As for why it's called a bug? I believe it goes back to when computers were vacuum tubes and actual bugs would get into the machines and screw stuff up. Don't quote me on that, though, unless it's right.
@The_Laughing_Man: I would agree with that. Think of how much money they made when they released it for Fallout 3. At the end of the day, they can tell us there's a "Real Ending" all that they want, but it's still a business and their ultimate goal is still to make money.
Yeah, Microsoft has to be at fault for some of this. They allowed the game to pass through their testing enough to get onto the console. Also, Valve and any other PC certification.
If you're going to count RF:G as a shooter, you may as well try out Fallout 3 and Fallout:NV. Not really "shooter" shooters, but they do have shooting in them, and have really immersive stories and gameplay. They'll also get you your monies worth as there's at least 40-50 hours of gameplay in the single player story, and another 150 hours in extra side quests.
@CptBedlam: The sad fact is that the majority of "gamers" (read: Kids whose parents buy them games) are never going to read these reviews and never going to even know this whole situation happens. The amount of people affected by these things, in my opinion, seems to be so minuscule that it shouldn't even be an issue. To me, it would seem, 9 out of 10 gamers are going to see an advertisement during the latest episode of "Top Chef" or some other stupid show, and go "I like the guns and blowing stuff up in [this completely CGI-rendered] game called Fallout. I'm going to go buy it!"
An educated game purchaser IS going to read the reviews, but ultimately make their own decision. Or, at least, they should. This game is a prime example of that fact. So many people are saying "This game is RIFE with bugs. But...I'm still getting it."
Log in to comment