Microsoft Should Buy Nintendo

  • 66 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for FreedomFreeLife
#1 Posted by FreedomFreeLife (3948 posts) -

Really.

Sony - Hardcore 100%

Microsoft - Hardcore 50%, Casual 50%

Nintendo - Casual 100%

So, if we looking at Casual gaming, it needs online gaming, Kinect, stats, ranks, everything that Xbox One has.

Microsoft should buy Nintendo. Buying Nintendo means that they still keep Mario and Zelda.

So, in results we would still getting good casual games like Mario and Zelda but just with better Graphic, online, ranks, everything else.

Then it should be Sony on Hardcore, Microsoft on casual. We dont need 2 same platform having same hardcore multiplatform games like Assassins and Call of Duty.

Kinect alone is bigger than Wii U innovatsion.

Avatar image for Life-is-a-Game
#2 Posted by Life-is-a-Game (617 posts) -

So much fail in one post it blows up my mind :O

Avatar image for sirk1264
#3 Posted by sirk1264 (5761 posts) -

Microsoft would ruin Nintendo like they ruined rare. Nintendo franchises would plummet in quality right from the beginning.

Avatar image for Rage010101
#4 Posted by Rage010101 (5470 posts) -

Dumbest thread I've had the misfortune to read all day.

Avatar image for jake44
#5 Posted by jake44 (2085 posts) -

...................................................................

Avatar image for FreedomFreeLife
#6 Posted by FreedomFreeLife (3948 posts) -

@sirk1264 said:

Microsoft would ruin Nintendo like they ruined rare. Nintendo franchises would plummet in quality right from the beginning.

You stupid or what? Developers make game not Microsoft.

Blame developers.

Funny is that when Rare said we start making different type games then more people bought their games than their old classic games.

Avatar image for tubbyc
#7 Edited by tubbyc (3848 posts) -

It's not that easy. Bill did try back in 2004.

http://au.ign.com/articles/2004/08/05/nintendo-dismisses-microsoft-advances

Avatar image for PurpleMan5000
#8 Posted by PurpleMan5000 (8880 posts) -

LOL at Nintendo being 100% casual when they have the only console EA can't sell sports games on.

Avatar image for Basinboy
#9 Posted by Basinboy (12304 posts) -

Good luck with that

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
#10 Posted by foxhound_fox (95247 posts) -

A stupid thread deserves a stupid gif.

Avatar image for Pikminmaniac
#11 Posted by Pikminmaniac (10832 posts) -

And yet Nintendo games tend to have much higher challenge than anything Sony produces... Casuals more hardcore than hardcore confirmed?

Avatar image for dogfather76
#12 Posted by dogfather76 (589 posts) -

Nintendo isn't going anywhere. It's handhelds alone could keep them in business.

Avatar image for nintendoboy16
#15 Edited by nintendoboy16 (31356 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

Well, if Microsoft did buy Nintendo, they might actually turn a profit in their gaming endeavors, instead of losing billions every single year on the Xbox.

Or they still lose billions and Nintendo gets royally f***ed... like a former Nintendo affiliate.

Avatar image for blue_hazy_basic
#16 Edited by blue_hazy_basic (30128 posts) -

Dear god no. I'm in no way a fan of Nintendo's games but if MS bought them they'd be corporatized and lose their uniqueness. Sony would be almost as bad (but not quite) if they bought them.

Nintendo should stay in its own little bubble.

Avatar image for Bukowski81
#17 Edited by Bukowski81 (242 posts) -

@FreedomFreeLife said:

Really.

Sony - Hardcore 100%

Microsoft - Hardcore 50%, Casual 50%

Nintendo - Casual 100%

So, if we looking at Casual gaming, it needs online gaming, Kinect, stats, ranks, everything that Xbox One has.

Microsoft should buy Nintendo. Buying Nintendo means that they still keep Mario and Zelda.

So, in results we would still getting good casual games like Mario and Zelda but just with better Graphic, online, ranks, everything else.

Then it should be Sony on Hardcore, Microsoft on casual. We dont need 2 same platform having same hardcore multiplatform games like Assassins and Call of Duty.

Kinect alone is bigger than Wii U innovatsion.

CoD and AC are to videogames what Justin Bieber and Eminem are to music. How can anyone think those games are more hardcore than Mario and Zelda?? Even the developers of CoD said that a lot of their audience arent even gamers.

Avatar image for Joedgabe
#18 Edited by Joedgabe (5134 posts) -

@Pikminmaniac said:

And yet Nintendo games tend to have much higher challenge than anything Sony produces... Casuals more hardcore than hardcore confirmed?

No they don't, and don't bring up that about the collectibles in the game to beat the Game 100% BS, It's not challenging at all, and is tedious as fawk. Some people don't know what a challenging game is. Sony and Nintendo are on the same boat except some of Sony's games actually have a hard mode.

Avatar image for Demonjoe93
#19 Edited by Demonjoe93 (9869 posts) -

You should never post another thread.

Avatar image for Pikminmaniac
#20 Posted by Pikminmaniac (10832 posts) -

@Joedgabe said:

@Pikminmaniac said:

And yet Nintendo games tend to have much higher challenge than anything Sony produces... Casuals more hardcore than hardcore confirmed?

No they don't, and don't bring up that about the collectibles in the game to beat the Game 100% BS, It's not challenging at all, and is tedious as fawk. Some people don't know what a challenging game is. Sony and Nintendo are on the same boat except some of Sony's games actually have a hard mode.

You haven't played a Nintendo game in a long time have you...

-Donkey Kong Country Returns (later levels, speed run medals, Golden temple levels, mirror mode)

-Sin and Punishment Star Successor (just generally difficult)

-New Super Mario Bros U (the challenge mode)

-Nintendo Land (Mastering every level)

-Pikmin 3 (achieving platinum medals in every challenge mode map)

Nintendo offers extremely high challenge that isn't just upping enemy health and damage. They offer carefully designed extra content that truly tests your proficiency of the games mechanics.

Avatar image for mems_1224
#21 Edited by mems_1224 (55078 posts) -

Holy shit, this topic is so stupid that I think you just ruined Christmas for everyone who read it.

Avatar image for Telekill
#22 Edited by Telekill (6301 posts) -

No. Just no. I would be sick seeing an XU on the market.

Avatar image for Joedgabe
#23 Edited by Joedgabe (5134 posts) -

@Pikminmaniac said:

@Joedgabe said:

@Pikminmaniac said:

And yet Nintendo games tend to have much higher challenge than anything Sony produces... Casuals more hardcore than hardcore confirmed?

No they don't, and don't bring up that about the collectibles in the game to beat the Game 100% BS, It's not challenging at all, and is tedious as fawk. Some people don't know what a challenging game is. Sony and Nintendo are on the same boat except some of Sony's games actually have a hard mode.

You haven't played a Nintendo game in a long time have you...

-Donkey Kong Country Returns (later levels, speed run medals, Golden temple levels, mirror mode)

-Sin and Punishment Star Successor (just generally difficult)

-New Super Mario Bros U (the challenge mode)

-Nintendo Land (Mastering every level)

-Pikmin 3 (achieving platinum medals in every challenge mode map)

Nintendo offers extremely high challenge that isn't just upping enemy health and damage. They offer carefully designed extra content that truly tests your proficiency of the games mechanics.

I beat those two and they was a cake walk. I don't have a Wii U for the other 3 but based on the first 2 yea cake walk most likely. Specially when you type in Achieve everything, Master every level so and so, you sound like some guy back in the Arcade days saying the challenge lies in getting the highest possible score Vs actually playing a game that set's up the challenge with the gameplay. Here, if you ever have a PS3 or xbox360 play this game

Just try to beat it in normally, no 100% achievements or anything ( no point game itself through gameplay is the challenge so you don't have to force a challenge on yourself to make up for the game lacking one.

Avatar image for Pikminmaniac
#24 Posted by Pikminmaniac (10832 posts) -

@Joedgabe said:

@Pikminmaniac said:

@Joedgabe said:

@Pikminmaniac said:

And yet Nintendo games tend to have much higher challenge than anything Sony produces... Casuals more hardcore than hardcore confirmed?

No they don't, and don't bring up that about the collectibles in the game to beat the Game 100% BS, It's not challenging at all, and is tedious as fawk. Some people don't know what a challenging game is. Sony and Nintendo are on the same boat except some of Sony's games actually have a hard mode.

You haven't played a Nintendo game in a long time have you...

