I have no desire to ever sub/buy OnLive, but yeah, I completely believe that it can bring streaming graphics equivalent to high end pc rigs. Its not like there aren't already services that deliver 1080p streaming content. This will just be an image rendered on a high end computer sever vs just straight video. The only thing that could be an issue is control latency. I fear things could feel a little sluggish there at times.
Are you implying that REACH is on the Mac?
Even though is was originally conceptualized as an rts, like their Myth series, I don't believe that aspect ever made it into production. The original announce video/screens were the game as a fps.
I don't understand why people are saying anything about Crysis. Maybe I'm missing something, but is there ANY link between Bioware and Crytek other than perhaps sharing a publisher? Seems about as likely as EPIC making the next Final Fantasy.
"But Bioware is fully cabable of making their own armor designs"
I will have to respectfully disagree with this, (in opionon, not the button) but the armor variations in Dragon Age are horrendous.
"This is Two World 2, and some bugs and glitches is still here, the game, is beautiful."
At first I thought I was reading through Google translate...
what bush?
I dont' see why so many people think having games adapted to Move is a bad thing. I'd much rather play RE5, Heavy Rain, Time Crisis etc with the Move than be jumping up and down on my floor in front of Kinect pretending I'm standing in a boat.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but it seems as if you don't really understand what OnLive is. Now while I don't think OnLive will take over anything in the near or even distant future, you're reasoning/entire comment makes little sense.
You're right, in terms of sales Kinect will probably beat out move. I feel bad for you 360 supporters who are getting shafted with this whole "causal" game push. Alteast there are other options (PC, ps3) that you can move onto when you want a game with some depth to it.
"We're exploring a Diablo-related concept for consoles"
"Please note that this is not an announcement of a console title. We are first and foremost developing Diablo III for Windows and Mac PCs and don't intend to allow any possibility of a console interpretation to delay or affect the release of the game."
I wouldn't get too excited yet kiddies...
Oh, I haven't played D3 on the PC yet, hows it similar to a console game?
/s
I honestly find this comment a little sad.
I remember a time when games were released fully functional, and you didn't have to wait a month for a patch to play them as intended.
I haven't played a CoD since MW1, but I thought BO had dedicated servers?
I don' think that percentage of power is really a good way to look at it. You can have a terribly programed engine that looks like crap, does hardly anything, and uses 100% of processor power, or a game that looks great, is well optimized, and uses only a portion of the max power. It really comes down to how well the code is written, optimized and then utilized on the system.
An online game where you can see the "ghosts" of other real players moving around, see how they died from touching their blood stains, get messages of warning from them, and break into their games to kill or assist them...
Oh yeah, thats been done a million times, nothing innovative about that online aspect. /s
"the lag it shows is more than what it is"
Seriously, what does this mean?
I'm going to have to agree. I never read the comments for any insight or value, purely for entertainment.
Probably that they're not against motion controls in general.
"it's optimized like shit because Rockstar are lazy and incompetent devs"
This statement is pretty spot on regarding the PC port. If you disagree, no offense, but you obviously have not played the PC version.