The main argument I am hearing about changing the Mass Effect 3 ending is ‘Bethesda did it for Fallout 3 and it worked’. Sure it’s trying to fix the problem of ‘It has a shitty ending’ but these are two entirely different situations, mainly the reason why it’s bad and how they fixed it.
*Fallout 3 Spoilers*
In Fallout 3 the main character has to enter a code to a machine which is inside a room that’s heavily radiated. The player has many choices to do this. He can do it himself which results in his death, he can refuse to do it and leaves or he can ask one of his companions to do it, which if the ‘Broken Steel’ DLC is not installed, is refused as well. All three of these endings results in the game ending. The reasons why this is considered a bad ending is because of two things: All three endings leaves it impossible for the player to continue playing the game which the player either has to load an old save or start a new character completely from scratch. The other reason is because the situation the player is in can be fixed without the player dying as three of the player’s companions are not affected by radiation (Fawkes, Charon and Sergeant RL -3). These options of asking the companion to put in the code are available but even though this will cause no harm to anyone and gives Washington DC fresh clean water the companions refuse. Their reason is roughly ‘It’s your destiny’. Of course you can see how this can called a horrible ending but Bethesda listened to outcry and made ‘Broken Steel’, a piece of DLC that allows the player to convince the companions of entering the code as well as a new quest line following the.. fallout of your actions.
*Mass Effect 3 Spoilers*
Now from what I can tell the reason why Mass Effect 3’s ending is considered horrible is because the condition the universe is in after Shepherd’s actions negates the actions from over the last 3 games and how that choice is laid out to the player. Mainly the destruction of the Mass Relays, the crash landing of the Normandy and the child from the beginning being ‘The Soul of the Citadel’ as well as some plot holes. The reason why Fallout 3’s ending was changed successfully was because the actual event of the ending still happened. You still had to fight to Project Purity and put in the code. The actual ending wasn't changed, it was what the player can do that changed, allowing players to continue playing the game after the ending. The change was almost purely mechanical. The reason why Mass Effect 3 cannot change so easily is because the issues people are having are 100% plot and writing. To really change the issue of Mass Effect 3’s ending you would have to completely overhaul the plot. Dialogue would have to be rerecorded, new animations, new graphics, new set pieces, part of the plot will have to be rewritten and parts would just need to be removed completely. This would be both incredibly expensive and time consuming. Current DLC plans would either be on hold or rushed. Pretty much the last third of the game would need to be changed completely. With Broken Steel they changed few things about the ending and added alot more to the game as well as a way to continue your game. Even if all that happens, even if Bioware develops this piece of DLC or revision that ending is still going to be in your mind. You’re not going to forget it so really you’re still going to remember Mass Effect 3 had a bad ending.
You cannot draw comparisons between Fallout 3 and Mass Effect 3 just because they have a similar problem. That similar problem has different causes with different solutions. The same can be said about Halo 2’s ending. This isn’t something that can be fixed with a few pieces of dialogue. Everything goes into account and I don’t think Bioware is going to throw years of development away from an excellent game just because the last 10 minutes of it wasn’t up to the extreme high standards Bioware has had with the series.
Do not let those 10 minutes sour your experience over the 150 hours you had of amazing gaming bliss.
Before I rant on this subject let me make one thing clear, I'm not a big PC gamer. I have a middle-range Compaq laptop that can barely run Team Fortress 2 at a playable framerate so I won’t be playing Skyrim or Battlefield 3 on the PC any time soon. While my Steam collection of games is quite respectable most of them aren’t even downloaded and quite a few would have no chance of running, even with all the settings down. I’m not some PC wonder-wizard.
The people complaining about the DRM in ‘From Dust’ are idiots. They’re pissed because ‘From Dust’ requires an internet connection when booting the game. I can understand this being an issue 5 years from now when those servers may not be running but if you are reading this then you are obviously on the internet. Let me ask you a question: When was the last time you played a recent release almost completely offline? Let’s say that a recent game is one month after release. I doubt any of you have. Most of the recent releases would only be playable on a desktop anyway as only a select few enthusiasts would have a modern gaming laptop. But even those people would be playing at home or at least on a table. Who wants to play something like Skyrim on the bus? The only people who would genuinely have an issue with this is people who don’t have internet (which would be 21% of the American population according to Gizmodo ). But of course the people who don’t have internet cannot get ‘From Dust’ because they have to download it. So the people complaining about this are doing it for no reason or at least not a serious reason.
