Sony's fanbase is a bit larger thab the comment section on N4G. Plus, without specific plans being laid out, I fully understand the trepidation.
Probably down when the article was submitted and back up before it was approved. Title says back up as of 1 pm.
I recall that as well.
"I am an absurd man with absurd ideas."
Is that you Donald Trump!?!
Wouldn't say that, though devs struggled initially, it did pull off some amazing things. That being said, it's also the main reason that we probably won't get this feature.
Exactly. It would make things more convenient for those that wanted it or missed out on some games at some point, but it is by NO means a "must have" feature.
Even if it WERE a simple port, it would be a lot to ask for a $20 price tag. I can see it being full price with DLC included (like a special edition) or slightly reduced to $40 for the game and you gotta buy everything else. It might struggle, after being out a year, to sell full price because there are some pretty die hard fans that felt slighted by the exclusivity deal. Guess we'll find out in the future.
@Blakhavoc...I fully agree. I don't think that diversity needs to be shoe-horned into everything just for the sake of representation. However, it would be great to see more diversity in places where race is really not the topic. As you said, when you are used to seeing adequate representation, it is often difficult to see why others might complain.
This!!!
What is "dull and boring" for YOU might not be for others. My comment wasn't attacking you. It was simply saying that if you haven't seen enough to intrigue you at this point, then you probably aren't the target audience. Plus, it's not like I haven't wasted money on the chance that a game would be good before. Every new IP is bit of a risk. This one seems to be worth it to ME. But, I can understand how it wouldn't be for others.
Was just explaining. Wasn't trying to jump on ya. lol Believe it or not, there are some that don't understand these things. Enjoy it. Unfortunately, I won't be able to. :(
While I understand your point, there can be good business and profit without necessarily being greedy. Cutting content to sell later, restricting already created content for micro's or DLC, etc. are pretty shady practices. (practices that didn't start with them, but have become standardized in most of their games) I get that nobody is forcing it on you. But, we're already sliding sown the slippery slope...and EA is surely trying to profit from the ride.
MS, as a company, has been extremely arrogant in the past. (they've admitted to such) They entered the industry with that mindset for sure. However, as Mike Tyson once said, "everybody thinks they will win a fight...until they get punched.
Basically, they have taken some punches (and given some no doubt) along the way and it has made them re-think their ruthless approach. The Mattrick's of the world represented the old ideology. Whereas, Phil seems to represent a new appr...
But then what would we do in the comment section of N4G? LOL
And...how long did that last? No disrespect intended, but a game has to mot only sell...but last. Games like CoD, Halo, Battlefield, etc. come to mind. Not saying that TF2 couldn't eventually become that. Just saying that, while TF did well and brought some interesting things to the genre, it didn't displace those games that are widely considered some of the best FPS's.
I wouldn't say "never". But, it's not like they would have enough new content to justify booths.
I don't really mind seeing things early. It's like seeing movie trailers during Christmas, but knowing that they won't be released until the Summer. Plus, as a very seasoned gamer (read OLD!!!), I have the ability to not get over excited and have patience. At the very least, I know what's on the horizon. I actually don't like seeing games that have been covered to death, or due to release within the week, get so much stage time.
I believe the online portion is to basically have a connected universe of discoveries and a persistent presence for everyone. Data for things that are destroyed will register so that it stays destroyed. Planets, fauna, etc. that are named will keep those names (should they be discovered by others). Plus, the unlikely event that you actually run into a person. (which is something that could probably be changed by the devs in the future if the community clamors for it).
I think each one's MP is supposed to fit with the style of the game. UC is more action based, whereas TLU is a but more subdued and stealth based which adds that intensity.
Personally, I just find it a bit defeatist. When I watch smartphone commercials I laugh because the tag is always "the best..." or "the greatest..." and I'm always thinking until next year. I don't want to think that when I buy a console. I don't care about how powerful PC is. I care about how devs can optimize games on my console that can come close to what PC does for a fraction of the cost and hassle.
Why not think about creating a console from the s...