That was the entire joke.
Yeah, what a lot of people don't understand is that wrestling games transcend wrestling fandom. You can be a former fan and still want a good, new wrestling game.
Give people the chance to create their own guys or guys they liked from years ago and they'll be happy. Have that with an updated roster and everyone is happy.
This game has its fun moments, but there's just so much wrong with it.
Well said. Everyone is rushing to get in on 'gamergate' that they forget that they too need to be up to the standards they are arguing about.
That's a very good question.
I'm of the mind that anything OTHER than a subscription service for this makes little sense and somewhere in the realm of $10 a month makes the most sense.
Not sure how many games you'd be able to try for that.
Maybe something GameFly-ish, where you can only "check out" one game at a time and if you check out another you can't play the first game for ten days, making you stick to one gam...
If you don't have access to a PS3 it might be okay, but if you do it's almost a no-brainer to pick one of these games up pre-owned instead.
It reminds me a lot of how Amazon's Kindle store works right now.
Kindle books cost literally nothing to produce and Amazon takes only a small cut. Publishers get to set prices, though, almost always making books cost at least $10.
The writers see only a small fraction of that cost, where as if they sell them on their own through the Kindle store and sell the book for $5 they'll see $3.50 in profit compared to about $1 from a big publisher selling a ...
Really? I've actually gone back to BF4 and played it a lot more since this beta.
Honestly, it's pretty cool that the best PS4 launch title (Resogun) was free on day one and that they keep giving away new releases like they are doing.
I don't understand the idea that the people who work on the software side of the console working on including features means that there is 'no focus on games.'
Such a weird, internet-centric talking point.
Yeah, I feel like they really focused on just getting the story right in this one, which was a good thing, as they tend to get really ridiculous in their games.
Now that they've gotten that figured out, time to make it a little bit more dynamic in the gameplay department.
It definitely has some flaws with it and won't be for everyone, but great, great experience.
Right. If you aren't going to do it right, why bother at all? Bad Company was fun, but BF3's single player was just not worth it.
Really? Why?
Not trolling, I'm genuinely interested in this. Most people I know don't even touch single player anymore.
I'm kind of upset about GTA V because I really, really want it to get a PC release sooner, rather than later, so I'm kind of shutting it out for the time being.
The Order 1866 has tonnnnnns of promise. Can't wait for more info on it.
I kind of gave up on Square after FFX.
You know, after playing their games for years. Their quality has really decreased, but I guess kids who are new to playing these games don't see that.
This is actually pretty fair.
I plodded my way through TLOU and honestly didn't enjoy it that much. I really, genuinely dislike games that force that much tension. I do a lot of high-pressure work 10 hours a day, six days a week. A game that forces you to always be on edge like that is just... Sometimes too much. I generally don't mind games that aren't super "laid back," but in the case of survival horror, I usually just dislike it.
I ...
No, don't get paid by hits at all, actually.
I really, really liked SR2 just for how fun and ridiculous it was. The story was kind of whatever, but I had a lot of fun just causing mayhem in it. I thought that in SR3 they kind of tried to appeal to that a bit too much, which made it feel less fun.
I know, I need another two games added to my library that I might play for five minutes before moving on.