But something that genuinely frustrates me is the thread titled: Did you not buy a game because (it’s) not on Steam? There are people in that thread who didn’t buy Starcraft 2 and aren’t going to buy Battlefield 3 SOLELY because it’s not on Steam. These people are lazy, moronic, retards. You are missing out on some of the best games within the last 5 years because you can’t be bothered to open a launcher on your desktop. While yes it would be nice to have all of your games in one launcher it’s not an extremely hard thing to open another launcher or pay for a game on a another website. As a console person this translates to me to ‘I’m not buying Modern Warfare 3 because I have to change the disc’.
Seeing how I got Facebook at the beginning of the year I’m not exactly deep in the casual Facebook game scene. I’ve seen others playing games like Farmville but I never had an interest in it, so much that I have never tried it. That said I’m also not a big Civilization fan, to be honest the only experience I’ve had with Civ was the coverage on Giant Bomb and Civilization Revolution on iOS.
Even with both of those against it I had an interest in CivWorld. I’ve always wanted a MMO-RTS hybrid with the long persistence of an Age of Empires title (which I hope Age of Empires Online will fill) so when CivWorld was released (launched?) I wanted to check it out.
First of all I must point out in CivWorld is that the start of the game is extremely slow. Like ‘continental shift’ slow. In your first hour with the game you’ll achieve almost nothing. In one hour of playtime (which includes a 6 hour gap in between) I manage to create 3 units. That’s right, 3 units in ONE HOUR. In the time it takes you to have a decent game of Civ 5 you’ll have 3 units in CivWorld. This leaves a MASSIVE barrier of entry to any new players with a casual interest. This is mainly because of the resource gathering and how it’s used. Unlike games of the genre food isn’t a commodity, it’s a level. To create units you don’t spend 300 food and have it taken away, no you have to get up to a certain amount of food and each time you want another unit you have to get up to the next level. For example to get one unit you must get 300 food and then after that you’ll need to get 800 food and it goes on and on and on.
This wouldn’t be a problem if the resource gathering itself wasn’t as slow as the rest of the game. The way resources are gathered isn’t as far-fetched as the unit creation but it’s still extremely slow. The Units you DO have are walking between their house, location of resource (farm, trees, rocks) and a drop off point in your town centre. Problem is that the resource they do gather is usually between 1 -3 and with goals in the hundreds and thousands it’s a process that takes a lot of time. Also in a bizarre choice another way to gather resources is a series of mini-games. These mini-games seems like your typing casual games, puzzles, mazes etc but the thing that will catch you off guard is that ‘moves’ are used when interacting with the puzzle. Moving a puzzle piece, twisting a path, passing through a maze all costs ‘moves’ and these ‘moves’ are limited. This stops people from grinding out resources which begs the question of why give me the option to do mini-games for resources when I can only play when certain conditions are met?
Unfortunately that’s as close as CivWorld get’s to being an actual ‘game’. Unlike past Civ games you have no direct control of your units. All you can do tell them what resource to gather and when you units collect resources using an inefficient path this only makes you wish you were playing Civ 5. That’s the less of CivWorld’s problems when it comes to interaction with the game. I’m currently playing on Firefox 5 with an uncluttered toolbar, even with that the Flash window CivWorld presents itself with is too tall for the default window of Firefox. The only way you can see the game window in its entirety is to go full screen, which personally for me sucks because I like to multitask, between iTunes, other tabs and other programs going from thing to thing in full screen Firefox is incredibly annoying. This wouldn’t be such a deal-breaker if your main controls weren’t on the top and bottom of the window.
My next point is being brought up with my lack knowledge on how other ‘Social-Casual games’ do this but it must be addressed. Micro transactions. In almost every subscreen of the game is an option to buy ‘CivBucks’. What are these ‘CivBucks’ you may ask? It’s basically Microsoft points for CivWorld. You buy CivBucks to buy resources, units and items for your throne room. Now I’m all for micro transactions. If buying your way through game makes part of the audience happy it’s good for both the player and the developer. But unlike Team Fortress 2, CivWorld tries to make sure that you are reminded every time you open a new screen to buy CivBucks to improve your Civilization. It’s really shows the money hungry nature of the casual games market and it's really blatant. Also it has a stupid name. CivBucks? Really?
Again, I’ve played CivWorld for an hour. I haven’t even touched combat or research or interaction with other players but so far from what I see and what I’ve played, CivWorld isn’t lookng so hot.
Seems like this year there are many things with universal hate. Kinect, Nintendo and Duke Nukem Forever to only name a few. I’m not necessarily a person who likes to follow trends. I always give a game a chance to impress me despite what others say. This personality trait has lead me to purchase games like ‘Alone in the Dark’ and ‘Alpha Protocol’ and with this trait I have gone out and bought Duke Nukem Forever.
I loved Duke Nukem 3D, despite being about 6 or 7 when played it back in the 90’s. I have very fond memories of running around the first level shooting Pig Cops and blowing up the screen to get at extra goodies. That plus being fascinated by the trolling zombie that was Duke Nukem Forever’s development pretty much locked in my purchase for the game. Due to lack of funds I couldn’t get it when it came out and announce to the world ‘I own a copy of Duke Nukem Forever’ as I was planning but because of this I got to witness the critical reaction to this game: Overall hatred.
But that wasn’t going to stop me, oh no. My hunger for Duke Nukem was not quenched by Manhattan Project or the port of Duke 3D to XBLA. I had to play the sequel to 3D.
14 years later Duke Nukem’s credits flow pass the screen, a completed game. Collecting my thoughts about it I realised how much fun I had with the game. It was very refreshing playing a shooter that wasn’t a Call of Duty knock-off or another cover based shooter. I enjoyed it more than I should have, but why?
I do really like Duke Nukem Forever but I can clearly see its problems and why people hate it. Load times are unacceptable. Load times shouldn’t be this long for a game that doesn’t look great. Load times shouldn’t happen as frequently as it does in Duke Nukem Forever. Most of the time the area in which the loading starts is also the same area the game loads back into so there is no excuse on why this game didn’t stream its loading as you went through the level. I didn’t mind going through the long empty hallways in Tony Hawk’s American Wasteland so why not have it here?
Framerate can get choppy, the game looks decent for a game that came out in 2006, had a boss that didn’t go through its death animation so I got stuck and I had the game crash at one point. But despite all of this I still found the game enjoyable. I’m not going to write a review on this game because that would require me to play the multiplayer and I don’t want to look a dead rotting horse in the mouth but if I could make one statement about the game it is that it is not for everyone.
This is pretty much every game enthusiast worst nightmare.
You have gotten your brand new slim Xbox. You want to get your profile off your old console onto your new console. You put the profile on your USB stick and delete the profile off your old one and place it on to your new profile. Your ready to play some Borderlands. Load it up and your character is missing. That's odd. You load up Halo: Reach and that Hollywood Holocaust remake you spent 3 hours on as well as the rest of your maps, films and other stuff gone. Your 200 hour plus Oblivion save is gone. Nothing is on this console so you check your old console and what do you know, it's not on there either.
So each and every one of my game saves the for 150+ games I played is now gone. Looking back at what I did I did I must of use the option 'Delete profile and items' which includes games saves and other junk. So really I am only angry at myself for being such an idiot and now I must try rebuilding back my saves.
Looking at this game with shallow eyes you might just see what the game is at the barest level, crazy zombie game with funny ways to kill and murder people. But since finishing Dead Rising 2 I have been thinking what Dead Rising represents to the player, what is its purpose, what is its message? To tell you the truth I do not know. I don't even think Keiji Inafune or Blue Castle knows. It does things that complement game mechanics like the combat and the weapon crafting system but also contradicts its themes, for example, the scene Katey falls unconscious after a dose of Zombrex or the scene in which one of the twins kills herself due to her sister's death. Now in a scene as compelling as that (for Dead Rising 2's standards) wouldn't you feel absolutely nothing if Chuck was wearing a hula girl dress, knight helm and SWAT boots. Would you just be laughing at the sheer madness happening on screen with no one even reacting? Why would you put in something that contradicts something so much that it’s falls completely flat?
Dead Rising 2 has some pretty amazing moments in it. I felt pity in Slappy's death cut scene when Slappy finally asks the girl of his dreams to a date in Heaven and he'll 'be there soon’ as he dies next to her. But once again Dead Rising 2 shoves its contradicting knee into your spine when Slappy suddenly jumps up and screams at the top of his presumably failing lungs. Again completely ruins one of the most compelling scenes in the game but awkwardly shoving it odd sense of humour in a scene that didn't need it.
