PandaBear

I think rick_fingers overall point is correct though. The system needs to be pressured by the community to change. I mean personally I think they should be gutted in the street as an example to the others, but a longer jail sentence will suffice. Look at countries like India dealing with their own rape crisis -- people go out on the street and protest over one rape. Say what you will about some of those poorer countries, they have the guts to rally and stand up for what they believe in.

This.

Though I was just thinking this morning about Generations. It's go some shit level later in the game. But the first 1/2 at least is excellent. Overall it was a good game... but Sonice needs the CE DX treatment.

I used to sleep on a queen, but now I sleep in a big bed with your mum. BAM!

Because this issue is among the most discussed in video games and if you're not bringing ANYTHING new to the table why bother? This is the third or fourth thread in a week to call out annual games getting special treatment. We get it, he thinks Call of Duty/other annual shooter/yearly adventure game are harming the industry. I mean, they aren't. They keep people employed. A LOT OF PEOPLE. If that's harm than so be it.

Who ever said that? I play Battlefield 3, I have about 250 hours in it. I love the shit out of that game. My all time favourite game is Ocarina of Time, which takes about 40 hours. Time doesn't equal quality. The OP's issue was why do annual games get a "free pass" but a once every few years Batman game get slammed for being unoriginal. The reason is modern shooters are like sports games -- they are designed from the ground up to be annual. Arkham Origins is a one and done experience, and from all accounts it's not hat much fun. It doesn't get a "free pass" for annual because it's a single-player game that doesn't change with every play, Call of Duty for example does. No two games are the same.

On the flip side should original IPs get a "free pass" for being new? Do they get a score bump for trying something different? Fuck that. I want my review to say "hey you know that job you work at for 40 hours a week to make money, well this game is worth that money" not "look it's not that great, but it's new! So buy it! But if they make sequels avoid them."

I cannot make heads nor tails of this. It has two releases as it will be released on two consoles. What's confusing about that?

Fuck this again? Sorry but there was heated thread about this already.

Recap:

Arkham Origins is a single-player focused adventure game that was made by the B-team this time around. It's derivative and though you can approach it multiple ways it's basically the same experience for everyone. It's the third in a series that need new life breathed into it. I thought Arkham City was pretty bland really.

Call of Duty is like a sports game, the single-player is usually good but the meat is the multiplayer where every game is different. Each year is like a dramatic roster update with new weapons and maps. If you're a fan of the series one you buy the game it becomes your go-to game for that year, maybe two. Nobody will play Arkham Origins all year, it's not that sort of game.

Call of Duty get criticised every year by reviewers and gamers. People act like they're the first person to say "Hey, has anyone else noticed CoD hasn't changed much?". You are not. Yeah it gets 9s and 8s, maybe 10s, but if you disagree with that reviewer constantly realise that's their opinion and move on. Maybe don't read their reviews anymore. I hardly ever agree with Jeff so I don't read his reviews (Syndicate was a 3-star game, Pokemon X is brilliant IMHO).

Hurting games? How exactly? Sports game have been annualised forever, now some shooters are too ... it's not a huge deal.

It's always bugged me how the majority of retro video game coverage is Nintendo... anyway, Sonic 3 was the best game I had for that thing. Fuck it I love that game, even if it is the black sheep of the original series.

I'll be honest, I was a bit disappointed to hear about them caving in. Jeff said it was basically about playing ball for future coverage, which never occurred. They should put it back up. Rockstar basically don't talk to the media anyway it seems.

YOU ELITIST BASTARD!!

Ignore him @qsaersersf ... you tell me all about your baseball gamez