Black Friday may be over, but Steam and CyberMonday are still go! - SWM

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for ActionRemix
ActionRemix

5640

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#51 ActionRemix
Member since 2011 • 5640 Posts
4-8 GB would be ideal but all of the consoles are probably going to have 1-2 GB. There is zero information on what kind of GPU it's using and six core doesn't tell us much about the CPU. The Cell is eight core, I believe, but it's outclassed by faster CPUs with less cores. For all we know, the 3 core Wii U CPU is comparable or faster.
Avatar image for loosingENDS
loosingENDS

11793

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#52 loosingENDS
Member since 2011 • 11793 Posts

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

[QUOTE="charizard1605"] We did have rumored specs a few days ago, that seem to line up with this new rumor of the Xbox going all AMD. According to those specs, the new Xbox and Wii U were evenly matched. I need confirmation of this, however.charizard1605

What rumors ? Any links with actual rumored specs ?

Also how is it possible to have hardware like WiiU, when

1. WiiU does not even use the best hardware of todays PCs

2. 720 will use the best PC hardware of PC 2 years after WiiU releases

How do you know any of that? You yourself said we don't know anything about the specs for either of the two, how do you know the Wii U uses dated hardware, or that the 720 will use top of the line hardware?

History and dates

1. 720 will release almost 2 years after WiiU and 360 used the best PC hardware of the time of release (better actually)

2. WiiU specs are definatly not close to the best PC today, at least that is the feeling i get since they say it is a bit better than PS3/360 and PC today is 10x-15x stronger than PS3/360

Even if 720 goes for a mid range off the self hardware and they dont do it at all like 360, it will still be mid range hardware 2 years ahead of WiiU one, so will be a lot stronger

Avatar image for ActionRemix
ActionRemix

5640

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#53 ActionRemix
Member since 2011 • 5640 Posts
Good chance it's not even going to use midrange PC parts. It could end up going with a smartphone chip.
Avatar image for loosingENDS
loosingENDS

11793

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#54 loosingENDS
Member since 2011 • 11793 Posts

Good chance it's not even going to use midrange PC parts. It could end up going with a smartphone chip.ActionRemix

Well, that has a one in the billion chance, but is possible

As much as PS4 using 1985 hardware

For now, we can assume that like 360 will have hardware better than the best on PC at the time of release, that is the 99.99% posibility

Avatar image for ActionRemix
ActionRemix

5640

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#55 ActionRemix
Member since 2011 • 5640 Posts

[QUOTE="ActionRemix"]Good chance it's not even going to use midrange PC parts. It could end up going with a smartphone chip.loosingENDS

Well, that has a one in the billion chance, but is possible

As much as PS4 using 1985 hardware

For now, we can assume that like 360 will have hardware better than the best on PC at the time of release, that is the 99.99% posibility

No. They would have to loss lead to do that, a strategy they're almost certainly abandoning. If they want to release a small and cheap console, they can't go that route.
Avatar image for Willy105
Willy105

25342

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#56 Willy105
Member since 2005 • 25342 Posts
loosingENDS, even if the 360 was "better than PC's" when it came out (it wasn't, using more cores than the average gaming PC's doesn't mean it was stronger, just like the N64 being 64-bit didn't mean it was stronger than a 32-bit PC from 2005), Microsoft and Sony are not very likely to go the high end graphics route again, especially after all the trouble it got them to this gen (hardware that was too expensive for people to buy, and too expensive to keep around without having to fire thousands of employees).
Avatar image for Willy105
Willy105

25342

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#57 Willy105
Member since 2005 • 25342 Posts

Also how is it possible to have hardware like WiiU, when

1. WiiU does not even use the best hardware of todays PCs

2. 720 will use the best PC hardware of PC 2 years after WiiU releases

loosingENDS

Also, you made this up.

Avatar image for soulitane
soulitane

15091

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#58 soulitane
Member since 2010 • 15091 Posts
loosingENDS, even if the 360 was "better than PC's" when it came out (it wasn't, using more cores than the average gaming PC's doesn't mean it was stronger, just like the N64 being 64-bit didn't mean it was stronger than a 32-bit PC from 2005), Microsoft and Sony are not very likely to go the high end graphics route again, especially after all the trouble it got them to this gen (hardware that was too expensive for people to buy, and too expensive to keep around without having to fire thousands of employees).Willy105
Nah man the next 360 is going to be producing graphics that even 4 GTX580s can't do :o
Avatar image for Kiro0
Kiro0

1176

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#59 Kiro0
Member since 2009 • 1176 Posts

So does anyone else get the feeling loosingENDS tries waytoo hard? That said those leaked specs don't really tell us a whole lot. The main thing I'm interested in is the GPU it'll be using anyways.

