Just seeing the results from yesterday's press releases at E3, and I have to say that Microsoft dropped the ball again this year. While I love the fact that they are emphasizing the indie market, they were certainly lacking in the exclusive department. They showed Halo and Fable which are nice, but I felt that Sony really upstaged them again with exclusives. Now, I am a bit perturbed at the fact that there were so many remakes, but the list is strong.
Microsoft Exclusives
----------------
Halo 5
Fable Legends
Sony Exclusives
-----------------
Ratchet and Clank
Grim Fandango
Order: 1886 (or something like that, I don't remember the year lol)
No Man's Sky
The Last of Us remastered
Landing the Destiny Beta
Diablo 3 Exclusive content
Exclusive Batman Scarecrow missions
Little Big Planet 3
Blood Bourne
Now granted the dust hasn't quite settled yet, and Microsoft may surely have some more tricks up it's sleeve, but I feel very safe in backing the PS4 for the new generation.
Sigvatr wrote: Sony pretty much took a huge poo-poo in Microsoft's head.
Microsoft wasn't bad this time (and that was hardly possible), but Sony just took the cake and ate it.
Also: you forgot a "minor" game to add to Sony's list. Uncharted 4
of course Thief's End...yeah definitely cannot wait for that one. I can't get excited for Fable because Fable 3 and The Journey were total ballsack as for as games go so I'm off the Lionhead train...
Ehhh, I decided on a PS4 when I get the funds.
Why? Well cheaper and most exclusives on the Xbone dont interest me.
Kingdomhearts 3 does though. but I will get mine probably next summer
Aside from God of War and Heavenly Sword, I never cared much for Sony exclusives last gen. The list above doesn't impress me either. I'm perfectly happy with my X Box One. Multiplats will be the big hits just like they were last gen.
Murdius Maximus wrote: Just seeing the results from yesterday's press releases at E3, and I have to say that Microsoft dropped the ball again this year. While I love the fact that they are emphasizing the indie market, they were certainly lacking in the exclusive department. They showed Halo and Fable which are nice, but I felt that Sony really upstaged them again with exclusives. Now, I am a bit perturbed at the fact that there were so many remakes, but the list is strong.
Microsoft Exclusives
----------------
Halo 5
Fable Legends
Sony Exclusives
-----------------
Ratchet and Clank
Grim Fandango
Order: 1886 (or something like that, I don't remember the year lol)
No Man's Sky
The Last of Us remastered
Landing the Destiny Beta
Diablo 3 Exclusive content
Exclusive Batman Scarecrow missions
Little Big Planet 3
Blood Bourne
Now granted the dust hasn't quite settled yet, and Microsoft may surely have some more tricks up it's sleeve, but I feel very safe in backing the PS4 for the new generation.
What do you guys think?
Sony didn't "land the Destiny beta". They get it earlier than the other platforms. Oh noes! They also have an alpha that starts this weekend, but that requires you to sign up for it.
Little Big Planet was never going to be anything but a Sony exclusive.
Bloodbourne was nothing but a cinematic trailer.
Last of Us was going to be a Sony exclusive.
Batman Scarecrow missions are likely going to be timed exclusive or just so boring that it wouldn't matter anyways.
Diablo 3 exclusive content is a wash as it's basically reskinned monsters.
Order: 1886 actually looks interesting but as an exclusive it seems to be a bit weird.
Ratchet and Clank and Grim Fandango are relying upon fanfondness.
Add to it that you left off Microsoft getting a slew of "premiere content first on Xbox One" for some big name titles(Dragon Age: Inquisition, Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare, Tom Clancy's The Division) and I have to wonder if you actually did pay attention.
It's also worth mentioning that Microsoft was showing off a mixture of first and third party titles while most of what Sony showed off yesterday was first party.
I don't get why Fable is constantly such a big deal. the series has been AT ITS BEST average. I'll admit that 3 was probably the most well-done of the series, but even that was mostly just 'average' at its high points.
curran12 wrote: I don't get why Fable is constantly such a big deal. the series has been AT ITS BEST average. I'll admit that 3 was probably the most well-done of the series, but even that was mostly just 'average' at its high points.
Fable should not be one of your big reveals.
While I agree with the sentiment(I did not like a single Fable game), Fable has become one of Microsoft's recognizable first party titles. It's a brand thing. The fact that they showed it off was to appeal to the people who were also looking at Diablo 3 for PS4(which is also seeing an XB1 release the same day).
curran12 wrote: I don't get why Fable is constantly such a big deal. the series has been AT ITS BEST average. I'll admit that 3 was probably the most well-done of the series, but even that was mostly just 'average' at its high points.
Fable should not be one of your big reveals.
Who knows. Maybe Fable Legends will reboot the series.
I like the Fable games, but yeah they were fairly average. Not nearly enough to compare with other RPGs like the Elder Scrolls.
curran12 wrote: I don't get why Fable is constantly such a big deal. the series has been AT ITS BEST average. I'll admit that 3 was probably the most well-done of the series, but even that was mostly just 'average' at its high points.
Fable should not be one of your big reveals.
Who knows. Maybe Fable Legends will reboot the series.
I like the Fable games, but yeah they were fairly average. Not nearly enough to compare with other RPGs like the Elder Scrolls.
What's there to reboot, though?
What would a reboot fix? It isn't about the story or world being messed up, it is about the Fable games being constantly the same flaw of large promises and small delivery.
Fable Legends reminds me of Phantasy Star Online, only some sadistic bastard placing traps and enemies instead of AI. I thought MS presentation was fine, same with Sony, neither "killed" the other.
I don't want to buy 2-3 $400 consoles every 3 years, in addition to a couple dozen $30-50 games each year.
I'd rather just put together my own gaming PC(which would run me $600-700) which only needs a few new parts every 3-5 years. I can do everything I could want from a console and so much more.
Tried Fable, had no interest, Halo 4 looked like a shallow follow up of its predecessors, and if that's all they had to show, I'm planning on getting a PS4 eventually. Especially because the first next-gen game I want is MK10, and MK has always been more comfortable for me on a PS controller than an XBox one.
Fable is a big deal because even though it always falls far short of its goals it has actually has ambition, which is a breath of fresh air among AAA title lineups.
But to be honest. :/ I agree with everyone here who says PC's are cheaper and more fun. Plus its more enjoyable, as it costs 60$ for a game on consoles. How much do I pay on the computer? 20$ for a game :/ I just wait for sales, because console games rarely go on sale.
Manchu wrote: Fable is a big deal because even though it always falls far short of its goals it has actually has ambition, which is a breath of fresh air among AAA title lineups.
Ambition?
More like hot air, imo.
