@Shin: "Dude, he owns the game and has played it. What have you got to backup your claims?? His words are a lot more trustworthy than you who has always hated the game and has never played it."
Excuse me, owning the game and playing it does not qualify him to say that Kitase is "passing the throne" off to Tabata. It does not qualify him to say that a new era of Tabata led epic games is starting. These are subjective, personal opinions that require the sc...
There may very well be 12 months, but only 3 of those months constitute a season of wanton, rampant spending. It's just smart business sense to release anything during those months.
However it's also true that established franchises always win the day during those months. Other companies need to use the other 9 months to make their games become established franchises.
"But technology limited it to standing still taking turns"
More like design choice. There were RPGs that were not turned based since forever.
That quote is nonsense. SE have lost the ability to tell a great story the day Sakaguchi left. If Kitase is the king, handing the throne over to Tabata, Sakaguchi is like FFIV Bahamut. The God of Summons who lives, unreachable, on the moon.
People should absolutely judge a book by its cover, 90% of the time how people dress is definite reflection of who they are.
@joe: Lol you think games aren't like movies because review embargoes on games are meant to prevent spoilers? What, movies can't be spoiled?
@ravenor: I don't think we played the same game. Aiden didn't get his sister killed. If anyone did it was Iraq or crippled dude whose name I always forget. If Iraq didn't try his hack, or crippled dude listened to Aiden, nothing would have happened.
Crippled dude also brought Aiden's sister and nephew into it, not Aiden.
Basically Aiden could have easily had his revenge at the start of the game if outside interests didn't keep interfer...
Yeah but Aiden got his revenge so he could have been a completely different character if he was the main for WD2.
I still think Jordi Chin is the series' best character though.
Lol, the author has not played many games.
it's only Sony's responsibility to provide the tools and then, when the developer fails to use them properly, to use the tools themselves, but that's it. The developer has more control over these things than Sony does unless it's a first party game. Everybody loves to blame Sony for everything, but this is clearly on Ubisoft because they do have nude models in game.
I mean let's look at the common denominators here. Sony allows Rockstar's games on th...
I think the point is being missed. That nudity is in the game isn't the problem for Sony. That nudity is being shared is the problem. A game is something with a rating and, depending on where you live has different laws regarding its distribution. Watch Dogs 2 is rated M and is not intended for children. But when you take a picture from the game and share it online, those laws no longer apply. So then a parent passes by their child who is online and happens to see that their child is look...
"Well since no one said otherwise the assumption is that they are hetero. So, yes."
No. Just no. To paraphrase a popular saying: "That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
But was the fact that they are hetero the reason it was a big deal, or did no one actually care enough to ask if that character was straight?
So what? That they exist and make games is no reason to make a pointless addition that will literally never actually be in-game. LGBT people should actually be insulted by this base pandering.
Damn, now that is a fair point.
@cyphertech: It's not. But it is forced pandering.
@FunAndGun: "Maybe the development team wanted to include gay characters. Maybe some of the development team are gay and wanted to be represented in their own game."
A) Then it would have made it into the game at launch.
B) In a first person Hero shooter with no real story?
"Maybe you could protect this creative freedom just like everyone protects the freedom...
Here's the thing though, none of us are asking for scantily clad women in seductive poses to actually be in games. We won't be upset if they are in the game of course, but we didn't ask for it and we aren't starting movements demanding them. What we don't like is the removal of something simply because someone else is offended by it. You do not have the right to not be offended, you do have the right to not purchase a product, and censorship benefits no one in the end.
People who care have deep personal problems that should be addressed via the nearest therapist. All that should matter in a game is anything that benefits the game. The only time sexual orientation should ever matter is if it is being used as a story element or part of character development. Since Overwatch has neither, this is base pandering at its height and I feel sorry for people defending it and asking "why do you care if it doesn't affect you?"
But it do...
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.