Avatar image for theuncharted34
theuncharted34

14529

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#60 theuncharted34
Member since 2010 • 14529 Posts

I don't know about that rumor, it seems unlikely. Mostly because of the supposed Dual Gpu.

The Cpu, maybe, only 2gbs though? If they only put 2 gigs of ram in that would be very foolish. Hell the 512 mb's of ram in current consoles are the main bottleneck - on both the 360 AND ps3.

Usually 8x the ram of the previous generation is the standard, I don't see why'd they'd put less than that in.

It's always puzzled me why consoles skimp on ram, I mean it's the cheapest component. Microsoft wanted to put just 256 mb's in the 360 at first :? Until Epic told them how stupid that was.

Maybe someone will have to tell them again? :P

Avatar image for spookykid143
spookykid143

10393

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#61 spookykid143
Member since 2009 • 10393 Posts

So does anyone else get the feeling loosingENDS tries waytoo hard? That said those leaked specs don't really tell us a whole lot. The main thing I'm interested in is the GPU it'll be using anyways.

Kiro0

I'm still trying to figure out why he hasn't been banned yet.

Avatar image for Willy105
Willy105

25342

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#62 Willy105
Member since 2005 • 25342 Posts

It's always puzzled me why consoles skimp on ram, I mean it's the cheapest component. Microsoft wanted to put just 256 mb's in the 360 at first :? Until Epic told them how stupid that was.

theuncharted34

The thing is, Epic is overentitled.

Game consoles don't need a lot of RAM like PC's do, since they don't need to run a huge and sophisticated OS like Windows or Mac OS. All game consoles need is a menu that allows you to choose whether you want to play the game, go to the store, see your friends, or whatever other app it does.

Avatar image for anshul89
anshul89

5705

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#63 anshul89
Member since 2006 • 5705 Posts

@ The_game21x, if it makes you feel any better (:P), my steam account was hacked and I got it back within 2 days :cool:

Avatar image for EPaul
EPaul

9917

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#64 EPaul
Member since 2006 • 9917 Posts

2GBs of ram is respectable look at what they did with 1/2 GB

Avatar image for theuncharted34
theuncharted34

14529

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#65 theuncharted34
Member since 2010 • 14529 Posts

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

It's always puzzled me why consoles skimp on ram, I mean it's the cheapest component. Microsoft wanted to put just 256 mb's in the 360 at first :? Until Epic told them how stupid that was.

Willy105

The thing is, Epic is overentitled.

Game consoles don't need a lot of RAM like PC's do, since they don't need to run a huge and sophisticated OS like Windows or Mac OS. All game consoles need is a menu that allows you to choose whether you want to play the game, go to the store, see your friends, or whatever other app it does.

Umm... okay?

The point is 256 mb's would have crippled the 360's performance. Developers now complain about the 512 mb's in the systems, so it obviously is the bottleneck in them. Drop that down to 256 mb's... :? Why would you purposely cripple the system from not buying more of the cheapest component? It would be comepletely asinine. You wouldn't even have games that are as technically impressive as the original gears of war had consoles had 256 mb's. All because they didn't want to spend an extra $30-50 on a console that would be on the market for over 5 years?

And yes, I know that consoles have small effecient Os's, but they still need enough ram as to not cripple the other components. And all this goes back to Ram being the cheapest component - It's an incredibly stupid move to skimp on it.

If console manufacturers want to save money on the console, they should have slightly weaker processors instead of halving ram.

Avatar image for Willy105
Willy105

25342

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#66 Willy105
Member since 2005 • 25342 Posts

[QUOTE="Willy105"]

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

It's always puzzled me why consoles skimp on ram, I mean it's the cheapest component. Microsoft wanted to put just 256 mb's in the 360 at first :? Until Epic told them how stupid that was.

theuncharted34

The thing is, Epic is overentitled.

Game consoles don't need a lot of RAM like PC's do, since they don't need to run a huge and sophisticated OS like Windows or Mac OS. All game consoles need is a menu that allows you to choose whether you want to play the game, go to the store, see your friends, or whatever other app it does.

Umm... okay?

