True, but the distance between the two is nearly the equivalent of moving from LA to NY. Not an ideal situation to be in.
It could be worse though: their studio could have been moved to the US.
Which is why it's not a viable solution. I'd hazard to guess that less than 10% of PS3 owners have an internet service fast enough for cloud gaming, let alone one that's fast enough AND isn't limited per month.
Cloud gaming eats up a ton of GB of data, and needs a very high speed ISP to run.
Myself, I'll keep looking forward to the PS4.
First off, this article claimed BF3 Premium was a $50/year subscription before fixing the mistake (which we can still see above). It's a one time $50 fee.
Second, BF3 Premium is a DLC bundle. People who are angry about having the option to save money on bundled DLC need to have their head checked.
I have 150 hours into BF3, and I'll probably put in another 150 into the expansions. That's $90 (for me since I got BF3 for $40 at launch) for 300 ho...
Awesome for two reasons.
1) People getting new jobs.
2) People living in Canada get to move to the UK instead of potentially having to settle for the US (I'm American btw).
Way to go Rocksteady!
"Just last year, millions signed up for Elite premium. More people signed up and paid for that s*** than people that actually bought the next most popular shooter."
No. In February the Elite Premium subscription number was at 1.5 million. Last I heard Battlefield 3 has sold just a bit more than that (at about 14 million).
Yeah it sucks that people don't give other games a chance. Borderlands, Battlefield 3, Dead Island, Starhawk, Gears 3, Uncharted 3. All have great co-op and/or multiplayer, but many COD owners will never play them.
Yeah Treyarch is the one that actually tries new ideas (although few), but their programmers suck (low graphical fidelity in WaW and BLOPS). Infinity Ward had the programming chops, but zero creativity.
I wonder how many people will be happy with BF3 and Halo 4 and pass on BLOPS 2.
Early PS3 ports didn't look worse than PS2/Xbox/GC games. That's false. They looked worse than their 360 counterparts out of the gate, but they never looked worse than last-gen games.
@omarzy
Uncharted 1, 2, 3
The Last of Us
Gran Turismo 5
Killzone 2, 3
LittleBigPlanet, LBP2
God of War III, Ascension
Motorstorm (3 games)
SOCOM 4
MAG
MLB The Show series
The Last Guardian
Wipeout HD
Infamous, Infamous 2 (although not a 1st party studio at the time)
That's 13 different IPs (25 games total) just on PS3, all from Sony 1st party developers, and si...
My theory:
Critics are leery of yet another Spider-Man game since there hasn't been a "really good" one in some time. This results in an extra-critical eye towards the game.
Gamers are starved for a good Spider-Man game, and are willing to overlook some of the game's flaws in light of the parts that work well.
My guess is the game is right in the middle of critics and gamers' scores. Probably a solid 7-8 game. It'...
I don't recall people saying OoT was a "milking" of the franchise, though I admittedly don't post here often. I do however remember people saying "The only two quality games the 3DS has are ports (OoT and SF4)".
I also remember people bashing the price of OoT ($40), considering PS3 HD collections consist of two or three games for the same price.
But I don't recall the milking argument.
That converts to $50 US. It better not be anywhere close to that price here.
$20 or less please.
60fps is an absolute must for top tier games next gen. Battlefield 3 on PC with ultra settings is 1080p and 60fps, and BF3 will be 3 years old when MS/Sony drop their new consoles (assuming they come out late 2014).
With more complex processors and a 4-8x increase in memory, next gen consoles will have no problem getting that done.
What really makes me mad about games like this is that they try to sell them at retail for $60. I'd like to hear them justify that price tag. How could you not feel bad knowing you made a crap game (they have to know it sucks) and are trying to sell it for $60?
Of Microsoft's 20 studios, 9 have never released a game, and 3 have only made Kinect games (4 total between the 3).
They have five studios of quality:
343 (Halo)
Turn 10 (Forza)
Lionhead (Fable)
Rare (Kinect games, Banjo, Viva Pinata)
Twisted Pixel Games (XBLA games)
That's three studios with core retail games. I would very much like to see MS increase their first party efforts in the future.
This comment isn't pro-MS. It's anti-Nintendo/Sony.
"Let's hope so", i.e. "Let us hope Microsoft gets a gaming monopoly. That means you want Sony and Nintendo's gaming divisions to not exist anymore.
Enjoy Steel Battalion.
Some men just want to watch the world burn.
Yet another failure of a Kinect game. Are there any more core Kinect titles on the way, or can we write Kinect off as useless for that market (like I did two years ago)?
I'll never understand why people thought motion gaming without a controller would be fun. Motion control WITH a controller is rarely fun, and even then it's easy to get bored fast.
Maybe scores like this will get MS back to making more core games that use controllers.
That's what a smartphone is for.
Tablets are weaker and have less features than laptops, and they're bigger and less portable than smartphones.
The argument I usually hear is "it's good for watching videos and reading books". Kindle's are much cheaper than tablets, and I could never justify spending $300-$400 for a mobile video player.
I personally think people buy tablets so they can say they have a tablet. I can ...
A little busy for my taste. The best looking 360 slim (imo) is the Modern Warfare 3 design. Unfortunately, that means it's branded after Modern Warfare 3. Take away the MW3s and that's a sexy beast. But, alas, it is forever tainted by that wretched game.