CRank: 5Score: 0

Maybe if all you needed to be considered "beast" is a participation trophy...

23d ago 2 agree0 disagreeView comment

That's not what they said. They said disclosing that a portion of the sale would be donated is not in compliance with the law on certain states, so they are instead just giving away the DLC and donating a set amount unrelated to the DLC.

24d ago 0 agree2 disagreeView comment

I remember buying a game and playing it and having fun. Then I bought the collection and had fun.

Call me crazy, but I'm not the type to buy expansion after expansion after expansion, then decide I'm a victim.

46d ago 20 agree14 disagreeView comment

If Minecraft needs more players, Microsoft could let Sony offer it as a free game with PS+.

I'm sure Microsoft would be cool with that, because unlike Sony, they don't run their business like a business.

77d ago 0 agree1 disagreeView comment

You're mean like Sony for not sharing and running their business like a business.

Be nice like Microsoft.

77d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment

If the two players on PS4 could play with the one on Xbox, this would make a huge difference.

Sony, stop being so anti-consumer. Your customers can't play garbage together.

77d ago 7 agree5 disagreeView comment

The list of games Sony is holding back is huge...

1. Minecraft
2. Rocket League (kinda)

Don't try to minimize the damage Sony is doing to the glorious cross platform future we all deserve.

77d ago 21 agree0 disagreeView comment

"The people buying the pro HAVE a 4K TV, HAVE the 4k service from Netflix, and probably want if they haven't already bought a 4k blu ray player."

According to?

I'll buy a Pro, and the last thing I'll be buying it for is because I just ain't getting enough pixels from my five or six Blu-Ray movies.

395d ago 1 agree1 disagreeView comment

Why 16? Is 17 months too long of a wait? Are the games so good looking that waiting too long is unbearable?

481d ago 2 agree0 disagreeView comment

I really wish Sony would have just shown games we already knew a lot about.

481d ago 4 agree2 disagreeView comment

I only want my consoles announced too early.

I really want to know about 6 teraflops in the upcoming nameless mystery box, but don't want to hear a damn thing about the games that will launch along side it.

Good job, Microsoft!

481d ago 2 agree0 disagreeView comment

A year ago, even having the latest and greatest console wasn't good enough for a lot of people. Last gen versions of games were supposedly holding back games on new consoles.

Generations aren't going away at all. This is just an opportunity to sell an Xbox to someone who already has an Xbox, while avoiding the fact that two or three years later, the next real generation begins.

These are just the new slims and Elites, because smaller boxes and fan...

483d ago 2 agree0 disagreeView comment

The article says "console exclusive". But the boxart that they are pointing to as proof of that simply says "Xbox One exclusive" which we already know is false.

496d ago 6 agree7 disagreeView comment

Why does it say Xbox One exclusive when it was already announced for Windows?

The boxart is the only thing we've seen that says anything about exclusivity, and it's obviously inaccurate, so I don't why anyone would rule out PS4 at this point.

496d ago 15 agree13 disagreeView comment


"Before they commit a disservice to those who have supported them since the start ."

Max Payne fans?

Just played that on my PS4.

501d ago 12 agree3 disagreeView comment

Really? You'd wait three years if you knew a slightly better PS4 would release?

You're that bothered that you won't have the best PlayStation out there, that you would go without one entirely for several years, and stick to something that released in 2006 just to save a couple hundred bucks? Sure.

549d ago 5 agree2 disagreeView comment

A port is a port. You can't exclude Zombi because it's a port from another system, yet give Tomb Raider a pass because it's a port of a better game.

Make the argument that Zombi just isn't as good if you must, but don't pretend you want retail games that aren't ports if you're going to just make that contingent on quality anyway. Don't drum up technicalities that only matter half the time.

And I'm not arguing that Plus wasn...

571d ago 5 agree11 disagreeView comment


At $49.99 for a year, each game costs us $0.70.

They ain't free. They're under $1 each. Huge difference. Thanks for pointing it out.

571d ago 7 agree8 disagreeView comment

I think he understands what's going on perfectly fine. Standards are all over the place.

Thief and Sherlock were on PS+ over a year ago, and despite the only difference being current-gen vs last-gen (and a year's difference), they're used as examples when making extreme claims about how good or bad PS+ and GWG are. We aren't seeing "PS+ ain't bad, but it could be better". We're seeing "Still trash. GWG is so much better than ps+." A...

571d ago 8 agree16 disagreeView comment

No way will it live up to the high standards set by Sherlock Holmes.

571d ago 1 agree3 disagreeView comment