I'm all for games pushing limits, but Fable has had 3 chances to do that and every time, it has not even come close to living up to its bluster. It's the same kind of 'ambition' that you get when you start yelling after half a dozen drinks. Meaningless blather.
...I'm not getting into a PC. vs Consoles argument again. Last time I did that (on another site), it was concluded that I was a braindead 11-year old fat American child that only plays CoD with wealthy parents that give me everything.
I shouldn't even check these kind of threads. For some reason they always manage to get on my nerves, what with people generally stating I'm being stupid and shouldn't do what I want. Eh well.
Anyways, OP, why didn't you include some of the "remastered" and "exclusive mission" things from Microsoft in the list?
curran12 wrote: It's the same kind of 'ambition' that you get when you start yelling after half a dozen drinks. Meaningless blather.
I have this attitude by the time I am done playing a Fable game. But as time goes by, I remember that I had fun playing it for hours on end even if it ended on a sour, unsatisfying note.
What would also be good: PC gamers not telling console gamers how they should be having fun.
thenoobbomb wrote: ...I'm not getting into a PC. vs Consoles argument again. Last time I did that (on another site), it was concluded that I was a braindead 11-year old fat American child that only plays CoD with wealthy parents that give me everything.
I shouldn't even check these kind of threads. For some reason they always manage to get on my nerves, what with people generally stating I'm being stupid and shouldn't do what I want. Eh well.
Anyways, OP, why didn't you include some of the "remastered" and "exclusive mission" things from Microsoft in the list?
You can do what ever you want mate
Well to be honest:
Alot of people know that E3 isn't really for gamers anymore, so I knew it was going to be disappointing the moment I saw who it was being advertised by. :/
It king of stinks because it should be the showing off of new games, not just by sony, microsoft, and nintendo. Yes they are the big competitors but there is also the indie scene who make lots and lots of games.
curran12 wrote: It's the same kind of 'ambition' that you get when you start yelling after half a dozen drinks. Meaningless blather.
I have this attitude by the time I am done playing a Fable game. But as time goes by, I remember that I had fun playing it for hours on end even if it ended on a sour, unsatisfying note.
What would also be good: PC gamers not telling console gamers how they should be having fun.
How do you get 'hours' out of a Fable game? 1 and 2 were amazingly short, and the only thing that added length to 3 was grinding the money to not have everyone die in the end?
Murdius Maximus wrote: Just seeing the results from yesterday's press releases at E3, and I have to say that Microsoft dropped the ball again this year. While I love the fact that they are emphasizing the indie market, they were certainly lacking in the exclusive department. They showed Halo and Fable which are nice, but I felt that Sony really upstaged them again with exclusives. Now, I am a bit perturbed at the fact that there were so many remakes, but the list is strong.
Microsoft Exclusives
----------------
Halo 5
Fable Legends
Sony Exclusives
-----------------
Ratchet and Clank
Grim Fandango
Order: 1886 (or something like that, I don't remember the year lol)
No Man's Sky
The Last of Us remastered
Landing the Destiny Beta
Diablo 3 Exclusive content
Exclusive Batman Scarecrow missions
Little Big Planet 3
Blood Bourne
Now granted the dust hasn't quite settled yet, and Microsoft may surely have some more tricks up it's sleeve, but I feel very safe in backing the PS4 for the new generation.
What do you guys think?
Sony didn't "land the Destiny beta". They get it earlier than the other platforms. Oh noes! They also have an alpha that starts this weekend, but that requires you to sign up for it.
Little Big Planet was never going to be anything but a Sony exclusive.
Bloodbourne was nothing but a cinematic trailer.
Last of Us was going to be a Sony exclusive.
Batman Scarecrow missions are likely going to be timed exclusive or just so boring that it wouldn't matter anyways.
Diablo 3 exclusive content is a wash as it's basically reskinned monsters.
Order: 1886 actually looks interesting but as an exclusive it seems to be a bit weird.
Ratchet and Clank and Grim Fandango are relying upon fanfondness.
Add to it that you left off Microsoft getting a slew of "premiere content first on Xbox One" for some big name titles(Dragon Age: Inquisition, Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare, Tom Clancy's The Division) and I have to wonder if you actually did pay attention.
It's also worth mentioning that Microsoft was showing off a mixture of first and third party titles while most of what Sony showed off yesterday was first party.
First off, I wasn't attacking either side just giving my opinion so drop the attitude. It is evident that you are Microsoft fanboy and if I upset you that was not the intention. But clearly by what you said you prove my point. Sony had more first party (exclusive) content than Xbox. Which is what really matters at the moment as far as the console wars go. Maybe you should pay attention
Murdius Maximus wrote: Just seeing the results from yesterday's press releases at E3, and I have to say that Microsoft dropped the ball again this year. While I love the fact that they are emphasizing the indie market, they were certainly lacking in the exclusive department. They showed Halo and Fable which are nice, but I felt that Sony really upstaged them again with exclusives. Now, I am a bit perturbed at the fact that there were so many remakes, but the list is strong.
Microsoft Exclusives
----------------
Halo 5
Fable Legends
Sony Exclusives
-----------------
Ratchet and Clank
Grim Fandango
Order: 1886 (or something like that, I don't remember the year lol)
No Man's Sky
The Last of Us remastered
Landing the Destiny Beta
Diablo 3 Exclusive content
Exclusive Batman Scarecrow missions
Little Big Planet 3
Blood Bourne
Now granted the dust hasn't quite settled yet, and Microsoft may surely have some more tricks up it's sleeve, but I feel very safe in backing the PS4 for the new generation.
What do you guys think?
Sony didn't "land the Destiny beta". They get it earlier than the other platforms. Oh noes! They also have an alpha that starts this weekend, but that requires you to sign up for it.
Little Big Planet was never going to be anything but a Sony exclusive.
Bloodbourne was nothing but a cinematic trailer.
Last of Us was going to be a Sony exclusive.
Batman Scarecrow missions are likely going to be timed exclusive or just so boring that it wouldn't matter anyways.
Diablo 3 exclusive content is a wash as it's basically reskinned monsters.
Order: 1886 actually looks interesting but as an exclusive it seems to be a bit weird.
Ratchet and Clank and Grim Fandango are relying upon fanfondness.
Add to it that you left off Microsoft getting a slew of "premiere content first on Xbox One" for some big name titles(Dragon Age: Inquisition, Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare, Tom Clancy's The Division) and I have to wonder if you actually did pay attention.
It's also worth mentioning that Microsoft was showing off a mixture of first and third party titles while most of what Sony showed off yesterday was first party.
First off, I wasn't attacking either side just giving my opinion so drop the attitude.
Seriously? Look at your title and then try that again.