My issue is that Dead Rising 2 doesn't need to do that. It already has some pretty crazy events and scenes which play out very well. Most of the psychopath death scene are either filled with extreme irony (mall cop being twice the man Chuck is, literally) or unnecessary awesome gore (Magician assistant get his revenge with a big ass knife). This is just cut scene as the actual gameplay can just be as crazy if not more so.
One theme I didn't think was need at all was the sexualised nature of the female protagonists, particularly Rebecca Chang. It’s seems like every scene she is in she hasabout 3 shots of her showing off her ‘assets’ and it was really off putting. This makes no sense to me in any way, shape or form. Chuck is not romantically involved withanyone in the game or even hints at that so the shots don’t represent Chuck frustrated libido so it seems like the only reason these shots exist is to show of the hot sexybig breasted character model (which don’t even look super impressive). These kinds of shots were in the original Dead Rising but this was in my mind at least to show the player the erotica photo op option in the game but in Dead Rising 2 it makes no sense.
I think it is all of these things and none of these things. It is a game with so much going on you are only going to give focus to. If you like the utter madness of a Frank West as Mega Man shooting at a duel chainsaw fighting clown do you leave the story with little attention as possible or just skip the cut scenes entirely? Do you just wear the default motocross jacket on you Chuck Greene because you want to have a ‘realistic’ experience and avoid the stupid weapons and costumes?
This is why I think Dead Rising 2’s themes are an interesting experiment in entertainment in general. It appeals to certain people with sections of the game completely dedicated to a theme and adds bits and pieces of other themes to keep things interesting. It is the game you wanted it to be, whether it’s the insane Japan crazy zombie beat-em-up or the survival simulator or the big giant escort quest.
You will be hard to find a person who doesn’t like an aspect of Dead Rising.
Since my last blog I have had the fortunate pleasure of finally get myself a job. Ever since my job I have had this fever dream of buying games new and old. Since my dive into the workplace my collection of games have doubled in half a year. I am to a point in which the rack I keep my games are full and what games cannot fit on it just lay on the TV stand. Some of these games I haven't even played. This is the first time in my life in which I haven't finished a game (or really got started) ever. I have multiple games just sitting there, barely opened just to check disc conditions waiting to be played. The prime example of this is Too Human.
Now let me get this off my chest. I bought Too Human for $8. This isn't American dollars either. This is Australian. I bought a game from 2008 for $8. This is a very rare to happen here where games remain at $110 despite the rising dollar or popularity. I played Too Human for about 45 minutes and let me tell you, it did not give me a good first impression.
First of all the controls are just bad. The right stick being used as melee is as about as good as precision shooting on the Wii. It just does not work. Flicking the stick in the direction of your enemies has no skill in it whatsoever. You cannot get any better then what you started off with. That's Too Human's first problem. The story is a mess of hard to understand metaphors and talking for minutes with the characters not really saying anything important. Granted I played it for less then an hour but if the story hasn't gripped me by the throat and dragged me under it is not doing it's job. The menu has this animation that takes up about 1.5 seconds but feels like forever and when you have to go to more then one menu (mostly likely it will because everything is split) it will be maddening. The last straw was after a very bad, very boring, very frustrating boss fight I took one step off the flying platform thing to find that not only had the game crashed but it gave me a Red Ring. I restarted it and hasn't even flashed it. My console wanted to kill itself over the bad structure and controls over one game and since then it has stayed in it's case and I have never looked back.
My past just came back to me so hard and so fast with all this time off. It's kind of scary and awesome at the same time. Going though your past can bring up all these memories whether it's good or bad. In this case (or several cases) this has been very positive. Really, when your reminiscing about this media it is always has a positive result. You don't really remember the bad aspects of your childhood when you focus on gaming. Maybe it's because it's our choice on what we play and how we rate a game's quality when were older compared to when you were young. Is that why we rate games from the past as the greatest games of all time instead of every holiday release because of it's superior presentation and gameplay? Who knows, maybe because we have less to worry about in our youth then now. All it was were you and the games and oh boy, the games I played in my youth came back to me with a heavy load...
