160°
Submitted by ChaosKnight 99d ago | opinion piece

Higher Player Counts Are Not Always Better

Hardcore Gamer: Games designed with a high player count in mind can be a lot of fun, but games designed specifically to provide a small scale experience have their own merits as well. It remains to be seen if Titanfall can live up to the hype, but the reason for its failure or success will having nothing to do with the player count. (Battlefield 4, PC, PS3, PS4, TitanFall, Xbox 360, Xbox One)

gillri  +   99d ago
Surely Gears Of War MP proved this ages ago
Lukas_Japonicus  +   99d ago
Halo and CoD also.
thekhurg  +   99d ago
So many damage control articles.

Getting old now.
NatureOfLogic  +   99d ago
@thekhurg No surprise. This is coming from the same crowd that said there's no difference between 720p and 1080p. Let them justify a full retail priced multiplayer only game that's limited to only 6v6 players.
#1.1.2 (Edited 99d ago ) | Agree(23) | Disagree(11) | Report
aiBreeze  +   99d ago
@ thekhurg Articles like this aren't damage control, they're just voices of reason and logic among many FPS fans.

@NatureOfLogic Not true, if the Xbox One can't start getting the majority of games working on 1080p soon, I'd personally find it very difficult to take it seriously as a "next generation" experience.
#1.1.3 (Edited 99d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(17) | Report
georgeenoob  +   99d ago
Seems like Sony fans love to forget there's 30 feet tall mechs in Titanfall.
Eonjay  +   99d ago
But this was supposed to be evolution. Look there is a article about Kingdom of Fire 2 having 10k characters in a single battle. I would love to see a massive Duel with hundreds or thousands of Titans. Yes, I would play that game.
scott182  +   99d ago
^^

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

I am getting Titanfall, it looks cool. But mechs plus high player counts have been done...
#1.1.6 (Edited 99d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(5) | Report
CELLA  +   98d ago
YES ITS GETTING OLD
wsoutlaw87  +   98d ago
Of coarse small player counts can be great. 1v1 and 3v3 stuff can be awesome, thats not the question. Thats trying to create a false arguement when thats not the entire problem. Just looking at titanfall everyone assumed it would be much higher. I think one team having say 2 titans and the other not, would just completely unbalance a 6 man team. Im sure they did their tests but i just hope 6 is a real choice and not a limitation.
littlezizu  +   99d ago
True but they had single player campaign. 6 on 6 on a game which has single and multiplayer acceptable but 6 on 6 on only multiplayer and 60$ not acceptable. Besides current gen games with only multiplayer like MAG (256 players) and Warhawk(24 players) were alot of fun as they had alot of players. even starhawk which has mech like titanfall has more no of player..
#1.2 (Edited 99d ago ) | Agree(20) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
mhunterjr  +   99d ago
Huh?
What does the online player count have to do with single player? Does having more players in a game somehow add to a games value?

Why should A 6v6 game should be with less money? A much better way to determine a games value is longevity. There are multiplayer only games with all sorts of player counts, and it's never been the player count alone that determined longevity. MAG fell off quickly despite having a huge player count.
#1.2.1 (Edited 99d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(12) | Report
aiBreeze  +   99d ago
Lol, good riddance, I'd be happy if narrow minded people like you missed Titanfall, it'll hopefully make for a much better community and help the game progress in the right direction for the future.
come_bom  +   99d ago
I'm waiting till Titanfall gets released, then pass judgment.
Revolt13  +   99d ago
Agreed. 100%
Gears of War MP is perfect at its current 5v5
#1.4 (Edited 99d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
kewlkat007  +   99d ago
MAG did the opposite..

Pure chaos..No team work, Lame ducks being carried by better players...Plenty camping around doing sh!t on most games with massive players..
scott182  +   98d ago
Actually there was a ton of teamwork in mag, it was insane to try and take a base with different sqauds doing separate tasks calling in air support and paratroopers landing all over. It was chaos, but controlled and extremely fun chaos. It was a great idea to have a massive battle online, I hope they try for something similar again.
ricochetmg  +   98d ago
You never played mag.
dcj0524  +   98d ago
You clearly have never played MAG.In domination everyone did their part. It was a team effort and nobody played lone wolf.Their were whole squads dedicated to repair orhealing or recon. I hope there's a MAG 2 someday because MAG wasa great innovative experience.
LeoDDestroyer  +   98d ago
Are you sure you played MAG. It wasn't not perfect but what that game did was amazing at least to me. MAG main faults were map imbalances and the devs making stupid decisions with the patches(1.03 random bullet spread). Team work was there but I see the problem with most shooters is the lack of proper grouping and chat systems.
ricochetmg  +   98d ago
People will try to anything to convince you that xbox one games and systems are gimped... this is kinda sad
3-4-5  +   98d ago
Most of the N64 games proved this in the 90's.

