They forgot Sam Fisher
My first guess would probably be you using Lunix.
The real question is why should I give a F$CK?
I'll buy a PS3 if there is cross-platform between the PC and PS3. That way I don't have to spend another $600 on another gaming rig.
I don't give three shits about ME2 coming to the PS3. When is Mass Effect 3 coming so I can download and play on my PC.
Don't pretend to be an expert at what you have no clue about. You haven't done lick of research and all you can do is make up rumors about how "M$ pays Crytek" and compare two games (GoW 3 and Cyrsis 2) that uses two completely different engines with a string of words you call a sentence. Please go back to school and learn how to write before even trying to start an argument.
I bet nobody bother to read and skip to the comments.
Halo Wars is a rehash of the original concept of making Halo an RTS
Really, because I think the auto-aiming ruins the "challenge" in console FPS.
I myself use the controller for certain games but defiantly not for competitive online mutiplayer like css or bad company 2.
" Try running Crysis on the PC with 512 MB of RAM only with a 3 GH CPU with a Nvidia 7600 card."
Cryengine 2 is a badly optimize engine for the PC and is designed run on general hardware while Killzone 2/3 is specific tailored and heavily optimized to the PS3's hardware, so saying so-and-so specs similar to the consoles can't Crysis is a poor argument. If game was specifically developed for the hardware specs you mentioned then I'm sure it will run much ...
"Still doesn't change parts of what I said."
What said was and I qoute, "Crysis needs a PC with 8 GB of RAM to look better than Killzone 2". Crysis doesn't need 8gb of ram to run and look amazing. Like I said before, my PC can the game just fine and it is running at maxed settings and looks like what you see on the screenshot.
"I have played Crysis on my PC. And no, it did not look that good without high resolution texture m...
The game itself needs 2gb of ram and runs just fine with 4gb. I have the game and it performs very well on my rig. Of course you are going to make that assumption because you never played the game.
Why would mention kinect in unrelated article about 3DTVs... oh wait, I know why! You are Sony fanboy and takes the pleasure prejudging a product that hasn't been released yet but he has the knowledge obtained from <please insert flamebait websites here> to make calls. Personally, I think kinect has too many problems and just isn't appealing to buy but still willing to wait.
A 3DTV isn't "new tech". It's just an overpriced HDTV with HDMI 1.4 and at least 120hz refresh rate, and I'm pretty sure manufacturing one doesn't cost as much as a regular TV either. The companies are seeing how much the average consumer are willing to spend by starting at the price they think consumers will buy and gradually lowering it until the numbers of unit sold are met and hit the sweet spot in price.
INB4 Kinect
All I saw was HHG shoving PS3 exclusives down the other guy's face as "proof" while he was trying to explain how Rage's engine is better because of the 60 refresh rate and high-res textures.
"From all accounts most people hated the mundane combat system and searching for useless items"
From people like....? Exactly, now STFU because if you don't like the game doesn't mean it is a bad to all. Played Alan Wake and I'm on my 3th run. Combat is smooth and controls are like butter to me. The only things I was disappointing in was the confusing ending of the story, lacking of variety in Enemies, and the pacing of the game. All-in-All, I think the ...
Someone gets asshurt something stupid like this? He takes gaming too seriously.
"It's cnet, it's like microsoft talking about sony's products"
They crowned the PS3 as the best blu-ray player. They are definitely not Microsoft biased.