It is evident that you are Microsoft fanboy and if I upset you that was not the intention. But clearly by what you said you prove my point. Sony had more first party (exclusive) content than Xbox. Which is what really matters at the moment as far as the console wars go. Maybe you should pay attention
I don't think you understand what "exclusive content" is.
I will say that I forgot about the Halo remastered edition coming out. It actually seems like a solid product, but as much as I love, love, love Halo, the series is pretty stale for me. 4 wasn't a big improvement and the story, to me, was largely forgettable.
Manchu wrote: Did you seriously play any Fable game all the way through in less than two hours?
Fable 1 was less than 10 hours start to finish, and I levelled up plenty in it.
For 2, I remember a lot of back and forth running from town to town. I can't recall the exact time, but there's no way it was more than a 20 hour campaign.
And 3 (the one I think did the best of Fable), that was probably around...hmmm mid 20s for hours. But a good portion of those hours were spent grinding gold in jobs or having property pay off so I could not have all the kingdom slaughtered by shoggoths.
There you go, hours of play. And the truth is I had some fun playing them. Yes, by the end I was very bitter about them but I did have fun, which explains why I keep buying them even despite thinking they are ultimately a disappointing line of games.
Murdius Maximus wrote: Just seeing the results from yesterday's press releases at E3, and I have to say that Microsoft dropped the ball again this year. While I love the fact that they are emphasizing the indie market, they were certainly lacking in the exclusive department. They showed Halo and Fable which are nice, but I felt that Sony really upstaged them again with exclusives. Now, I am a bit perturbed at the fact that there were so many remakes, but the list is strong.
Microsoft Exclusives
----------------
Halo 5
Fable Legends
Sony Exclusives
-----------------
Ratchet and Clank
Grim Fandango
Order: 1886 (or something like that, I don't remember the year lol)
No Man's Sky
The Last of Us remastered
Landing the Destiny Beta
Diablo 3 Exclusive content
Exclusive Batman Scarecrow missions
Little Big Planet 3
Blood Bourne
Now granted the dust hasn't quite settled yet, and Microsoft may surely have some more tricks up it's sleeve, but I feel very safe in backing the PS4 for the new generation.
What do you guys think?
Sony didn't "land the Destiny beta". They get it earlier than the other platforms. Oh noes! They also have an alpha that starts this weekend, but that requires you to sign up for it.
Little Big Planet was never going to be anything but a Sony exclusive.
Bloodbourne was nothing but a cinematic trailer.
Last of Us was going to be a Sony exclusive.
Batman Scarecrow missions are likely going to be timed exclusive or just so boring that it wouldn't matter anyways.
Diablo 3 exclusive content is a wash as it's basically reskinned monsters.
Order: 1886 actually looks interesting but as an exclusive it seems to be a bit weird.
Ratchet and Clank and Grim Fandango are relying upon fanfondness.
Add to it that you left off Microsoft getting a slew of "premiere content first on Xbox One" for some big name titles(Dragon Age: Inquisition, Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare, Tom Clancy's The Division) and I have to wonder if you actually did pay attention.
It's also worth mentioning that Microsoft was showing off a mixture of first and third party titles while most of what Sony showed off yesterday was first party.
First off, I wasn't attacking either side just giving my opinion so drop the attitude.
Seriously? Look at your title and then try that again.
It is evident that you are Microsoft fanboy and if I upset you that was not the intention. But clearly by what you said you prove my point. Sony had more first party (exclusive) content than Xbox. Which is what really matters at the moment as far as the console wars go. Maybe you should pay attention
I don't think you understand what "exclusive content" is.
Yeah. So I'm seeing that being, shall we say, rude and condescending, is your way to win an argument. Good job. Calm down there little buddy.
The title of my thread is my opinion, but I never once said that Xbox 1 Sucks, or that PS4 is the best. I merely said I was glad I'm backing the PS4 and that my opinion is they had the better show with better games coming out.
As far as exclusive goes...just stop, you're making yourself look worse
Manchu wrote: There you go, hours of play. And the truth is I had some fun playing them. Yes, by the end I was very bitter about them but I did have fun, which explains why I keep buying them even despite thinking they are ultimately a disappointing line of games.
I yield the semantic point. Yes, I did get plural hours of play out of Fable.
That said, for the sprawling RPG worlds that they inflated themselves up to me, I am left seriously chafed. I paid full price for games that I could have beaten in a weekend and have zero replay value. That isn't ambition, no matter how big they talk it up to be.
To use your analogy, just because the first bite of a sandwich is good doesn't mean it is a good sandwich when it is awful by the end. And that you paid full price for a finger sandwich.
But to be honest. :/ I agree with everyone here who says PC's are cheaper and more fun. Plus its more enjoyable, as it costs 60$ for a game on consoles. How much do I pay on the computer? 20$ for a game :/ I just wait for sales, because console games rarely go on sale.
Manchu wrote: There you go, hours of play. And the truth is I had some fun playing them. Yes, by the end I was very bitter about them but I did have fun, which explains why I keep buying them even despite thinking they are ultimately a disappointing line of games.
I have to agree with this. I did, in fact, have a lot of fun playing the first two games. The third one didn't feel like Fable to me. I agree with the poster who said that most of the game was a gold-grind, but I invested heavy in real estate and had no trouble there. I would just park it in a corner somewhere, and leave the game on overnight for a few days and BAMF. But what killed it for me was the crashes and game ending saves. They took too long to patch it, and just when the DLC was headed in the right direction, they abandoned it. didn't work for me personally...
Again, no argument here about the Fable games being ultimately disappointing. My original point is that they have ambition, and specifically not that they live up to it. Everyone of them has been much less than hyped BUT they still stand out.
curran12 wrote: What does it say about a game that " park it in a corner somewhere, and leave the game on overnight for a few days" is the best way to deal with it?
yeah...don't have anything to refute that with lol! But it was an ambitious game, and honestly, they did sport some of the best graphics of the generation! And hey, it is the only game ever that you can literally fart in someones face, then kill them, then say you were sorry to guards and they'd let you go
Fallout will definitely make a return. I think that enough demand is there for it, but I agree it is probably a new engine for it. Plus don't those games take forever to make? I mean on new hardware and and whatnot I would wonder if they would have to start from scratch to make one?
Murdius Maximus wrote: I mean on new hardware and and whatnot I would wonder if they would have to start from scratch to make one?
Its not new hardware, the next gen consoles are simply highly specialised PCs, just like the last ones.
No man's Sky looks suspiciously like a Spore FPS/arcade flight sim and we all know how Spore turned out..... It may be good but the game play featured in that trailer did not inspire me with confidence.
Perhaps the Eldar Scrolls Online is a source of their money worries?