Not having to make sure 64 players are connected will help the lag, but I'm thinking this game plays in it's own unique way like how the N64 multiplayer games did.

They each had their own "thing" that made them special.
ThatCanadianGuy514  +   99d ago
Then why fluff the count with A.I?

Why are all these apologists pieces popping up? Titanfall, 6vs6 at 720p, on a new next gen console, by the lead team that has been pumping out mediocre COD's for years - and people expect greatness?
AngelicIceDiamond  +   99d ago
@Canadian"Why are all these apologists pieces popping up?"

So what do you want you people to do continue to bash it until release? What's wrong with you that makes no sense? You want continuous hate articles?

Wow anyway.

I realized 6v6 will be fine. The AI could change how it works among human players, how useful they could be this time around. And interact and counteract among the players just as Respawn said.

If this works this could be the first game to cure really dumb or overpowered AI. Plus like the above mentioned, COD and Halo are 6v6 and look how stupid things can get with 12 players on those games.

Some of the AI was seen in games like Halo amongst various upon various other games trying to "help" the player but ultimately failed time and time again.

Like I said I bashed this as well in like 4 other articles.

"Titanfall, 6vs6 at 720p, on a new next gen console,"

Yep just as predicted. Lets bash the res and make it a big deal out of it because its not hitting the bigger res number. I'm glad you can see 1080p is bigger number than 720p.

I mean its funny because its not like you ever have anything good to say in these articles anyway.

The ultimate conclusion is this. We have to play it! Well your not gonna play it so it doesn't matter to you.
SoapShoes  +   99d ago
Because it's Microsoft's only exclusive with any hype. Unfounded hype though, I'm sure once it jumps and the sequel becomes multiplatform it will be forgotten.
admiralvic  +   99d ago
"Then why fluff the count with A.I?"

Probably to avoid people comparing it to games that already exist. Like Lost Planet 2 has 8v8 online multiplayer and mechs, so the fluff makes it seem super action packed.

"Why are all these apologists pieces popping up?"

Regardless of where you stand on the player count, we really need to see the game to know if this is right or wrong. As it stands, a lot of people have it in their head that this game should be XY vs XY, which might not work as well as 6v6. On the other hand, they could totally be right and the AI is a cop out. The only thing we know for a fact, is that we don't really know if it was the right or wrong move until we actually play the game.

"and people expect greatness?"

The problem is the growing segment of gamers that use their own terms and the increasing ease to be a journalist. Since a lot of the former become the latter, we're seeing a lot of terms being replaced with more "powerful" versions of the original terms.

Some examples include the following:

Potential is now 'save the' and then whatever the game is saving
Low sales / poor reception is now 'dead'
law sales (for a game) is now considered 'underrated'
Derivative is now a 'rip off', 'clone', or in some rare cases 'plagiarized'
Lack of variety (usually due to ones personal preference) is now genre 'fatigue'
etc.

Many people hyped Titanfall up to THE end all, beat all, Xbox One game, which was set to redefine the genre. Since people kept hearing people say this, their expectations were raised and now you see people realizing that it might not be the case (similar to Call of Duty Black Ops Declassified being the game that would 'save' the Vita). Only time will come, but sites / people need to choose their words better.
Irishguy95  +   99d ago
Because the AI is part of the gameplay, NOT the PvP. The Ai does not 'fill' out the map/ They are not bots. The can't wall run/jump, they have no titans. They are 'normal' troops, among the Elite 'Titan pilots'(Which the players play as). Seriously, this game is like a Co op versus game. It's not straight up PvP.

Killing Ai gives you experience points. A tiny amount. If someone goes around killing only Ai, they will have a 0 kill count and the lowest score.

You have a Titan timer
Killing Ai reduces it
Killing Players reduces it much more
Doing an objective reduces it even more
Killing a Titan gives you the most.

