234r2we232

I liked Deadpool before it was cool... >_>

With that said, I have a terrible feeling about this game. They could totally get away with recycling the X-men Origins: Wolverine game and flopping the characters around for DP - that doesn't sound too bad on paper at least.

I'd be more interested in a 60's Batman TV show game ;)

And surprise. Slly news editor interjecting his silly opinion into "newz" articles. A Superman game would be the worst thing and considering the roll they're on with these awesome Batman games, it'd be a terrible way to kill the series.

Still. Makes more sense than the Vita.

Holy eff. A modern city. Every other game ever... ball's in your court now.

@Dragon_Fire said:

@sofacitysweetheart said:

Because you're playing it on a PC. Buy a console already. Duh :)

Woot, 720p and 30 FPS all the way. (sarcasm)

The game is broken with DX 11.

You're ruining video games.

Because you're playing it on a PC. Buy a console already. Duh :)

It's a poor shooter and an even poorer RPG. It's fun in co-op, but unless you have a group of friends who you know are going to commit to it the same as you, it's really not worth the time. All this, plus a million bugs, unintuitive/bland/repetitive quests and a pretty lame story. I was super disappointed by it and (for some odd reason) gave it multiple chances. As someone who is usually into shooters, RPGs and bizarre fantasy/sci-fi, I cannot recommend.

Giving your credit card information to Microsoft is a very bad idea. Just throwing that out there.

This seems to be more of a "testing the waters" type deal for whatever their next system is. Imagine if their new console hit the market for about the same price as this, that'd be crazy, but since their "premium" online service gives nothing back outside of very basic access to bog-standard online features, I'm not sure how they'd lose money (oh, and let's not forget the ad revenue they must be pulling in).

Then again, this is Microsoft. Give me any reason at all to not buy your next console, please.

@ERoBB: Call of Duty has the Call of Duty brand name. That's just as valuable to it as the NFL name is to the Madden series. Difference being, Call of Duty has good ratings and sells well. One might argue it's appropriately rated ;)

@ERoBB: I'm not sure I understand. The player base who consumes those games rate them pretty highly, but then, wouldn't that just cause the critics to appear wrong? It would prove that scores don't matter if those games really are as panned as you're saying but still, there's not a whole lot to be amazed by in those games. So if that's the case, who is really the authority on good games? The reviewer or those who play them and enjoy them?

Is a game overrated if it receives high scores but has low sales and is regarded poorly by video game players? Does it have more to do with it's contradicting popularity outside of gaming circles and in the mainstream media? Are we talking strictly about the amount of mechanics and depth?

Still, I'm not buying that a game can be unexceptional, sell well and not be overrated to some extent of whatever meaning you're going for.