Did Playstation 3 owners pay less for their copy of Tomb Raider: Underworld? I'm pretty sure they paid the same, and yet they never did get those two pieces of DLC that were on the marketplace.
Don't we still have Playstation 3 owners waiting for Dead Rising 2 DLC like Case Zero and Case West that is still exclusive to Microsoft since 2010? Pretty sure they paid the same for their copy of Dead Rising 2 that 360 owners did, and yet... no argument there?
Look, I'm a big fan of Sony's exclusives but let's be real, not even I could look past The Order's failings, and I paid full retail for the game at launch.
The Order had fantastic graphics, an interesting story seed for a franchise going forward, and the most bland gameplay you've ever seen. It deserved all of the criticism about its lack of diversity in weapons, repetitive combat, and broken AI.
What they really need is a sequel to ge...
Alpha Protocol! No seriously, stop laughing. I actually thought that game was brilliant.
Edit: But yes, also old school non-online Phantasy Star.
But how will it compete with OnLive that does the same thing and is a massive success? Wait, what?
Time codes for Digital Fiasco Episode 32: The Anatomy of a Scary Game
(0:23) There's always time for joke intros and Mother's Day
(2:14) Dandr0id plays Metro Last Light
(4:47) Jack McBastard plays Shock Tactics
(8:28) Jack McBastard plays Prey
(15:33) Doing Stuff is Fun! - debrief on Lovers in a Dangerous Spacetime
(20:13) Discs, Downloads and DLC
(26:38) Anti-releases
(31:37) E3 Rumor Roundup
(...
"PS4 Pro support is slowly growing up to be a disappointment within the core community, so much that many are now wondering whether the console is actually worth the higher price."
Source?
I love that franchise!
Way to go out on a limb, Shinobi.
Yeah, they're about 7 years too goddamn late for this faux outrage.
Right. I'd like to know what metric they use to determine "most".
Xbox One S pretty much banks on that, actually. :)
Yep. Read the blog, read the links. Your argument that this move is anti-consumer isn't compelling. Their motive might be for profit but not in the way you think. No early reviews means no leaks, no chance of code being pirated in advance.
Providing review copies may be a "common tradition" but they're under no obligation to do so. And Bethesda still does, but only 24 hours ahead of time instead of a week ahead of time. Reviews come out a week later inste...
Just as long as your wife doesn't eject your disc to watch a movie, not realizing that you were in the middle of the game. Just an example. Not something that actually happened. Not that I'm bitter. Dammit.
The title you're looking for is "System Shock"
*This episode of The Digital Fiasco Podcast was recorded live on location at Girls Costume Warehouse
Time Codes for Episode 31: Trademarks are a Pain in the Æ
(2:23) Dandr0id plays Rain World
(10:34) Dandr0id returns to Metro: Last Light Redux
(18:17) Jack McBastard plays Shock Tactics
(23:11) Jack McBastard plays Prey (2017)
(35:23) Discs, Downloads and DLC
(42:25) E3 Hype (Superbowl vs The Draft)
(48:12) ...
Its much more likely that this is just a new Call of Juarez game, of which the last three entries in the series were published by Ubisoft.
We can move beyond "you don't have to buy it immediately" if you can explain to me how buying when you feel comfortable with your purchase is somehow anti-consumer.
"So a piece of content that was already ready for the game's arrival gets cynically removed as a trinket for pre-ordering..."
This is hardly a new occurrence for any developer, Bethesda or otherwise. Not sure how it relates to this situation uniquely.
"...
Its not a late review embargo. There is no embargo at all. If someone wants to rush out a review day 1, they can (mind you, I'd think twice about trusting that review.) Still, if anyone is concerned, just wait to buy it. Its just that simple.
Seriously. I don't accept the premise.