Kastagir wrote on Jul 29, 2012, 02:57:
It's all conjecture, but the best reason for the delay I've seen suggested is that they're having problems porting it to the PS3. From what I gather, the 1.6 update still hasn't made it to the PS3 and 1.7 is now in beta. Why this should hold up the PC version, I don't know. And I can't get behind the silent treatment from Bethesda. Where things stand now, there's no guarantee that Dawnguard (or the next DLC, for that matter) is expected on the PC. That is something Bethesda needs to clear up.
PropheT wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 23:04:
There isn't exactly a dearth of cases where a majority wasn't exactly an indicator of validity. If people think it's a great idea, then they're more than welcome to fund it; I just question why Kickstarter, a site that's supposed to be used to appeal for funding for a new project, is the right place to do that rather than something on the site itself.
Prez wrote on Jul 24, 2012, 21:47:
Who gives a shit why the author is "not okay" with the PA kickstarter? Instead of being a self-important blowhard and writing a snobbish editorial about it, just don't donate. If enough people agree it isn't in the true spirit of kickstarter ,an opinion I actually share, it will die.
The community decides; not some hack editorialist or gamers with an over-inflated sense of their own importance.
Silicon Avatar wrote on Jul 18, 2012, 11:27:
I don't understand publisher fascination with metacritic as a metric. Shouldn't sales be the main metric?
necrosis wrote on Jul 3, 2012, 17:34:
How is it "woosh"? They are charging more for games and doing LESS to make them work properly. If they are charging more and the games actually WORKED and they kept in features that were once there I would have no problems with it and accept the fact it costs more to do things.
But once again, we have to pay more for games and are getting a total piece of crap product. Features ripped out, content stripped from the game to sell as DLC, game breaking bugs at launch (not to mention sometimes zero patches to fix said issues), games that are a shadow of their predictors.
Paying more and getting the same is one thing. Paying more and getting less is just bullshit.
Mr. Tact wrote on Jul 3, 2012, 14:06:
I have always considered this argument as simply silly. I own my copy of the game. You position is equivalent to saying I can't sell my couch in a yard sale. I didn't make it. I only own the couch in its physical form. I don't own the couch. I was only purchasing the use of the couch, it isn't within my rights to sell it. Ridiculous.
Cutter wrote on Jul 2, 2012, 12:29:
Yeah, wtf is with all CEs now being $100+ and this doesn't even have a model or anything. Even if it did that's still way too much. I can't believe people buy that shit.
Jerykk wrote on Jul 1, 2012, 20:52:StingingVelvet wrote on Jul 1, 2012, 20:10:
Just got Spec Ops, Syndicate, Max Payne 3 and Darkness 2 on amazon all for like $80. Also got the Duke singleplayer DLC for funsies.
Why would anyone buy a game at release anymore unless it was a super favorite?
To support developers. A game's success is generally determined within the first month of release. If a game sells a lot of units within the first month, the likelihood of a publisher making a sequel or working with that developer again increases significantly. First month sales also determine how much support the game will get in terms of patches and extra content.
If you pick up Darkness 2 for $12 and end up enjoying it, then you'll probably be disappointed to know that there won't be a Darkness 3 because the game's first month sales were underwhelming.
Dev wrote on Jun 30, 2012, 18:01:StingingVelvet wrote on Jun 30, 2012, 15:15:I'm pretty sure they have a version of the fan patch that doesn't add content but just fixes stuff.
I use the competing patch which released a final version years ago. I prefer to stick to the core game the developers made.
El Pit wrote on Jun 30, 2012, 04:49:netnerd85 wrote on Jun 30, 2012, 04:27:El Pit wrote on Jun 30, 2012, 02:17:FYEO is alright, there are some scenes in it which are good. Like all of them really, there are some amazing scenes but overall they just don't hold up for me. I used to hate Live and Let Die, it's still not great but it's a notch above Quantum of Solace. FYEO has some good Moore moments, I do like his comedy.netnerd85 wrote on Jun 29, 2012, 12:04:
Someone else really needs to make more Bond films than Roger. Moonraker and A View.. are awesome but the rest are meh.
Really? I liked "For Your Eyes Only" the best, which also has better IMDB scores than "Moonraker" and "A View to a Kill".
Can we agree that Octopussy was bad? it could have been good but... Bond in a clown costume? why. I use to love TMWTGG but, it could have been done better.
Yes, "Octopussy" is one of the worst Bond movies, but I also don't like TMWTGG. I rate Live and Let Die higher than the Golden Gun. And I like FYEO because it tried to be more real, more down to earth (at least for a Bond movie ).
Lokust wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 13:46:
That's a pretty dumb generalization. Broken Steel for Fallout 3 was at least a full expansion worth of content for much less of what expansions generally would cost.
Creston wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 11:09:
I wouldn't do it, if I was you. The DLC is available, just get it. It SHOULD have been there to begin with. Don't ruin it for yourself, just watch the Extended cut, and then watch the original ending afterwards on Youtube.