, they expect things to work properly when they've paid for them and WILL bite back if pushed hard enough, they'll go direct to the company with said problems rather than spending time bitching on the net.