Beamer wrote on May 21, 2013, 16:33:

Yosemite Sam wrote on May 21, 2013, 16:30:
Well watched the whole thing and my first impression seems correct. Microsoft innovated for non-gamers, odd for a game machine, seems the only thing Microsoft did for gamers was buy exclusives. From a purely video game standpoint, the PS4 looks to be the clear winner.

You have that impression for 2 reasons:
1) There really isn't much room for innovation for gamers, hardware-wise. We're at old technology. It's kind of like expecting your alarm clock to innovate. Things can be done here and there, but we're really at refinement, not truly changing. Just the point on the product curve we've reached
2) They didn't show game stuff here because this was a general public announcement. Want the game specific one? Wait for E3. Which is smart - these are the announcements that make the 6 o'clock news, so hit with them. Then, with this stuff exhausted, you can focus on games at E3 so people don't roll their eyes when you show them some NFL exclusive BS that's 100% identical to the ESPN BS you led off with

Here's the product curve I mean. Depending on where you sit, consoles are either at mature or decline, but no one will deny that they're past innovation.
That kind of goes for video games as a whole. People blame consoles exclusively, but we're at the point where graphics can't really get better, at least not in any way even remotely cost-effective, and there's little else to be done. Things like Occulus Rift may change that somewhat, but people keep saying "it looks like Crysis" for a reason - everything is incremental now, changes in lighting and the like mostly, and we won't ever really have the "holy crap!" moments we got the first time we saw ourselves leave bloody footprints in DN3D.

Verno wrote on May 21, 2013, 13:25:
I hope someone else here is watching this shit show, "Xbox ESPN!" hahah. They didn't even lead with games, it's all TV and Twitter nonsense so far. The console itself looks like a pretty standard Antec or Silverstone HTPC case.

Edit: Oh boy, Kinect 2.0. "It can read your heart rate!"

Smartglass, just what people care about.

Get to the games already.

PHJF wrote on May 18, 2013, 14:56:

I don't want to see Nintendo making games for other platforms,

Ummm I and all the other "core gamers" would love for this to happen.

Spektr wrote on May 15, 2013, 10:45:
yeah there's something about old nazi cougars in tight leather suits going around to each his own. Hmm I dont recall ever having a gun pointed at me by an evil old man in an fps... Ah Maybe in Bioshock?

Blue wrote on May 3, 2013, 19:43:

Yosemite Sam wrote on May 3, 2013, 17:51:
Hey Blue, hate to complain about the site, but these auto-run ads with sound are friken annoying.
I don't mind auto-run-ads if it helps you make a buck, but the sound part sucks.

We aren't supposed to have any of those. Can you tell me what you are seeing ads for?

Krovven wrote on May 3, 2013, 19:05:
That half second shot at 1:36 is in the game. http://youtu.be/dIIAeFsx7bA?t=4m14s The lighting is slightly different, and that's it. Lighting is a common thing to have change and not lawsuit worthy. If movie and game companies got sued for everything that changed from trailer to final production, nobody would make entertainment any more. But good on you for picking out a fraction of a second shot in a trailer that has lighting different than the final product. You deserve millions in compensation.

The second example you gave is a pre-rendered cutscene halfway through the game (not in-engine like some of the cutscenes in the game). Which you would know if you had played the game and had any clue what you are talking about.

http://youtu.be/dIIAeFsx7bA 12:06, the exact shot, from a cutscene, that is in the final game.

There are plenty of articles and websites dedicated to listing scenes from trailers that changed or were omitted entirely in their final products. The marketing studios that cut trailers get their material months and months in advance of a game or movie being finished. The material they have is what gets used.

Other lawsuits of this nature go nowhere, and this one will die quickly too.

Krovven wrote on May 3, 2013, 15:32:

jdreyer wrote on May 3, 2013, 14:10:
Question on this. The big deal was being made about the way a demo looked 6 months (there was one back in 2011, too) before release. However, there were three trailers released right before the game shipped.

I don't own the game, but maybe someone can address it. Do these look better/different than what shipped?

It's exactly how the game looked at launch. Looks better after the 4gig patch. Everyone's complaints are based on the E3 Demo footage.

Beamer wrote on May 3, 2013, 15:15:
What this suit is alleging is that Gearbox showed that footage knowing the game wouldn't look like that. That's almost impossible to prove.