Open Zone ----->
The combat system isn't terribly deep, you're right, but the presentation, story, style, etc. of the game are brilliant.
Don't get too excited, it's essentially a poor man's quake 3 built on the Unreal 3 engine.
I didn't bring sony into it, Serg, you did, with your opening statement. I meerely stated that both Sony and Microsoft allow dedicated servers. Then you went on some fanboy-fuelled (and very misinformed) rant about XBLA games and user generated content.
I used to be a huge C&C fan. Shame just about everything from Generals onwards has left me very disappointed =\
Indeed, I'd love to know where people got this idea of Microsoft not allowing dedicated servers. I guess it came from the logic of "If Sony lets people do it, Microsoft probably doesn't".
There's also a façade that Dedicated Servers are ALWAYS better, but as the above poster points out, if you don't live near the server, it can actually be worse. Both P2P hosting and dedicated servers have their own pros and cons.
Maybe I'm just being dense, but where's the download link?
Something to keep in mind:
Guitar Hero 1 and 2 were developed by Harmonix. 3 and World Tour, as well as many of the spin offs and sequels were developed by Red Octane.
Rock band was developed by Harmonix. Notice something?
Basically, ignore the name and follow Harmonix's trail, that's where the REAL spirit in these games lie. GH1 and 2 were great, while 3 marked the series going down. At the same time, Rock Band was released and was amazing, with Rock Ba...
$50 would be a bargain for a new game in the UK. That works out at something like £30, which does very occasionally happen for newer releases, but not always. I always stick to my guns and wait for a game to drop to around that price, but the RRP in the UK is like £45, which if you ask me is ridiculously expensive.
"Will you still buy it? Probably."
Speak for yourself. I believe this "rumour" is absolute bull, but just to point something out: No matter how badly I wanted a game, no matter how long I've waited and how good the game is, I will never ever pay a single penny above the general RRP for it. When you're going to sell 10million copies, you don't NEED to raise the price, in fact you could drop the price and still make an amazing profit, anything more is just sheer...
The first game (and the "second encounter" expansion pack) was brilliant, but Serious Sam 2 was pretty rubbish. I think the main failing of the second game was the Croatian sense of humour not translating very well, but I'd sure as hell be willing to give SSIII a go, since the first games were so much fun.
I've yet to see a 360 fanboy say that. But then again, I stay away from the OpenZone. Maybe that's where you meant to post that?
Of course it's worth developing for the PS3. That's the wrong question. The real question is what kinds of games are worth developing for the PS3?
In the same sense that mature games don't really sell on the Wii, despite 50million+ owners, wheras they sell buckets on the PS3/360, the PS3 has a different market than the Wii and some might even argue the 360 (although there's certainly a lot of overlap). I think there's plenty of scope for profit on the console and all this talk of...
Dash != Guide.
So you can't work on something, then decide that you'd like more people to help work on it? You either have a full team or no team at all? Is that how the world works?
What a useless article. Anyone can come up with arbitrary numbers like that. It hasn't really told us anything and completely failed to bring home the point it was trying to make: Activision isn't happy, for one reason or another.
Did you read the thread's original poster? He asked what would happen IF Activision did it, not if activision would do it or not. Thus, motive is irrelevant because in this discussion, we're talking specifically about what would happen if activision pulled support for whatever reason.
comment on a different thread within this news post to discuss reasons for why they might do it.
EA's reasons are irrelevant, it doesn't matter why they did it, just that they did. The outcome was still the same.
It could genuinely mean the end of the PS3. At the very least, it would secure its third place this generation.
This actually happened before about 10 years ago with the dreamcast. The then-biggest publisher in the world, EA, said they wouldn't support the console unless it sold 1,000,000 units in 3 months. It did it in 1 and EA still didn't support it. And we all know that, despite the Dreamcast having an amazing lineup of games (particularly 1st party titles), it wasn't enough ...
Xbox1 was not a failure. It was never going to be a success. The Xbox1 was designed with one purpose only: To launch MS into the console business and that is exactly what it did.
It was never going to make a profit, it was never going to trounce the PS2, it was only going to make Microsoft a name.
The 360, on the other hand, is the "real" console from MS, they have repeatedly said that the longer you hold onto a console, the more money it will make. Since both Sony and ...