I'd really rather have another Eldar Scrolls game than Fallout 4. Fallout has a cool setting but the combat was poor. While Skyrim's combat is hardly masterful it's fun enough to keep you going through your playthroughs.
Co-op option for the next Eldar Scrolls game please.
Medium of Death wrote: Perhaps the Eldar Scrolls Online is a source of their money worries?
I'd really rather have another Eldar Scrolls game than Fallout 4. Fallout has a cool setting but the combat was poor. While Skyrim's combat is hardly masterful it's fun enough to keep you going through your playthroughs.
Co-op option for the next Eldar Scrolls game please.
...wait what. Excuse me, but as a huge Skyrim fan myself, the "battle system" in Skyrim is utter garbage. At its best times. Fallout and its VATS system are leagues ahead of Skyrim combat-wise.
Murdius Maximus wrote: I mean on new hardware and and whatnot I would wonder if they would have to start from scratch to make one?
Its not new hardware, the next gen consoles are simply highly specialised PCs, just like the last ones.
No man's Sky looks suspiciously like a Spore FPS/arcade flight sim and we all know how Spore turned out..... It may be good but the game play featured in that trailer did not inspire me with confidence.
It's coming to PC as well as PS4. Imagine if the game is moddable.
Both systems have been mediocre since their respective launches, and this year's E3 changes none of that. In the end, neither system offers much that you can't get in better quality on PC. Bloodborne might be enough to get me to buy a PS4, but that's more because I'm a hardcore From Software/Souls Series devotee.
Nintendo, on the other hand, has been running circles around the competition with their offerings this year.
On the topic of Nintendo, I think the Legend of Zelda/Dynasty Warriors game (Hyrule Warriors?) looks utterly fantastic! Mario Kart is always solid, and I think that landing Bayonetta 2 (and getting the first one with it) is a major step forward for Nintendo. Smash Bros. is looking pretty good, but not sold on the Mii in the game thing though. Interesting, but gimicky at best...which one could argue is what Nintendo is good at, but this is cheese...
Nintendo really has to step up and with so much stuff being released so late, it's going to be a tough 2014 for them. Iwata recently took the second (!) 50% paycut.
Well, Nintendo's new goal to make all of their games respond to the skylanders/infinity figure model. I buy a 4.99 'toad' model and now I can take toad to all my nintendo-branded games and get DLC because I own the figure. Now they become a figure-selling company as well as tying it in to all of their franchise games.
LoZ is the only thing that would motivate me (and apparently quite a few other people) to buy a Wii U. I don't think that's really a win for Nintendo.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
nkelsch wrote: Well, Nintendo's new goal to make all of their games respond to the skylanders/infinity figure model. I buy a 4.99 'toad' model and now I can take toad to all my nintendo-branded games and get DLC because I own the figure. Now they become a figure-selling company as well as tying it in to all of their franchise games.
But here's something neat. I would never consider buying skylander toys. That stuff is for the kids that I don't have.
Grim Fandago? I don't know how they're going to change a rather old point and click adventure game to the Playstation, but if they manage, I'd be first in line... if only I didn't have an Xbox.
Manchu wrote: LoZ is the only thing that would motivate me (and apparently quite a few other people) to buy a Wii U. I don't think that's really a win for Nintendo.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
nkelsch wrote: Well, Nintendo's new goal to make all of their games respond to the skylanders/infinity figure model. I buy a 4.99 'toad' model and now I can take toad to all my nintendo-branded games and get DLC because I own the figure. Now they become a figure-selling company as well as tying it in to all of their franchise games.
But here's something neat. I would never consider buying skylander toys. That stuff is for the kids that I don't have.
But I would definitely buy Nintendo figurines. =0
The thing I've found with Nintendo (in my opinion at least) is that when they introduce something new, it's usually quite a step up from the predecessor and maybe even try something new. The figurine idea is pretty interesting. Anyone tried it with Skylanders or Infinity yet?
I personally have never tried the Skylanders thing, but it is evidently VERY popular. Just read an article that this tech coupled with Pokemon could be just what Nintendo needs to revive their failing market or some such. Interesting idea...might actually be worth looking into...
Manchu wrote: Did you seriously play any Fable game all the way through in less than two hours?
Yeah, I've gotta throw the BS flag on that one. I've probably put 20 hours into Fable 2 and no where close to the finish. 3 was a shorter game, but still good in my eyes.
Manchu wrote: Did you seriously play any Fable game all the way through in less than two hours?
Yeah, I've gotta throw the BS flag on that one. I've probably put 20 hours into Fable 2 and no where close to the finish. 3 was a shorter game, but still good in my eyes.
I agree. 20 hours is like the bare minimum if you just go for the main story arc and don't do anything else.
That's also not much different from Skyrim either. You can get through the main story fairly quickly, although there is still plenty to do even if you do blast through it unlike Fable.
Its supposedly a fleet based RTS game with customisable fleets and ships
Take command of massive capital spaceships, fighting on beautiful planet surfaces or in orbit within the title’s core competitive multiplayer suite and explore the solar system in the episodic, single-player, story-driven campaign.
I have both systems, and tbh, nothing is screaming out at me for this year. Xbox One Minecraft, Sims 4 and Disney Infinity 2.0 are the main games I want. Anything that has me actually excited isn't due until next year. Dang.
On a side note, does anyone else think Nintendo would be better off keeping control of the handheld market, and dropping out of the main console market to release all their in house games on Xbox, Playstation and PC. I really can't see how they would not make an absolute killing financially with that tactic.
So Microsoft has put up the list of exclusives. It's 9 in total, all slated to come out by December.
Spoiler:
The exclusives are:
Halo: The Master Chief Collection (with a Halo 5 Guardians Multiplayer beta)
Sunset Overdrive
Forza Horizon 2
Ori and the Blind Forest
Dance Central Spotlight
Disney's Fantasia Evolved
Project Spark
Killer Instinct: Season 2
Fable Legends (Multiplayer beta)
Of that, I wouldn't count Fable Legends since it's just the multiplayer beta and I also wouldn't count Project Spark since that is seeing a PC release--which puts it at 7 "exclusive" titles.
Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote: I have both systems, and tbh, nothing is screaming out at me for this year. Xbox One Minecraft, Sims 4 and Disney Infinity 2.0 are the main games I want. Anything that has me actually excited isn't due until next year. Dang.
On a side note, does anyone else think Nintendo would be better off keeping control of the handheld market, and dropping out of the main console market to release all their in house games on Xbox, Playstation and PC. I really can't see how they would not make an absolute killing financially with that tactic.
Seeing how it's doing now and considering they're making their handhelds have 3d graphics now, yeah, I guess Nintendo could take a monopoly on its handhelds.
