@Dsny: With a list like that, it's not surprising to find out you're one of those that doesn't bother to read the article on a site built for reading articles.
@foliage: Geez. The guy is not talking about all of gaming with the Halo thing. Halo was the first game to bring regenerative health as we know it to *FPS*. Halo obviously wasn't the first FPS on consoles but it was the watershed game that solved most of the dilemmas of porting the genre. That's how it brought FPS to consoles.
He's talking about how it changed the perception that FPS was a PC-only thing.
Why are people so eager to rob the game of it's deserved credit...
@beavis: How did you play a game in 2001 that didn't debut until 2004?
@necrum: Halo predates CoD entirely and MoH used health packs for a loooong time.
Hey hey. They never said you'd need a $4000 PC to run it.
They said it would be impossible for them to scale it so most machines, from low end to $4000 dream rigs, could get an enjoyable experience.
...Which was all apparently a lie since *tada* here it is. Or it could play like crap and they'll try to say "I told you so." Either way, I'm passing.
Call me when you go back to respecting your PC fans, LucasArts.
Absolutely not. The entire basis of this argument hinges on exclusives and Natal support. Neither actually matters.
Yeah, I know most of us would like to see MGS make more exclusive core games, but that isn't happening according to the boss man. But why o why do people think that translates into a "casual" 360?
Did everyone suddenly forget about that 3rd-party strategy? That might mean fewer exclusives, but that in no way should be taken to such extremes a...
I'm thinking mods. They talked that up a bit a while ago how they'd like to get some kind of user mod download going on PS3 since 360 is out of the question.
I think it's unquestionably true. It's just less risky to produce a game on lesser tech and maybe make piles of cash than to use the latest and (pessimistically) maybe break even.
I think it's also pretty cool in most cases. The PC version of these games will usually run and/or look better anyway. Also, you eventually get more mileage out of of your purchase since you aren't "upgrading every few months" to take advantage of the latest greatest.
The stink of EA is all over this. Smooth move teaming up with them, Bio. Smooth.
It looks and probably runs nicer, but that was pretty much a given for the PC version. Might please the gfx whores out there, but I don't see the substance personally. I would have rather they added a new mode or exclusive cars & tracks. But hey, at least they worked on something to justify the inevitable PC delay.
@cmbre: What am I missing here in your reasoning?
So I guess you dislike Demon's Souls? And Tales of? And Fallout 3? And Star Ocean? And WKC? All have the same ingredient: real-time battles instead of turn-based. And frankly, BG:DA was more dedicated to action than all these games combined.
Too much action for you? Really? *Really?*
@cmbre: *Dark Alliance* was better than ME? You're saying a Diablo clone hack n' slash from Snowblind studios is *better* than a full-fledged Bioware RPG?
Now I've heard everything.
@Logic: Actually, people said the PS3 didn't have many *J*RPGS. And they *were* pretty much right. But it looks like more are popping up each day.
Errr, right. The list. Decent list. Oblivion is a nice choice for #1.
I must be the only guy on the planet who doesn't care at all about this game.
Why is it that someone who doesn't want MS's own overpriced stuff up to something "dodgy"?
You don't see a reason to switch out an HDD? How about installing ALL your games instead of just your "favorites"? How about downloading more XBLA games, demos, and promotions worry free? You should be able to do all this without having to shuffle content around to make room.
But no, MS sells you an overpriced canoe and you don't see the benefits of a yac...
"AAA potential"
Well. That sounds like a nice crock of euphemistic crap.
Anyway, I hope they use the time to do proper QA.
"Kind of" is kind of an understatement.
This is douche baggery at its finest.
Real news is boring. Drama draws hits like flies to sh*t.
@Dragon619: ^^That's exactly what I was saying in another thread. This is a stupid amount of "mistakes" and "missteps". Obviously there's something afoot at this point. Whether that's concrete proof of a port is highly debatable but by now we should know it's not out of the question.
My point in saying so was that it SHOULD NOT be ported at all if it's taken on by outside devs. Do we really want to see another EA port to PS3? Sounds like an "inferior version" waiting to happen. I dunno about Demiurge, but they don't have much pedigree.
$30 for 512MB vs $40 for 2GB? Disgusting.
Someone will pop up to say "MS is just trying to protect blah blah blah 'noble intentions' blah blah." But honestly, they put themselves in position to be blasted when they decided to overcharge for memory. If they were fairer, we wouldn't have had to seek out 3rd-party alternatives in the first place.