The Ai can also be part of the objective in some gametypes.

Edit -

00 - The Ai is there for exploitation. They can be used to your teams advantage(strategically) and they give the players points. I imagine the best players are the ones who will be killing the Ai and the enemy team as the go along, I imagine the best teams are the ones who will force enemy players into a firefight versus player and Ai together. Effectively making it a few players and some cannon fodder which can do damage shooting at their enemies. Effectively the numbers will be higher on one team than another a certain points, if a team is able to utilize them well.

The Ai are not completely useless btw. They can damage players. But again, you won't be getting sneaked up on through a window or over you or by running up a wall behind you by an Ai.
#2.4 (Edited 99d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(15) | Report | Reply
00  +   99d ago
when you put it like that the A.I bots sound like canon fodder and will be predictable and probably exploited by the many better gamers.
#2.4.1 (Edited 99d ago ) | Agree(11) | Disagree(1) | Report
AngelicIceDiamond  +   99d ago
I would listen to @Irish. He seems to know more about how this works than anyone.

Even corrected my mistakes on the game.
aiBreeze  +   99d ago
Honestly this hate is really making me facepalm but I still think the ai controlled bots is a BAAAAD idea. Watching over gameplay footage, you can clearly tell what the bots are, they're just cannon fodder there to fill player's ADD impulses until they find real opponents. I still have faith in Respawn and can sort of see what they are trying to do but I love mp for the thrill of playing human controlled players, if more than half the people I'm shooting at are pure cannon fodder, a lot of that thrill will go.
lonewolfjedi  +   99d ago
The way you explained it sounds cool, understandable, and you fully explained it bravo! Respawn should have done this.
Ashby_JC  +   98d ago
You basically are thinking what I am how the game will work.

Another thing is....I'm curious if the ai players week respawn???

Let's say they can't respawn...depending in the objective or game type it could get really strategic far as the end game goes.

One thing that I have never experienced that they show is the enemy having to retreat at the end of a match.

I will respect that they...The devs know what and the why of there choices. Simply bumping the human player count from what they said didn't improve what they set out to do with game.

I'm very interested in this game. Look forward to plain with friends.
maniacmayhem  +   99d ago
Because 720p shouldn't be a benchmark to determine if the game is next gen or not.

READ the many, MANY articles submitted to N4G from the actual developer on why they chose 6v6 and what the actual AI will be doing during the multiplayer match.

This isn't a basic BF4, CoD deathmatch where the objective is to kill everyone and the game is over. There are goals, story progression and objectives that must be completed the AI help to further that on the battlefield.

They are trying to tighten up gameplay not have a player respawn a million times because players are camping in bushes.

I love how whenever people come out to correct huge mistakes people are making about a product those people accuse them of DEFENDING. Yea, because you are spreading ignorant and wrong information.
#2.5 (Edited 99d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
dcj0524  +   98d ago
Why did you say BF4? BF4 has different objectives like capturing flags,arming MCOMS,stealing the Bomb, and capturing the flag. The goal is the objective. Even COD has objectives although small. Why are you lumping in a objective focused game like BF4 with a deathmatch like Call Of Duty.Clearly you haven't played battlefield to make such a ignorant statement. Thats just stupid.
mhunterjr  +   99d ago
The AI doesn't fluff the count. The AI isn't meant to replace human players. They serve a similar purpose to creeps/minions in Dota or Lol... games that have no problem facilitating competitive multiplayer environments with lower player counts and AI.
Derekvinyard13  +   99d ago
Until I play it, then I will see.
True_Samurai  +   99d ago
Strategy > Chaos
mdluffy  +   99d ago
Where are the xbone guys that said killzone failed for only having 12 vs 12?
And killzone also got 24 a.i bots in the matches... thats 48, 24 vs 24
mhunterjr  +   99d ago
Did xbone guys ever say that? Because that wouldn't make sense considering the only xb games to have high player counts it bf... which is multiplatform.
NegativeCreep427  +   99d ago
Xbox Fanboys hardly ever do make sense. Their stances on certain aspects of gaming and the gaming business change with the direction of the wind; sales don't matter anymore, power of the cloud, ordering pizza hut with kinect, and Titanfall 6v6 players is what really matters now!
#5.1.1 (Edited 99d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(7) | Report
scott182  +   99d ago
The AI being there doesn't bother me at all as a future owner of this game on pc. I am just wondering WHY the AI is there... Is it to give the illusion of a bigger multiplayer experience, if so, why not just have more human players? I have no problem with playing games where AI has a specific task like on lol, to run in mindlessly on a set path and destroy towers. But in a shooter it just doesn't make much sense to me. If 6v6 is the magic number, why add more AI to fight.
#5.1.2 (Edited 99d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(1) | Report
True_Samurai  +   99d ago
He's just pulling straws cause I sure hell don't remember ever seeing anyone saying that
mhunterjr  +   98d ago
@scott182

I just don't understand the sudden why there is such the AI is such a big deal all of a sudden. They've been talked about since the debut.

They are aiming for what they call 'campaign multiplayer'. They want to blend the multiplayer experience with what we traditionally see in single player games. This means the inclusion of npc's. It's just like having marines fighting alongside master chief, or having extras fighting alongside the protagonist in a movie.

They are a lower class, and wouldn't be fun to play as. Would you want to be a marine in halo while everyone else is a Spartan?

And there will be opportunities to use these npc's strategically, like in a MOBA. They aren't meant to replace human players at all.
#5.1.4 (Edited 98d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(3) | Report
scott182  +   98d ago
Interesting, I will just have to see examples of it to understand how and why they are used in game before I make a judgment.
Ashby_JC  +   98d ago
Ok. I have been on this site for awhile. And follow all games.

I have never seen anyone talk about ai in kill zone. Hell I didn't even know the mp had ai lol.

I'm not saying know one ever trashed it because of this. But it wasn't wide spread as your making it.
LeoDDestroyer  +   98d ago
When GG announce the player size of 12 v 12 for kzsf there were a lot of people disappointed with the player size. For better or worse people expect more from new games and you don't want a situation where your looking for something to do on a map b/c the player count is to low( cod ghost stonehaven map for example).

All we can do is wait for a beta or the games release and then make proper judgements.
karl  +   99d ago
wouldnt that depend on map size? im sure titanfall maps arent that big

or maybe they are but cant be packed of players cuz the size of the titans..

who knows
00  +   99d ago
then why fill it with bots
if 6v6 is supposed to feel right like the the devs said why have A.I at all.
mhunterjr  +   99d ago
The same reason dota and lol have ai... because it's a different approach to multiplayer.
LeoDDestroyer  +   98d ago
Dota and lol ai is there for basically leveling up your champion. I hope this isn't what the ai is for. Brink did ai as well when there was not enough players or if you were playing solo. The question are really what will the ai do? Can they be control or directed? Will they simply follow a script even if it not the best decision? I can't wait to find out more about these things.
brew  +   99d ago
First 6 vs. 6 is the perfect amount for that hardcore arcady competition that they crave , but then 6 and AI bots on each team is somehow perfect too all of a sudden.

I don't think most people even know what the game is or isn't at this point or even what they want it to be , lol.

It's pretty strange that a hyped-up multiplayer focused game like this that is coming out pretty soon is so vague to so many at this point.
Ashby_JC  +   98d ago
I feel that many are not actually reading the articles entirely.

They (respawn) has explained how the ai is used. This game is trying something different. And I feel that many are not seeing that.

They see the player count (12) and assume that the ai is just simply to up the player count.

I'm not going to go into detail but I understand what they are trying to do with the game...I look forward to seeing how they pull it off.
thezeldadoth  +   99d ago
i prefer multiplayers with smaller player counts. i find no fun in playing with 63 other people
iistuii  +   99d ago
I agree, I hate B4 64 player, it's just too hectic & no fun. I want to play 32 player conquest as that's the mode I liked to play even on PC, but as of now there's no servers available on PS4. Just hope Titanfall has a better start than the B4 online mess.
LogicStomper  +   98d ago
With large number of players, teams can't focus on the one 'carry' on the other team because there are like 15-31 other players on the other side. Because you're 1/16th or 1/32(th?) of the team, it's easy to feel the urge to camp due to have so many other players covering you.

When it's 4v4 or 6v6, each player is more vital to the team. You can't have that 'one' player who just afk's unlike 32v32.

