coryrx8

I'm from Kansas and currently live in Texas, and I've had to listen to enough of that noise to fill multiple lifetimes. There isn't a single country musician on the face of the Earth that I can stand to listen to.

From playing the demo, Dante's appearance aside, I can't stand this game because it doesn't play like a Devil May Cry game. It's far too easy, far too simplistic, and falls into a lot of the same pitfalls that Ninja Gaiden 3 fell into, where randomly mashing buttons is a viable approach to the game. I'm more than a little sick of "accessibility" being crammed into absolutely everything. To me, this game is the Devil May Cry equivalent to adding rapidly regenerating health to Dark Souls; it fundamentally changes the way the game plays in ways that I don't like. I can only hope that 1.) this game flops, and 2.) Capcom goes back to the old-style of DMC combat. Unfortunately, this game flopping will probably make Capcom abandon the series altogether instead.

Sony's analog sticks are the only ones that I've never really been able to use for FPSs. They just have way too little resistance and feel like they take longer to center than either Microsoft's or Nintendo's analog sticks. It's too bad really, because I love the Resistance series. I doubt that Sony will ever fix them seeing as how they've used the exact same design for three console generations now.

@rebgav said:

These two changes seem to go hand-in-hand. Avoiding class action suits is mostly a good thing for both the company and the potential claimants as those sorts of proceedings have become quite seedy and scam-like and generally don't benefit the claimants financially in a meaningful way. Small Claims has, I think, a claim limit of $5000 (which I'll bet is significantly higher than the average payout in a class action) though I can't imagine what Valve could do to put you five grand out of pocket. Still, Valve footing the bill for you to sue them seems like the sort of generosity (or over-confidence) which blurs the line between customer service and complete insanity.

I will say that I'm not a big fan of lawyers getting rich when consumers have been wronged, but what really drives me nuts is that they get rich while the corporation still isn't adequately punished; they're making serious bank for doing a terrible job, because often these suits are settled at a fraction of the cost of the true harm that the corporation inflicted. For instance, the RIAA-membership implemented a price-fixing scheme that lasted for over a decade and brought in billions of dollars of extra profits. Then, when sued, both parties settled for $67.4 million. So not only were the claimants not made whole and the lawyers made off like bandits, but the offenders involved weren't really punished at all. What message does that really send? It's not that doing the wrong thing doesn't pay, instead it's that you should always do the wrong thing, because if you get away with it you make money, and if you get caught you still make money, but you may have to give a little of it back.

That said, I'll still take it over mandatory binding arbitration, which should be illegal. Consumerist came up with a statistic that arbitration goes in favor of the group who chose the arbitrator 98% of the time, regardless of who actually paid the bill for the arbitration. Strike the mandatory part, and I'm OK with it. Strike the binding part, and I'm OK with it. Being legally required to waiving your right to use the courts and having a biased arbitrator as your only chance for relief is just wrong.

Heck no. I usually re-evaluate Linux every five years by using it exclusively for one month, and July 2011 was a nightmare. My trackpad would lock up when resuming from suspend and would require a reboot to fix, although this didn't happen after hibernating. My graphics would drop down to 16-bit color when resuming from hibernation or suspend and would also require a reboot to fix. On a laptop, both of those problems are a pretty major pain in the rear since they would pop up every time I closed the lid. The support forum's response? "We'll have a fix in 11.10." No thank you.

2005 Mazda RX8: $32000. College came close, but thankfully I graduated in 2005, just before prices skyrocketed.

I won't count my house since my wife actually bought it before we got married. I'm paying the mortgage on it, but I didn't buy it.

I'll watch anything but Enterprise or the Insurrection movie. Those particular entries bore me to tears. Most of the original series and The Next Generation are better than Deep Space 9 which is better than Voyager, but really, I get some amount of enjoyment out of watching almost anything Star Trek-related, other than the aforementioned exceptions. Some people are a lot more critical of Deep Space 9 and Voyager particularly so your mileage may vary on that. I actually just watching Voyager on Netflix and got a lot more enjoyment out of it than I ever thought that I would. If you're new to the series, start with TNG. Nobody will ever top Captain Picard.

I'm assuming that "aged better" means "looks less obsolete." My answer to that would be neither. In terms of the main menu interface, both consoles are a mess. XMB is the colossal abortion that it always was, and Microsoft abandoned the one salvageable interface that they had in order to make their console more Kinect friendly. Woohoo. In terms of graphics, both consoles are looking equally aged. Like developers, engineers, and everybody else outside of Sony's marketing machine have been telling us since 2006, the two consoles are technologically on par. They both maxed out back in 2008-2009 and are really only making incremental graphical improvements. No matter which machine I boot up I feel like I'm playing with yesterday's technology, and I'm ready for a new generation of consoles.

@Largo6661 said:

heavy rain has some of the worst, most unconvincing voice acting known to man.

That's an unpopular opinion? Wow, apparently I was bitten by the false consensus effect on that one.

My contribution: Valve didn't handle the Steam hack any better than Sony did the PSN hack, but for some reason the gaming media always throws a tarp over the skeletons in Valve's closet instead of revealing them.

I'm a little tired of the constant villainization of used games sales. Just because Gamestop is incredibly sleazy about how they handle used game sales doesn't mean that everyone involved is evil. I buy my games new, but I'm tired of the first sale doctrine being callously disregarded by every big corporation thinking that they are entitled to get a cut every time something they make changes ownership. The fact is that the games sitting on the used game racks are sitting there because the original owner got tired of that game. Instead of throwing a temper tantrum, publishers and developers should either determine why that is and add a bit more longevity to their titles, or just deal with it. As much as I love single player experiences like Shadows of the Damned and will never part with my copy, the chances of me playing that game again are very remote just because of the fact that it really gives me no incentive to replay it. If someone wanted to sell that game in exchange for money to buy a new title, then I don't fault them at all.

Along those lines, publishers don't really seem to understand that people's entertainment budgets aren't unlimited. People who buy used games exclusively don't contribute to publishers, period. Cutting off used games would probably get them to purchase a few new games, but those sales would be offset by lost sales coming from people who finance some of their new game purchases by selling their old games. I really don't understand why publishers have so much trouble seeing beyond a single level of indirection in their logic, but clearly they do have major issues with it. Aren't some of the brightest and highest-paid financial minds supposed to be working for these people?