I don't know about handing house games to Microsoft though.
For example, look at what happened to Banjo-Kazooie, one of Rare's N64 titles, when Rare sided with Microsoft.
Banjo fans abandoned ship because the result was not what the fan of the game were looking for.
This is just my opinion, but I've thought of Nintendo's mascots to be one of its stronger points as a new title from the company carries a good amount of weight with the fans. If they changed, like making a shooter with Mario, fans of the mascot might feel like its going downhill and might jump ship. Then again, I may be wrong.
Nintendo's warchest is obscenely huge and they can weather years of low console sales. With the release of Mario Kart 8 apparently Wii U is starting to move a lot of units, and Smash Brothers, Mario Party 10, and Legend of Zelda: Skyrim will probably see that trend continue.
Sony murdered Microsoft last year. This year they just kinda avoided making eye contact as they passed one another in the hallway. Phil Spencer looked at both his watches so as to avoid having to say 'hello', whilst whoever the new Sony guy is looked at his Vita to check the time, then remembered he doesn't own a Vita because no one owns a Vita.
More exclusives is a bad thing, as it means more division (and not The Division, either). It's better if everything is openly available, as that means the PC gets a release, and PC is superior.
*is still happy about GTAV PC!*
As for Nintendo? They've been around since the 1800's. They will be fine.
Kanluwen wrote: The exclusives are: Halo: The Master Chief Collection (with a Halo 5 Guardians Multiplayer beta) Sunset Overdrive Forza Horizon 2 Ori and the Blind Forest Dance Central Spotlight Disney's Fantasia Evolved Project Spark Killer Instinct: Season 2 Fable Legends (Multiplayer beta)
So basically:
1. Games they already put out. 2. A game everyone says is trying too hard to be cool. 3. A racing game that will no doubt be filled with microtransactions, just like the last one. 4. A seemingly indie game that also appears to be trying to hard to look indie. 5. No one cares. 6. Ditto. 7. Out on PC, where it will be superior. 8. DLC for a game that's already out. 9. Everyone hates Fable nower days.
Personally I would be fine with exclusives going away, period. All it does is set up this whole stupid "console wars" nonsense with people smugly pretending that exclusivity somehow justifies the purchase of whichever platform they chose.
Exclusive games won't just go away because they're a vested interest in the owner of a console to make that console more attractive. Sony gains them through a large stable of first party developers or owning the IP. Microsoft does it through a smaller (tiny) stable of first party developers, owning IP and just throwing moneyhats at publishers for usually timed exclusivity.
That being said, I find the console war tedious. Just buy the console you like the exclusives on or your friends have if you're into multiplayer. Getting worked up over one consoles exclusives being better just seems pointless.
Kanluwen wrote: Personally I would be fine with exclusives going away, period. All it does is set up this whole stupid "console wars" nonsense with people smugly pretending that exclusivity somehow justifies the purchase of whichever platform they chose.
As would I, as it means everything gets to come to the PC, and we can be smug about something different.
Kanluwen wrote: Personally I would be fine with exclusives going away, period. All it does is set up this whole stupid "console wars" nonsense with people smugly pretending that exclusivity somehow justifies the purchase of whichever platform they chose.
As would I, as it means everything gets to come to the PC, and we can be smug about something different.
PC gamers would still be smug about the same thing they are smug about now ie being PC gamers.
Kanluwen wrote: Personally I would be fine with exclusives going away, period. All it does is set up this whole stupid "console wars" nonsense with people smugly pretending that exclusivity somehow justifies the purchase of whichever platform they chose.
As would I, as it means everything gets to come to the PC, and we can be smug about something different.
PC gamers would still be smug about the same thing they are smug about now ie being PC gamers.
Here at PC gamers, we're better than you, and we know it!
I don't want to buy 2-3 $400 consoles every 3 years, in addition to a couple dozen $30-50 games each year.
I'd rather just put together my own gaming PC(which would run me $600-700) which only needs a few new parts every 3-5 years. I can do everything I could want from a console and so much more.
Making your own PC is far cheaper than getting expensive consoles. And you can always hook up an emulator and still play with your friends.
I really had to resist to post a reply to this but i just had to. I know this is US pricing and not sure how much it translates but will explain it in NZ prices.
For a start you don't have to buy 2-3 consoles. Just 1 will do. Now for me its the PS4 and thats about $600 NZ here. Now I know pc parts over here are a lot more expensive than in the U.S but to build a decent gaming rig will cost upwards of $1k. So the console is cheaper. You said it yourself, $600-700 for a PC or $400 for a console. How can you say that a PC is far cheaper?
Also please get your facts right, the ps3 was out for 7 years before the ps4 was released, so not every 3 years. Now how long does a PC last before you have to updgrade it? Not 7 years that's for sure. I know I guy that 2 years ago put $4k into a gaming rig and now its out of date. You never get that problem with a console. Now I don't want to get into a whole PC vs console debate, as there are both positive and negatives for each side. But to say that a PC is cheaper and lasts longer is not true in my opinion. If people want a civilized console vs pc debate we can happily take it to another thread.
On topic, I am a sony fan over Microsoft. However Microsoft had much more content and exclusives than you give them credit for OP. Much like kan was saying a page or two back. Uncharted and the order to appeal to me though as I really am over Halo. Its not enough by itself to convince me of getting an xbox one. Also I love the white PS4 and will probably use that destiny bundle to pick up my next gen console.
Finally, since last year I have been obsessed with the division. And to me it still looks awesome. So. cant wait for it
tuiman wrote: How can you say that a PC is far cheaper?
The games are significantly cheaper, especially via Steam sales, Humble bundle etc etc etc. The savings made by buying PC games could easily make up the cost difference between an average gaming PC and a console in a year, if you buy a lot of games you will make up the difference even quicker. The hardware is certainly more expensive but it is also modular so its easy to upgrade, there is no such thing as 'next gen' PCs.
Palindrome wrote: The savings made by buying PC games could easily make up the cost difference between an average gaming PC and a console in a year
While true, you neglect the sales that, at least, Sony does. I don't know about sales that Microsoft does as I've never owned an X-Box. It's not uncommon to see popular, older titles (and by that I mean released earlier in the year) at Christmas for 50% off, at least. I've seen some hit 75% off as well. It doesn't hit the obscene specials that they do on Steam, but Sony at least have been doing some rather good sales.
Now add to this Playstation Plus. While it's a subscription service, I have now paid $40au for 6 months. I have received 6 full priced games for my Vita - I paid $200au for it, those games collectively go over $360au worth of free games. I've received 10 PS3 games - near $700au at retail (and includes games like Tomb Raider, Bioshock Infinity and X-Com Enemy Unknown). The free PS4 games haven't been big, but they've saved me about $100au. I know Microsoft does something similar on the X-Box. I signed up only recently - people who have been subscribed to PS Plus since launch over a library of over 50 games at least. And since E3, they're bumped it up to 2 games per system per month.