My point: Lower player-count = more competitive.
LeoDDestroyer  +   98d ago
Well bf4 problem too me isn't the size but the lack of a proper lobby and chat system. Every team base shooter I have played recently have this problem. MAG (my favorite shooter last gen) kinda solved this issue with not only a good lobby but also an excellent comms channels with proxy chat. 32 v 32 (full clans) was great competition and while there more room for error with more people when you lose two or more it can still effect the outcome of the match.
Mega24  +   98d ago
1 problem here, Call of duty, the series that I have played since it came out in 2003. The game when it got popular became overwhelmed by corner campers, rooftop campers, and door campers, it was a fast paced game, with 6v6, very competitive, yet it suffers from camper mania, every game will suffer from this, its due to stats and K/D ratios, a game can have a player count of 2v2, people will still camp and go AFK (AFC in this case) because that just the reality of it. The game can be 1v1 or 2000v2000 people will still camp a corner.

Now the main reason why I'm skeptical about Titanfall's player count is due to the fact that the game has 38 AI's. It could have been spots for players but they decided to go with AI. For and Multiplayer only game this worries me.
iistuii  +   99d ago
Let's just wait & see how it plays shall we. It has many best of show awards & the journalists who played it never once moaned about the player count, why ? Because the AI was so good they didn't even realize.
I've just watched the E3 demo being played & it did look like a low player count, but at the same time looked action packed & fun.
#10 (Edited 99d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
ShowGun901  +   99d ago
eh, it just seems like the same smoke and mirrors that were being talked about for the launch xbone games. when the #s came out for cods resolutiongate, they used subjective arguments like "its the same experience!" and when the #s came out about ryses length and resolution, they said something subjective like "its amazing!" seriously, people are disappointed with the player count, and im pretty sure EA is going to botch this somehow, given their current track record with online games...

i really do hope for the best with titanfall, but i won't be pre-ordering it, maybe pick it up in 30 days when they iron out the multiplayer glitches and such. (and see if it "revolutionized" videogames by then)
AngelicIceDiamond  +   99d ago
Man the fanboys are out hard on this article. Whatever its not like they'll be playing it when it comes out.

So let them make the usual and predictable rounds of. "We need hate articles about this" No "damage control articles."

Even though pathetic fanboys don't know what it means to be voice of reason, logical, rationalism words they don't understand. You can't have hate all articles all the time there needs to be balance.

Like I said I hated the news as well and thought it was just plain dumb numerous. Yeah I was part of the hate crowd.

6v6 in the REAL world should be fine. And the AI from what Respwan made it sound should be the AI everyone wants. AI that works and exist among players.
GrandpaSnake  +   99d ago
Hmmm.... hmm.. i believe that the ai will be like counter strike were if someone leaves or their is not that many team members the room can start with bots, as people join in you will instantly take their place. Now for the 6vs6 thing that was acceptable last gen, most of us already know that when it comes out on pc it will probably have more players. This gen with nothing but huge games and bigger teams to vs, coming back to a 6vs6 will just feel small in comparison to all the games THAT ARE OUT RIGHT NOW. even last gen. its not just about how good it is on its own its what people are used to, thats why i think their banking on the COD crowd and trying to promote it as the next cod as much as they can.
mooseo21  +   99d ago
Someone please tell me the "correct" player count? Oh wait, there isn't a "correct" player count. No matter what the player count is/was it would be bashed into the ground as being too high or too low. There is no winning here, regardless of the player count it would not be good enough for the haters.
CELLA  +   98d ago
6vs6 human players the rest is ai
HeavenlySnipes  +   99d ago
How many of these submissions are gonna be approved

This is really a non issue at this point. When the game comes out we'll see if its really an issue or not
Gabenbrah  +   99d ago
Why is it okay for Knack to be $60 for a 4 - 5 hour atrocious campaign with terrible gameplay, but an award winning, best of show winning multiplayer which will have far more replay ability than any other next gen game so far not okay? Oh wait, this is N4G.
kewlkat007  +   99d ago
I bet you, if this game had 12x12 (those not really getting the game but just whining because) would still find something..

Now they have issue with A.I. players....
UnHoly_One  +   98d ago
Of course they would. They hate on everything that xbox has that PS4 doesn't.

Until they get the same thing, then it's awesome. Look at how hated and ridiculed the TV features were, now Sony is talking about a TV service through the PS4 and it's great. lol

They think Titanfall will be terrible, but a couple months ago they were convinced it was coming out for PS4 and excited about it. They still talk about getting the sequel which I'm sure will be awesome even if they change nothing.