-Donkey Kong Country Returns (later levels, speed run medals, Golden temple levels, mirror mode)

-Sin and Punishment Star Successor (just generally difficult)

-New Super Mario Bros U (the challenge mode)

-Nintendo Land (Mastering every level)

-Pikmin 3 (achieving platinum medals in every challenge mode map)

Nintendo offers extremely high challenge that isn't just upping enemy health and damage. They offer carefully designed extra content that truly tests your proficiency of the games mechanics.

I beat those two and they was a cake walk. I don't have a Wii U for the other 3 but based on the first 2 yea cake walk most likely. Specially when you type in Achieve everything, Master every level so and so, you sound like some guy back in the Arcade days saying the challenge lies in getting the highest possible score Vs actually playing a game that set's up the challenge with the gameplay. Here, if you ever have a PS3 or xbox360 play this game

Just try to beat it in normally, no 100% achievements or anything ( no point game itself through gameplay is the challenge so you don't have to force a challenge on yourself to make up for the game lacking one.

I have a PS3... It's how I'm playing Dark Souls and Super Street Fighter IV right now (I'm always playing Street Fighter IV). Those Nintendo games set up the challenges for you. It sounds like you might let credits decide for you if a game is done or not. If I enjoy a game, I like to experience everything the developers have offered.

Donkey Kong Country Returns offers perhaps some of the toughest challenge I've ever experienced in a game. Those speed run challenges are borderline impossible. They require you to play all the levels like those guys on youtube that you feel are way out of your league. You have to play PERFECTLY and cut every corner you possibly can.

I'm sure Resonance of Fate is a a challenging and fun game, but I've grown away from RPGs oddly enough. I used to think they were the greatest genre when I was younger, but now I've become more of an action gamer. Fighters, Hack n Slashes, platformers etc...

Avatar image for Joedgabe
#25 Edited by Joedgabe (5134 posts) -

@Pikminmaniac said:

@Joedgabe said:

@Pikminmaniac said:

@Joedgabe said:

@Pikminmaniac said:

And yet Nintendo games tend to have much higher challenge than anything Sony produces... Casuals more hardcore than hardcore confirmed?

No they don't, and don't bring up that about the collectibles in the game to beat the Game 100% BS, It's not challenging at all, and is tedious as fawk. Some people don't know what a challenging game is. Sony and Nintendo are on the same boat except some of Sony's games actually have a hard mode.

You haven't played a Nintendo game in a long time have you...

-Donkey Kong Country Returns (later levels, speed run medals, Golden temple levels, mirror mode)

-Sin and Punishment Star Successor (just generally difficult)

-New Super Mario Bros U (the challenge mode)

-Nintendo Land (Mastering every level)

-Pikmin 3 (achieving platinum medals in every challenge mode map)

Nintendo offers extremely high challenge that isn't just upping enemy health and damage. They offer carefully designed extra content that truly tests your proficiency of the games mechanics.

I beat those two and they was a cake walk. I don't have a Wii U for the other 3 but based on the first 2 yea cake walk most likely. Specially when you type in Achieve everything, Master every level so and so, you sound like some guy back in the Arcade days saying the challenge lies in getting the highest possible score Vs actually playing a game that set's up the challenge with the gameplay. Here, if you ever have a PS3 or xbox360 play this game

Just try to beat it in normally, no 100% achievements or anything ( no point game itself through gameplay is the challenge so you don't have to force a challenge on yourself to make up for the game lacking one.

I have a PS3... It's how I'm playing Dark Souls and Super Street Fighter IV right now (I'm always playing Street Fighter IV). Those Nintendo games set up the challenges for you. It sounds like you might let credits decide for you if a game is done or not. If I enjoy a game, I like to experience everything the developers have offered.

Donkey Kong Country Returns offers perhaps some of the toughest challenge I've ever experienced in a game. Those speed run challenges are borderline impossible. They require you to play all the levels like those guys on youtube that you feel are way out of your league. You have to play PERFECTLY and cut every corner you possibly can.

I'm sure Resonance of Fate is a a challenging and fun game, but I've grown away from RPGs oddly enough. I used to think they were the greatest genre when I was younger, but now I've become more of an action gamer. Fighters, Hack n Slashes, platformers etc...

I honestly really didn't find Donkey kong :CR challenging at all, i found the older Donkey Kong titles a lot harder but then again i was a lot younger. Most likely i might just be too used to platformers by now, but I did find a reasonable challenge in Rayman Origins.

