vahram90's forum posts

#1 Posted by vahram90 (119 posts) -
Well...thank you for the information!
#2 Posted by vahram90 (119 posts) -

The little gameplay footage in the trailer seemed way too reminiscent of GC3. I loved the avatars though xD. A good sense of humor is always appreciated in strategy games. If they execute it properly. If they fail...it's a catastrophe though.

#3 Posted by vahram90 (119 posts) -

I agree entirely.

And the solution is really quite simple: organization.

Anytime the common rabble has in any way been exploited or ripped off the solution has always consisted of organized desent. The labor rights movement of the thirtys stands as a perfect example of this fact. A union should be established wherein every disenfranchised consumer of goods made by EA signs an oath that states that they will no longer purchase any goods made by this organization until they swear to abide by a set of guidelines.

We wouldn't do this place the losses in persepctive for EA. I'm sure EA knows exactly how much money they're losing as a consequence of this, and that figure is trivial compared to how much money they have already made through pre-orders and people who just shop blindly.

We would do this to attract like-minded individuals, to organize, to enlighten, so that this absurdity which is pre-ordering video games without any foreknowledge can come to end. So that we can, even if it is only slightly, tilt the favor to the side of the consumer.

#4 Posted by vahram90 (119 posts) -

I had the exact same concerns and kept checking up on the reviews primarily on gamespot. Saved myself sixty bucks.

#5 Posted by vahram90 (119 posts) -

You're absolutely right, I don't know how it works. And I won't know how it works until I see some decent gameplay footage. And if that footage proves to be redeeming both of the criticism and of the new features, I might then consider paying $60 for it. Versus.....paying $60 for a game which has been ridiculed ever since it's mention just for the sake of an objective assessment. Unfortunately I can't afford $60 for objectivity.

#6 Posted by vahram90 (119 posts) -
I wouldn't call them opinions. I would call them observations. When a player says that you cannot build subways, highways and that the city is half the size of the smallest in sim city 4 and that you're required to play online, these are not opinions, they're observations. And I treat them seriously enough to not dish out $60 on a product which is clearly inferior given the state of technology and the decade long gap between it's predecessor.
#7 Posted by vahram90 (119 posts) -
I would have to pay $60 for the game to know exactly what's wrong with it. But judging from the reviews I've read it's not worth the risk. And it's not the online connectivity that's preventing me from buying the game, but the actual features present, or the lack of them. And these claims that the cities are ridiculously small.
#8 Posted by vahram90 (119 posts) -

I'm so glad I didn't. The media EA provided for the game looked so appealing that I was seriously considering pre-ordering it right up to midnight last night until I asked myself....why? If I can't play the damn game until the 5th why take the risk of paying for it before then if I'm not going to receive anything in return outside of a few asthetic features.

I'm not going to buy this game, ever.

#9 Posted by vahram90 (119 posts) -

Without a doubt, the burnout series is the best if you enjoy massive crashes (upwards of 30 cars, or more). Followed by the Flatout series, for the individual vehicle detail-oriented crashes.

#10 Posted by vahram90 (119 posts) -

I've been searching for another halfway decent railroad simulator, but I swear...I don't think there is anything else. This is quite disappointing.