Funny, cuz what i was thinking was "how many sony fanboys would feel the desperate need to shower unwarranted praise on uncharted as a result of it justifiably not being included in a top 10 list."
i think the more intelligent statement would have been "people that obsessively share their opinions about uncharted (and feel the need to mention it on EVERY article) are too young to think critically or to have experienced enough games to give an objective opinion.
the missing title that really surprised me is Starcraft.
Half-Life 2 absolutely belongs at number one.
also, Portal 1 is infinitely better than Portal 2.
As for the people talkin about Uncharted...come on. the game doesn't do a single unique thing. it also doesn't have original characters, set pieces, combat, dialogue, etc... Uncharted 1 was a very charming game t...
There were so many games that disappointed me. Portal 2 was a HUGE let down. la noire got old quick. skyrim, while a great game, has too many of the major flaws that were in oblivion. kz3 and uncharted 3 were not enjoyable at all, but i didn't really expect much from them. i stopped playing gears 3 within about 2 weeks and still haven't finished the campaign. rage was really boring too.
there were some really good games though: arkham city is great (and i didn&#...
Bioshock 1 is one of the best games of this generation. Up there with Portal. Bioshock 2, on the other hand, was pretty bad. there was nothing wrong with the gameplay, but it just wasn't an interesting story and the combat got repetative...especially they way it became so formulaic when it came to the big sisters.
bioshock 3 could very well be the best of the 3 though. i just hope the game doesn't get bogged down by having that girl with you so much of the time.
i don't understand this comment "Microsoft has the cash to buy." so many people make it and it doesn't make sense.
if a corporation doesn't have the money to buy, then that corporation is bankrupt. that's the whole point in a business...to make money. not to lose money
MS isn't going to shell out millions of dollars if they don't expect to make that money back.
so a company busts their ass to pack a game full of content for the same price as many much crappier games that are 5-6 hours long, and there are people who would raise this question? sad!
you don't have to explore 1/20th the content to beat the main story, so quit your bitchin!
"That's what Nintendo wants you to think. They are too cheap to invest more powerful hardware."
no, THAT'S what they want you to think.
truth is, nintendo (and many eastern developers) just don't have the skills and tools to push hardware. the wii is pretty much just a repackaged gamecube because nintendo didn't know how to make mario and link look any better.
MS didn't "shift" towards anything. they are trying to maximize profits by catering to a large audience. they don't favor cod over halo...they favor them both when the timing is convenient for the sake of moving units.
"And if Halo 4 is really coming to the Xbox 360, then I do not foresee strong enough changes to the formula to revolutionize anything"
