Okay roll call guys, if you're a console gamer who's disappointed they can't play this, why don't you go ahead and hit that big disagree option on the bottom there.
Multiplayer: No.
Singleplayer: Sometimes.
Irony.
Someone tell this guy to google Shadowrun.
Terms of Service agreements are designed to pre-emptively limit the risk of liability in the case of a lawsuit. They rarely have anything to do with intentions, they're purely to manage risk. There's nothing here to say they won't somehow reimburse paying PSN Plus or even free users as obviously it's bad PR if they don't.
At least here in Australia, there are certain inviolable rights for goods and services which cannot be waived. If there is an equivalent...
They probably just mean with a lack of NPCs to interact with. Portal 2 is largely similar to older school FPS in that interaction with other in-game characters is minimal.
Although it is possible they mean it in a more general sense. Certainly nothing in their pipeline contradicts this. DotA 2 and any L4D sequels are designed to be cooperative. If this is the case, I guess it will be interesting to see what they pull out of the hat for Episode 3.
Nothing is free, Sony isn't ripping people off by essentially charging for the hosting of a P2P hub, but you're still paying for it. It's pretty naive to suggest anything in business is a courtesy.
As for periodic maintenance, servers nearly always have test and production environments for a reason. So that all you need to do is run an update on the production environment once you've finalized working code in test.
I'm not saying Valve is a particularly bad example, if anything it's held out longer than most other gaming companies.
But it is a slippery slope when it comes to pay models.
People pay for P2P internet gaming through Xbox Live, for example. Personally I think this is ridiculous and would never give them a cent for such a rip off.
But what's to say, now that every gaming executive can see from Microsoft's example that there is...
It's a protest score obviously. Most of the people giving it 1-3/10 will probably still play it and enjoy it.
Before DLC and overly frequent sequels, game releases came as major releases and expansion packs.
Sequels used to see improved graphics instead of being almost identical but with a new skin, and time wasn't wasted developing massively overpriced and generally worthless DLC content. That effort went towards an expansion pack that was actually w...
Keep at it, the first act is unfortunately by far the worst in terms of content and pacing. Once the game storyline picks up though, it becomes something else entirely.
It is available on GoG as a downloadable with no DLC:
http://www.gog.com/en/page/...
If it doesn't have 80% more processing power, they're doing something wrong.
Being able to optimise a single piece of hardware has hidden the fact that the graphics cards in consoles are woefully old.
Specifications are not linear predictions of performance but consider that the 360 graphics card comaparable to a souped up X1900 released in January 2006 has 106 million transistors.
A HD 6970 selling for ~$300, right now has an 880Mhz ...
Uploaded here:
http://www.megaupload.com/?...
Censoring fail.
m-s-8-2 my good man, I neither know what a gamerscore is, neither do I care.
And if you'd like to challenge me on the latter point I encourage you to hit me up on Starcraft 2, but I guess you're probably too busy twiddling your thumb sticks.
If any of you truly cared about more than minor nitpicks, you would have gotten a PC already.
I have yet to figure out why anyone cares about achievements.
You're playing a game. Presumably, the game rewards you for doing well. Why exactly do you need another layer of positive reinforcement, especially one that pulls you out of immersion every time you do something trivial?
What next, games coming with a free session to a therapist to talk about your self esteem and inadequacy issues?
What does anything I said have to do with JRPGs?
The game has well developed characters and interesting side quests even if the main storyline is tosh. It's got far more tactical gameplay that 90% of titles although it is scaled back from the first.
Point is, it might be a relative let down but it's miles more interesting that some derivative 6 hour FPS that passes off for $60 these days. The kind that score 9.5/10 from frat boy reviewers like IGN.
Just like movie blockbusters, games nowadays are so big budget they have to stoop to the lowest common denominator to make back their budget. Everyone understands explosions. Not everyone understand complex storylines or cares about developing characters.
Guess where the money goes.
Also buying reviewers with exclusive pre-release version offers. Remember the last time a pre-release review for a big budget game was negative? Neither do I.
Guys, let's not ruin this game with too much fanboyism ...