I've never been superstitious enough to see ghosts, witches, and devils as something negative, so the overall "Spooky" theme is in my opinion very fun. Tying it in with all the other goodies of harvest time during the year, like pumpkins, apple cider, Oktoberfest, changes in the leaves is what makes fall time time a blast.

So the question that has been on my mind these last few days is should I even bother picking up ACIII and beating it before I play the new one? Now, the last thing I'm trying to do here is start another AC thread, however I think that oftentimes I ask myself where to cut the corners. I for one have a lengthy list of games to play, movies and shows to watch, and books to read. Knowing full well unless I dedicate my life to being a shut-in (not that there is anything wrong with that) I sometimes make the difficult decision of missing out on something in order to move on to something better. For example never having played the Arkham games I jumped straight to Arkham City, I understand Asylum is probably a great game but the commitment of a trilogy just seemed a bit much. I also played and enjoyed BioShock Infinite without ever picking up a BioShock game before that.

So aside from answering my question of should I skip ACIII and just read the synopsis, tell me some of your own corners cut in games. How do you determine which titles to skip out on?

Why is pink considered a girl's color? Or The Notebook considered a chick flick? A social stigma is and always will be associated with certain things, the sweet taste of Smirnoff Ice and other wine coolers tend to be marketed toward women more and usually many women like them. That being said drink what you want and don't let the opinions of others throw you off something you like. Personally none of my friends can stand Bud Platinum, doesn't change my opinion of it.

As far as features go, San Andreas blew me away with all the new things you could partake in as well as the sheer size. Still my vote has to go to Vice City, the Miami 80's setting is what sells it and I can't wait to go back.

I was actually just thinking about this today, the very first game with "choice" I was exposed to was Fable but having never completed it I'm not sure if it stacks up to the other obvious ones such as the Bethesda RPGs, and the Witcher games. I really thought making choices in the GTA IV was interesting and would have really liked to see more of that implemented into the new one. I think Bethesda does it best with you can create your characters appearance and then allow his/her actions dictate the type of person they are. Skyrim lacked the Karma or Fame/Infamy of the other titles which I think added a better element of realism to choosing good or bad deeds. Hero's can go unnoticed and villain's can be secretive.

Whether other games have or have not been reviewed like this in the past, doesn't it make more sense to do it this way? I mean if you are anything like me and couldn't care less about the online features of GTA V, a score only reflecting the story is going to be more helpful when deciding to buy the game. I think more big releases should be handled this way.

Let's have a look at the libraries for the two systems- the DS simply had so many better higher rated titles than the PSP, it wasn't even funny. Sure, the PSP had its own gems too, but the DS won ONLY because of its games, not its price, and those same games may help ensure success for the 3DS too.charizard1605

[QUOTE="Lalucar"]

I don't understand how the regular DS outsold the PSP... but thats just me.

charizard1605