Syed117

I don't think there is any way to judge the chemical reaction that occurs in a persons brain when they interact with a games mechanics. Good or bad is relative. I think there is usually a consensus on what makes a good game, but different strokes for different folks. Not everyone has to love everything, but you will always find gamers who love certain things more than they deserve to be loved.

Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy are two franchises like that for me. When I was young I thought the dialogue and stories in those games were amazing. That was just an effect of being young. Metal Gear specifically has some of the worst storytelling, dialogue and plot of any series I've ever played. I don't understand how anyone over the age of 20 can find it appealing in any way. If someone who is in their twenties or older tells me they genuinely think MGS has good characters or stories, I wouldn't say they have had taste in games because you can separate those things from gameplay mechanics. I would say they have bad taste in fiction.

If you have the money, why not get both?

As far as I'm concerned, that's all it comes down to. If playing games is the priority, then you need all the platforms. I know I don't have the time to play games like I used to, but I still like having all the machines in case something comes out that I really want to play.

From launch until now, I've played the xbox one a lot more. Only because it has more exclusives that I was interested in. I don't regret getting a PS4 because I had the money and because I know there will be great games to play on it. Infamous looks fantastic. Again, I know I won't get as much time out of it as I will Titanfall, but that's not the point.

Get both if you can. Doesn't have to be right now, but at some point there will games you think are worth playing on both.

If anyone has a spare xbox one code, I'd love to get it for my little brother. He's been trying to whole twitter/message board thing, but I doubt he will get one that way.

There is no crisis to be had. If someone is having that kind of reaction to something like flappy bird, they have much bigger issues to concern themselves with.

Patrick is extremely judgmental and always has been. He will go on until the end of time to defend some indie trash because it supposedly has some deep message. He will defend shitty games with piss poor mechanics because they are indie. This whole trend is terrible. He is at the opposite end of the spectrum as the call of duty bros. Douche bags on both sides. We need more call of duty games like we need more shitty indie games. At least call of duty is mechanically sound.

Flappy bird does not deserve the attention it got, but it's just about perfect in terms of mechanics. The art might be ripped off and the gameplay style as well, but it works. People are losing their minds over this one example because it's popular. There is nothing more to it. No one needs to write 5000 word essays on Flappy Bird. It's gotten completely out of hand and pretentious pseudo intellectual gaming "journalists" need to get their heads out of their asses.

1. Yes

2. Yes

3. Many people I know are playing it and it was fun to try and beat high scores. There might not be any real progression, but that doesn't really matter. A one tap button that works as intended is nothing to get upset about. The simple mechanics work perfectly fine. It's about getting the highest score possible and it succeeds in engaging people.

4. No

5. No. It has nothing to do with mobile gamers or their tastes. I think people need to get off their high horses.

6. It's really not as hard as people seem to think. It's not unfair and the mechanics are simple yet challenging enough that it encourages people to keep trying.

There are no excuses for the companies that put these products on the market.

It just feels like the vast majority of games "journalists" never grew up. Most of them are still stuck in that fanboy mentality that does nothing but hurt the industry. Gamers are the same way. All the internet babies want to scream and cry and make a million stupid memes but they don't want to speak with their wallets. They can't. Everyone thinks they are infinitely funnier and more clever than they really are. Every basement dweller that spends all day and night on internet forums bitching and moaning but needs to pre-order every game that they already know will be the best thing ever.

I really enjoyed the walking dead on PC, but I lost save progress twice. There is no excuse for that. Reviewers ignored those issues even though they were widespread.

It's like they are afraid to speak out because the industry runs on connections and no one wants to get blacklisted. They also ignore problems with games from companies that they love. There is almost no integrity. For the most part, I really like Giantbomb. I have occasional issues with the way Brad defends the games he thinks are incredible and obvious problems with Patrick and the pretentious douche bag hipster indie parade. For the most part, the guys here don't seem like they have an agenda.

What about every Bethesda game last generation on the PS3? I didn't see reviewers slamming Bethesda for all the problems those versions had.

For me, the last straw was Battlefield 4. That game was broken on all platforms at launch. Every single version was prone to crashes and all sorts of other problems. You would never have known seeing the reviews scores on day one. You're telling me that there is an entire industry of so called gaming "journalists" and not one spoke out at launch? Everyone was too busy throwing out those review scores and giving each other high fives?

I can guarantee that if reviewers had the balls to slam developers and publishers when they deserve it, we would never have all these problems. If Battlefield 4 had been slammed the way it deserved, EA nor DICE would never attempt to release a product like that again. No one would.

None of the things that happen in the games industry would be tolerated in any other industry. This is an industry where people are allowed to sell broken and incomplete products. It's a joke.

I've been wanting to try the multiplayer for a while and after a handful of games, I'm glad I didn't buy it.

It feels like the Killzone series has always been for weirdos who wanted to love a playstation exclusive simply because it's an exclusive. For those who want to ignore battlefield or call of duty for irrational reasons. I'm not talking about someone liking the universe or science fiction. Simply from a gameplay perspective.

