no. the RGB range setting on the xbox one being obviously set to "PC" while the PS4 setting is obviously set to "limited" =/= "xbox one version looks noticeably better."
if both were set to full/PC or limited/standard, there'd be no difference in the colour saturation or black levels. but the PS4 version would still technically look better because its resolution is higher.
it has everything to do with the RGB range setting on the consoles. PS4 is clearly set to "limited", xbox one is clearly set to "full."
it's not the same game, but here's a great example of the difference between the limited and full RGB settings (xbox one calls them standard and PC):
game prices in the 80's were upwards of $90-100 in some cases. in today's money, that would be ~$190.00 to ~$215.00. so... $60 is not that much...
this looks interesting...
yeah, that drinking game was absolute BS. there was no reason for it at all - and the fact that they made it so annoyingly difficult was even worse.
overall, i didn't think there was anything particularly wrong with the game. the only thing they need to "fix" would be to not show the game running on a high-end PC, and advertise it as the console version.
... the witness *lacked* content? that's news to me. i didn't realize that at least 40 hours of gameplay and over 600 puzzles = lack of content. (btw, i know that's not what *you're* saying, it's just the first i've heard of there being a complaint about the amount of content).
at any rate, i think it all depends on the situation. there's clearly cases where people are acting horrendously entitled, but there's also situations where the compla...
thank god. it's evident that the game's just getting too big for them to keep up with an annual release schedule. as much as i really enjoyed syndicate (love that it was brought back to being a single player experience with no tacked-on, irrelevant co-op/social media nonsense), these games need at least 2 years in between - ideally 3 to 5.
i managed to get it to work, but had to use a different e-mail address.
to this day, i think the first ninja gaiden is one of the hardest games i have ever played.
how is raising the price of the season pass after they've already set the price not controversial? are they adding content to the pass that wasn't originally planned?
that's absolutely horrible. there's no way i can support them after that.
wait... they're raising the price of the season pass??
i'm sure that a season pass could be purchased on the PS store when it becomes available - likely as soon as the game pops up as a pre-order in the store as well.
"I've always seen this game as an uncut diamond, a bit more work in some areas and it will do well."
exactly. the game wasn't perfect by any means, but it was still *way* better than what those handful of 2-4/10 reviews were suggesting.
for some reason, it says "access denied" when I submit my information.
it's a day 1 purchase for me as well (will probably pre-order as soon as it becomes available in the PS store), and the game looks really great so far - hopefully they don't pull the same thing they did with DS2 as far as the graphics are concerned. my only real concern - and it's only because I will aim to get the platinum - is that I don't have to play through the game nearly 3 times just to obtain *one* spell.
edit: oh, and they better still have the sunb...
you keep saying it's terrible, but have yet to cite a specific reason as to why it's terrible. is it broken? does it lack content? or is it just not the type of game you typically like, therefore rendering your verdict moot?
Shut Up Canyons, yes. :)
... the game is still in development...
sony did *not* develop the game. they're publishing it, and were footing a portion of the development *costs*, but they had no hand in the actual making of the game. it has nothing to do with whether capcom needed help - you're outright blaming Sony for something the actual devs are responsible for.