I recently bought ' Unreal Tournament 2004' for an awesome price of $20 AU and whether or not it's because of it being a recently installed game or because it's on an external hard drive or the my machine sucks but the load times are extremely long. Like 5 - 10 mins long. So what I have been doing during these down times is playing my recently rediscovered ' Nintendo 64' and with that I have been playing 'The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time'. It has seem to have ended up that I have been playing more Ocarina then I have of UT2004. I don't know if you know this but Ocarina is mathematically and with my opinion the greatest game ever made. It's been about 11 years since it came out way back in 1998 and still to this day is have surpassed every game ever since. It's still an absolute blast to play as the gameplay, story and even the graphics never get old. Going through the Great Deku tree has never gotten old no matter how many times I have went though it. In the only media in which older products can be harder to play and overall less enjoyable it's astounding that Ocarina has stood up for so long during the hard test that is time.
With that my big ball of nostalgia began rolling down the hill...
A friend of mine was selling his Playstation with a bunch of games for about $30 and with those titles came two games which I never really played but is almost as revered as Ocarina and they are ' Final Fantasy VII' and ' Metal Gear Solid'. Now these two franchises have not had a had lot of exposure to me. The Final Fantasy's I have only play were 'IX' which I played and enjoyed but didn't finished and barely remembered it and finally X-2 which I never want to play again. Metal Gear is more positive as I went though ' Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater' which is the closest game that has made me cry, I barely scraped though the ending with a dry face.
Obviously these franchises alone made the Playstation back in the early 90's and is one of the revered series in the media. But back then I was very indifferent to them. I had to go on for about 10 years being told "Final Fantasy VII made me cry" and "Metal Gear Solid's Psycho Mantis is the great boss fight ever" until I got my hands on it. The result of my crusade into the Playstation's greatest hits has been mixed. Final Fantasy VII is a great game today and even though one of my most hated concepts of any game is random encounters VII still manged to make me stay with it's engaging story and deep combat system. Metal Gear on the other had been a bit more negative. Don't get me wrong. the story and cinematography is quite good with good voice acting and a great sense of humor but I can't shake the feeling that I'm just a floating camera watching Solid Snake rather then controlling him. Sure I can run around and move but I still can't do things I would of done in the situation and the main fault of that is the camera. Yes indeed I have been hit by the thought of 'I have played too many modern stealth games that I can't play it in a fixed camera angle'. Metal Gear Solid 3 had roughly the same problem but that was soothed by the first person shooting view which is easier taking out guards. I don't know I just can't see myself playing the rest of MGS (mainly because I'm stuck on that fucking dickhead in the tank). Maybe I should play more fixed camera games like Resident Evil or Silent Hill.
Another non-game related nostalgic crash course was unfortunately Pokemon. No, I'm not talking about the games (which I only played Yellow or Blue or Red, fuck I don't remember) I'm talking about the kids TV show which took over my life for about 3 years. I don't know how it happened, I don't know why it happened but Monday I was reading Pokemon wiki pages, watching about 5 episodes and watched the 2nd movie, Pokemon: The Movie 2000 for a collective of 9 HOURS. Jesus Christ, that almost as bad as reading Persona 4 fan fiction for 6 hours. I just don't know what the hell happened but somehow I ended about with the original theme song on my iTunes, made a midi cover of said theme song in FL Studio and almost bought Season 1 on DVD on eBay. I needed help which was somewhat achieved with a combined effort by Daft Punk, Call of Duty 4 and Pirates of the Caribbean 2.
Hopefully this nostalgia free fall will make me end up buying a Playstation 2 (and playing Persona 4) and me watching The Mask.
I'm really picky when it comes to buying games and with the trend of demos getting rare and short I'd thought I go through all my experiences playing demos and finding out which demos was the worst marketing scheme.
I'd also like to point out this list of the worst demos has nothing to do with the quality of the game but the quality of the demo containing it. Dead Space's 'Dismemberment' Demo.
Don't start the show with the show stopper but this demo was punishingly cruel and unfair. In this demo the main character is in a hallway with only one room being available to "explore". I used quote marks on "explore" because this one room is about the size of a living room with nothing of interest besides the few enemies. When said enemies are killed, the door you came through unlocks and you able to open the door to see a scripted event of your character dying.
Then the demo ends.
When I got the Dead Space demo I'd expected a few weapons, couple of nasty looking monsters and some rooms and hallways to shiver my way through. What I got was a debug room and a stupid ending. If you want me to buy your game don't let your main character be unavoidably killed during the demo. Skate 2
The first Skate demo was well crafted in every aspect, great little sandbox area, 40 mins of playtime and a few challenges which weren't required to complete. Sure it didn't have any customizable skater or board and you had to go through training every time but it was exactly what a free roaming game demo needed to be, plenty of your time at your own freewill.
