Can you feel it? Oh the rhytm!
Activision: We will release DLC at a total amount of $75 this year for Modern Warfare 3.
Activision: If you wish all these packs and additional content in form of clan features, game shows and live broadcasting with commentary at the best possible quality - You can subscribe a year for $50.
You get more, for less = approved.
Normaly quality comes at a higher price. If Battlefield 3 had so much more quality content than Modern Warfare 3, it would cost me or are we again using thumb-rules that does not really exist in the video game industry?
This is a very minor list and not very correct. Icefrog and Gabe Newell has already said that each and every DotA hero will be installed in Dota2.
Five Map Packs @ $15 - $75. You get these for $50 plus additional services, such as livestream + commentating 720p/1080p quality of live events. A gameshow with two wellknown actors. Several clan additions and game gimmicks.
I think if you wish to purchase additional content, the $50 is well put out.
Great!
Can't tell if worried about BF3 sales or worried about BF3 sales. I think i'll go with option 1.
What is your point? My entire point was that it's overpriced and yet people pay for it. Your comment is rather useless.
That Razer reveals Razer Blade just proves that PC Gaming is as well going as it has always been. People pay for these.
I don't always comment on my own N4G news, but when I do - I look like an absolute NERD.
Another disgusting console port company. Why even support them
Every company does this. There is no major companyn that is not working on expansion packs or downloadable content before the game is released. Its standard.
DICE even does this, if you cared to open your fanboy eyes.
They just announced LAN support for PC, so much nerdgasm flowing through right now. Enjoy Origin DRM <3
I didn't say so. I said you cannot fully destroy buildings in multiplayer.
Battlefield 3 focuses on veichular combat on large maps with high number of players.
Modern Warfare 3 focuses on close encounter city combat on minor maps with medium amount of players.
In basics they are two different games, BF fanboys however, try to turn it into a war they can't win. MW3 will outsell BF3 on every platform.
I'm glad they moved the Osprey(Chopper Gunner) to 17 kills and hopefully rebalanced the choppers. They have way to wide impact points and not getting overheated really does not make much sense from a balance point of view.
Both. The numbers from DotA added with the support of Valve includnig a yearly 1.6 million dollar tournament will not only bring casuals in but alot of experienced competitive players. Scenes will be drawn to this game.
How can Dota2 not be in this list? That game will be more successfull than any of those five mentioned games.
Yes, that is actually the case. If you play a singleplayer mission or co-op you can stay there for the amount of time you want to and DICE stated that it would take atleast 100 playthroughs of a map to bring everything to the ground.
In Multiplayer maps with timelimits and objectives, there will be no fully destructible buildings. They even said so themselves, that buildings would be needed to ensure a playable battlefield.
Black Ops came at a higher price and sold more than Modern Warfare 2. It also generated more income on DLC than Modern Warfare 2. It seems to me that it has become more acceptable to sell content packs even at a price I disagree with.
Upgrading your graphics isn't neseccarily making your product better if you remove or decrease features. Take for example destruction which has much less impact in BF3 than in Bad Company 2. So you get much better graphics but less destructi...