I know, there are many other tribes that haven't really been explored; Orcs, Ogres, Pegasi, Homarids... I guess my main problem with Dwarves is that they have so many good tools, and nothing to use them with. Okay, maybe it is a bit personal...
I don't know if they hate small people; they did Kithkins, which are basically white Dwarves. There are just as many Kithkin as Dwarves, and prior to Lorwyn, they pretty much didn't exist! (there were 5, 3 of which came from TSP block) All Dwarves need is a single set to help them out, and I'll be happy...-ish.
Um... the PS3 came out over a year after the Xbox360; so if the PS3's hardware is outdated, then so is the 360, but even moreso.
Yeah, you're right, it is. And while it did result in them stumbling out of the gate, I think it's paid off for them in the long run. Blu-Ray had a respectable market share, and PS3 sales are catching up to the 360.
Naughty Dog is reporting that the current version of Uncharted 3 is over the 50GB limit. How 'bout them apples?
Also, to correct: standard dual-layered DVDs can hold closer to 8GB of data. That's still less than 1/6th of a dual-layered Blu-Ray disc, but it's worth pointing out that several very graphically and technically impressive games have fit on an X360 DVD, so not exactly anything to scoff at. Also, because of how BR discs work, a lot of developers has revealed/complained that they've needed to put certain kinds of data on the disc twice, so a game that only takes up 7GB on the 360 might take about 11GB on the PS3, even if running to the same specs.
I can see the logic; the don't want developers giving the 360 a shoddy "port" of the game, which I can understand, because the PS3 got some terrible ports of 360 games in it's early years, and I really wish Sony had taken some sort of similar stance. However, it is hurting them now. A lot of these games that are being released later for the PS3 are getting "superior" versions, often with DLC content included on-disc. And while Microsoft may have paid for the timed exclusive, there's not much they can do about this practice. So I have no problem waiting to get BioShock and Mass Effect 2 on the PS3, because we're getting fully patched versions with additional content for the same price, as a "reward" for our patience. And Arcade/PSN titles like Braid and Limbo aren't any worse because we got them a summer later, I'm certainly not gonna run out and buy a 360 for them.
Unless, of course, none of the three people she voted for win, in which case she just cast 3 votes that didn't matter instead of 1. Hooray?
I do admit, I've seen polls where it would be beneficial for voters to be able to cast exactly 2 votes; unfortunately, the current forum system is an all-or-nothing; either someone can only vote for 1 (dots), or as many as s/he wants (checkboxes).
I really can't tell you when my mind changed. I think as I tried different genres I found that camera set up to be less effective for some games then other, so often when starting up a new game the first thing I'd do is mess around with the camera inverts and just see what felt most natural with the game; sometimes invert one, sometimes both, sometimes neither. Eventually I found myself using non-inverted most of the time, and then all the time.
I don't play flight simulators, but anytime I find myself playing any sort of aerial section of a game (God of War 2 and 3, for example), I think I find myself preferring the inverted Y, so I like when games give you the option to flip movement for just those parts (again, I believe GoW2 does, don't remember about GoW3).
I still maintain that I see what Julian McMahon was TRYING to do with Doom, and I liked what he was going for; he was trying to be that calm, cool, plotting villain rather than the balls-out, maniacal laughter psychovillain, but unfortunately he did come across as bored/boring. With a better director, I think he could have pulled it off. Alas, doesn't seem that will ever happen.
I do wish there was a way that Ioan Gruffudd could reprise his role in any potential reboot; I suppose it could happen, but seems highly unlikely. Imagine if Marvel DID ask Gruffudd to come back, but absolutely no one else from the movies? Awkward...
I realize this isn't even an official thing yet, but I am excited by the possibilities this could offer. This whole Avengers project could be the tip of the iceberg; imagine if Marvel took the concept and expanded it to the extreme. Not just the idea of doing 4 "origin" stories culminating into an epic mash-up, but instead a film library where every hero or team had one or two "solo" movies to establish the characters, and then every other movie they made was a crossover of two or more franchises, with characters and items from several stories popping up in every other story. Captain America and Thor, Fantastic Four with Hulk... hell, imagine if they eventually established enough characters to do the Civil War?
A pipe dream, I know. But if handled well, it could be awesome. It makes me wish Marvel could re-aquire Spiderman, X-Men (though I am excited to see what Fox does with what First Class set up), and any others they don't have back yet. (Daredevil? Punisher?)
I admit, I'm fairly skeptical myself. Not only is it a very different approach to the series, it's also a different developer, which is always concerning (well, technically, it's a different branch of the same developer, but still). I'm looking forward to it, but am mentally preparing myself for it to be a letdown. I get the feeling it's going to be a bit like Deadlocked; a fine game in it's own rights, but most of it's criticism will likely be based on it being a bad Ratchet and Clank game. Hopefully IG Burbank takes the reigns for the next one and gives us something more in line with what the series should be. I still dream of a R&C game where each weapon is basically an RPG character, with stats and perks that you get to pick and increase each time it levels up.
September:
-God of War Origins Collection 9/13
-Team Ico Collection 9/27
October:
-Ratchet And Clank: All 4 One 10/18
-Batman: Arkham City 10/18
November:
-Elder Scrolls 5: Skyrim 11/11
-Assassin's Creed: Revelations 11/15
So September is going to be my Collections month, thankfully followed by about a month of nothing I particularly want. I then get hit with two games I know I will be spending A LOT of time playing, and then 2 more pretty massive time sinks within days of each other in early November. Given I still have Mass Effect 2 and Killzone 3 that I haven't even started, I don't expect to get to Skyrim or ACR (or possibly BAC) until sometime next year.
