|
|
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=24029 |  soydeedo (178) Aug 18, 2011 - 05:58 pm
| You know, that comment is actually very reasonable. These games aren't purchases where users only buy one or the other like you do with a car, a computer, or even a cell phone. Many people have hankerings for many different games at different times and while I'm sure there is a good chunk of the gamer population that is on a tight budget, most of the time people can afford to buy two games if they're both great.
The only times I can see that not happening is when the price is too high to justify two purchases(though prices do seem to be on the rise), if the customer is so competitive that he or she can only dedicate his or herself to one game, or if the customer just plain doesn't feel they have the time to play them all. The third scenario is often not a factor since many people don't have time to finish even one game to begin with - they just want the gaming experience for whatever spare time they have.
So really you're primarily left with the first two scenarios and I don't think the number of individuals falling into those categories is too great. Of course, I haven't done any market research to back any of this up, but it sounds good to me. =P Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=23987 | soydeedo (178) Aug 11, 2011 - 07:44 pm
| | I hear you, man. I have been pretty excited about BF3, but just like you I've been really put off by these two latests announcements. It IS battlefield, though, so they know most people will just deal with it - hell, I may do the same - but as it stands I doubt I'll get it the first day it's out like I did with Bad Company 2, Battlefield 2142, and Battlefield 2 before it. It's kind of sad, really. Diablo 3 doesn't bother me quite as much since I already play Starcraft 2 on battle.net and it's not a completely different client. This is still better than GTA4 though. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=22569 | soydeedo (178) Feb 24, 2010 - 12:39 pm
| Absolutely. It made sense when there was such animosity for Vista, but now that 7 is out and feverishly gaining ground, there's no reason to hold us back any longer.
You can still do XP support for the games that don't need so much horsepower, but any high end game with steep hardware specs might as well ditch the DX9 code path anyhow. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=22372 | soydeedo (178) Dec 05, 2009 - 10:22 am
| Well, from what I gathered it seems like they're just going to be using the old boards for development and continue designing their next generation product based off of the same architecture. So, in essence, there is working hardware to begin software development and test for compatibility etc.
Of course, they can't judge efficiency much because of the under performing hardware, but I guess they're just trying to make the best of a bad situation. All told, they may reclassify this as R&D rather than cost of goods sold or something. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=22359 | soydeedo (178) Dec 02, 2009 - 11:38 am » Edited on Dec 02, 2009 - 11:40 am
| Exactly. With all the Steam and Direct2Drive holiday/weekend/anniversary sales going on these days, it's no surprise at all.
Hell, Left 4 Dead 2 probably sold a huge number of units through Steam or Amazon's after Thanksgiving sales and those wouldn't be included either. Not to mention the discounts those two retailers offered for Dragon Age and Borderlands.
All this metric proves is that people are buying PC games from brick and mortar stores less. That's it. And let's face it; we're a lazy bunch so again, there's no surprise there.
EDIT - Whoops. I just realized this was for October's sales, but I'm sticking to my guns anyhow. =P Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=22329 | soydeedo (178) Nov 20, 2009 - 03:52 pm
| | True, but while that's not ideal it's not a deal breaker for me as long as they use smaller maps that concentrate the action. If nothing else, we can consider it a stopgap until BF3 which will go back to the proper Battlefield formula. =) Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=22308 | soydeedo (178) Nov 14, 2009 - 12:24 am
| We're damned if we do and damned if we don't, really. If PC sales are poor, they will just say the market is dying, piracy is growing, and ultimately gloss over all the negativity from the community.
I wouldn't have said this after CoD4, because it seemed like Infinity Ward knew what their customers wanted, but they've taken a turn into crazytown, it seems. Not sure what happened... Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=22308 | soydeedo (178) Nov 14, 2009 - 12:15 am
| Thanks for your straight review. It was good to read a review from a pc-centric source that wasn't dead set on giving this a poor rating from the outset. I still think the multiplayer issues warrant a score less than your given rating of 82%, but that's alright.
I do need one bit of clarification, though; you have the following listed as a con:
"Consoley FOV size. You’ll feel like you have tunnel vision and/or get a headache. Gee, wish I could change that…"
Is this similar to the nausea and headaches that many people had with several Valve titles including Half Life 2 and its subsequent episodes? If so, that's going to render this game completely unplayable for me. Thanks in advance. Flag this | Edit this post |
|