Sony fans on this site are the worst examples of spoiled children I've ever seen on the internet. It's a disgrace.

I don't ever remember any example prior to this of people bitching over the player count in a game nobody has played. It doesn't even make any sense. Until you play it, how can you possibly know what the right count is?

Everyone bitches about too many CoD and Battlefield clones. This game is DIFFERENT from those games. And yet still they bitch.
#16.1.1 (Edited 98d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(3) | Report
Ashby_JC  +   98d ago
You know what..

Had there ever been a game that the latter count was talked about THIS MUCH???

Even battlefield games on consoles having low player counts compared to pc was not discussed this much.

Weird
UnHoly_One  +   98d ago
Agreed, it's being blown up by all the people that won't or can't play it anyway.
LeoDDestroyer  +   98d ago
This would be a valid statement except people did complain about knacks price for what the game was. Hell all the critics complain and even the people that like it suggest getting it when it was on sale.
mgszelda1  +   99d ago
imo at this point 1080p should be standard in all games. Why is it such an issue in the new gen. They've been trying to do it since the beginning of last gen. 4K is all the rage, it's not like we're asking for that resolution.
As for the 6 on 6, that does seem a little lack luster for a killer IP on "impressive new tech" Killing a bot is in no way as satisfying as killing a player. BF4 does 64 ppl with different vehicles, granted all the bugs with BF4 doesn't help but I think if given the polish it needed Titanfall could reach a higher player count. I'm not saying 64 like BF but something higher than 12. At this point it's just a slightly different version of Cod
CELLA  +   98d ago
1080p is in the game
Ashby_JC  +   98d ago
All these articles about the player count are doing a great job of promoting the game!!!

Before they announced the player count via Twitter. There want much news about the game.

If this was there intent. It was smart!!!

The more people are talking about the game..The better...It's publicity.
JusticeSoulTuna  +   98d ago
While I too agree that the player count is fine, this topic IS getting old. However, I don't want this to end with people just saying 'yeah Titanfall is cool, the savior would NEVER let us down!!'. No. This game has a lot to answer for. This recent controversy proves how little we actually know about the game. What game modes will there be? Will there be customization? Will there be a mode with a lower player count like 1 v 1? What're the DLC plans, if any? You see what I mean? People are so ready to hand Titanfall the crown as the most innovative game of next gen, when we don't even know any concrete info. You should be worried indeed if your $60 purchase lacks even basic features of games since past, and trust me, player count is not one of them. We need to keep the conversation going, let Respawn prove to us and assure as that this will be a fun and accessible game. I'm excited for it, but I don't even know what the matchmaking will be like or what options I'll have like private match, etc. Also, one HUGE alarming concern: Where's the news of the 360 version? We need answers and we need conversation.
#20 (Edited 98d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Locknuts  +   98d ago
Considering I still find to this day that MW2 is the best multiplayer experience around, I agree.
AlexFili  +   98d ago
2-4 player RTS games are still exciting despite the low player count. Mario Kart DS/7 and Assassin's Creed only have 8 players but they're still extremely exciting

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories
30°

The Real Deal: impressions of Rusty's Real Deal Baseball and in-depth Smash Bros. discussion

1h ago - A game about buying games? Random Nintendo shares impressions of Rusty's Real Deal Baseball, plus... | 3DS
30°

Conception II: Children of the Seven Stars Review | GearNuke

1h ago - GearNuke: "Conception II: Children of the Seven Stars is the latest turn-based RPG from Atlus, de... | PS Vita
40°

Things we’d Love to See in Red Alert 4

3h ago - GamerBolt: " Here are some ideas that we’d love to see integrated into the next iteration from th... | PC
40°

League of Legends is Hard to Get Into, Because of Its Community

4h ago - Max Level: League of Legends is the front-runner of anything dealing with E-Sports — bolstering o... | PC
Ad

Enter to Win a PS4 and More!

Now - We are buying one lucky N4Ger a PS4 just for commenting on any N4G story! | Promoted post
40°

Grind or Not to Grind?

4h ago - 'Having finally obtained a PS Vita and gained the ability to play PSP games, I have been able to... | Culture
Related content from friends