Skate 2's demo is the opposite to that and one of the killing factors is the Time Limit. The Time Limit is messed beyond belief which all sorts of problems. You start the game with 8 mins. That is all of your training which rounds of at 6 - 7 minutes. Now the challenges around you give you extra time but not alot, 1 - 2 minutes each. Now if you rush through these you'd get around 9 minutes of freeroam time. Adding all the playtime it required to get the extra time and the begining and end results you'd get about 15 mintues of total playtime and half of that is doing objectives around the small skatepark.
What the hell happened? Did EA think that undercutting the first demo for the second would get better sales? What was going through EA's mind when the suggested 'Hey, let's cut the demo time from the first demo in half and make the player do stupid missions?".
But they didn't stop there....Oh no they didn't my friend as the time limit reaches zero an annoying seemingly unskipable cutscene comes on and you now have to watch this awfully put together montage of plot and gameplay. I just do not see how EA went from hit to shit.
Super Street Fighter II Turbo HD Remix's trial.
Fighting game: Awesome. Only 2 Selectable Characters: Understandable. They're Ryu and Ken: Disapointing. Verses Mode Only: Annoying. No Online: Angry. Second Controller Required to Even See The Game: Fuck This Is Shit., Dashboard.
YOU DO NOT RELEASE A DEMO IN WHICH IT ONLY HAS LOCAL MULTIPLAYER CAPCOM.
Ninja Gaiden's Xbox Demo
I have one problem with this demo. It's not the unforgiving difficulty, odd bugs or useless save point which was seemingly lfet in the demo, it's that when you die once you get thrown right back to the demo screen. Not the game start screen, all the way back to the demo disc main menu. I think this is a bit rare seeing how you had to have a copy of OXM but this is an unforgiveable demo sin.
I can think of anything else, but if you have a horrid demo you would like express about put it in the comments section. Cheers!
I don't understand why Australian gamers get constantly abused by the gaming industry. In any other media like movies or music Australians get up to date releases (or within the week) and we rarely if ever get movies or music with no release, more so if that media is release online with such programs as iTunes. But with video games it's different.
The video game culture in Australia has not developed to the level of the US or UK (but still is growing). Besides the big chain retailers and the Game Retailer Monopoly known as 'EB Games', game retailers who only sell games and whatever comes with that is a rarity. The closest one of these would be a good 20 minute drive to go to a store that's sandwiched between an EB Games and a electronic goods store. There is not a single hobby store in which I can go play WoW or a video game convention which doesn't completely suck (the last one of these I went to was showing off on the TV ad that they were showing 'Star Wars: Republic Commando' about 2 weeks after it was released).
In this new age of gaming in which the Internet could solve all our problems about game releases and multiplayer being fixed and that all goodness would cause global peace within the world until it crashed before my eyes when I got word of the release of Kodu Game Lab. on the US marketplace a few days ago, also being completely absent from the AU marketplace. The reason this sucks is because...
It's under the 'Community Games' tab which the AU marketplace doesn't even have.
It's published by Microsoft Game Studioson Microsoft's own download service so doesn't have (or shouldn't) any sort of region deals.
The size of the file is less the 200mb
It's 400 MSP
You need to be on an American account to just play the demo (which is TIMED)
So really Microsoft, why is it that a tool that you flaunted off at CES this year as easy using and family friendly cut off from Australia? The price and file size says you didn't really put alot of effort into it's development or wanted it to make money for you. It doesn't require you to ship it half way around the world and it's made by Microsoft, published by Microsoft on Microsoft servers. I cannot see any reason why Microsoft went out of there way to keep this inside the US.
Even when Microsoft tries to spread it's love over the world it fails at that to. No doubt you remember when the South Park episode 'Good Times with Weapons' was released for free sometime last year? Well Microsoft decided to give Australia some well needed love and also release it here for free, but someone must of been asleep at the wheel because the advertisement on the dashboard showing the episode didn't work at all and just a like stumbling fool waking up to see his work not done they decide to fix it the day it was to be taken down. But they keep doing this, like the shoot-em up they released for free never made it over here. Most of the demos get released late and so on.
Australia and the rest of the countries effected by the American Games Industry needs to demand to have closer release dates, same marketplace, same items for download and same rights as the Americans do.