The point is 256 mb's would have crippled the 360's performance. Developers now complain about the 512 mb's in the systems, so it obviously is the bottleneck in them. Drop that down to 256 mb's... :? Why would you purposely cripple the system from not buying more of the cheapest component? It would be comepletely asinine. You wouldn't even have games that are as technically impressive as the original gears of war had consoles had 256 mb's. All because they didn't want to spend an extra $30-50 on a console that would be on the market for over 5 years?

And yes, I know that consoles have small effecient Os's, but they still need enough ram as to not cripple the other components. And all this goes back to Ram being the cheapest component - It's an incredibly stupid move to skimp on it.

If console manufacturers want to save money on the console, they should have slightly weaker processors instead of halving ram.

256 MB is not "crippling a system". The 360 and PS3 are well enough with that kind of RAM, especially consider what they do.

It's just now that when we compare it to current PC's (as developers get used to making games for them), it's when the number seems low. Developers always want to make bigger games, so they always want more power to do it. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's reality. People were complaining about the N64 and PS1 back in the late 90's, and people will complain about the next-gen systems in the late 2010's.

Remember that these are not small numbers. They are more than enough to do so many things.

Avatar image for ActionRemix
ActionRemix

5640

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#67 ActionRemix
Member since 2011 • 5640 Posts
Low RAM makes development harder. They want extra RAM so they don't have to worry about memory management as much.
Avatar image for theuncharted34
theuncharted34

14529

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#68 theuncharted34
Member since 2010 • 14529 Posts

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

[QUOTE="Willy105"]

The thing is, Epic is overentitled.

Game consoles don't need a lot of RAM like PC's do, since they don't need to run a huge and sophisticated OS like Windows or Mac OS. All game consoles need is a menu that allows you to choose whether you want to play the game, go to the store, see your friends, or whatever other app it does.

Willy105

Umm... okay?

The point is 256 mb's would have crippled the 360's performance. Developers now complain about the 512 mb's in the systems, so it obviously is the bottleneck in them. Drop that down to 256 mb's... :? Why would you purposely cripple the system from not buying more of the cheapest component? It would be comepletely asinine. You wouldn't even have games that are as technically impressive as the original gears of war had consoles had 256 mb's. All because they didn't want to spend an extra $30-50 on a console that would be on the market for over 5 years?

And yes, I know that consoles have small effecient Os's, but they still need enough ram as to not cripple the other components. And all this goes back to Ram being the cheapest component - It's an incredibly stupid move to skimp on it.

If console manufacturers want to save money on the console, they should have slightly weaker processors instead of halving ram.

256 MB is not "crippling a system". The 360 and PS3 are well enough with that kind of RAM, especially consider what they do.

It's just now that when we compare it to current PC's (as developers get used to making games for them), it's when the number seems low. Developers always want to make bigger games, so they always want more power to do it. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's reality. People were complaining about the N64 and PS1 back in the late 90's, and people will complain about the next-gen systems in the late 2010's.

Remember that these are not small numbers. They are more than enough to do so many things.

On the systems we are talking about, yes, it is. Developers complain about Ram, more than anything else. Let's say consoles had the same Cpu's and Gpu's, but half the ram. :idea:

Here's the other point that you didn't mention from my last post - ram is the cheapest component to buy.

(Just an example) Why on earth would you build a system, spend $200 a piece on the gpu and Cpu, and spend $30 on ram, to only be able to use half of the processor's power?

This isn't about not having enough power, it's about having it in every other area but one - and bringing down the entire system because of that. So in essence money and the time developing the system has been wasted severely. Which is why Epic and other developer's pointed out the obvious flaw in the original 360.

So, they could (in the same example as above) spend $100 on each of the processors, as for enough power to have all the parts run close to their max potential. Saving money, and having the same potential.

Avatar image for mmmwksil
mmmwksil

16422

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#69 mmmwksil
Member since 2003 • 16422 Posts

Update the history books. Skyward Sword proved the sky's the limit when it comes to floppage.

Avatar image for 789shadow
789shadow

20195

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#70 789shadow
Member since 2006 • 20195 Posts

LIVE from System Wars this is

SYSTEM WARS THE MAGAZINE

So, Skyward Sword. Like, WTF?

.

Seriously, like, huh?

"I'm sorry, but I don't think I got high tonight," said shinobishyguy.

"I do believe the sheer WTFitude could power faster than light travel," said foxhound_fox.

Many users we interviewed only made gurgling noises.

"Is this real life? Let me stab myself and find out," said madsnakehhh

This magazine currently is of the opinion of simply, "wat."

Avatar image for quaappybla
quaappybla

718

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#71 quaappybla
Member since 2010 • 718 Posts

Update the history books. Skyward Sword proved the sky's the limit when it comes to floppage.

mmmwksil

is this bigger than infamous 2's flop?

