New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by moocowman

BF4's destruction was definitely not a downgrade from BF3.Personally, I'd rather have unique environments with micro-destruction than have the ability to take out a whole village made up of a bunch of copy-pasted buildings. I feel BF4 hit the sweet spot between BC2's and BF3's destruction.
I'm still confused as to how this is considered news..
Game developers are anything but lazy.Also, on consoles wouldn't developers want to avoid day one patches? I'm not sure about the current generation of consoles but I thought it was ridiculously expensive to put out a patch on the Xbox 360.Anywho.. Is this actually considered news? This seems like more of an opinion piece than news.
Wow. I think Ubisoft needs to chill out for a little bit. This is a lot terrible press for such a short amount of time.I'm sorry but serves you right. That's the risk you run when dealing with unauthorized key resellers. This also seems pretty off-topic.I think a lot of people would argue otherwise regarding the Far Cry series.
No, no and no.I think a followup would be pointless if the developers aren't having as much fun making it which is one of the reasons why I felt the original worked so well. It could still be a fun game to play since it would likely play similarly to FC3/4 and the original. I don't consider a game ruined if it still has decent gameplay. I just think you'd be able to feel that the developers didn't put their hearts into it. That's why I personally don't want a followup.I...
Feeling forced may or may not ruin a game but that's irrelevant to what I was saying. I think I was pretty clear about what I meant the first two times I said it so I'm not going to repeat myself once more. If you still don't get what I meant then oh well.
No. That's clearly not what I meant. Did you notice that I put ruin in quotes? I did that because I've seen quite a few people say they'd mess it up because they're a bad/incompetent company. I was saying that I don't think that's the reason why it wouldn't work.
I'm surprised that people expected a followup.. But meh. I personally think it's better that they don't. Not because Ubisoft would "ruin" it (I guess Ubisoft is the new EA?), but because Blood Dragon was a balls-out insane piece of awesomeness that came out of nowhere. I think that if they tried to recreate the feeling that the game gave, it would end up feeling forced and then people would get upset because it wouldn't be a "worthy" successor.
Honestly, this game looks pretty friggen awesome. I hope it plays as good as it looks.
The free games are always nice. I can't say I agree on the BF4 thing, though. DICE has done a pretty job of fixing the game since its release and the CTE has been great for general tweaks to the game. It definitely wasn't broken beyond repair. It still has some issues and quirks but the same could be said for the majority of Battlefield games.
New Posts  All Forums: