The vast majority of the older members of the union that populate the IRC and offsite don't really visit this place or care what happens to it. And I'm one of them.

So if there are members here who want to try and improve the GS-bound portion of GUFU, give them the reins and let them go nuts. Whatever you guys do doesn't affect me at all, anyways. 

You all can work out your policies on recruitment and whatnot when we're not running things. 

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]

[QUOTE="delta3074"]i agree with this, getting extra content is rewarding peoples patience for waiting for said game and i personally see nothing wrong with it, i would rather play the game day and not wait a year but i don't mind if people get extra content for waiting an extra year to play the game.tormentos

And I see nothing personally wrong with requiring a downloadable game released day and date with another it hurts no one, I also see no reason why a retail game shouldn't be parity across all systems, Why should another company receive extra content for absolutely no reason? Tit for tat is seems Microsoft doesn't demand extra content but requires the same content as every one else...

simply put sony required atleast one Company to fashion extra content for a game or they wouldn't allow it be released.

MS demands that content be equal "on-disk". That has nothing to do with DLC. So you can have exclusive downloads on the PS3, and Microsoft has no objections to it in its policy.

Even that demand doesn't seem to be set in stone, considering that the PS3 version of Mortal Kombat had Kratos as an exclusive character, and it was still released on 360.

I don't have much problem with this policy. If they want to limit what games can come out on their platforms, let them. It doesn't matter much to me, and it keeps each platform's library more distinct, which I kinda like.

The bigger problem is how Microsoft's restrictions on patching games and their required battery of tests harm smaller developers and keep larger ones from properly supporting their games post-release. That seems like a much more important discussion to me, as a consumer.

Of course, Android has 66% more marketshare than Apple in the smartphone market. So there are more Android users in general.

The whole "more likely" thing seems like a great way to use statistics to confuse people. Let's get a few things straight.

1. This poll is made up entirely of people who use Hunch, and answer their questions. I assume the baseline is the average answer for any given question. Hunch has gotten 80+ million responses to its 2,000 questions, so each question has an average of about 40,000 respondents. 

2. The demographics of Hunch don't reflect the demographics of the country, considering that more people use Android phones than iPhones, yet more respondents to this question use iPhones than Android phones. There are a number of possible reasons for this. 

3. The "more likely" thing is a little confusing. If, for example, an Android user is "80% more likely to only have a high school diploma", that's just relative to the rate of people who only have high school diplomas. If, say, 5% of poll respondents only have high school diplomas, then that would apply to 9% of Android users. 

To me, there seem to be a lot of parallels between these results and those of the Mac vs PC debate, also on their blog. Mac vs PC is even more skewed, but both seem to reflect that Apple's product is largely used by well-connected urbanites, while its competitor has a more diverse crowd. I don't think it means all that much, personally. 

Well, seems Nintendo heard our cries, looked down, and whispered, "No."

Thank you for your enthusiasm. We promised an update, so here it is. We never say "never," but we can confirm that there are no plans to bring these three games to the Americas at this time. Thanks so much for your passion, and for being such great fans!Nintendo

Guess they don't want my money anymore. 

[QUOTE="Heil68"]Have we fulfilled the vision of AKLover? Guppy507

Oh wow, I remember that guy from my lurking days.  He was banned I presume?

That he was. Yet some say his ghost still haunts these boards, worshipping Russian weaponry and mocking users he finds foolish. Such is his legend. 

Happy birthday, GUFU! Though you change, you still remain the best place on Gamespot. 

You did good, Wasdie.

I'm proud of you. :)

[QUOTE="sts106mat"][QUOTE="CTR360"]MGS4=almost perfect game Mozelleple112

If that's the case, I would disagree with his review.

Metal Gear Solid as a series has frequently suffered from this problem, but while there are some good moments where cutscenes lead into gameplay, for much of the game, the two feel very divorced. Early on, the stuff you're doing doesn't have much effect on the plot (most of the open gameplay scenarios that I recall fondly are pretty much Snake going from point A to point B). And later on, the plot itself goes on and on and on and doesn't tie into the gameplay that much. There are setpieces where the two intersect, and some of those are really incredible, but they just make the low points that much more obvious to me. Compare that to, say, Braid or Portal. Even if those two games don't have cutscenes, all the story elements they do communicate reflect directly on what you're doing. And much of what you're doing (especially in Portal) is the story. Phoenix Wright, or other adventure games, do this within a structure that more closely resembles MGS4.

MGS4 inspires so much discussion because its fans are so passionate. If they liked the game as much as, say, people tend to like Bioshock, it wouldn't come up so much. I like MGS4. Despite all the things that I find poor in it, there are a lot of pretty incredible highs. But when people call it the Best Game Ever and compare it to titles like OoT, I come out against it, because, to me, it doesn't seem like that sort of game.

It's also frustrating for me, as a person trying to figure out why people are so attached to the game, when most of the fans adopt a "haters gonna hate" attitude about all the negativity and pretty much never bother to respond to any kind of criticism. That's why I made a thread specificially asking for more informed opinions, which I appreciated.

• Super-fluid visuals and character animations ala Blazblue. Well over 30 stages can be equipped in a title running on hardware such as the ones currently available. Hand drawn backgrounds would've been o.k by the fans I'm sure.

• Capcom didn't have to RE-draw every sprite. They simply could've added to the already existing ones by tweaking and enhancing them. Suffice it to say, if time was ever an issue with Capcom, this would have not been

Bullet points. For the lazy.

mrmusicman247

How do these two points work together? It's going to have super-fluid visuals, using sprites that date back to the 90s?

Marvel vs Capcom 3 should have had Blazblue: CS's featureset (in terms of online play and tutorials), but there's nothing wrong with what they did for gameplay, characters, and stages.

I don't really like review embargoes that go past the release date. That's just a way of forcing people to buy the game blind.

Embargoes on release day or before, on the other hand, ultimately lead to better reviews. They let game companies send their products out to varied outlets and prevent a rush to be first that causes people to blitz through games and create content as fast as possible. This makes it more likely that the review won't be comprehensive, or the reviewer won't be playing the game under normal conditions due to that rush. None of the alternatives are really desirable. Without embargoes, either companies flat out won't get sent review copies, or it'll be a free for all, and either option leads to reviews written with an interest towards time rather than quality.