lkpower

So guess it's a matter of perspective for me. I've only recently started using consoles again after playing everything exclusively on PC for the last 3 years or so and just got used to waiting for a hefty install to finish and then tearing through the game. You all raise great points and have convinced me that even though partial installs are frustrating at times they have their place and are usually beneficial. The process itself will probably get better as time goes on.

So "installed" dying light on my PS4 this morning o the fullest extent that the system level installation would but I still got the same immersion breaking message that Vinny did.

I understand that playing a partially installed game was touted as a huge feature at the launch of the current generation but I'm finding that it gets in the way more times than it helps. I was having a pretty good time with Dying light this morning; getting a feel for it, understanding the world and the mechanics and this brings me to a dead stop. Times like these make me wish there was a way to opt out of partial installation and just get the whole thing. I would wait for it if it meant that I could keep playing straight through. Other games have done this too Battlefield 4 being the most egregious one that I can remember. I think this needs to stop or publishers need to at least give us the option to download and unpack the whole game at once if we want to instead of having to launch and play the game and then wait in game for everything to finish. Has anyone else gotten this? Where does everyone stand on the partial installation issue?

I want a Bladerunner game with LA Noire Mechanics

Bladerunner....

Done. Good luck!

PSN: lk-power

Timezone: US Eastern Standard Time

Games: GTA V, The Last of Us Remastered, Battlefield 4, COD: Advanced Warfare, Watchdogs, All of the PS Plus offerings for PS4

Have Headset, I'm down for coop

I think it's more about how Jeff is probably fed up with what the industry has become. Triple A games are for the most part, known quantities at this point ,and people that are like Jeff and have been covering the industry for decades can see what's coming. I think the predictable and PR driven nature of the Triple A gaming space really bums Jeff out. That's why he seems like a jaded old man those kinds of games are played and out boring to him. That's fine. I'd rather him be honest than anything else. That's a big reason I come to GB.

lk-power

on PSN I'm down

Standard def is referred to as such because it was (at the time) when pixels began to matter for displays the NTSC standard pixel count for all cable and over the air TV content. It was a broadcast resolution that was applied almost everything at time. Thus it was "standard" resolution or definition. That begin said there is no reason to change what Standard is because we are actually further from a standard display resolution now than we were back then. With resolutions varying between, consoles, individual games and displays (not all "HD" Displays are created equally) 480/I is still the "Standard Definition" that all displays are held to both as a minimum and a point of comparison. Anything above 480 is something else entirely. Just let your resolution be your resolution. Why should we care what the standard is? Just semantics I know but if we "standardize" HD now, in a few years we will have the same discussion. pointless to change what "standard def" is

Does anyone know what is to become of disc based Games for Windows live titles when they take the service down next year? I have a bunch of boxed titles (Batman Arkham Asylum, Fallout 3 Ultimate edition etc... the'r codes do not work on steam. Will I then inherit several useless discs and codes?