"...you don't want to display something you're not a fan of ....BUT you're more than willing to come into a thread about that same product and make negative comments which nobody cares about."
Are those two cases supposed to be alike (or unalike) in some important sense? Not sure what you're getting at tbh. I don't display things I don't like and I do comment on things I don't like. So what? What's the tension between these two thin...
Sure, others will look at it and perhaps like it and not know who the character is. That's true. I guess, if I'm going to display something like that, I want it to be something I'm a fan of. Call me crazy, but that's just how I see it.
You'd have to be a complete dickhead to spend $380 on this statue. I mean, it's a quality statue and all but sadly the same can't be said about the game. Why would you want such a cringe worthy character on display in your home?
"...so you take critics opinions as the absolute authority on whether something is worth playing..."
Where did I say that? You're perfectly correct in what you imply: there's no "authority" to which you can look to in order to settle one's opinion on a game. There's the reasons the negative reviewers give and I they happen to tally with my own.
"...if you’re an adult and still can’t make your own decisions that’s ...
If this is a reply to me then I agree with you about all those games. You're assuming that I'm motivated by some bias in favour of MS. Nothing could be further from the truth. Feel free to examine my comments history. You will search in vain for such bias. You will find a fair bit of harsh criticism and not one bit of praise. I don't own an Xbox, their exclusives don't impress me at all (with exception of the Forza series), and I have no love for the direction XBOX is going in...
"If someone likes a critically bashed game, it doesn't necessarily mean he's biased."
That involves a misreading of my statement. I never said the 80 score on metacritic is all the result of bias (Perhaps it is, perhaps it isn't. I don't know). Don't confuse my statement about what I observe on N4G with whatever is going on on metacritic. To say someone is uncritical is not necessarily to say he/she is biased. However, if you're biased then...
All that proves is there's a lot of uncritical idiots out there. And yes, you fanboys are salty, which is why you're always crying about the reviews linked to here on N4G.
That's not fair. After the suffering these Anthem players have been through, I would have thought a full refund AND monetary compensation is perfectly in order.
That's going to be risky. I wish you luck with that. Plan your moves very carefully, friend.
What I've heard on the spec side is pretty impressive (ZEN 2, Navi with some RTX capabilities, really fast SSD) even if we don't have precise specs of the APU. But without the precise specs any talk of 'secret sauce' is just plain marketing speak.
Days Gone would have been better if they tweaked things just a little.
If they had just made DSJ a little less cringe worthy by changing him into someone who's not a biker with a baseball cap on backwards. And then perhaps slightly changing him so that he's someone completely different but actually interesting.
They could then have tweaked the AI just a little to emphasise the "I" part of the "AI."
Maybe they...
I'm not upset about anything. I'm amused by the fanboyism on here.
They should have marketed it as a comedy then. In a way it is a comedy, a comedy of errors.
The game looks mediocre af. Stop trying to shoehorn your brand of right wing politics into this. It's childish in the extreme.
I watched the trailer. It didn't seem weird to me. Not much of a fan of the 2D platormers but that trailer showed a pretty impressive evolution of the visuals.