Avatar image for Jynxzor
Jynxzor

9313

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#72 Jynxzor
Member since 2003 • 9313 Posts

[QUOTE="mmmwksil"]

Update the history books. Skyward Sword proved the sky's the limit when it comes to floppage.

quaappybla

is this bigger than infamous 2's flop?

It's Zelda, Link is the king of flops when he decides to go for one. This SWM writer for one is shocked and awed at the same time.
Avatar image for gamebreakerz__
gamebreakerz__

5120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#73 gamebreakerz__
Member since 2010 • 5120 Posts
So Zelda is a retread but MW3 isn't? Right........
Avatar image for Cloud_765
Cloud_765

111406

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 46

User Lists: 0

#74 Cloud_765
Member since 2008 • 111406 Posts
LOL at the Sonic/Mario pic, it's just priceless.
Avatar image for abusedbunny
abusedbunny

1196

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#75 abusedbunny
Member since 2007 • 1196 Posts

Picture says it all. Either Nintendo did something to anger GS, or gamespot is just craving attention.

Avatar image for magiciandude
magiciandude

9667

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#76 magiciandude
Member since 2004 • 9667 Posts

LOL at the Sonic/Mario pic, it's just priceless. Cloud_765

Thanks. And to all those who comment on the comic.

Avatar image for CwlHeddwyn
CwlHeddwyn

5314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#77 CwlHeddwyn
Member since 2005 • 5314 Posts
I'm trading in goldeneye 007 reloaded coz its poor. Deffo getting zelda SS.
Avatar image for mrmusicman247
mrmusicman247

17601

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#78 mrmusicman247
Member since 2008 • 17601 Posts
It is confirmed that GS is certainly trolling us this year. Or just Tom.
Avatar image for deactivated-5b78379493e12
deactivated-5b78379493e12

15625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#79 deactivated-5b78379493e12
Member since 2005 • 15625 Posts

I read the review, and comapred it to other reviews that have come out. Either Tom saw things that so many other reviewers didn't, or this is a cry for attention.

Avatar image for CwlHeddwyn
CwlHeddwyn

5314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#80 CwlHeddwyn
Member since 2005 • 5314 Posts

I don't know about that rumor, it seems unlikely. Mostly because of the supposed Dual Gpu.

The Cpu, maybe, only 2gbs though? If they only put 2 gigs of ram in that would be very foolish. Hell the 512 mb's of ram in current consoles are the main bottleneck - on both the 360 AND ps3.

Usually 8x the ram of the previous generation is the standard, I don't see why'd they'd put less than that in.

It's always puzzled me why consoles skimp on ram, I mean it's the cheapest component. Microsoft wanted to put just 256 mb's in the 360 at first :? Until Epic told them how stupid that was.

Maybe someone will have to tell them again? :P

theuncharted34
RAM is one of the cheapest components but it's also one if the easiest components to skimp on and keep costs down. You've also gotta remember that historically ram was a lot more expensive than today. To Microsoft and extra 256mb per console adds up to hundreds of millions of dollars overall. In the case of epic they were clearly right. The extra ram meant much better visuals and much better sales. The 360 would have tanked with just 256mb ram
Avatar image for CwlHeddwyn
CwlHeddwyn

5314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#82 CwlHeddwyn
Member since 2005 • 5314 Posts
[QUOTE="TheGuardian03"]Alright PS3 got its 7.5 which is Infamous 2. Wii got its 7.5 which is Zelda SS. what about the 360 ? :twisted::P

question is how come so many average games walk straight into an 8.0 or more?
Avatar image for chocolate1325
chocolate1325

33007

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 306

User Lists: 0

#83 chocolate1325
Member since 2006 • 33007 Posts

Should be very intresting.

Avatar image for EPaul
EPaul

9917

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#84 EPaul
Member since 2006 • 9917 Posts

Lol

you guys need to make a Comic for this. Just like the one for Zelda TP 8.8

Avatar image for Willy105
Willy105

25342

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#85 Willy105
Member since 2005 • 25342 Posts

REPORT: ZELDA FLOPS

Willy105:

"This is blasphemy! I want Tom's head on a stake by tomorrow morning!" says Animorphsfan.

Ah, memories.

In 2006, Jeff Gerstmann reviewed Zelda: Twilight Princess with a score of 8.8, becoming the most publicized game review in the history of the Internet. Such a huge flop, people called for Jeff to be fired, calling him fat, and threatening to kill him for his review. We thought we would never see something like that ever again.

