Cairnius (User)

  • Contributor
  • 5 bubbles
  • 10 in CRank
  • Score: 14060
""

Comments

Free PSN+ for everyone for a year.

Other than some kind of mea culpa for the outage, there's nothing Sony can do to "win" E3. They already lost. The presser is going to be hilarious.

If they address the outage, they have to do it extremely deftly. If they don't address it, journos will crucify them. DRAMA #24
1156d ago by Cairnius | View comment
The article was speaking to people who want to get in as press, not just people who want to get in.

You can pay $400 and walk the show floor all day...but you don't get into:

- The demo rooms in the publisher's pavilions
- Some of the video presentations
- The big conferences
- Any of the private rooms on the second floor where all the really cool stuff is

Example given, last year Sony's pavilion had this r... #10
1247d ago by Cairnius | View comment
So you didn't read the article but spout off at the mouth about it? That's what's absurd. Or retarded. Take your pick. :)

You N4G'ers crack me up sometimes... #6.1
1370d ago by Cairnius | View comment
You all missed the point
Seriously, it's as though no one on N4G actually reads...if the Japanese gaming industry is in trouble, it might be because they're not selling to a world market. You guys loving on Japanese games, that's great...but clearly there aren't enough of you to keep the Japanese games market from shrinking while the American market is growing.

So, if you care about your Japanese games, you'd better hope that the Japanese start selling to the world market and maki... #5
1370d ago by Cairnius | View comment
Seriously? Three approvals? When someone actually WRITES something instead of using stupid screenshots or videos, it gets three approvals? It's no wonder no one takes video games seriously. We gotta start actually reading stuff, guys... #1
1404d ago by Cairnius | View comment
The fact that this piece of tripe gets 250 degrees of heat on N4G is why this site gets disrespect. This isn't actually an article, it's collection of completely obvious statements that's insulting to people who actually try to think when they write video game articles.

This never should have been approved in the first place. N4G needs to exercise higher quality control over who gets the right to approve stories. *rolls eyes* #13
1418d ago by Cairnius | View comment
I don't know if I'd go THAT far...they thought that dude's camera was an RPG. I think, maybe, that video is an argument for not shooting until you're fired on first. I think that's the price for "being the good guys," if we want to be. #9.1
1422d ago by Cairnius | View comment
But they're NOT becoming realistic. That's the first point of the article! It's saying that complaining about Medal of Honor being realistic is retarded because it's NOT realistic, and then by way of making the point, shows you what realistic WOULD be.

The second point of the article is that you DON'T want your games to be realistic. You don't know what you're saying when you state that. A "realistic" military FPS would be fucking -awful-... #7
1422d ago by Cairnius | View comment
...I don't think this article has anything to do with people acting out the games. I think it has to do with whether military FPS games can ever be realistic or not, and answering the question with a definitive "No." #2.1.1
1422d ago by Cairnius | View comment
The article isn't complaining about the gunship level from MoH, it's just pointing out how unrealistic it is, and how it would be a lot different...and a lot less fun...if it WERE "realistic." #1.3
1422d ago by Cairnius | View comment
This whole debate is idiotic. We've been playing as Nazis in multiplayer FPS titles for over eight years now. No one made a stink about that - because it's the Taliban, now, people are getting up in arms?

It's sensationalist bullshit. I'm glad there's a piece on the Dtoid blogs calling out how stupid this debate is. #9
1432d ago by Cairnius | View comment
I don't get people who say "Hey, we knew this is how it was going to be beforehand, why is anyone reacting to this?"

Because it's different when you actually have the game in front of you, and you can feel what you're missing? Announcing that you're going to do something that might let some people down doesn't mean that the people who feel let down have to not say so when it actually happens. Christ. #1.2.1
1444d ago by Cairnius | View comment
Ugh. Stories like these are what give N4G a bad name.

"Even though it probably will never happen or at least won’t happen in the near future due to the fact that Blizzard is mainly PC only, how awesome would it be if the series came to the PS3? Better yet how about it came with PlayStation move support?"

Not only is the writing awful, but hey, let's speculate about something that Blizzard has said -nothing- about, and will likely never do, and h... #6
1444d ago by Cairnius | View comment
The Terran campaign isn't what was gimped, but the story. What about Kerrigan, and Zeratul? They deserve to have their own narratives now, just like Raynor defines the Terran campaign.

Starcraft is a story about all three races, and how they're interwoven together. We waited 12 years for the story to continue, and we only got a third of it. #4.1
1444d ago by Cairnius | View comment
This has been my experience so far, as well. They should have called it Starcraft 1.5, not Starcraft II. I expect a little innovation in my sequels. Maybe I will find it the deeper I get into the campaign, and the change of having something to really do in-between missions is nice, but what really matters is the gameplay, but it's virtually identical to the same game we got 12 years ago other than the graphics updates, and when the going gets rough, you're not looking at the graphics,... #5.1
1444d ago by Cairnius | View comment
So...if you haven't played the game, you really have nothing to add to the discussion, is what you're saying. :) #1.1.1
1444d ago by Cairnius | View comment
My only problem with their review is that it was written by someone who had been in the beta. You can't tell me that his thoughts on the game hadn't already, to some degree, been set in stone before he reviewed the retail release.

I'd have preferred that the review be written by someone with a fresh perspective. A little thinking ahead could have had Joystiq ask someone not to play the beta in lieu of promising them the review piece when the time came. #5
1444d ago by Cairnius | View comment
Who said that Destructoid is respectable? Being popular doesn't make them journalists. You assume that they get the access they get because anyone thinks they're a respectable media establishment.

Wrong. They get access because they're outrageous, and that's what draws in the page hits. Read the article, man. #1.1
1450d ago by Cairnius | View comment
Your statement makes the implication that there was ever a time when it wasn't like this. When was that, precisely? ;) #3.1
1452d ago by Cairnius | View comment
I think the issue is that it isn't actually journalism, and everyone wants to keep thinking that it is. It is "trade journalism," which is distinctly different than "real journalism," i.e. what your newspaper writes, or what people study when they get college degrees in journalism.

The video game press is called an "enthusiast press." That means that it's written by, and for, enthusiasts. It means it's not real news. It's not real... #4
1452d ago by Cairnius | View comment
1 2
Showing: 1 - 20 of 27