I would pre-order Resistance 3, but I'm thinking about getting that Playstation 3D TV, which will come with R3, so I'm holding off on it. Another omission is Uncharted 3, and while I enjoyed the previous two entries, I can wait for it to drop to budget price, as that's very much a "one-and-done" for me.
I reserved the CE, but after some consideration I think I'm just gonna switch to the regular. I like CE's with good in-game and physical goodies, and while a Batman statue is kinda cool, it's not worth spending an extra $40 for, as none of the other stuff really excites me (early access to some challenge maps? I'll pass). I'd rather put that money towards one of the many other games coming out that I want.
Look, I thought the first one was really good. And I don't mean "good for a horror film" or "good for it's time"; it had an original plot that was very well executed and sufficient acting. Even the second was a good movie. Sure, it recycled the same concept, but I liked how well it tied into the first, with each of the new main characters having a connection to someone from the first. So yeah, first two I liked.
The 3rd is where it started getting terrible for me. That's when I felt the deaths stopped being interesting and started becoming those "really? WTF?" type scenarios. What truly killed it for me was when they main characters found out what was going on by, I kid you not, Google-ing "premonitions" and reading about the events of the first two films in a new story. Even the second one had the decency to let the characters figure that all out on their own; having the premise get discovered via internet search (I believe the 4th used the same method) just cheapens this otherwise great concept. The only thing I liked about the 4th was the implication that it would be the last one ("THE Final Destination). Guess I was wrong... >.<
You say this one is better than the last two? Ok, that's good. But unless it's at least close to the quality of the first two, I can pass. I don't particularly enjoy horror/gorror movies anyway.
Yup, looks like a sequel to Borderlands.
The only thing of note I would say is that in two of the pictures, you can see (what would appear to be) one of the new main characters using two guns at once. Maybe duel-wielding is possible in this one?
I'm certainly not shocked they're introducing new characters. But I'm also expecting the four new characters to each be comparable to one of the old ones, so probably not going to be breaking the mold of the previous classes much.
I've actually been impressed at the mechanical improvements they've been making. If someone played the original Red/Blue, and then tried Black/White, things would be considerably different than simply brighter, shinier graphics and new 'mon, they're really changed the game each generation without totally mucking up the mechanics.
And yet it's surprising how many type combinations that still don't exist. I mean, it took 5 generations to finally get a Fire/Dragon type Pokemon. Five ****ing generations. That should have happened in the first two. It would also be nice if they added new types, they haven't added new ones since Gen II.
Sure, there are a lot of things they could do to mix things up that they haven't, but I still feel they're doing a good job of innovating the series, so I wouldn't write it off.
I almost wouldn't count the Final Fantasy series. Sure, the last few have been less-than-great, but considering how little each installment really has to do with each other, killing the franchise wouldn't do anything. And I don't really think you can accuse Square-Enix of milking the franchise, they're not exactly pumping them out yearly like a lot of others (no need to name examples, you all know at least some of them). It WOULD be nice if they upped the quality, but the name "Final Fantasy" has brand recognition that Square would be foolish to cast aside.
Both of these have sequels in the works; BG&E2 has been a bit silent for awhile, but at last report, it's still in the works. And BioShock Infinite is looking absolutely stunning.
This is one I'm not sure I'd want to see a sequel for. I absolutely loved the first, but I worry that it was just too original for it to work again, kind of that "lightning in a bottle" thing. A re-release on the PSN would have my money in a heartbeat, however.
I'm personally a fan. Sure, they're getting into the habit of yearly releases, but I still feel each installment brings something new to the table, and it's always entertaining to wander around a different ancient civilization. When I feel like Ubisoft releases a cookie-cutter cash-in sequel, I'll be one of the firsts to call for an end of the franchise. But so far, I think they're doing a great job.
THOSE are what need to stop, not the series itself. I lost count of how many handheld or mobile spin-offs we've had since KH2. What they NEED to do is just work on Kingdom Hearts 3, that should be good.
I have no problem with Bane's mask. I've never read the comics so I don't really have any preconceived notion of what he should look like beyond that terrible Batman and Robin movie, so the less he looks like that, the happier I am.
What is somewhat bothersome for me is Batman himself. Maybe it's me mis-remembering, but it looks a lot different from the other two movies. It no longer looks like body armor, it looks like a costume. To be fair though, the suit he wears when filming combat scenes is probably different than the one he normally wears, what he's got on will probably look fine after post-production when we only see it for about a second per angle.
I understand the benefits of DD, but it's just not for me. It has nothing to do with cost; hell, I traded in vanilla Resident Evil 5 and bough the Gold Edition, even though I could have bought all the DLC off the PSN for about 10 bucks less. I just like being able to hold something for the money I spend, something tangible I can see and touch. I like being able to put it on a shelf with my other games (or movies, or CDs), I'm a collector. I like having all the game content on the same disc, I was so mad when the GOTY editions for Borderlands and Uncharted 2 included vouchers for the add-ons (especially since Gearbox had specifically stated all the content would be on the disc). I'll do it in some cases, like those "mini" games that get released on PSN/XBLA/Steam, or DLC if I know the game won't get re-released with it. But I still won't like it. And trust me, I take EXCELLENT care of my discs, my son learned at a very young age not to play with daddy's shiny circles.
I'm not Nai, but I loved it as well. It's a deceptively simple game; all you can do is move, jump, and rewind time (I think that's it), but the different time mechanics introduced in each world just make it so complex, pure platforming at it's finest. And yeah, very artistic, up there with Shadow of the Colossus, Okami, and BioShock in terms of the whole "video games as art" debate. It's one of the few XBLA games I bought back when I had an XBox360, and when it got released on PSN I didn't hesitate to download it again.