But then comes the next Zelda game.

"My Goodness I go away fro one day and miss the biggest flop of the century!!!!!!" said musalana just minutes after the review was posted.

"I just watched the video review. Its like he didnt even play the same game as all those other reviewers...I love how he describes the game as fetch quest, dungeon, fetch quest...It sounds like Skyrim. Yet that has a 9.0." said argetlam00

"So charizard do we both lose our bet now?" said super600.

"f*** this site, Tom McS*** reviews." said SaltyMeatballs.

"Wow I am absolutely loving the madness. All the sheep flipping out and losing it xD" said GiveMeSomething.

"I need to vist Jeff in person to reclaim all my death threats and to say I'm sorry. I've cleary sent them to the wrong person." said Technoweirdo.

Gamespot's review is one of the lowest the game has gotten, which has previously recieved Perfect 10's from places like Game Informer, IGN, and Edge.

Avatar image for 789shadow
789shadow

20195

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#86 789shadow
Member since 2006 • 20195 Posts

The **** did you do to my report, Willy. Keep it the way it was, please.

Avatar image for ActionRemix
ActionRemix

5640

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#87 ActionRemix
Member since 2011 • 5640 Posts
Most responders accused Tom of sucking at gaming or not being a real Zelda fan. "But IGTEN gave it a perfect score. :cry:" Having played the game, I disagree with the review, but I think the score is fair. I have to wonder if you've played any Zelda besides Twilight Princess if you think this corridor platformer is clearly the greatest Zelda of all time. I should have seen the linearity coming considering the previous 3D Zelda was an on-rails shooter.
Avatar image for chocolate1325
chocolate1325

33007

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 306

User Lists: 0

#88 chocolate1325
Member since 2006 • 33007 Posts

Funny that image of all those Sheep.

Avatar image for ActionRemix
ActionRemix

5640

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#89 ActionRemix
Member since 2011 • 5640 Posts
 -
Avatar image for forgot_it
forgot_it

6756

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#90 forgot_it
Member since 2004 • 6756 Posts
Super excited for this game, Gamespots score has no effect on me (not going to read it cause I've barred myself from any real information on the game) but this is freaking hilarious :lol:.
Avatar image for Valiant_Rebel
Valiant_Rebel

4197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#91 Valiant_Rebel
Member since 2009 • 4197 Posts

.

Avatar image for ModeDude
ModeDude

1135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#92 ModeDude
Member since 2009 • 1135 Posts
Some people mistake unchanged for having the same weaknesses.
Avatar image for illmatic87
illmatic87

17934

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 564

User Lists: 0

#93 illmatic87
Member since 2008 • 17934 Posts

Picture says it all. Either Nintendo did something to anger GS, or gamespot is just craving attention.

abusedbunny

Or those quotations are completely taken out of context when taken out and pit right next to each other.

If I were to play along: "weaknesses" would be a key word if you were to use that image anyway.

-

>Tom McShea game Super Meat Boy a 9.5 - apparently he sucks at vidja games.

Avatar image for The_Djoker
The_Djoker

210

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#94 The_Djoker
Member since 2011 • 210 Posts

LOL My topic yesterday "gamespot...8.0?" Was a troll topic attempt, i photoshopped an image with 8.0 on it. Yet ironically GS trolled harder HAHAHHA

Avatar image for hippiesanta
hippiesanta

10301

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#95 hippiesanta
Member since 2005 • 10301 Posts
Tom Mcshea have breakfast with Simon Cowell and Gordon Ramsey in the afterlife
Avatar image for anshul89
anshul89

5705

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#96 anshul89
Member since 2006 • 5705 Posts

.

Valiant_Rebel

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

So much win in that gif.

Avatar image for shakmaster13
shakmaster13

7138

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#97 shakmaster13
Member since 2007 • 7138 Posts
So Zelda is a retread but MW3 isn't? Right........gamebreakerz__
Call of Duty hasn't stayed the same game for the past 20+ years. It'll get there though. This was long overdue.
Avatar image for EPaul
EPaul

9917

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#98 EPaul
Member since 2006 • 9917 Posts

Nice can't wait for the interview with the man himself

Avatar image for 789shadow
789shadow

20195

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#99 789shadow
Member since 2006 • 20195 Posts

Hey, we could accept questions from here too! :)

Avatar image for EPaul
EPaul

9917

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#100 EPaul
Member since 2006 • 9917 Posts

Nice , here's my question for tom" Did you expect any backlash from your review score?"