Outside of torrenting games, I haven't seen that kind of value on my PC. And yes, while I lose access to the games if I let my subscription lapse, I'm not one for replaying games anyway.
They each have their pro's and cons. Using both a desktop (iMac) and a console (360) I enjoy gaming on both. The 360 for 'my mates are here, pick up and play, plus beer' evenings and ' oh my God I have just dumped another 12 hours into Football Manager' evenings when the wife is out and I'm alone.
Gamers are gamers, regardless of their chosen platform.
tuiman wrote: How can you say that a PC is far cheaper?
The games are significantly cheaper, especially via Steam sales, Humble bundle etc etc etc. The savings made by buying PC games could easily make up the cost difference between an average gaming PC and a console in a year, if you buy a lot of games you will make up the difference even quicker. The hardware is certainly more expensive but it is also modular so its easy to upgrade, there is no such thing as 'next gen' PCs.
Only if you are desperate to get a game the day its released. I always wait a few months, and use stores that do trade-ins or buy and seel second hand on tradme ( the local ebay in NZ) all od sudden the cost of buying games is not that expensive at all. You just have to be smart about it. For example I just only recently got the last of us and was only $30nz second hand. Also all the reasons above that loki mentioned about PS network and PS+. SO far got tomb raider, and variuos others that I cant think of right now for free with that. Its only expensive if you make it expensive.
I buy all my games from overseas (specifically ozgameshop), where the prices are stupid good compared to local prices, so the overpriced console releases and the cheaper PC releases are even cheaper.
Outside of torrenting games, I haven't seen that kind of value on my PC. And yes, while I lose access to the games if I let my subscription lapse, I'm not one for replaying games anyway.
I got 3 free games this month, 1 from Steam and 2 from origin.
Second hand sales are ubiquitous, but not really worth the effort these days, and the base price PC games are around a third cheaper than console games so PC games are cheaper even during sales. In essence PC gaming is cheaper in the long run.
tuiman wrote: I know I guy that 2 years ago put $4k into a gaming rig and now its out of date.
(edit for spelling)
Either this is hyperbole, pure BS, or this guy you know is a complete idiot. I've sunk about 2 grand into my PC over the course of seven years; a grand to build it and another to do a pretty major retrofit a year or so ago and i've never had to go below max settings on games I play.
The Witcher 3 is one of my most anticipated games. I really enjoyed the 2nd game but its linear nature annoyed me. The new games fully open world combined with the world building of the earlier games should make a modern classic. Should.
tuiman wrote: I know I guy that 2 years ago put $4k into a gaming rig and now its out of date.
(edit for spelling)
Either this is hyperbole, pure BS, or this guy you know is a complete idiot. I've sunk about 2 grand into my PC over the course of seven years; a grand to build it and another to do a pretty major retrofit a year or so ago and i've never had to go below max settings on games I play.
It could have been a laptop (never buy a gaming laptop).
I gotto say, the three variation mechanic for MKX has me worried. I mean yeah, sure, it's cool and all, but how long before "Each character has three variations!" becomes "Pre-order from Game Stop to get the Hellfire variation for Scorpion or from Best Buy to get the Samurai variation of Scorpion". How long before variations become on-disc DLC, there on the disc but locked behind a pay-wall because Warner Brothers Interactive is a "me too!" publisher, always ready to copy the most obnoxious and consumer unfriendly policies of other bigger game publishers like EA and Ubisoft.
Palindrome wrote: It could have been a laptop (never buy a gaming laptop).
Gaming laptop? Contradiction in terms, isn't it?
And I'd like to meet the game that can make my twin Titans obsolete in two years.
Outside of torrenting games, I haven't seen that kind of value on my PC. And yes, while I lose access to the games if I let my subscription lapse, I'm not one for replaying games anyway.
I got 3 free games this month, 1 from Steam and 2 from origin.
Second hand sales are ubiquitous, but not really worth the effort these days, and the base price PC games are around a third cheaper than console games so PC games are cheaper even during sales. In essence PC gaming is cheaper in the long run.
Not arguing it doesn't happen, and I agree in the long run PC gaming is cheaper. I was just pointing out thanks to sales and Playstation Plus you were severely selling Sony short, and possibly Microsoft. It's not as wide a gap anymore - at least on Playstation with Playstation Plus, you can get serious value for money and very, very good games free only months after release. The edge goes to PC thanks to Steam, but dismissing consoles shows a lack of understanding of strides they've taken lately.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I gotto say, the three variation mechanic for MKX has me worried. I mean yeah, sure, it's cool and all, but how long before "Each character has three variations!" becomes "Pre-order from Game Stop to get the Hellfire variation for Scorpion or from Best Buy to get the Samurai variation of Scorpion". How long before variations become on-disc DLC, there on the disc but locked behind a pay-wall because Warner Brothers Interactive is a "me too!" publisher, always ready to copy the most obnoxious and consumer unfriendly policies of other bigger game publishers like EA and Ubisoft.
I wouldn't worry too much about that, it would be suicide. I would imagine you'll just see different costume packs.
PC is definitely the "better" platform, but I will say this: it will cost you more in the long run than a console would. I am not terribly familiar with PC costs, but I do know that you are going to have to sink money into upgrades at some point, usually in the form of a new video card. Which as I understand can be expensive. That being said PC users have Steam, and yup can get some awesome deals on there
As for which is truly better in my opinion it nor or less comes down to what you prefer and are willing to pay for. Me personally, I prefer a console because I like knowing that the next big game coming out for my PS4 will run and I don't have to mark any upgrades to the hardware. I also really like the control, but that's probably a moot point given the existence of pc game pads. My friend prefers his pc, but he has the spare scratch to tinker with it and can afford the upgrades that are needed if a new game comes out and he has to upgrade.
tuiman wrote: How can you say that a PC is far cheaper?
The games are significantly cheaper, especially via Steam sales, Humble bundle etc etc etc. The savings made by buying PC games could easily make up the cost difference between an average gaming PC and a console in a year, if you buy a lot of games you will make up the difference even quicker. The hardware is certainly more expensive but it is also modular so its easy to upgrade, there is no such thing as 'next gen' PCs.
Only if you are desperate to get a game the day its released. I always wait a few months, and use stores that do trade-ins or buy and seel second hand on tradme ( the local ebay in NZ) all od sudden the cost of buying games is not that expensive at all. You just have to be smart about it. For example I just only recently got the last of us and was only $30nz second hand. Also all the reasons above that loki mentioned about PS network and PS+. SO far got tomb raider, and variuos others that I cant think of right now for free with that. Its only expensive if you make it expensive.
