"The video game industry, like many others, is an industry of trends. One company does something, it works, then five other companies follow suit. The multiplayer rewards from Call of Duty 4, regenerative health, and motion controls are all examples of the trend centered, follow the leader mentality that the games industry observes. While it generally helps improve the overall quality of the games there’s one trend that disturbs me: releasing incomplete games."
Carlos writes: "Christmas may have come and gone in the blink of an eye, but that doesn’t mean we haven’t still got plenty to look forward to, and as 2019 creeps up on us, the reality of countless exciting new games is just around the corner. Before we start splashing the cash too early however, let’s first take a look at the Xbox One and Xbox 360 freebies on offer with the Xbox Live Games With Gold of January 2019. As we kick off the new year, just how good or bad are the titles nestled within our monthly subscription?"
Major Nelson: For the month of January, Xbox Live Gold members will receive four new free games - two on Xbox One and two on Xbox 360 - as part of the Games with Gold program.
Celeste looks cool, as for the rest...meh. another lackluster month for GWG.
Hopefully I don't get an..oh, it's an Xbox article, no worries.
Celeste is awesome. However they gave that Lara Croft game before. This is the first time that either PS+ or GWG has hit us with a duplicate and it's not cool. It doesn't matter if some people missed it back then it's not fair for those of us who have been members since the start and already have it. First they give us an old OG Xbox game last month and now they hand us a duplicate. Not cool at all.
First time in about 6 months that im actually looking forward GWG. Celeste alone makes it worth being excited over.
I haven't played any of these titles so I'm excited to give them try. Far Cry 2 is the only one of that series that I skipped.
Carlos writes: "It’s already been a great year for Xbox One Backwards Compatibility, but we’re still only a few months in and that means there is plenty more to come throughout 2018, with many more of our favourite titles still yet to be added. Whilst the latest additions aren’t more of the recently promised titles that will be getting Xbox One X Enhancements, they still continue the trend of frequent releases, and it's always good to see old Xbox 360 becoming available on Xbox One. The question is though - are they games that we should be heading back to?"
Vanquish is the best third-person cover shooter I ever played. The whole game is a pure adrenalin rush.
MS loves their lame timed exclusives that come out looking like crap. Remember the buggy mess that was The Last Remnant?
Honestly, who gives a shit? Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light is perfectly playable as a single-player experience (and is really quite good) and local co-op works fine.
I have't cared about Tomb Raider in over 15 years. Why should I start not? This version looks like the GBA versions, actually. And they all sucked.
This game looks really fun and co-op/online is always welcomed. My only beef, and that may be a bit of a fanboy hidden deep inside, that this game has yet to get a gig for it's lack of online co-op. If it were on PS3 first it would of been sh*t all over for it.
But the online is coming. I kind of think the game was in a deal to be part of XBLA Summer of Games, but didn't get done in time. MS did have exclusive DLC with Underworld, so they could of easily payed for a timed deal.
This is nothing to freak out over. It's good timing. 360 gamers are able to play this before REACH consumes them in september, while PS3 gamers can play it the month before november so they have free time to be consumed with GT5 & LBP2.
@STK026
I agree
Regarding the article, the reason SOCOM was punished in the reviews was because it was mostly unplayable and had very long load times. These issues have now been resolved for the most part, but back when it launched, the game was unplayable, at least in my opinion.
However, for Lara Croft, the game is missing the online portion as of now, but that doesn't mean the single player and local multiplayer are unplayable or anything. Why would a reviewer give the game an abysmal score, just because ONLINE co-op is not included in the game from the get go? Also, the writer doesn't take in account the fact that some reviews probably removed some points for the lack of online co-op.
So, the difference is, SOCOM was barely playable when it launched and was under review. Lara Croft was playable and extremely fun, but was lacking its online component when under review. Should both games be punished to the same degree when their flaws are on a whole different level?