Your burst out adds nothing to the discussion though. It's an opinion, possibly a valid one, that doesn't lay any support for itself. At best, your comment is a waste of your time, at worst though, it's a waste of other people's time, which is worse than any "crap article" on any site.
Indies might flock there but do indies really sell hardware? I'm not sure that if ads for Shovel Knight were on TV that it would make people flock out and buy the system.
Way to be constructive.
I don't know. I'm still pretty pumped for it. I don't need 64 people on the same map, 12 is plenty.
Different way of playing games I guess, for me gameplay trumps story every time. If a game has a great story but I hate playing the game (The Last of Us), I find it hard to stay engaged; however if a game has a mediocre story but great gameplay (Tomb Raider), it sticks with me longer.
Except those other companies actually succeed at providing good experiences while Sega doesn't do that with Sonic.
I have a problem with them both being on the list at all.
That's a shame you feel that way, I feel the exact opposite.
What would be the ones you'd pop into the top 20?
Big cats? Like Bengal tigers? I'll take a Snow Bengal as part of my squad.
pfft...
I feel all three of those games are lucky to even be on this list.
That doesn't even make any sense. It is informative of this site's tastes. Being as these lists are all subjective anyway, they don't need to conform to your standards, just as you don't need to conform to theirs.
It is however fun to debate the placement of titles on these type of lists.
Seems fine.
You're right, it never does get old complaining about them.
@GrizzliS1987 you do realize that even if someone were to follow your rigid set of guidelines for a review, it would still be based on opinion right?
@AsimLeonheart except I did back up my argument, you just chose to ignore it. It is fact that Microsoft has not prevented anyone from creating great new characters. Maybe the fact that players aren't latching on to characters like they once were is because the characters being presented by the companies that created them are either stagnant (Nintendo) or unappealing and unoriginal (Square). None of that has anything to do with Microsoft's being in the game business and isn't sure ...
@AsimLeonheart except your argument in the first place isn't valid or rational. It's actually irrational and illogical.
You do realize that the characters you mentioned were created and left dormant (Crono) or to be retraced over and over again (Link, Cloud, Sephiroth) well before Microsoft came into the picture. Link was created in the 80s. Crono in the mid-90s. It's not Microsoft's fault that Nintendo and Square haven't continued to create great new IP....
@AsimLeonheart It would be nice if both sides would just buy the console they want and leave it be. Who cares which one "wins" as long as whichever one you makes you happy.
That would be interesting to know and fortunate for Disney if they do because Star Wars is going to be a huge brand for them going forward and they can't afford to have EA bungle it for them in the games space.