devilzrule27's forum posts

#1 Posted by devilzrule27 (1239 posts) -

no time for handshakes, im too busy hugging everyone.

#2 Posted by devilzrule27 (1239 posts) -

i did this as a kid

#3 Posted by devilzrule27 (1239 posts) -

Please whatever you do Insomniac don't focus test it!

#4 Posted by devilzrule27 (1239 posts) -

Congrats on coming out and welcome to the LGBT club, we're fabulous. :)

#5 Posted by devilzrule27 (1239 posts) -

not by a long shot but I'm happy as can be.

#6 Posted by devilzrule27 (1239 posts) -

Lara got a tan!

#7 Posted by devilzrule27 (1239 posts) -

I usually go 0-5 over in residential areas and 5-10 on the highways. And I'm basing this on mph instead of kph.

#8 Posted by devilzrule27 (1239 posts) -

@oy said:

@devilzrule27 said:

@dewar said:

Paying for the service and then paying again to rent the game is a bad deal. It's why On-live failed and it doesn't make me hopeful for this service.

Other write-ups made it sound like an either or thing.

Yeah, but you'll still have to pay for the service then pay for the game either/or rent the game. Your basically paying to play the game that you bought/rented, online or single player. Its an always-online system. Its OnLive.

From the playstation blog

"We want to offer you choice when it comes to how you want to access content on PS Now, so you will be able to rent by title for specific games you are interested in. We’ll also offer a subscription that will enable you to explore a range of titles."

#9 Posted by devilzrule27 (1239 posts) -

@brendan said:

Considering the proportion of people on this site that complained about their internet connection not being stable enough to enjoy the Xbox One's initial online only plan, I'm surprised at the positive reception so far for this feature. Judging by the reaction last year, about half of you should never be able to consistently enjoy this.

Well it is an optional service to provide backwards compatibility not a requirement to play new games.

#10 Posted by devilzrule27 (1239 posts) -

@dewar said:

Paying for the service and then paying again to rent the game is a bad deal. It's why On-live failed and it doesn't make me hopeful for this service.

Other write-ups made it sound like an either or thing.