The best bolter was always the Chaos bolter from Fire Warrior. Not only was it better than the imperial version (more ammo per clip), but each shot had a slight scream/warp effect applied to the sound effect.
I keep wishing for some better music in the game. ME1-3 had some great tracks that really helped amp up the action...but I can't even hum the slightest part of anything that is in Andromeda.
The original ME had a *lot* of flaws, but somehow Andromeda has yet to convince me in the way that game did, which at least had consistently compelling characters and story. Hopefully, I'll be proved wrong in the end, but after 3 games I would expect a much better overall experience, even if the game lacks the classic characters of the original trilogy.
My main problem with Watch Dogs is that it tries too hard to combine the best elements of Assassin's Creed 2 (/Brotherhood) with the best bits of Far Cry 3...and doesn't really pull off anything that equals either.
Your character is that bit flatter and more remote than the protagonists in those games and the world is rather conservative due to its attempt at realism. As a result WD barely interrupted my 4th playthrough of Mass Effect 3 - a less open game but far more engaging thanks to its characters and story. I'd love to get back to another go at Far Cry 3...I don't think I'll be saying the same thing about Watch Dogs.
As a result, Watch Dogs is a good game...but not an immersive one.
So...people only end up hating the review because it doesn't fit with their own view of the game. Reviews should aim to get developers to raise their game, not just make them feel smug because they're marketing has persuaded the masses that their product will be that awesome.
Characters need internal consistency for them to be believable, and in my view believable characters are what are required for a 'Perfect' game and story.
As for the misogyny, I'll leave that for people more qualified than I. But as women become a larger part of the gamer population, is having more nuanced characters across the board (even in GTA) that much of a problem?
Really? You're going with the fanboy accusation? I've been playing the GTA games since the original came out in the late 90s with its obsession with running over Hare Krishnas. Vice City is still probably one of my top 10 games. Stick to the case presented instead of just trying to score points, eh?
GTAV will probably have a deeper story and more polish, I agree. But GTA doesn't really try to innovate - it's become a variation on a theme. SR isn't trying to be deep, it's just trying to be fun and humorous (comedies are rarely longer than dramas) instead of trying to be the GTA clone it started out as.
Saints Row takes risks in the way GTA never has. GTA used to have a sense of humour, but over time lost it in the pursuit of gritty realism (starting with San Andreas, I'd say). My main criticism of SR4 is that it is so over the top that the big moments can lack the impact that the big moments of SR3 did.
SR does sometimes hit the wrong note, but at least they not afraid to give it a go. They play around with the genre in a way that is rare these days as games aim for "cinematic" experiences. I'd say only SR and Just Cause amongst the big titles aren't afraid to really poke fun at their own genres (Indie games often try it too).
As long as they don't crowbar in multiplayer for the sake of it, fine. Services like achievements and especially cloud saves are nice, even very useful.
I just hope EA don't compromise games just to add in multiplayer.
@volc-123 Vista was just a bad release, not so much a bad OS. It was rushed out too early with inadequate driver support.
The interface built nicely on XP, and Win7 built nicely on Vista. Win8 decided to take away any obvious cues that Vista and 7 had, such as searching and how to get at useful areas (like control panel).
LordRork's comments