Taking a bunch of elements from COD4 and changing the situations slightly.
That's quite clever, IW.
/sarcasm
MS is always talking about their non-gaming features and how they make LIVE gold such a good value. And I don't want to pay for the non-gaming features, only the online gameplay (If even that).
So I hope they make separate, cheaper fees:
Fee #1 - Strictly for Online play
Fee #2 - Access to Netflix, Twitter, etc.
And then I can only pay for the online gameplay and pay less for it.
And MAYBE that smaller fee will be closer to justified to me for the ...
I hope they can redeem themselves next gen.
MS needs to make a more solid console.
And they need to stop making LIVE fees intertwined with non-gaming crap and online gaming. I play GAMES online on GAME systems, not Twitter; so don't make fees for both.
Nintendo used to spit out great games by the truck load. Now they focus too much on accessibility and family. That's fine, Nintendo, but you almost COMPLETELY ignore your core fans from back in the day, and th...
....hide the fact that the ever expanding PS3 intimidates what is considered to be such a supreme developer.
They didn't stop at ''It's difficult to develop for'' because they had to prove themselves.
Their ''points'' about community don't really add up.
Things like the chat options in fact SCRAMBLE teamwork.
And lack of cross invites on PSN are a minor inconvenience.
And these minor inconveniences are NO WHERE NEAR BEING WORTH LOSING OUT ON 24 MILL...
Then IW and Activision got just what they wanted.
They now have controversy for the extra attention.
(I think you're kidding, but we all know SOMEONE will)
As unsure of this game I was before, I'm not even considering touching this game anymore.
....hide the fact that the ever expanding PS3 intimidates what is considered to be such a supreme developer.
They didn't stop at ''It's difficult to develop for'' because they had to prove themselves.
Their ''points'' about community don't really add up.
Things like the chat options in fact SCRAMBLE teamwork.
And lack of cross invites on PSN are a minor inconvenience.
And these minor inconveniences are NO WHERE NEAR BEING WORTH LOSING OUT ON 24 MILL...
Enjoy the version that's identical to the PS3 version, worse than the PC version, and costs $50 a year to play online.
???
The first jumped around a bit (Nothing horrible), but this one runs wonderfully consistent.
*THIS IS A MIXTURE OF PS3 and XBOX 360 FOOTAGE*
*Square button and d-pad @ 1:08-1:16
*''A'' button @ 1:01
''I can tell which version looks better by a Sub-SD youtube video.
HURF DURF DUUUUUURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR''
...pushes me to getting a DS.
SP: Garbage
MP: ZOMG, we luv to use teh n00b tube!
9.3/10!
lol
...imagine how great they can make graphics with 30fps? Perhaps 1080p??
"the create mode was garbage"
Trolling Xbot CONFIRMED.
That's one butt-ugly looking game.
"…You get what you pay for"
When is paying for free services and stuff you can do with a telephone "what you pay for"?
Halo 3/ODST didn't even play in native 720p.
Unless this fabled "X-Engine" is real, I doubt that Reach will break any boundaries.
...but what's with the color? Looks a bit less vibrant, am I right?
*Free online play
*graphics on par or above other consoles
*controls are on par or better than the other systems
*Sports Exclusives (MLB, NBA: the inside)
I'm not sure how well...
"He started it!"
...would hold up in a court if Activision took legal action.