2kings

Yes, we remember. If everyone has kinect from day one then developers know everyone will have kinect and they'll do more than a half-assed effort to include kinect in regular games. This has been stated over and over again.

"A couple of games with voice command" comes around because of the outright (and largely unwarranted) hatred flowing towards kinect. While I won't say it's going to change things like adding a Mouse to FPS use (we all used to play Doom, Duke Nukem etc with just a keyboard and thought it was fine, remember?) I think it will be good to have.. and it will only get better.

And, really, I do not understand why people assume MS is leaning away from games because they're showing all the additional stuff their hardware can do besides gaming. It's an xbox. It games. It also does other things, isn't that nice? =/

I think we just saw the rise of the entitlement generation now dictating the future for everyone else with their incessant, butthurt, and whining. Yet, it should be said, that these weak-minded fools can also be easily manipulated into cheering for things such as now having to pay for multiplayer. Did you see how happy they were for that?

Mind pointing out what those are?

I would like to point out I actually totally agree, having Songbird not be a force you fight as a boss I think was a great idea, and i'm glad it's the case. What i'm not so keen on is the fact that Songbird not only disappears between the The Beach area and the Siren section, but is basically never mentioned during that space of time. You'd think this monster that's trying desperately to hunt down Elizabeth wouldn't only notice you again after you try and fly out of there.

Articles like this really remind me that the games industry is still young ,and quite Immature. So are the journalists bloggers that write about said industry.

The issue wasn't the cost of games, or the funding campaign, or some silly forum comments. The issue was that their publisher was in a legal battle, and was short on funds. I'm no right winged economics preacher, but if a business looses its backing, it goes out of business. If there's no demand for a certain game, then the business closes down unless it iterates a new product that does fulfill consumer demand.

It seems people like to preach the economics of salaries, but everyone likes to ignore the fact that game dev studios are businesses. Why should game dev studios be entitled to survive, while other business simply shut down? Its all well and good to make the games that you want to make, but don't come a crying when there's no money stream.

People like Patrick likes to knock large franchises, and first person shooters but the thing is there is a demand for such games. It follows the sensible route of "Shit man people really want these games! Lets make them!", then you add your own personal touches to the concept to make it unique. Instead the games industry fancies itself some kind of art-scene" Hey man I got this obscure idea for a game that will be so cool! Shit man lets make it!" then by great astonishment no one buys the obscure game, and the business looses its funding.

What most people fail to understand, is that the brilliance of such studios like Naughty Dogs, and Bungie lies in making games that the consumers continuously demand, but then they place their creativity in the details and fine tuning of the concept.

Its not the only way to make games though, and admire the entrepreneurial spirit of indie studios, but please stop crying when new wacky ideas don't work out. Don't beat the dead horse, let it go and go and try to make something new. Its not like there isn't a new dozen indie studious forming every day.

-Jonathan Blow's Arch Nemesis

It's half baked because all of those various options aren't solid or reliable, there's no guarantees that when you try to use some of the more esoteric combinations whether or not they won't be immediately rendered useless by guys getting their pathfinding locked up or have some unforseeable nonsense completely derail your entire idea. The entire combat setup in BioShock is a chaotic mess, as the mechanics all struggle to co-exist and eventually you just resort to the few things that are boring and reliable. As I said, it sounds more like Ken Levine just throws his combat ideas into a pot and then pours it out completely heterogeneous rather than refine them until there is a slick, clean fundamental level to lay embellishments on. It sounds like he thinks of the embellishments first and then just chucks them out there. In fact, it sounds like he spends more time trying to refine the story and the exploration than he does the core gameplay, and it shows.

And no, I don't like the majority of first person shooters on mechanical levels (and I HATED shooters in the past). I feel like third person shooters do much better simply because they allow you to have an idea of your body and allow for defensive play that the majority of FPS absolutely do not.