30 dorra is stupid expensive.
I wonder how good those "free" games where if you can't even remember them.
In steam you can also sell hats, and get hat moneys. With hat moneys you can moar hats or games that unlock hats. I used my hat moneys to buy xcom+dlc.
In steam you can also sell hats, and get hat moneys. With hat moneys you can moar hats or games that unlock hats. I used my hat moneys to buy xcom+dlc.
And thus, I became a fan of steam, even though I always so 'no' when asked if I played TF2
I don't want to buy 2-3 $400 consoles every 3 years, in addition to a couple dozen $30-50 games each year.
I'd rather just put together my own gaming PC(which would run me $600-700) which only needs a few new parts every 3-5 years. I can do everything I could want from a console and so much more.
Making your own PC is far cheaper than getting expensive consoles. And you can always hook up an emulator and still play with your friends.
I really had to resist to post a reply to this but i just had to. I know this is US pricing and not sure how much it translates but will explain it in NZ prices.
For a start you don't have to buy 2-3 consoles. Just 1 will do. Now for me its the PS4 and thats about $600 NZ here. Now I know pc parts over here are a lot more expensive than in the U.S but to build a decent gaming rig will cost upwards of $1k. So the console is cheaper. You said it yourself, $600-700 for a PC or $400 for a console. How can you say that a PC is far cheaper?
Also please get your facts right, the ps3 was out for 7 years before the ps4 was released, so not every 3 years. Now how long does a PC last before you have to updgrade it? Not 7 years that's for sure. I know I guy that 2 years ago put $4k into a gaming rig and now its out of date. You never get that problem with a console. Now I don't want to get into a whole PC vs console debate, as there are both positive and negatives for each side. But to say that a PC is cheaper and lasts longer is not true in my opinion. If people want a civilized console vs pc debate we can happily take it to another thread.
On topic, I am a sony fan over Microsoft. However Microsoft had much more content and exclusives than you give them credit for OP. Much like kan was saying a page or two back. Uncharted and the order to appeal to me though as I really am over Halo. Its not enough by itself to convince me of getting an xbox one. Also I love the white PS4 and will probably use that destiny bundle to pick up my next gen console.
Finally, since last year I have been obsessed with the division. And to me it still looks awesome. So. cant wait for it
(edit for spelling)
Here is why the PC is cheaper.
I'm not going to be sticking to one console, because I like games on multiple systems. So realistically, I'm buying a new console every 2 years. While I pay the 1k upfront for my PC and then just upgrade some of its parts every 3 years or so(which would be $600ish tops over a 10 year period)
If we look at a 10 year period, and assume games are the same cost(which they aren't), then I've paid $1600ish for the PC, but I've paid $2000 for the consoles. And any new games I get will work on my single platform. And I can do all the things you can do on a PC you can't on a console.
And I'm not paying 1k for a gaming PC if I build it myself. I can get away with it for around $500 with a little effort.
Then the games for PC rapidly drop from release cost of around $50-60 down to $20-30. Console games don't drop like that.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Murdius Maximus wrote: PC is definitely the "better" platform, but I will say this: it will cost you more in the long run than a console would. I am not terribly familiar with PC costs, but I do know that you are going to have to sink money into upgrades at some point, usually in the form of a new video card. Which as I understand can be expensive. That being said PC users have Steam, and yup can get some awesome deals on there
As for which is truly better in my opinion it nor or less comes down to what you prefer and are willing to pay for. Me personally, I prefer a console because I like knowing that the next big game coming out for my PS4 will run and I don't have to mark any upgrades to the hardware. I also really like the control, but that's probably a moot point given the existence of pc game pads. My friend prefers his pc, but he has the spare scratch to tinker with it and can afford the upgrades that are needed if a new game comes out and he has to upgrade.
Not really.
You may pay $300 for a new video card every 3-5 years tops.
...most of my friends only stick with one console. In fact, only two others have consoles other than their first one - one of them bought it herself, and the other has a PS3, with the Xbox being his brother's.
also, not having to upgrade my system every 4-5 years is nice.
If you have the money, time to assemble one, and don't want to play with friends on a couch.
LOL WUT?!?!
you know you can plug MULTIPLE console like controllers into a PC and play almost every console game ever right? even with friends whilst sitting on the couch... emulators are awesome.
I spent ~400$ for my PC because I dont shop stupid(shop smart, shop S-Mart!) at the big box stores that over charge, and ~200$ for a good graphics card, that was about 5 years ago, all the peripherals I have had for almost 15 years, and they still work... compared to ~500$ every time a new gen console comes out, and the fact that I have to buy 2+ consoles to get all the games I want...
what commie country do you come from where the PC's are not assembled? it costs me like 20-50$ if I want them to put it all togetehr for me, but I do it myself, plugging a board into a slot and manipulating tiny screws is not that hard.
and I am still running brand new games like wolfenstein at high settings.
Yeah it is one of those unending debates, but I just go with the ebb and flow of the thread here anymore. DakkaDakka is nothing if not extremely efficient at derailing threads way off topic then bogging them down into insults and one upping...
That Dreadnought gameplay looks awesome. I tried shouting at the trailer in English but it's still speaking German so I don't know what is being said.
I haven't seen anything new for that Homefront sequel, then again I haven't been looking.
While looking for new E3 trailers I discovered that IGN have cloned Jessica Chobot... what is that about?
Although I did find this. It's not from E3 but it may be of interest to others who haven't seen it.
Now if sony get their project morpheus thing to work with this game, guaranteed buy for me. Although I may need to buy some adult incontinence pants.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I will say that they need to brush up on the Alien noises and get rid of those Predator clicks.
Part of the reason the Alien is so terrifying is that it makes very little noise. Obviously allow it to make noise walking around, but having it roar just seems a but too much. Hissing, squealing and perhaps a scream or two.
I'm really excited for Alien Isolation! It seems to be a good direction and surviving was always a major part of th movies. Seeing as how shooters didn't really work this could be really good. But I remain pretty skeptical about it because every Alien game I have played has left me down so it's hard for me to allow myself myself myself more than excited...especially being I was so let down by Colonial Marines...
tuiman wrote: How can you say that a PC is far cheaper?
The games are significantly cheaper, especially via Steam sales, Humble bundle etc etc etc. The savings made by buying PC games could easily make up the cost difference between an average gaming PC and a console in a year, if you buy a lot of games you will make up the difference even quicker. The hardware is certainly more expensive but it is also modular so its easy to upgrade, there is no such thing as 'next gen' PCs.
Only if you are desperate to get a game the day its released. I always wait a few months, and use stores that do trade-ins or buy and seel second hand on tradme ( the local ebay in NZ) all od sudden the cost of buying games is not that expensive at all. You just have to be smart about it. For example I just only recently got the last of us and was only $30nz second hand. Also all the reasons above that loki mentioned about PS network and PS+. SO far got tomb raider, and variuos others that I cant think of right now for free with that. Its only expensive if you make it expensive.
30 dorra is stupid expensive.
I wonder how good those "free" games where if you can't even remember them.
In steam you can also sell hats, and get hat moneys. With hat moneys you can moar hats or games that unlock hats. I used my hat moneys to buy xcom+dlc.
$30 is nothing for a game that has given me 100+hours of entertainment. Even if its more expensive than PC games it doesn't mean its stupid expensive.
Tomb-raider, bioshock infinite, metro last light, batman arkham city, boarderlands 2, devil may cry, pro evo soccer 14. These are all the free games that I personally have enjoyed playing, this year alone, from having a ps+ account and I still have half a year to go.
I am extremely, extremely sorry for taking this thread off topic. Its just that in every thread that is (mostly) about just console gaming there is always the one or two people that just jump in about how much better it is to have a pc and how much better pc's are than consoles. Just grinds my gears.
$30 is nothing for a game that has given me 100+hours of entertainment. Even if its more expensive than PC games it doesn't mean its stupid expensive.
This is just anecdotal bs.
I have played dota 2 for 1040h and it has cost me -5€.
30$ is almost 3 weeks worth of dinners (5 meals per week) at local quality restaurant. Anything that costs more than your normal living expenses is expensive and paying for something is expensive is stupid. Thus 30 dorra is stupid expensive.
illuknisaa wrote: Honestly all games look pretty boring. fc3 was pretty good so fc4 might be worth to wait and AssGreed seems to have fixed the slowed ui.
$30 is nothing for a game that has given me 100+hours of entertainment. Even if its more expensive than PC games it doesn't mean its stupid expensive.
This is just anecdotal bs.
I have played dota 2 for 1040h and it has cost me -5€.
30$ is almost 3 weeks worth of dinners (5 meals per week) at local quality restaurant. Anything that costs more than your normal living expenses is expensive and paying for something is expensive is stupid. Thus 30 dorra is stupid expensive.
I wouldn't pay 30$ even for HL3.
Your food costs are ridiculous and impossible. Unless, as another poster suggested, you're eating off the dollar menu at McDonald's. And if that's your idea of fine dining, then your opinion of game quality cannot be trusted.
If I have anything to say about PC/Console game costs its that the latter have horrified me
As someone that hadn't bought a video game in a retail store for half a decade stepping into GAME (a UK Vidya retail store) to see £65/70 new games was a massive shock
I'll admit, I think in about the past half-decade on Steam I've brought a £40 game once or twice due to the urge to play it being unbearable. I've bought a fair few £30 ones and I see no real issue with that; its mostly new games I've had a degree of hype for.
The games I have no real hype for at all, like RAGE, Borderlands, X-COM Enemy Unknown I usually buy at £20 or less after a few months, if their reviews are in the region of 7.5~10. (Because critic rating systems are terrible and anything below 7.5 is increasing degrees of garbage and "humorously bad" by their general standard)
RAGE turned out naff, Borderlands turned out fairly fun for a while, X-COM Enemy Unknown I made a sub-conscious link to with the very old UFO:defense one, though I never played that, and I found X-COM EU to be one of the best purchases I've ever made.
But overall the thought of paying £40 makes me extremely uneasy and the thought of paying £70 is disgusting, no matter how much hype I have I will never, ever pay that much for a game.
Mr.Omega wrote: If I have anything to say about PC/Console game costs its that the latter have horrified me
As someone that hadn't bought a video game in a retail store for half a decade stepping into GAME (a UK Vidya retail store) to see £65/70 new games was a massive shock
So shop on their own online stores and hunt down sales, just like you do with Steam. Sony even has the grace to reduce the price of the standard digital versions compared to the physical versions at launch.
If you're horrified by the cost of console games at retail, wander over the the (nearly non-existent) PC section and you'll see similar (though slightly cheaper due to lack of licensing) prices.
Avatar 720 wrote: $30 Gets you 15 quality restaurant meals? Where can you go to get a $2 meal that isn't a fast-food chain?
$300 I could understand, but $30 giving you 15 'quality restaurant' meals is complete BS.
The rest of your post is just idiotic.
I'm an uni student. Fast food actually costs usually 3 times more than normal meal with student prices.
Finnish gov pays half of the food costs which allows companies to provide fast, cheap and quality food. Fast foods chains can't even compete with campus restaurants.
How is rest of my post idiotic? I have spent 0€ on dota 2 but various hats I've sold propably totals around 5€ if not more. I sold 1 chest for 3€ ffs.
Depends on the console. Sony gamers got plenty to be excited about, like Littlebigplanet 3, The Order 1886, Bloodborne and finally seeing a bit of in-engine stuff for Uncharted 4.
It's kind of hard to have a general thread like an E3 thread without it devolving into console wars. I only know one forum where that really happens, and it sure isn't here.
Cheesecat wrote: To be honest from what I've seen so far there isn't much to talk about so I can't blame people going off-topic.
Nonsense! There's heaps to talk about, and we get to keep talking about it 'til 2015, 'cause everything at this year's E3 isn't out yet, as this year's E3 is "The Great Holding Action of 2014".
-Loki- wrote: Depends on the console. Sony gamers got plenty to be excited about, like Littlebigplanet 3, The Order 1886, Bloodborne and finally seeing a bit of in-engine stuff for Uncharted 4.
It's kind of hard to have a general thread like an E3 thread without it devolving into console wars. I only know one forum where that really happens, and it sure isn't here.
Halo, Fable and Crackdown. I'm fairly excited, too
It was all right. Truth to tell I was pretty bored through the whole event. Most of it we've already seen before. One thing I will say. Sony needs to get Jake back. The new guy was so boring. I actually started to nod off at one point when they started in on the tv stuff. I was interested in the Halo collection though. Been some years since I played it. I wouldn't mine having them all on one disc. Not enough to buy the system though.
See I am not terribly excited for the Halo collection simply because I have literally sank hundreds of hours into the all of them, and don't really have the gumption to sit down and plow through all of them on Legendary again...
I would adore another ODST game though...in my opinion that one was the best of the whole lot.
of course Thief's End...yeah definitely cannot wait for that one. I can't get excited for Fable because Fable 3 and The Journey were total ballsack as for as games go so I'm off the Lionhead train...