Avatar image for Pikminmaniac
#26 Edited by Pikminmaniac (10832 posts) -

@Joedgabe said:

@Pikminmaniac said:

@Joedgabe said:

@Pikminmaniac said:

@Joedgabe said:

@Pikminmaniac said:

And yet Nintendo games tend to have much higher challenge than anything Sony produces... Casuals more hardcore than hardcore confirmed?

No they don't, and don't bring up that about the collectibles in the game to beat the Game 100% BS, It's not challenging at all, and is tedious as fawk. Some people don't know what a challenging game is. Sony and Nintendo are on the same boat except some of Sony's games actually have a hard mode.

You haven't played a Nintendo game in a long time have you...

-Donkey Kong Country Returns (later levels, speed run medals, Golden temple levels, mirror mode)

-Sin and Punishment Star Successor (just generally difficult)

-New Super Mario Bros U (the challenge mode)

-Nintendo Land (Mastering every level)

-Pikmin 3 (achieving platinum medals in every challenge mode map)

Nintendo offers extremely high challenge that isn't just upping enemy health and damage. They offer carefully designed extra content that truly tests your proficiency of the games mechanics.

I beat those two and they was a cake walk. I don't have a Wii U for the other 3 but based on the first 2 yea cake walk most likely. Specially when you type in Achieve everything, Master every level so and so, you sound like some guy back in the Arcade days saying the challenge lies in getting the highest possible score Vs actually playing a game that set's up the challenge with the gameplay. Here, if you ever have a PS3 or xbox360 play this game

Just try to beat it in normally, no 100% achievements or anything ( no point game itself through gameplay is the challenge so you don't have to force a challenge on yourself to make up for the game lacking one.

I have a PS3... It's how I'm playing Dark Souls and Super Street Fighter IV right now (I'm always playing Street Fighter IV). Those Nintendo games set up the challenges for you. It sounds like you might let credits decide for you if a game is done or not. If I enjoy a game, I like to experience everything the developers have offered.

Donkey Kong Country Returns offers perhaps some of the toughest challenge I've ever experienced in a game. Those speed run challenges are borderline impossible. They require you to play all the levels like those guys on youtube that you feel are way out of your league. You have to play PERFECTLY and cut every corner you possibly can.

I'm sure Resonance of Fate is a a challenging and fun game, but I've grown away from RPGs oddly enough. I used to think they were the greatest genre when I was younger, but now I've become more of an action gamer. Fighters, Hack n Slashes, platformers etc...

I honestly really didn't find Donkey kong :CR challenging at all, i found the older Donkey Kong titles a lot harder but then again i was a lot younger. Most likely i might just be too used to platformers by now, but I did find a reasonable challenge in Rayman Origins.

That's interesting. I love Rayman Origins to pieces, but it was a cakewalk in comparison to the challenge Donkey Kong Country Returns offers. I'm a platformer nut and tend to 100% every platformer I can get my hands on, but Donkey Kong Country Returns is one of the only platformers to ever best me. I've accepted that I will never complete it. I've managed 198% completion on the save file, but that doesn't include the speed run challenges.

Avatar image for YearoftheSnake5
#27 Posted by YearoftheSnake5 (9006 posts) -

A fairly unanimous "No" seems to be forming.

Avatar image for speak_low
#28 Posted by Speak_Low (2249 posts) -

@FreedomFreeLife said:

@sirk1264 said:

Microsoft would ruin Nintendo like they ruined rare. Nintendo franchises would plummet in quality right from the beginning.

You stupid or what? Developers make game not Microsoft.

Blame developers.

Funny is that when Rare said we start making different type games then more people bought their games than their old classic games.

That is something they overlook and also Nintendo had a 49% share in Rare but let them go anyways (also lost partnership with DMA Design who would become Rockstar).

And look at where Nintendo is now. Making kindergarten commercials telling Billy and Sarah to coax their parents to buy a system nobody wants.

Nintendo is either going 3rd party or selling their bodies soon for the right cash. They will never make another console because they will never have the hardcore audience they once had, and they're harassing casuals who don't care about Nintendo any more.

Avatar image for sirk1264
#29 Posted by sirk1264 (5761 posts) -

@FreedomFreeLife: says the guy that made the dumb thread. Rare's old games are far better than anything they have put out to date. Funny how we forget how good the original GoldenEye, perfect dark, and even banjo kazooie were before Microsoft bought them. Rare doesn't even get to make killer instinct anymore. Rare is a shell of their former self and the same would happen to nintendo if they were bought by Microsoft.

Avatar image for darkangel115
#30 Posted by darkangel115 (3941 posts) -

@FreedomFreeLife said:

Really.

Sony - Hardcore 100%

Microsoft - Hardcore 50%, Casual 50%

Nintendo - Casual 100%

So, if we looking at Casual gaming, it needs online gaming, Kinect, stats, ranks, everything that Xbox One has.

Microsoft should buy Nintendo. Buying Nintendo means that they still keep Mario and Zelda.

So, in results we would still getting good casual games like Mario and Zelda but just with better Graphic, online, ranks, everything else.

Then it should be Sony on Hardcore, Microsoft on casual. We dont need 2 same platform having same hardcore multiplatform games like Assassins and Call of Duty.

Kinect alone is bigger than Wii U innovatsion.

Sony is not for "hardcore gamers"

Avatar image for nini200
#31 Edited by nini200 (11477 posts) -

LOL Wow I didn't know it was possible for someone to post something so wrong LOL

Avatar image for MoneySha
#32 Edited by MoneySha (209 posts) -

Why... So they can do to Nintendo what they did to Rare??? Microsoft Studios is a game developer "graveyard"!

Avatar image for PurpleMan5000
#33 Posted by PurpleMan5000 (8880 posts) -

@Joedgabe said:

@Pikminmaniac said:

@Joedgabe said:

@Pikminmaniac said:

And yet Nintendo games tend to have much higher challenge than anything Sony produces... Casuals more hardcore than hardcore confirmed?

No they don't, and don't bring up that about the collectibles in the game to beat the Game 100% BS, It's not challenging at all, and is tedious as fawk. Some people don't know what a challenging game is. Sony and Nintendo are on the same boat except some of Sony's games actually have a hard mode.

You haven't played a Nintendo game in a long time have you...

-Donkey Kong Country Returns (later levels, speed run medals, Golden temple levels, mirror mode)

-Sin and Punishment Star Successor (just generally difficult)

-New Super Mario Bros U (the challenge mode)

-Nintendo Land (Mastering every level)

-Pikmin 3 (achieving platinum medals in every challenge mode map)

Nintendo offers extremely high challenge that isn't just upping enemy health and damage. They offer carefully designed extra content that truly tests your proficiency of the games mechanics.

I beat those two and they was a cake walk. I don't have a Wii U for the other 3 but based on the first 2 yea cake walk most likely. Specially when you type in Achieve everything, Master every level so and so, you sound like some guy back in the Arcade days saying the challenge lies in getting the highest possible score Vs actually playing a game that set's up the challenge with the gameplay. Here, if you ever have a PS3 or xbox360 play this game

Just try to beat it in normally, no 100% achievements or anything ( no point game itself through gameplay is the challenge so you don't have to force a challenge on yourself to make up for the game lacking one.

I think the thing you are missing is that the Nintendo games actually require you to go for most of those "100% achievements" to actually play the later levels. You don't have to force any challenge on yourself. You can't play the whole game if you don't get all of the extras. Nintendo does a really great job of making games that anyone can play and feel like they have won, yet include enough content beyond the main storyline (lol) to satisfy the most hardcore among their fans.

Avatar image for El_Garbanzo
#34 Posted by El_Garbanzo (296 posts) -

2 piles of s..t together just makes a bigger pile

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
#35 Posted by R4gn4r0k (23704 posts) -

A thread with this level of stupidity actually requires effort.

Well done.

Avatar image for betamaxx83
#36 Edited by betamaxx83 (360 posts) -

I don't like Microsoft at all, but I value the competition all three bring. Choices are good for consumers.

Avatar image for trugs26
#37 Edited by trugs26 (7206 posts) -

Oh man, those percentages with the "hardcore" rating is hilarious.

Avatar image for Devil-Itachi
#38 Posted by Devil-Itachi (4384 posts) -

So much wrong in the first post.. ridiculous.

Avatar image for Heil68
#39 Posted by Heil68 (56335 posts) -

That would be a horrible idea.

