Environmental puzzles in an open world setting? count me in
I don't think that people try out an interface before they purchase a player, but I'm sure it would turn people off if they did.
the fifty million went to disrupt gta exclusivity, since it makes sense. But what I don't understand is how you can vehemently disagree with what Jamie Foxx says without having evidence to the contrary. Jamie has accounts of people stating that the fifty was for DLC. Regardless of whether that seems high priced or not, or whether it seems more feasible that MS paid for gta to be multiplatform, only a person with half a brain would push this as canon without having proof.
Why would there not be multiplayer in a racing game? SEEEEGaaaaa
and my original comment was meant for the gamer zone, sorry if the posts are almost identical, I'm not trying to spam.
How can there be on multiplayer in a racer in this day and age?
I think it's the square button that eliminates the need for precision, even though THAT'S not always precise.
Wow, did you read ANY of the article? The article is a whole five sentences. But the last post is correct, this is a feature for MULTIPLAYER games, and yes, the article does bring up the question of cheating.
way back when it cost 299. The reason no one buys ps2s or xboxs for that now is because you can find dvd players for less that 30 dollars. You know that.
What the Wii did right was not its motion controls, but making motion controls almost a requirement. Why develop for the PSeye if you don't need to? The only thing "revolution"ary about the Wii's motion controls is the fact that it's bundled in every console purchase.
Moore's law isn't a law? This article fails in not even understanding the scientific meaning of "law"
EDIT: can anyone tell me where this chart comes from? If their price comparisons, then they just can't be right.
They try to keep it in the closet...*
*The preceding was in no way meant to disparage neither homosexuality nor gaming.
for the easter egg
but they usually don't come with a fee.
I don't care about Halo; a beta should be attached to a product that the person wanting the beta would most likely want. It should be an added bonus, not a trick to spend money the person would most likely not spend otherwise. I would rather preorder a limited edition copy than buy Qore.
Frankly, I would rather pay for access to the beta, rather than pay for Qore. This feels like borderline blackmail.
I have no problem with Qore being an OPTION to get betas, but if this is the only way to get certain "exclusives?" Count me out. I like options.
And before someone says Halo3 beta again, I don't have a 360, so I don't know anything about it.
do non-qore subscribers have access to socom? If they do not, then they are missing out.
I don't want to have to pay for ads in order to get into a beta.
By paying for this online magazine, and by making the comments above, you are justifying these companies cramming more betas into this online subscription that we might have gotten free otherwise.
If this goes well for Sony et al then expect GOWIII, maybe LBP, and various other high profile games to have their demos only available to those that purchase Qore.
I don't care how anyone spends ...
agreed
Google didn't make an offer ON yahoo, they made an offer TO yahoo, as in negotiations to be business partners. My memory could be mistaken, but I think it involved Google giving Yahoo program for ad initialization (or something involving ads). for yahoo it means more ads/money, and Google it means less money to MS
I'm waiting for the EXCLUSIVE decapitation fatality HOME post, or maybe the exclusive first HOME contraband raid...do you think Sony's mods will bust through our virtual doors with police avatars?
this was a MICROSOFT EVENT. There would have been no mention of the Sony versions of ANYTHING.