CRank: 5Score: 118200

Umm... not sure. But after purchasing Insomniac for $230 million Id think the studio was almost purchased for ‘free’ in that game alone, excluding development and publishing costs of course

1857d ago 23 agree0 disagreeView comment

Can’t really agree Sony was protecting their customers. Sony is quite strict with refunds, where if you play the game once on PS, stream it, etc, you void your ability for a refund if purchased digitally. For Sony to keep it on the digital store and anger customers who want refunds would cause a situation where Sony is forced to change their digital refund policy for a single title that they didn’t develop or publish. Microsoft handles their refund policy differently, where a gamer can be ref...

1857d ago 1 agree0 disagreeView comment

@gamer7804, no ones dodged your question, as Thundercat hasn’t answered it yet, so no need to be defensive. I’m glad your enjoying Hivebusters DLC. There are a lot of quality titles to play currently and to catch up on the past year. In the launch period of new consoles, DLC for an older game isn’t exactly full wind in the sail of excitement

1857d ago 1 agree0 disagreeView comment

You mean quantity, or was that the joke?

1857d ago 1 agree0 disagreeView comment

Not quite. I mean I get the joke. Xbox is mostly a digital platform now. So from that angle yes, it’s only offered digitally on the Xbox marketplace. Me personally as a PS player I buy almost all of my games physically, as I enjoy my game shelf of titles smiling back at me. I have great memories playing every one of them. Haven’t played cyberpunk, but I can buy the game today on PlayStation physically, which is the only way to preserve your games you spend money on. Who knows, if cyberpunk wa...

1857d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment

Agreed. Patches were once something to improve upon a game, add new content, etc. But now us gamers are expected to accept patches are a ‘gift’ given for developmental failures of a studio gamers have dropped their hard earned money on? I grew up on the SNES, there was no patches and the games worked

1859d ago 3 agree0 disagreeView comment

Bro you should let it go, hope for a different directive art style, or stop buying ND games

1861d ago 0 agree1 disagreeView comment

They aren’t owned by Microsoft. Not until next summer anyway

1861d ago 0 agree2 disagreeView comment

Going back a few years now, I remember Test Drive on PS2, loading screens you played Pong

1864d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment

I wouldn’t say he undersold because he didn’t over oversell. He was very specific to not have high expectations, thus there was 1 game announcement by cgi trailer

1867d ago 6 agree7 disagreeView comment

The setting looks good though

1867d ago 2 agree1 disagreeView comment

They certainly have something good brewing for them, but it will take several years to find what works and what doesn’t. To develop that mutual family ‘ecosystem’ under the MS name where one studio shares coding and developmental tips and tricks on a trustworthy scale that can fully be adopted by the other studio. That’s my thought anyway. For PlayStation first party their studios openly helped Media Molecule, Sucker Punch, and Insomniac. In the end those 3 studios joined the PS family as fir...

1906d ago 3 agree0 disagreeView comment

Well no... I can agree with Greenburg. It doesn’t matter if game prices go up and it’s also on gamepass. That’s IF it’s on game pass day 1, like as if every game title release will be on gamepass day 1. It doesn’t matter from that angle. Gamepass has 200+ games currently, but more that 200 games release each year from single A to AAA. That can be a problem if you’re trying to sell games. Other console manufacturers aim to sell their consoles based off the games they deliver. 2 manufacturers d...

1930d ago 0 agree1 disagreeView comment

Salt. If they did invest for first party launches the interest in Bethesda would be minimal. The acquisition didn’t happen overnight. It takes time to offer and deal. MS didn’t slack on first party launch titles to save for the Bethesda purchase, which is what your suggesting? A launch game with a 50 million dollar budget is fractional to 7.5 billion. Wasn’t uncharted 4 budgeted at 50 million? If MS wanted to show titles prior to the Bethesda acquisition, they would have. The titles currently...

1947d ago 0 agree8 disagreeView comment

I’m happy it works for Phil’s image- the guy who sells a hidden trick up his sleeve but never shows it and make that common smirk on his face 😏. Finally, I mean FINALLY, his words and body language have an honest basis. It is a big acquisition, possibly the largest in first part history in one go. In the long term it’s a big delivery for Xbox as a brand. In the short term, little for the console manufacturer with IPs continuing as multi platform. What those studios can bring for poten...

1947d ago 3 agree12 disagreeView comment

Id love it to continue, as it’s an great feature for newcomers to experience old games, which I enjoyed fervorously as a kid. But at the same time, why stop bc/upscale with the One to all of a sudden resume with the x/s series. Shouldn’t it have continued if it’s part of the same ‘ecosystem’? Why stop bc/upscale with xbox platform to resume gen 6 bc games with the new generation? To me it’s senseless to resume it on the Xseries as if it wouldn’t work for the One consoles. If it were to conti...

1960d ago 1 agree0 disagreeView comment

Oh no you didn’t!

1960d ago 2 agree1 disagreeView comment

The names are very confusing from one to another, and I often have to re-read comments to understand which console/performance standard being spoke upon. Like you said for example, “discontinued the all digital one s”, and mention “all digital series s.” I’ve been gaming for over 25yrs now as I approach 30, and its a lot to wrap my head around requiring some rereading to fully understand the topic of conversation. To say the average soccer mom walking into the game store to buy the new Xbox f...

1960d ago 3 agree1 disagreeView comment

They removed PS2 comparability because they couldn’t sell a PS1, PS2 and PS3 “all in one” console with a ‘ahead of its time’ Blu-ray drive, built in WiFi, rechargeable controllers, and free online play for $600. At the time it was a steal for value, but most people weren’t willing do drop $600 for that PS1-3 console when for $400 the 360 could do essentially the same (except WiFi, buying AA batteries, and paying for online play. So Sony reduced their production cost by cutting the PS2 out (w...

1962d ago 6 agree3 disagreeView comment

Because there are over 80 million ps3s that were sold. If you are a gamer you have one. If you want to play those games you can buy one. If you had one and sold it, your an idiot. Sony doesn’t owe you anything. If for whatever reason cannot get another PS3, you have ps now. Gosh, the amount of “why doesn’t Sony hire these guys to” is getting cringey. If you wanted to play PS3 games, you would either have a PS3 or play on PS Now. I have 3 PS3’s and over 170 physical games for it

1962d ago 1 agree1 disagreeView comment