I think this is the REAL Arkham City sequel, and WB shouldn't have wasted money on that shitty ass Origins game that was a blatant and shameless cash grab that was terrible. Shame on them.

Most casual gamers won't know that Rocksteady developed this one as opposed to the crappy developer that developed Origins, and may grow fatigue with the Arkham series, since it's not yet established that Batman may see annual releases like Assassins Creed. Being able to roam around Gotham City is promising but I'm afraid there will be some limited scope to this, and it won't quite be the size of Los Santos. Gotham City is modeled after New York City, it's freaking enormous, both in raw land mass and even density. It's probably a little bigger than Los Santos, and just as dense as Arkham City. I'll be really surprised if they pull that off. If they do, it would take more than the Batmobile, you would need the damn jet!

I bet there are some games that have already been released that you haven't played yet that will look good on your new card.

Have you ever played Borderlands 2?

intel celeron

gtx titan

No, 59.99 is still the standard for a console release in the U.S.

Other countries have higher prices, but that is nothing new. I don't believe they will attempt (or sustain if they do) even a $5 price increase at this point. $59.99 is the ceiling for the U.S. for most console releases. If anything, it could go down, cause at that price, gamers are more conservative about what their buying, which explains the extreme disparity of a game being hit or miss, of a studio riding high one year then going bankrupt the next.

If anything they are indirectly increasing the price through DLC. But I personally have not played a game yet where I thought the DLC was crucial to the experience, thank God.

I was a game tester for about 6 months. It's not as enjoyable or even as easy to get into as you would think.

Game testing jobs are seasonal, and many companies only hire on a part-time and temporary basis (i.g. You are a tester for Cod: Ghosts, the project ends, the studio won't necessarily pick you up for another project, it's back to LinkedIn to see who's hiring for QA). Right now is kind of a weird time in the industry with the transition to the next consoles. But generally I think the future looks bright. You typically will have a hard time finding work in the winter while work will pick back up in the summer, and it'll be painstakingly difficult for you to find anything paid out the gate with zero experience.

The hours are also very rough and the job gets very old very fast. You're not going to be testing Titanfall or Destiny, out the gate you're going to be testing lots of shitty mobile and web based games, because that's probably where the most QA work is at right now. And if you do get something on consoles you are doing very repetitive and cerebral tasks to try to intentionally generate bugs and glitches. It's a bit of a numbers game because they want to see how many bugs you can find, and some companies will mandate quotas. It's also easy to get cabin fever very fast.

If you are still serious about getting into QA (Quality Assurance) my advice would be to start off looking for something non-paid at first and see how you like it. A lot of the testers I knew actually enjoyed it. Good for them. I recommend getting something non-paid at first cause it's an easy way to rack up experience, get better at the job, and begin building your LinkedIn contacts. They may attempt to put pressure on you, but believe me, the company knows their being stingy (or they've accepted they have no money) and they know their getting what they pay for, lol, so there isn't as much pressure to rack up high numbers as there would be in a paid position for a big budget game.

If you do become a game tester, never take anything personal (like getting hours cut or a better/more experienced tester getting the gig over you) cause for every game tester you have to have the mindset that you're always looking for work. So even when you're working on a project, always hit up your LinkedIn contacts to see what their working on and if the company their with is looking for anyone. Goodluck!

Nice thread. For me, I am going with the Xbox. It was the spiritual successor to the Dreamcast. Microsoft may have never pursued a home console, at least at the time that it did, had it not been for the Dreamcast and it's fall. Dreamcast had Windows CE as its OS which gave Microsoft the idea to install a Windows kernel on a home console.

It was also its spiritual successor in other ways, such as its aggressive push to popularize online gaming in a home console. Xbox Live would not catch on until the 360, but it was with the original Xbox that it built a solid foundation, debut, learned from its mistakes, and would continue to build upon its foundation that would help make it so popular on the 360. And then, there are direct Sega-Xbox correlations as many Sega games would be published on Xbox.

The GameCube is a console that actually gets better overtime, cause at the time it was a real POS and I hated it. The miniature cube shape was such a gimmick, and it had a very distinct personality. You can call it gaming-centric yes, kid-friendly maybe, but it sure as hell wasn't as hardcore and adult as the Dreamcast and Xbox. And there was no online, at all.

But overtime and looking back on it in retrospect, it had a lot of solid games, and a game just being on the GameCube, the GameCube's personality rubbed off on it, like with Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles. As a vintage console, it actually is one of the better systems I own. And even though the graphics are dated by now, there is a sort of distinct lush art style look to its games, like with Metroi Prime.

But ultimately my vote goes to the original Xbox, one of my favorite consoles of all time. An exclusive;y hardcore gamer's machine, unlike 360 which really was the PS2 of its generation.

No that's crazy, as long as there are gaming PCs you'll always be able to custom build. The very concept of a "custom build" isn't something you can take away. "Custom build" isn't a product, it's the very act of assembling. You will be able to assemble anything you want at any time you want for all of eternity.

PC Gaming is great, it's PC Gamers that are stupid. Stop shouting at everyone with how much better your $1,500 PC is compared to an Xbox 360 and just enjoy your games.

All of those things wouldn't save it.

Cut the price by $100, ship it with a pro controller instead of the tablet, then have fully-3d Mario/Zelda/Metroid/Donkey Kong/Kirby/Star Fox/Mario Party/Martio Kart sequels in addition to their other IPs that they've outsourced to other developers like Xenoblade, then we're getting somewhere. Oh, and they'd have to start releasing titles of those calibur once a month for the next 2 years beginning next month, in addition to the price cut and ditching the tablet.... That's just not happening.

Resident Evil and Final Fantasy.

More Survival Horror and traditional JRPGs, please, but enough of those series'.

But the Wii U isn't an old school gaming console either with it's tablet controller. The Wii sure as hell wasn't an old school gaming console. The GameCube was their last old school gaming console. Their last GOOD old school gaming console was the N64.