The DLC is AMAZING. Will totally get this just so I can replay it all again. Do wish they'd give a firm date though. Guessimg August.
Vitor's forum posts
Saw it last week - not a good movie but it has the marvel name so it'll go well. The Captain America films are the weakest of the Marvel films by far so I don't know why I expected this one to be any better. He's still the most bland hero of the bunch and the movie was completely toothless and far too overly serious.
Stop going to Comicvine, problem solved.
Tony always seemed like a nice guy but my word, the lack of professionalism on the site is astounding. I literally can't go for a single paragraph on any of his articles without coming across either a grammar or spelling mistake. That, combined with the generally adolescent quality of the writing at large just made me stop going, barring the odd occasion when I need to look up who a certain super-villain is. Even then, Wiki seems to do a better job these days.
Shame that the story elements of Halo 2 seem to overshadow all the good things that game that and the huge refinements it made to the series.
- Vehicle takedowns/hijacking - possibly the most copied feature since
- Removal of all health packs - fully recharging HP
- That covenant sword lock-on risk/reward epicness
- The fun of dual wielding
- A massively better looking game
- The best multiplayer maps in the entire series
- A fantastic match-making system (a first for consoles) and all that brought with it
Sure, a lot of these were apparent in the multiplayer but whenever people refer to Halo 2 as a disappointment, I have to remind them that in terms of gameplay, it was the high-point of the series. Now that was combat evolved, while Halo 3's messy deployables just overly-complicated an already elegant system and the complete nerf to dual wielding lessened options. Let's face it, the BR became the defacto weapon from that game onwards which I think is a damn shame.
Second go, first time I got like 1100 because I didn't skip anything... Fun game but inconsistent about how accurate you have to be. Some series let you get away with just the main name but others require the specific entry.
Was a little annoyed with one of the answers - they wouldn't accept Silent Hill The Room for The Room, even though I feel that should be OK.
On the other hand, this engine is designed to pump out a new frame every 16ms. Clearly it doesn't always manage it, but a drop down to single digit frame-rates would necessitate that engine taking 100ms to render the next image
Wow what an ignorant asshat.
An engine designed to produce 60fps couldn't possibly drop to 1-5fps under any circumstances?! Right!? Guys, how is this even possible? I mean, come on. I'm not pointing fingers and calling anyone a liar, but... let's just ask the question. Is Jeff Gerstman a fancy pants liar or not?
Anyway, ... I think Titanfall looks pretty awesome as far as gfx and design. I just don't like FPS comp shooters enough to break away from the other stuff I'm playing yet. Really hoping they continue on with the Titanfall stuff, maybe make a few different types of games in the universe.
Lol. You're really quoting the DF guys, people who actually know how game engines work, as ignorant asshats? Rocks, glass houses and all that.
They weren't reacting to Jeff's article. They were reacting to the massively negative thread that it prompted on places such as Neogaf. If anyone here would actually bother to read and click on the links embedded there.
He's not calling Jeff a liar - he's just asking how likely it is that the engine would drop so much. Most engines built around 60FPS tend to have drops - they discuss that in depth and prove that this is worse than most for that, but they rarely hit single digits because they have such a high overhead. Dropping 20FPS when you're running an average of 60 isn't THAT huge a problem. Dropping 20 when your max is 30 is most definitely an issue. No idea why you're taking it so personally.
I don't get why people cheese the game with magic. It just never felt satisfying for me. Sure, you still have to deal with positioning as you would in melee but it always felt like swords were what this game was designed around. There's so much to learn and so much pay off when doing so.
Not that Brad is playing it 'wrong', it's just that it's better to learn that stuff early on when the game is easier, than be forced to learn it in the late game because you had such a huge crutch to start off with.
How does it look better than PC?
Everything except for the Lara character model looks the same if not better on PC and I seriously would hope that character model would look better than PC if they went out of their way to to recreate it for the new consoles.
The end result will be minor but he went into a lot of details as to how it will be better. The new particle system and the higher resolution textures will be what stand out. Compared to PC the jump won't be huge and the PC will still have the edge on resolution but the PS4/X1 versions (is there an X1 version? Whatever) will have added little details here and there that will add up...slightly.
TR on PC easily runs at 60FPS on a modest rig. That's a pretty big difference besides the potential resolution increase.