I played this game on normal without retrying and didn't lose a guy or lose a country. I have played the original X-COM, but I found this game very easy. I am currently doing classic Iron-man and finding it a bit harder. I should add that I played very safely, but am I the only one who found it this way? People keep complaining about the difficulty, but is anyone finding it this easy?
I went on a date last night to Tron: Legacy because the girl suggested it. I had never seen a movie or game in stereoscopic 3D before and didn't think it would be that good but I was blown away. It truly looked visually stunning and I really enjoyed the movie, as well as the date. I now have a better understanding as why movie companies like 3D, other than increased ticket cost. In house 3D has the problems of glasses and expensive TVs but I could see it working in the future. I am curious what Giantbombers think of 3D. The perpetually sleepy Adam
Red dead redemption is very well built game, ignoring the infrequent bugs and control issues, but I did not really enjoy it. I am so close to the end, but really have no urge to finish it. I started to skip cut scenes near the end because I wanted it over with, and by the end I had come to hate John Marston. His character goes on a series of similar events with similar outcomes and people always betray him; he just never seems to learn from his past events or connect two situations together. I was really annoyed with his character, something that rarely happens to me, but I wanted Johns story over by the end. I left the game after Dutch dies and he goes back to his farm with his family. It is obvious that something bad will most likely happen, the game would not put you through some boring farming missions just to finish at a happy point. But I really don't care what happens anymore. The combat wasn't very enjoyable and the way the horse controls almost drove me crazy, and those stupid herding cow mini games drove me insane. I was wondering if anyone else feels this way, I am just saying how I feel about this game not saying it is a bad game. It is a good game I don't like. Also wondering if you have any games that are well made and good but you don't like. Your sleepy friend Adam
I find the cultural differences in the video game market quite interesting and will to share some of my observation and here what you have to think. If we look at the console war we see Nintendo killing it with approx. 77 million and the 360 and PS3 at 46 and 42 respectively , but the breakdown is the interesting part. The Wii is the only console that is split evenly, considering the population of each district, while the 360 is most sold in the US at 27 million compared to the 17 million PS3 sold. While in the EMEA, look it up, the PS3 has sold 20 million compared to the 18 million 360s. And Japan is so skewed I am not dealing with it. Racing games generally sell better on the PS3, GT5 sell 2.9 million in 2 weeks compared to Forza 3 selling 614 hundred thousand in the same period. Or NFS: HP selling 634 hundred thousand on the PS3 so far compared to the 587 hundred thousand on the 360. Non console exclusive shooters tend to sell 1.5 times as more on the 360 than PS3, ex. MW2 sold 12 mil 360 and 8.8 mil PS3, BLOPS sold 8 mil 360 and 5.5 mil PS3. Action adventure games tend to sell about even, ex. AC:B sold 1.72 mi on the 360 to the 1.70 on the PS3. I am currently very sleepy and hoped you enjoyed this. If people like this I might do something again in the future similar to this, or just expand to the differences. Your friendly and sleepy neighbor. Adam
My name is Adam and I am a Psychology major and am continuing my education in psychology. Through my undergrad I primarily study substance abuse and the emotional issues that are related, I have worked in an RTS (Residential treatment center) in Utah for two summers with teenagers who have drug and behavioral disorders. I understand why many of these kids use these substances but do "recreational" users if they know the risks?(For the record this question is hypothetical) The Lancet recently a paper about the most harmful drugs to the user and to others, surprisingly alcohol rank first among twenty other substances. You my ask "What does this have to do with Prop 19?" well I will tell you. I would like to mention that I am Canadian and Prop 19 does not affect me, I also do enjoy a drink but have never done drugs. I do not understand how marijuana is illegal while alcohol and cigarettes are? (Though personally I think that they all shouldn't be necessary but whatever) In the U.S.A there is no universal health care and the money for treatments mostly comes from insurance or from the individual, so the legalization and taxation of marijuana does not mean much because health effects are less then the effects of smoking or alcohol. In countries with universal health care like Canada, France, and Britain the legalization and taxation does not make sense and I will explain this to you. In 2009 Canadian health care spending reached 183.1 billion dollars which comes to $5452 a year. This is amusing that is split among the total population, which it is not because of age, so this number increases the amount by quiet a bit (I do not have this number). My point is the cost of taxing the substances does come close to the amount it costs. Here is a quote from a CBC article from 2007 (Not a fan of the CBC, but needed material)
They estimate that, in Canada, the societal costs attributable to smoking for 1993 were approximately $11 billion, of which $3 billion was spent on direct health care costs such as hospitalization and physician time. The remaining $8 billion was due to lost productivity. In comparison, it is estimated that in 1993/94, revenue from taxes on cigarettes totalled $2.6 billion.
How is it that the a government allows for the taxation to not equal the cost? I do not propose a ban on all substances but there should be more of an individual cost rather than a societal one. I think we as humans need to learn to care more about our bodies and effects all substances can do. This probably does not have much to do with Prop 19 (wanted to draw people in) and I am interested in what your opinion on this situation is. Thanks Adam Edit: Sorry forgot to add this image. 88 Comments
This game has been in development for such a long time that it has become ridiculous. He needs to learn how to let go, he has stated that he wants GT 5 to be perfect, but he needs to learn that it can not be reached.
I have had been wondering why you, the Giantbomb crew, dislike it when betas are used as a promotional device. I was reading an article in GI that point out its good points; testing massive server hits, balanced and unbalanced features in mass, test software stability, etc.
As the Blizzard design director Dustin Browder said about the Starcraft 2 bet “I’ll say it up front: If this is a demo of our game, this is the worst demo ever. It’s not really meant to be a demo. It’s really meant for us to test our servers, test the balance and gameplay experience.1*” I do understand that Starcraft 2’s beta was not a promotional tool, but the best argument for using a beta as one would be Modern Warfare 2.
Modern Warfare 2 lacked proper testing procedures in which both open and closed large scale betas were not used, but instead a small unit of testers. This could have helped to reduced glitches like the javelin, akimbo shotgun, care package knife deaths, wall and elevator glitches, unintended infinite ammo, One man army imbalances, etc. Although it is not possible to know what the effect of proper beta testing would have done, it surely would have reduced the number of exploits.
A promotional beta is still a beta. I prefer a situation in which the most data is collected in order to make the game better. I think that compared to other aspects that game companies do like advertising in-games it does not feel that bad, but that is for a different post.
I would like to know what you, the GB crew and community, think about this issue. Do you think I am somebody on Internet bitching and moaning, or is this a reasonable look at betas?
I hope that you enjoyed this post, and thanks for reading. If you liked this I will continue onwards with out issues. I love both positive and negative feedback, so the more the better.
1. Gonzalez, A. (2010, August). The Lab rats. Game Informer, XX(209), 17-19.
Please read this article. It has made me lose all faith in most PC gamers. Please tell me a feel good story about PC gamers. They can't all be this heartless, I was so disgusted by this article I bought the package for 25 dollars.
EDIT: I was very angry when I wrote this. Sorry to the good PC gamers out there.