What do you mean don't worry about it?
That's why a bunch of other shooters HAVE failed.
You can name any other shooter this year that wasn't CoD/BF and it's most likely NOT getting a sequel or the studio behind it shutdown.
These companies could have been doing other games in other genres but the success of CoD is one NO publisher will forego. They'll force studios to try their hand at Generic Warfare Shooter #353 and when it tanks...
Yeah I'm badly addicted to this game. There are some really, really, cool gangs on this game like the Ronald McDonald gang, or the Black Afro gang, or the Joker squad.
The creativity really keeps things fresh. I can't wait to see what new kinds of content they come up with.
Fanboys will be fanboys.
You do know that console ports of games using less RAM have like 50% of the graphics and gameplay density stripped out of them?
Since you probably live on N4G, just look at GTA IV iCEnhancer and compare it to the PS3 or Xbox 360 version of GTA IV. Herp, derp, hurp, not even close is it?
Also notice that the PC version of GTA IV can support a full screen of different cars all jammed onto the streets. Where-as the con...
It's like you guys are living in the stone age. 2GB of RAM goes for like $16, ace. Why on Earth would you want consoles bottle-necked that badly? That's just infantile.
And please do some research...ONE really "big" graphics card is always worse in performance, heat consumption, energy efficiency and memory management than two middle-ranged cards.
AMD has perfected Crossfire with their cards where you can get any two low or mid-ranged card...
2GB won't even be enough to run GTA VI on consoles without bottlenecks. I hope they don't use your logic because we'll end up with fail consoles.
I agree with all the sensible people: 4GB or GTFO.
We all know they're going for 1080p and AAx, etc., etc., which eats RAM like crazy, not to mention destructibility, voice chat, in-game audio and assets, etc. You'd be flatout mental to think that 2GB would get you much on a next-gen machine. 2...
You make valid points up until the RAM.
Destructibility has become a huge factor in a lot of games and the consoles will need about 4GB of RAM if a game like GTA, Mafia or Saints Row plan to go the route of full-destructibility. That's not to mention that I'm pretty sure games will be a standard of 1080p, so yeah...RAM will still need to be plentiful especially for open-world games.
I would hate for the newer consoles to repeat what we seen in this ...
You're wrong about dual GPUs being more expensive and causing more heat. My dual 5770s create less heat than my 4850 and out-performed it in DX10 games by about 20%.
AMD is known for making efficienct XFire cards that require low-maintenance and low-energy consumption while producing very little heat for good results. Dual-GPU sounds about right for AMD and it would be the cheaper way to go.
That's how it works...
You gotta make a new account and re-buy EVERYTHING.
Is that not evil or what?
Bubbles for common sense. Completely agreed.
I know a lot of fantards just want "mah kilz! lulz!"
But the truth of the matter is that you hit the nail on the head: MW3 is glorified DLC. However, as a buyer's guide, it should be pointed out that the game is only worth full price if you HAVE NOT played Modern Warfare 1. But then again, who is going to buy MW3 if they haven't played MW1?
The problem is that, as you mentioned, it...
Son, you just made me want to play Medal of Honor. I'm going to give it a try after reading that description.
And gaming journalist should take note...THAT comment ^^ is how you do a review of a game. It all boils down to whether or not it's worth the purchase based on the information provided.
Bubbles to you.
So you mean...like Brothers in Arms: Earned in Blood on Authentic Mode?
Right.
How could Master Chief win if he couldn't even catch Doom Guy? I mean, Doom Guy can run faster than the Warthog can drive, and his fists could cause demons to implode.
That's not to mention that he could run so fast that he could actually make leaps across canyons without even jumping...he didn't even have a jump button. You can't touch that...more importantly, Chief can't touch that.
It's weird but you're right, Halo is a sci-fi military shooter and has become iconic for his immersive atmosphere. Just another example of devs not being lazy or trying to follow in the footsteps of the dumbed-down Call of Duty franchise.
I don't think it's hard to implement I think they just don't want to. I mean, what you say about the military FPS sub-genre could go for any action genre, but it all depends on how the devs tackle the subject matter and characters.
The big pubs basically pump out military FPS games for the little kiddies to run-and-gun and do nothing else. But a real-to-life military FPS could be an amazing thing if they decided to actually focus on character development, or mayb...
The original certainly wasn't typical but Infinite has a lot of "typical" features. The game looks a lot more scripted than the original and I fear this may be one of those games where you're doing more looking than actual playing.
I could be wrong, but I hope this is more like the original BioShock and not an attempt to make the game more accessible to casual shooter fans.
Well I'll poke the horse while he's locked in the stockade.
But...it's not "cool" to bash on CoD because it's CoD. I don't know where you people get this from.
Everyone is bashing on CoD so Activision finally stops milking gamers and stifling the industry. They have the funds to make CoD an award winning, ground breaking game but they won't and the series will probably die before they do.
People are hating ...
Bubbles to you.
I steer clear of all P2P games because they really aren't worth it. I can't believe people paid for DC Universe Online, as a F2P title it plays like it's in its alpha stage (Allods runs circles around it in terms of playability).
And yeah you're right, XBL is already P2P but adding additional P2P on top of that for "executive" features is just too much. And like Vladplaya mentioned, most games get boring these days ...
The games stopped living up to the hype when Black Ops came aboard.
I still can't believe that we're playing games with less gameplay features than Halo: Combat Evolved back in 2001. At least that game lived up to its name.
Now we have CoD which makes $1 billion and they removed stuff like character customization, and then added in a Juggernaut mode that's been around since...Halo: Combat Evolved.
I, too, am glad some reviewers...
What is this guy smoking? COD Elite IS pay-to-play. And that's on top of buying the game for $60 retail.
EDIT: You know what's sad? There are free-to-play shooters that have more content than CoD right now with everything that guy mentions in his article (i.e,. Alliance of Valiant Arms) but big publishers would never go that route because they make more money strong-arming gamers with DLC, retail prices and decade old features.
THANK YOU!
I'm so glad you brought an air of common sense to the stuffy room full of the musty sweat of CoD's smelly rehashed whore's breath.
How other gamers can pay that prostitute $60 a year is beyond me, but turning the same tricks every year would get boring if you had an I.Q. that excelled beyond the single (and in some cases double) digit columns.