I think Microsoft has been tremendously successful with developing their own console(s). In reality, I want both companies to be successful and drive each other to better and better places. And uhhh, Nintendo too.
Haha. Microsoft hasn't been tremendously successful. They struggled for most of a decade to turn a profit on their hardware.
Not making a profit for a while doesn't mean Microsoft wasn't tremendously successful with what they set out to do. Creating an entire division of a company along with the software and hardware for the products itself, the many partner deals, ect...it's a lot to pay for up front to suddenly compete in an oligopoly. I mean, if anyone could do it Microsoft could but taking a while to finally get into the black doesn't mean that Microsoft has been unsuccessful.
Man, I played the first game 2 years ago and I cannot remember for the life of me what the "Wild Hunt" is. I haven't played the second game, but I remember the civil war between the humans and squirrels (I'm racist because I can't remember how to spell the actual group name). Acutually, the end of the first game is something else. Some wizard/magic guy that you fight in some other-realm.
This is such a stupid comparison. GTAIV is what, 4/5 years older than SR3? Of fucking course its design and controls are a lot worse! Other than the philosophical divergencies between the two it's pretty silly to compare them as equals.
A lot of the "fun" in games for people, be they sports, chess, video games, comes from the "challenge".
I'm in the middle. I wouldn't play Fire Emblem without perma-death because it changes the way that I would play the game to be less fun. However, I always have, and always will, repeat levels until I make it with all my characters though. I don't see a problem with this because rather than play the entire game a dozen times, I just work at a puzzle until I figure it out. That, for me, is fun.
Log in to comment