@Yamakoichi @darksidecelica @b09h THAT I'd actually be down for. Some of these people that call themselves "exotic dancers" are just ones who are not capable of making money any other way. We SHOULD start importing Pro-Strippers.
This is retarded. Plain and simple. No, gamers are not in any way shape or form professional athletes. It's ridiculous to even imply such a thing. Once again the people up top are broadcasting their ignorance to the world, and I for one didn't vote for this. Nor do I expect my tax dollars to be spent on deciding issues such as this, I'd much rather they protected the borders, or put some cops out on the block so I can walk my puppy after dark, or help drug addicts, help elderly, sick, homeless, poor. The veterans are committing suicide in astonishing numbers because they have to wait six months to see a shrink. What is the government doing? Opening up immigration to professional gamers, GTFO!
Watch all the Korean teams start applying for visas because they're, all of a sudden, professional athletes! What kind of retarded thinking are they doing up on the hill? I most definitely want some of that sh!t they're smokin on, maybe that would bring my pulse down after seeing stupidity of this magnitude.
That's my biggest question. Mass Effect was set, pretty much from the very beginning, to be a trilogy. So why are they making ME4? If Shepard's story is done, and let's be real here, all three ME games were about Shepard, everything else is fluff, Shepard is the centerpiece. It's like if Blizzard decided to make StarCraft3 but place it in Azeroth... it just doesn't make sense.
From the gamer perspective it doesn't make sense, it makes perfect sense from the corporate money-grubbing perspective. Mass Effect is a HUGE franchise, it's not just games. There are multiple books, there are sweaters, t-shirts, keychains, coffee mugs, etc etc etc. So I can easily see how the corporate types want to slap the ME name on anything just to milk that cow. But are we (the gamers) just going to let the suits make us their b!tches once again? We pay these ridiculous prices, we deal with day 1 DLCs, the dysfunctional products that require multiple fixes to work properly, the retarded DRM systems, etc. When is the breaking point? Sooner or later something has to give, there's only so far they can keep pushing. Indie developers are already quickly gaining ground, their products aren't as flashy and not as polished. But they work, they have new intelligent systems whereas the AAA titles are all about feeding the consumer the same game with the next number on it. (a la CoD105, Crysis15, HaloXXIV, CivilizationDCLXVI, etc) Anyhow, getting offtrack here, this is already much too long for most of the audience...
We're living in interesting times... there's a whole lot more coming in the near future that we haven't been expecting. The internet is still fairly new and the companies are still unsure about how to intelligently make use of it. It would be great to have true photorealistic graphics in games, it would up the immersion to a whole new level. But it also bring it's own set of issues, and I'm not talking about the controversial things like gore and sexual content. No, I mean things that are more like what they mention in the article.
There's only so much you can achieve with high quality graphics. You gotta remember some of the things that tie into graphics very closely. For example lip-sync, currently it's pretty rare for a game to be lip-synced well enough to actually seem realistic. Then there's animations, you can have the clearest most beautiful graphics ever, but if your faeries are shambling about like zombies the graphics won't help much. One of the questions I'm asking myself is 'Do we really want games to look real?' This is a big question IMO, there's a pretty thin line between acceptable and morbid. With today's graphics games can have all the gore they feel is necessary, but when it actually looks life-like wouldn't that limit the devs in some ways?
And of course on top of that is the loudest question, and likely the one we will see/hear most of in the coming years. And that is parental controls and adult content. The closer we get to making games lifelike the more acute this issue will become. There are multiple groups out there already protesting violent and sexual and otherwise adult topics in the game industry. Everyone understands that these topics are here to stay, they're not going anywhere, but how they're ultimately restricted is a very big question, and one that the gaming companies need to start working on yesterday. If they wait until the tech is here to decide this we're going to see problems. (Which we will likely see in any scenario.)
Judging by this trailer it looks like more of an action game then old school stealth. Old skool stealh was actually about getting in and out unnoticed and preferably without leaving ANY evidence... While in Dark it looks like you're killing every single enemy in sight, that isn't stealth. Essentially it's about as stealthy as AssCreed or Far Cry 3, it lets you slink around in the shadows and get a jump on unsuspecting enemies. So it's still a murder game first, stealth is just a catch word they're using to ramp up the sales.
Either way, I've been watching this game pretty much since they announced it. I'm not exactly happy with the end product, at this point, because it's so far away from what they supposedly set out to do. But I specifically said 'at this point' cuz I haven't had a chance to play this game yet. I'll probably be back here or the review page (or forums) and post more once I could actually get some time in the game.
Now I wish I had played the beta while it was still open. :/
Essentially it looks exactly like the first game. Great looking RTS, still horrible graphics if you choose to zoom in for a closer view, so just stick with the genre standard view. Seriously though, what are the changes? I understand it's a new engine (supposedly) but how will that actually affect my game? Is this more or less the exact same game but now set in a different part of the conflict? Or did they add new mechanics and stuff that will add to the gameplay?
@FragHatter He is right to an extent. This horrible looking crap needs to stop. There is no reason to not make the graphics much much nicer then this, and I'm not talking about reaching the levels of detail that the AAA titles have. This is literally 20+ year old graphics, it was cute the first couple (dozens) of times, but at this point it's not fun anymore.
@jholden3249 @1wikkid1 I actually had this happen already. Sometime around 98 or 99 I bought a multiplayer racing game (Motor City Online), way ahead of it's time obviously, most people who were online were on dial-up, but anyway, I loooved that game (classic and muscle cars, none of them currently popular rice-burners.) But then around 2002 the servers were shut down because the game was never popular in the first place (ahead of it's time playing in again) and immediately the game and the disk became worthless. It had no single player mode or anything... obviously not a smart way to draw clientele.
5.0?! Wow, I didn't expect GS to mess up *this* badly. Seriously though, you guys need to figure out which genres are enjoyed by which reviewers. Reviews like this are actually counter-productive. It's obvious that people play this type of game exactly for the reason that this review takes points off for, micromanagement. That's the game's MAIN feature, that's what it was made to do, and that's why fans buy the game and play it. It makes no sense letting somebody with no patience review a game like this, obviously that person won't like it, and it's understandable. What's not understandable is why this person got to review this game in the first place.
This game is not meant to be Sid Meyers Pirates! Port Royale knows exactly what it is and what it wants to do, and does it well. This game truly deserves a noticeably higher score then a 5.0.
1wikkid1's comments