Avatar image for mariokart64fan
#40 Posted by mariokart64fan (20106 posts) -

Nobody I repeat nobody is responsible enough to own Nintendo as sony would ruin them by not releasing enough ,

and Microsoft would make them do all kenict crap like they do rare ,

so with that said since nintendos perfect on their own and their software is good on their own , and nintnedos not in any danger of bankrupt . and has the 3ds and wiiu , pushing respectable numbers since the release of quality titles, have fun trying to persuade them to sell to other companys it just wont happen

Avatar image for jdc6305
#41 Edited by jdc6305 (4249 posts) -

I'm 37 years old I've seen a lot of companies come and go in gaming. Microsoft is the worst god damn company I've ever seen in the industry. I would love to see M$ crash and burn over Nintendo.

Avatar image for R3FURBISHED
#42 Posted by R3FURBISHED (11538 posts) -

@FreedomFreeLife: For threads like this you need to look at the financial ramifications.

  • Nintendo is a ~18.64 billion dollar company who would not sell for anywhere near that, especially to an American giant like Microsoft.
  • Also, why would Microsoft buy Nintendo? How would they recoup the billions of dollars they spent on Nintendo?
  • What would they do with the existing staff working at Nintendo?

Then there are many, many more important factors that I am sure I omitted. Microsoft buying Nintendo doesn't make any sense to me.

Avatar image for SolidTy
#44 Edited by SolidTy (49818 posts) -

@FreedomFreeLife said:

Really.

Sony - Hardcore 100%

Microsoft - Hardcore 50%, Casual 50%

Nintendo - Casual 100%

So, if we looking at Casual gaming, it needs online gaming, Kinect, stats, ranks, everything that Xbox One has.

Microsoft should buy Nintendo. Buying Nintendo means that they still keep Mario and Zelda.

So, in results we would still getting good casual games like Mario and Zelda but just with better Graphic, online, ranks, everything else.

Then it should be Sony on Hardcore, Microsoft on casual. We dont need 2 same platform having same hardcore multiplatform games like Assassins and Call of Duty.

Kinect alone is bigger than Wii U innovatsion.

M$ has a terrible track record of fostering and cultivating tremendous AAA talent they bought. If what you proposed happened, within five years what we know as Nintendo would be dead. The "Nintendo" bankable name would exist and M$ would surely use the Mario/Zelda characters/name, but there would most likely be a huge Nintendo talent exodus. Bungie jumped ship, RARE all but destroyed, and is in name only a shell of what it once was. Ensemble was shut down...those are some of the big names, the bought talent list is longer. I can't imagine M$ trying to grow and simply maintain the incredibly unique Nintendo culture...what nightmare scenario.

No, I can't agree to this proposal looking at M$'s long history...unless I wanted Nintendo to die as they are, then I would agree it's a good idea. I wouldn't want that. That would result in less awesome games than we get today. As a gamer, I don't desire less amazing games.

Speaking of less amazing games: I already hate the timed exclusives idea, that ALREADY results in less games, but gamers don't realize it. Instead of money going towards developing a new product, we get a previously multiplatform game exclusive for some months. Big whoop.

Avatar image for MonsieurX
#45 Posted by MonsieurX (35262 posts) -

...and ruin them like they did with Rare?

Avatar image for dbtbandit67
#46 Edited by dbtbandit67 (415 posts) -

@FreedomFreeLife: No, that's a bad idea. Their philosophies are too fundamentally different.

Even a buy out did happen in the future, Nintendo wouldn't resemble anything like the company we have today. At first everyone would think that's a good thing and point to the Wii U as the reason why, but then we wouldn't have the a system like the 3DS and all the awesome games that have been coming out for it.

Avatar image for fugwit
#47 Posted by fugwit (488 posts) -

IntelligenceFreeLife at it again

Avatar image for Link3301
#48 Edited by Link3301 (2000 posts) -

@FreedomFreeLife said:

Really.

Sony - Hardcore 50%, Casual 50%

Microsoft - Hardcore 50%, Casual 50%

Nintendo - Hardcore 50%, Casual 50%

Avatar image for ultimate-k
#49 Posted by ultimate-k (2348 posts) -

I rather them die in dignity, then become a dead corps that M$ reanimates once in a while to make shame their name with shovel ware kinect games. Look what they did to rare now it is shoval rare!

Avatar image for John_Matherson
#50 Posted by John_Matherson (2085 posts) -

I think you should....I honestly don't have the words for this thread. Someone lock this crap.