I don't like the combat, but I didn't really have a problem with DA2's combat. I enjoyed that game's combat system. I think DA:O is very tactical, DA:I is very loose and almost automatic, and DA2 was a good mix of the two.
Here we go again, I will now list the reasons why physical games are far superior to digital games:
Doesn't require redownload when removed from disc
Can play without internet connection
Can trade in, or lend out
Here are the cons:
Need to insert disc to play
I'll respond to your pros and cons in numerical form.
Cheaper - Honestly, I find more sales on digital games nowadays than on physical ones. If they are the same price, I opt for the digital one, because I don't have to waste gas money no matter how close the game store is. This is especially true with the weekly digital deals on both platforms.
Released earlier - with the whole preorder and download earlier on these new consoles, I don't see this being the case for much longer. I see people predownloading games and then playing them as they open on release.
Doesn't require redownload - Having a 2TB or larger drive solved that problem for me on the Xbox One. I have only used a quarter of my storage and own a lot of games that have been released. Really.
Can play without internet connection - Is this true on the Xbox One? I am gonna try this and see. I'm pretty sure it works perfectly fine though.
Can trade in, or lend out - This is the only issue I have. I am stuck with some of the games I bought. I opted for no driving over ownership. I don't see this problem being solved in the near future, but as of now I am okay with it. I don't buy games for full price digitally. I wait till the holiday season and buy them cheaper.
The con with having to put the disc in is actually more of a factor than I thought. I used to be 100% physical but then I bought the Xbox One Madden bundle. I then bought a few more games digitally and found myself playing the digital games more often because I didn't have to swap discs. It's very nice and convenient.
@impartialgecko: Mine really haven't either. I can still snipe like nobody's business, and have pretty good aim. I know this when I play CoD4 and I get my killstreaks multiple times a match, or when I play Halo and my BR and Sniper shots are spot on. My problem with the game (CODAW) is when you are killed from behind extremely often because the of the spawns and jetpacks. The spawns change more rapidly than ever due to the increase in speed and mobility. I specifically have a problem with the mobility options paired with the P2P connections and killstreaks. I have tried constantly to have fun in Advanced Warfare, but it's very difficult to play that game and remain calm. How fast is your internet connection?
@believer258: I played a crap ton of CS 1.5 and 1.6. I honestly think it's my most played game behind WoW. I don't have a PC to run it, though. I really liked the CS games I named, but Source really killed a lot of enthusiasm I had for the game. I have it on 360, but it's obviously terrible when compared to the PC version ... and just terrible in general, lol.
@mosespippy: Yeah I think this is definitely one aspect of today's shooters that really bothers me - the progression systems. I admit that it sometimes gets its hooks into me, but for the most part it just ends in frustration. I love being able to choose my own weapon going in, but I would much rather spawn similarly to 'all BR' matches in Halo 3 - everyone has a weapon and can compete, but you can definitely get the upper hand if you work hard enough to control the power weapons/map. The Assault Rifle starts are a different story...
@alexw00d: See, I ask myself that all of the time. Am I actually having fun? I know competition is a part of our culture, and I do enjoy it, but with video games I just don't know. It reminds me of the Jonathon Blow speech at one of the conferences where he talked about multiplayer shooters and how they aren't actually fun.
@csl316: I can definitely get some Halo in and have a good time. I still get frustrated, but mainly when the matches are AR spawn matches or my team is terrible.
I play something when it looks like something Id like to play,I watch something when it looks like something I'd like to watch. I listen to, read, go to, experience, blah blah blah. Just do whatever you want whenever you want in that regard. It sounds so cliche,but people really are too worked up about labels/labeling themselves/other people. Just do whatever brings you some amount of enjoyment (as long as it doesn't involve hurting others/yourself/other obvious bad things)
I haven't really played LoL, so I can't speak to the community. I will say that I think this is a serious issue. I have definitely played enough Halo 3 to know how vitriolic a community can be, and it can literally cause someone to not want to play anymore. Instead of wanting to improve, it just drives people away. I wish there was a way to improve player-to-player relations but it seems, as our medium is often used as a form of escapism, that it is almost hopeless.
I remember, though, that Bungie had a really cool feature in Halo Reach where you could choose to get matched up with players based on play style. The options ranged from serious play, working as a team, and just playing for fun. I thought that it was a really neat idea, but the Halo player base was simply dying too quickly after 3 to really show if it worked or not. I hope someone brings that idea back around, but it seemed that Bungie did a lot of that kind of work when they were under Microsoft.
@legion_: I don't know if many will agree with you, but I do to an extent. It felt like a Dragon Age game with ridiculous combat that kept it interesting, and a focus on a group of characters. Since it stuck to the same group of characters, you had the chance to see how your influence affected everyone. It wasn't perfect, but I was, more or less, constantly engaged in whatever was happening.
@yummylee: Yeah I read a lot of what you posted in your post before typing this up. I don't know if Bioware is just adding things they have wanted to add in the series from before, or if they are aiming to address each specific complaint from sequel to sequel. It's probably a lot of things, but it just seems that they add or remove things without thinking of what it will do to the overall experience. Like they take bullet points of previous games but don't stop to understand how they actually worked or what made them great. Maybe that's a bit harsh. I don't know.