Search Results

The practise of the publishers posting user reviews on Metacritic is unfortunately nothing new. It's happened in the past and publishers have been caught out before. It really doesn't hold any ground and lets be honest who actually buys a game based on the metacritic user reviews? The type of person to use that site is pretty savvy. Metacritic is more useful to developers/publishers than it is to consumers.

As for the idea that publishers/developers/PR agencies may have gone too far? Probably not, at least not further than most other forms of media. It's the marketing departments job to sell you a product no matter what it is, and it's the consumers job to spend wisely.

Really the issue for me is the power publishers have over the press. They are in control of most of the news via press releases. They also control who gets promo copies before release. Piss of the publishers and you won't get the game and blacklisted. While they need the press for marketing reasons, the publishers have more power over the press than the press does over the publishers and that is an issue. There isn't another way around it or a way to change it. Unless we change the way we see gaming news. The press should be getting scared because publishers are starting to do news and videos themselves without the need for journalists. Activision only allow sites to embed the trailers they uploaded themselves. With social media and community managers, the publishers can directly show consumers press releases and news by themselves. Their need for the traditional gaming website is still useful but diminishing. This may lead to publishers having more control and can show people only what they want to see and then we will get more situations like Aliens: Colonial Marines.

Radio Protector - 65daysofstatic

I personally don't get why so many people were expecting and wanted to see the console itself. To me that is the least interesting part about a console launch. I guess people enjoy the hype of seeing it in the flesh, it gives the impression it's nearly here. But at the end of the day its what's inside that counts.

As for your question. It's a possibility but doubtful, depends on how similar the online infrastructure is between the 2 machines. I doubt you'll be able to play the same game together, I'm guessing there are lots of complications with that. Though a party chat between the 2 consoles seems possible. At least for the first few years.

Well... After reading this thread I now feel old.

I remember that. It was great day....to be a staff member.

It's bad that when I saw that title I instantly thought of that damn song.

Haha at the Jonas Brothers comparison. Busted were ahead of their time obviously. Or Jonas just use a style that was even out of date 10 years ago. I'll go with the latter.

Unfortunately I don't have it for PS3, or else I would so be there.

Looks like Japan knows how to handle the Vita. I just hope the west know what to do or else it will just end up like the PSP, 'Japan and J-RPG fans little darling, but no-one else caring'.

Looks like Tecmo did a Konami, release something without telling anyone.

I've always heard of this series but never actually got in to it. If it ever becomes cheaper in the future I may consider getting it.

I remember seeing a documentary on her some time ago. She is still going huh.

What's a world Atlas got to do with anything? ;)

Still, not being able to read disc' must suck.

Absolutely no idea.

Kojima disguised himself as a random Ubisoft developer and added it into the code.

Ubisoft outsources the AC series to almost all their developers all over the world.

It's the whore of the video game development world. It gets around a lot.

Goat Dung is more amusing.

I am for now on going to call you Goat Dung.

It is only my speculation about the reason for the numbering.

I think that most people that buy Assassins Creed don't really care much for multiplayer, it just happened to be that it actually ended up being pretty good, so they kept it up.

Looking back at the AC series they have done a lot of reactionary crappy business decisions over the years. Added multiplayer when it didn't need it (though it ended up working), season passes, yearly iterations and content taken out of the game for DLC in AC2. They've done a lot of crap things with AC, but with the games ending up being pretty good, so we overlooked them. But with Revelations being a bit crap, and AC3 being a mixed bag, people are starting to notice.

Saying all this I'm still looking forward to Black Flag. Naval combat was the best thing of AC3, so expanding upon that and adding a pirate setting with a seamless open world. Colour me interested.

...

I can see why they went with a numbered title. Assassin's Creed has peaked so by naming it ACIV they can make it seem more important and get more sales before Ubisofts next generation blockbuster (Watch_Dogs maybe?) comes out. Basically like how Prince of Persia was Ubi's little gem last generation and fell off the radar once Assassins Creed came out.

By chance I was listening to this song the other day.

Tree Village by Dance Gavin Dance.