That is horrendous.
" I don't see how you can complain over GFWL. It's there, it's not in the way, and it got way less issues then steam do with games. For the PS3+Steam, I really think is a half ass'ed test out crap. We'll see it in 1-2 games, so pointless, but Valve love to experiment i guess. "It's TOTALLY in the way for me. It's a nightmare. Buggy, causes crashes, and totally unnecessary extra level of redundant security and extra log ins on top of what Steam does. It also encrypts your game saves. So if you lose your log in, you lose your game saves. Awesome! And it forces you to create a new friend list and everything. Everything it does is redundant to Steam, and done in a horrific and poor conceived way that interferes with getting to your game. Totally unneeded junk. Just like Gamespy.
"...I think because it was designed originally as a partner to the console service more than the PC service, we had a rocky start.”
Ya think? Gee sounded like such a brilliant plan - "a partner to the console service instead of a PC service" - wow man, no idea where you guys went wrong there. I mean obviously PC gamers want to pretend like they have a console, along with all the restrictions and problems - finally the worst of both worlds! And really - it's just a "rocky start"? How about it started a nightmare, and it's still a nightmare? And they think the biggest problem with it is not enough games? Hah! The less games on there the better, as far as I'm concerned! They know its a disaster, they just aren't going to full blown admit it.
It's sad how console-centric Microsoft's view of the gaming world is. I think they're quickly becoming a victim of their own success and I think we'll be seeing more of these "Sony-like" blunders in the future.
Speaking of Sony - it will be very interesting to see how the partnership with Steam goes for Portal 2.
Sony + Steam = Big Win
XBox + GFWL = Epic Fail
" So what's the dichotomy in this situation? "The dichotomy here is the two contradictory concepts of pre-order DLC marketing - they want you to make pre-order people feel like they're getting something that is an advantage, while convincing non-preorder people that it isn't an advantage. Maybe it is an advantage, maybe it isn't, but it can't be both, and I thing the marketing people want us to believe it can.
People just making incorrect statements does mean anything like trolling, you understand that right? Trolling is posting inflammatory statement (true or not) on someone else's thread to get a desired reaction, generally an argument or flame war. So I just ask that you take a closer look at your own actions before pointing fingers, please.
" @Dizazter said:
Yeah, you know. Making statements that contradict facts is pretty close to trolling. Also wrong again. You still join with your own charachter. In fact, it doesn't matter if said charachter/class isn't in the party or wasn't even picked up at all. The Boarderlands comparison makes no sense. "
Just read through some early reviews of Dungeon Siege 3, and I've gone for very interested/optimistic to virtually zero interest.
I was really hoping it would be an awesome next gen throw back to the original that I enjoyed for hours on end.....
But I am NOT at all digging where it sounds like they're going with Dungeon Siege 3. They're really going the console-ified route, and making it "action Party RPG" which seem to be the rage these days. You don't make your own characters - you are assigned a group of 4 characters that will always be the same. (weak!) And it's coop is a secondary add on. A friend hosts, you join their storyline as a henchman. This game, like the original, should have been designed to be coop from the start, not designed as a single player game, with a coop option thrown in for fun. Boooo:
For one thing, your party is made up of characters, not classes. Unlike the first game's freewheeling experience system, the second game did introduce abilities and classes, though DS3 abandons that idea for four named characters (only two, Lucas and Anjali, have actually been revealed so far), each of which have ability lists that cross over the various fantasy archetypes.
In the full release, you'll be able to manage a party of up to four heroes, either in a single-player game where you control all four characters, or with a group of three other people in co-op mode. Two players may share the screen locally, and you can bring in two more players online. The other players will serve as assistants to one main player, and no progress will be carried over to their game.
And so it's obviously a console to PC port, I always look forward to how buggy and clunky those are. (looking at you, Borderlands!)
I feel like this consolification of all these games is just taking something good, and turning it into whatever is the latest Justin Bieber of the video game world, because that's what everyone else is doing, or at least what seems to sell for now, instead of just making a great game.
Oh well....I guess it's back to biding my time till Diablo 3.
How do you guys feel about this news? Excited or disappointed?
I know you're just making joke here, so I'm jokingly responding.
- No need for expensive equipment
- Reflected light means less eye strain
- Unchangeable yet perfect difficulty setting
- Much less expensive
- Infinitely good graphics (cannot be quantified)
- Food can be eaten while reading
- Exceedingly portable and highly appropriate in a public setting
- Less social stigma
- Much better story and dialogue
- No tacked-on multiplayer
- Much wider variety of subject material"
Am I missing anything?
Use your keyboard!
Log in to comment