Shooters controls on consoles have gotten extremely precise and killzone feels ancient. The DS4 sticks aren't great, but this game feels slow. Even pushing the sensitivity up to 80% makes little difference. Everything feels slow. Button responsiveness isn't great either. There is a noticeable delay between tapping the grenade button and throwing it. That's not even a problem with the controls, the game throws grenades slowly, but switching to the shield and using it is instant. I don't even feel like using the grenade because it feels like a chore.

Hit detection doesn't seem great either. I don't know if that's because of other players or their servers, but seeing a message on the left side of the screen saying something about connection issues should not happen in your premier first person shooter.

The gameplay is not as tight as call of duty or battlefield. The shooting doesn't feel as good. I don't play call of duty any more but I would play that over this game. Why anyone would play killzone over those games is beyond me.

I logged in around noon eastern time and there were between 4k-5k players.

I don't really mind it in deathmatch based games. People just like to sit back and not be in the middle of the action. With your back to the edge of the map, you are protected at all times. It's a lot harder to face someone directly and count on your reaction time and aiming ability than it is to sit with your scope up waiting for someone on the other side of the map. It's fine in deathmatch because kills are all that matter. It's valid. Seems boring, but they are still doing what the gametype is asking.

I find it infuriating in Battlefield specifically. It's such a team oriented and objective based game. I've been in too many rounds where 10 guys are lying prone two miles away and not helping with the objective. Sometimes they end up getting a ton of kills and but are near the bottom of the scoreboard because they didn't do anything else.

People think kills means everything. In battlefield, they mean almost nothing. It's frustrating to see myself on top of the scoreboard with over 10K points and sometimes less than 10 kills. We lose a lot of those games because the snipers near the bottom have 20-30 kills and didn't try for an objective once.

Kill to death ratios have become too important. I used to care when I played call of duty because it seemed to relate directly to deathmatch based games. Having a KDR of at least 2.5 mattered. I don't care at all in Battlefield. I don't use vehicles and I'm now slowly rising from about 1.5 as purely engineer/assault. Being in the top 5 almost every game and having a high score per minute is a lot more important.

Got one as well.

I recommend removing any associated credit cards. Doesn't hurt to be safe. I had to use one when I redeemed the 30 day Plus trial. That was stupid and should not have been required.

I'm glad people chose to see exactly what they want to see. I guess the 8-9 paragraphs about all the things that need improvement were glossed over for the short parts comparing it directly to what the PS4 offers.

The Sony fans jump in to defend the playstation brand with their lives. It's hilarious how little they can take.

When I said Sony doesn't push, instead of offering some examples of how they've pushed the experience, I get called biased and ignorant. I can tell you what Microsoft did since the original xbox. It's very easy.

- They were the first to standardize hard drives in consoles. It was unheard of and in reality the original xbox probably didn't need one. People were copying their music CDs for playback in games.

-. The were the first to add an ethernet port to a home console. Every console could easily go online when broadband penetration was a joke. This was 2001.

- Headsets for all users that plug directly into the controller. The original xbox did this. Now the PS4 does this.

- Xbox Live was the standard for console play. It still is. Sony is now catching up.

- Downloadable games were a huge selling point and established from the start on the 360. I guess the Sony guys like to forget what the PS3 was like at launch despite being a year late. Do you remember what PSN was like? No, of course you choose to ignore those things.

- Achievements, party system, unified friends lists. Everything that Microsoft started and sony imitated.

Now Microsoft is betting on "the cloud" and what it could do for gaming. They are taking a huge risk because they always have. Will it work? Who knows, but the xbox one is only a few weeks old at this point. Microsoft was laughed at every single time they said they were doing something new. The original xbox, xbox live, ethernet ports, hard drives were all ridiculed and mocked because small minded simpletons thought they didn't belong in gaming. Microsoft has always been more forward thinking than Sony. That's not an opinion, it's a fact.

Enlighten me. What exactly has Sony done that directly compares to how we use our consoles today? Disc based media? Really? That's what you're going to use as an example? It's dying.

It wasn't analogs, or rumble, or triggers or anything controller related. All those things were done by Nintendo and Sega to some extend. What exactly are the things that changed the way we play?

Now people are losing their minds about how different the PS3 is from the PS4. Tell me because I don't see it. I own one unlike most of the Sony fans who don't also own the Xbox One. Is it streaming your gameplay? Or DVR? Is it the ability to finally have a party system like the xbox has had for years? A touchpad on the controller that isn't even supported in the web browser? Starting games while they install? That's great, but it's still slower than the old way when we inserted a disc and started playing.

I said the PS4 is the safest console that Sony has ever made. How am I wrong? For every console prior to the PS4, they created custom hardware. The PS4 uses off the shelf components. The fiasco with the cell processor nearly destroyed them so they did the logical and easiest thing they could. It was the right thing to do. It's not a risk in any way.

Right now despite all its little quirks, the xbox one does more. Feature for feature, it just does more. Is it perfect? Of course not, but it's a hell of a lot more ambitious than the PS4.