WC - 2013 has been a stellar year for gaming. From cinematic mainstream AAA titles like GTA V, The Last Of Us and Bioshock Infinite, to the steadily increasing rise of the indies like Brothers: Tale of Two Sons and Gone Home, the end of 2013 has left behind many memorable gaming experiences, and hopefully inspire success in 2014.
The GTA 5 Agent Trevor DLC episode could have been a real treat for fans on PlayStation and Xbox, before it was scrubbed sometime before 2017.
With the amount of money they generated, I just don’t understand the scrubbing of this. It would’ve been fantastic for fans.
I really want to know who drove the decision to focus on multiplayer was it Rockstar or take two.
Because when online started taking off many of the studio leads began having falling outs and leading including a founder
One of the reason I believe once gta 6 release, most of us thoroughly play it, enjoy the world they crafted then after that no offline support, no dlc at all
Grand Theft Auto V was released on PC on the 14th of April 2015. That means the game will be nine years old in four days, and it’s still among the most-played titles on Steam. With a 24-hour peak of 145K players, it’s as popular as Baldur’s Gate 3, Apex: Legends, and Destiny 2.
The freedom to explore large areas, approach objectives in multiple ways, and stumble across amusing distractions will always be an excellent format for video games, but some do it better than others. To celebrate the formula and parse the best from the best, have a look at the best open-world games of all time so far.
on The Last Of Us:"why can the enemy see your character plain as day, but is somehow blind to the goings-on of your allies"
because it would be a pain in the ass to have an AI always wrecking the whole STEALTH gameplay, you cant really count on a AI to do exactly what YOU want, so thats why its made on purpose to not waste your effort at being stealthy.
honestly, who really want to see the AI going all "leroy jenkins" on the enemy and waste your experience? NOT ME.
Here come the Naughty Dog Fanboys.
Stanford's Nass suggests that people are quick to vocalize their critical comments because of the "brilliant but cruel" phenomenon. This term was coined by Harvard Business School professor Teresa Amabile, after her research found that negative book reviews were seen as more intelligent and reliable than positive reviews, thus shedding light on people's natural wariness against overly positive evaluations.
"Being negative makes you feel smarter," says Nass. "The guy who says 'I agree' never seems as smart as the guy who says, 'I disagree.'"
God ND fanboys, calm down about the whole AI thing.