It's a parody of an existing, popular, gif.
That's all.
I'm disturbed by the idea that, increasingly, people seem to like to label things they don't like as "bad." Whatever happened to "not for me?"
If this list is accurate, this will be a *beast* of an event. Seems a bit unlikely the line up will be *that* insane, but keeping my fingers crossed.
I don't even understand the "criticism."
Not only are indies often incredible but even if you're too closeminded to like them, they are at the very least "only" filling out the launch year gaps. Every other console launch in the past just had major droughts. Why would that be better?
Makes no sense. Also, give more indies a chance, some are among the best games ever made.
The pink arm issues basically disappear on Vita, where I played it.
There were some pretty bad sound syncing bugs though at a few small parts near the end.
That said, I paid full price for the game and absolutely adored it. For free, it is another amazing ps+ perk.
Though, I don't regret buying it even though I'd have gotten it free, it was worth every penny.
I think it's really just a matter of the way the msg is delivered.
I'm a huge Sony supporter, and usually a critic of ungratefulness, yet even I have had trouble reconciling the messaging from last year about this game, vs this year.
Last year by saying the game let you platinum with the Plus version, the implication was the Plus version was fairly complete. Now it sounds quite limited, despite the platinum still being on the table.
...
Yeah, I'm confused as to how anyone can disagree with you on this. The press last year from Sony seemed to indicate, essentially, a full game. They emphasized how the Platinum was possible etc. Now, after a long additional wait (almost a year by the time it launches) it seems like more of a sampling.
I'm not usually hard on Sony (or any company, I pretty much get all the systems) but in this instance, I don't love how this one was handled.
Yep, you nailed it.
As a public person he had to know that what he said might have consequences. He said it anyway, and here we are.
The odd thing is he was tweeting about people's right to say what they want in their own home...yet he was doing the opposite.
I admit, I'm not wild about people being fearful to express even opinions I despise, yet if I were his employer I'd have interpreted his tweet as a big middle finger to me. L...
Odd considering the game doesn't look that great. The whole thing seems half baked.
Yeah, I think fixing AI is definitely part of polishing a game. Also would explain why the gaming press was allowed very limited access. Could be that the AI only "worked" in some limited environments.
Anyway, I'm all for delays when it's necessary.
Turning it off would undermine their efforts to have it be relevant.
Before devs really show off what it can do (I too have my reservations, but who knows?) offering the option of turning it off would see like 90% of people shutting it off.
Then devs would say "why bother working on cool ideas? 90% of people turn it off."
So, I imagine, the option to shut it off won't come until a conclusion is made on whether devs can make dec...
Yep! HD remasters were a huge part of last gen. They made sense then, they still make sense.
I keep forgetting this was announced.
Agree man, looks very unimpressive.
Witty, but clickbait gets what it deserves.
Yep, picking on Naughty Dog is the big thing right now because they are at the top. Sure, some high profile people have left, but then again, I'm willing to bet they are being promised the world from these other studios. Acquiring someone from Naughty Dog has to be considered the big win in talent acquisition these days. In the end, the vast majority of of the people who made the games we love are still there.
If they do it, it will be to take the wind out of an XB1 price drop. Could be very smart. Even a small one with a bundle-in. The Last of Us Remastered bundle for $379 could be VERY hard to beat.
It truly depends on your play style and the type of game.
For me, a game like the Last of Us doesn't need trophies. I could see it being fun to go back and get them all, but it more than stands on it's own.
Then you have a game like Assassin's Creed 4. I played it to the end, as I usually do, but the experience was tarnished by the trophies. By this I mean, there is sort of an inherent trophy orientation for a completionist's game, such as AC...
Maybe...but if so, team up with a big dev and blow the world's socks off. Stop telling us how awesome it is and expect people to wait patiently. People believe what they see, way more than what they hear. I agree with many here, that this is really poor PR.
I feel like MS as an overlord is probably harming the Xbox division by trying to micro manage them. This seems the only explanation for the odd messaging from a company that should know better.
Yeah, it's way past time to stop talking about this. If it can be done, deliver that and we'll all think it's awesome...
...but at this point, the more they say it, the more it seems untrue. It's working against them.
They should sell the machine on the console that it is, and on the coming games line up, rather than get into a specs war with pixie dust for ammunition.
With E3 coming, MS, change the record, get back on track and ...
I wonder, though, if the agreement didn't have sales minimums built in. If so, this might be an "out" to reduce the duration of the exclusivity.
Either way, I think it's obvious that no 3rd party is thrilled with going exclusive anymore, they're all trying to build brand-kingdoms and chasing insane sales. Every publisher wants to sell big across all platforms and set up future sales for sequels. So, that said, EA is definitely pulling any and all tricks ...