DarkGamerOO7's forum posts

#1 Posted by DarkGamerOO7 (574 posts) -

What I want from a 3DS? I can tell you what I don't want and that is yearly revisions that end up fucking over early adapters.

#2 Posted by DarkGamerOO7 (574 posts) -

The problem with that low of a battery life means that you will have to constantly charge it so you know it can last when you take it out. The nice thing about a long battery life is you can use a device for like a half hour to an hour car-ride, put it away then pull it out again later knowing it will still have plenty of battery life left for over more uses without having to constantly charge it or have it die mid use or mid trip on you. Sure you can say that you will just have to charge it more often but lets think about this here for a minute, the more times you charge a battery the quicker it deteriorates in terms of how much charge it will actually holds until it eventual dies and can no longer hold a charge. The DS's battery could only be charged 500 times before it would start to deteriorate. Now the battery may hold a charge for 2.5 but what after the battery starts to deteriorate? It could drop to an hour, then a half hour and then nothing. If it only lasts for two and a half hours and you travel quite a bit or just enjoy playing games on the system at home you will need to charge this thing quite frequently and the battery will probably not even last a year before you have to replace it, and probably in the later months of the year the battery life will probably be even less than 2.5 hours. It just simply isn't enough battery life for me.

#3 Posted by DarkGamerOO7 (574 posts) -
@Mikemcn said:
" PC is not going to be battlefield 3's lead platform, EA and Dice do not expect to sell anywhere near as many copies on PC as they do on Xbox or PS3. And even if they sold more On pc thats not the audience they want playing their games, they want the COD players to come to BF3.  DICE is giving the same bullshit about caring about the PC that we saw leading up to Bad Company 2.  "
You are completely wrong, DICE already stated that Battlefield 3's lead platform was the computer, they want the computer audience to play their games which is why they put prone, jets, and 64 players back into the game even after they had been removed from previous versions, and aside from the 64 players, they will be in their console counter-parts as well. Your statement comes off as ignorant, really ignorant, yes EA/DICE want "Call of Duty" players to come over to Battlefield because it means more sales and more people playing, but just because they want those people to come over doesn't mean they will and that doesn't mean they will "dumb down" the game as so many of you think.

#4 Posted by DarkGamerOO7 (574 posts) -
@JJWeatherman said:
" @DarkGamerOO7 said:
" Maybe I'm doing something wrong here, so if anybody knows please let me know it would be much appreciated, but the only thing I do not like about Steam is how as of now if I go out and buy a game from retail how I have to download the game from Steam and cannot just install the game to Steam from the disk which would save me hours of my time. Other than that I love it. "
Oh, you mean for Steam-compatible games bought at retail? I was under the impression that there weren't too many retail games that were compatible. "
Quite a few are actually, I bought The Orange Box about a month ago and I had to download Half-Life 2/Episode 1/Episode 2/Team Fortress 2 which was quite a lot of data to download and took me nearly an entire day as I only have a 2MB connection, it works fine for playing games online...downloading them....not so much.
#5 Posted by DarkGamerOO7 (574 posts) -

Maybe I'm doing something wrong here, so if anybody knows please let me know it would be much appreciated, but the only thing I do not like about Steam is how as of now if I go out and buy a game from retail how I have to download the game from Steam and cannot just install the game to Steam from the disk which would save me hours of my time. Other than that I love it.

#6 Posted by DarkGamerOO7 (574 posts) -
@CmdrSheppard said:
" @JB16 said:

" America's government is based on the Bill of Rights. And banning video games because of their content is a direct violation of the 1st amendment, many politicians and lawyers have tried to get video games banned in the US already and the results are always the same.  Also you need to do some research, because there have been several scientific studies that suggest kids are more aggressive cause of video games, and of course several saying the opposite. Finally look up what Fascists and socialist means because those words are NOT interchangeable, and I think you need to learn their meanings before you start throwing them around. "

Fascists and socialists are theoretically opposite ideologically. But both are totalitarian in practice and rule through total control over the population. "
Someone was feed some major bullshit in Government class.  
 
Socialism
 
Totalitarianism 
 
Fascism
#7 Posted by DarkGamerOO7 (574 posts) -

I believe I visited his website once to see a post that he had made about something, I think it was his rap or whatever, that was in a news article. Well guess Sony now has my IP address....good thing I don't own a Playstation right now or I would feel really screwed.

#8 Posted by DarkGamerOO7 (574 posts) -

AHEM!
 
  

  

#9 Posted by DarkGamerOO7 (574 posts) -

I cannot believe people are defending this. I understand that the time between a game being finished and a game releasing is a large open window for a developer to start working on extra content and that is all find and dandy but look at it this way, because the content was on the disc to begin with, that means the content had to be done in time when discs were being printed. This means that this was not a case of downloadable content made within the window between the game being pressed and the game being released, this means it was done during the normal development period of the game and locked out on the disc. More over I find it disgusting that companies want us to pay for virtual clothing. I understand that they need to make a profit and have bills and families to provide for but expecting us to pay $1 to $3 for virtual clothing is a bit much, they should have just put it in as an unlockable thing after an achievement or level was completed. I have no problem paying for content that actually adds something to the game such as episodic content, multiplayer maps (if they are reasonably priced), or entire expansions etc, but virtual clothing and weapons are where I draw the line.  

#10 Posted by DarkGamerOO7 (574 posts) -

I hope whoever stole this is happy, they were too impatient to wait under TWO MONTHS! to pay $60 for this game, seriously? What a bunch of jerks. They could have just possibly convinced Crytek to stop making computer games, and instead develop for consoles. Considering the reason Crysis 2 was on consoles to begin with was because the first Crysis was so heavily pirated I believe, so I really think if Crysis 2 sells well on consoles and gets pirated to hell (which it appears from this that it will be) that Crytek will say goodbye to making games for the computer. I wish people would just pay for their games and stop pirating them, those developers have to make a profit, they have lives to live and bills to pay!