MasterDex

That notion seems highly prevalent amongst gamers (ie. that there's not much advantage beyond better graphics with next gen consoles). Better processing units and greater and faster amounts of memory will mean that we should finally be able to significantly advance certain aspects like AI, interactivity and overall complexity. The major hurdle right now, I believe, is that the industry and community at large still see better graphics as the sign of advancement and pursue better graphics as a result. Hopefully this generation, the industry can look past the graphics and make advances where they're truly needed.

Going from a comment on Kotaku, it appears that Warner aren't requiring any proof - "Accidentally redeemed the code on the wrong PSN account, the one I use for playing and trophies, not for purchases. Called, got a code to redeem on the right account. They just email a code, no questions asked." There are going to be more fuck-ups along the same line and legit customers will be hurt but I don't see problems like this being big enough to warrant a boycott or complete condemnation of the concept of online passes. If we're going to use this fuck-up to condemn online passes then surely, it's only fair we include PC CD keys in the mix because the same shit can happen with those too.

The thing is that 85% of people are morons. The same applies to gamers whether you like it or not. The thing is that's a bullshit stat. I'm not denying that there are plenty of morons in this world but to generalise entire groups of people as morons seems a tad moronic in itself.

I don't think so. I imagine I'd be pissed but a fuck-up like this wouldn't change my opinion on the concept of the online pass.

Looking at the back of my Oblivion case I see The Elder Scrolls®: Oblivion™ so it's not registered but they probably wouldn't have too much trouble defending it considering how often they use just the subtitles to refer to each game in the series and the success and popularity that Oblivion garnered when it released. Before I thought to check the back of the case , I did a google search to try and confirm what you're saying and it brought up articles about them filing an Oblivion trademark for movies too.

Thanks for expanding. No need to worry about vagueness, you explained the situation well enough. Now that you mention it, I realise that the marketing has shifted away from promoting the head-to-head competition. Competition is good but trying to force a choice on the consumer through marketing is cheap and risky. I'm glad EA had the sense to change up their marketing strategy. Just look at the comments to that last trailer on youtube. What intelligence? They are a bunch of rabbid animals. If we used comments to determine an entire group's level of intelligence, we as gamers would be seen as cro-magnon apes.

I think you're taking my comment the wrong way, I'm genuinely curious. From my side, it does seem like EA are the ones pushing the head-tohead marketing but of course, you're an EA employee so you may know better so I was hoping you could expand on your claim more. It's easy for you to say that it isn't EA as we have no way to refute you as you're privy to info we're not but it would be just as easy for me to imagine you're just redirecting the blame away from your employer. I'm not suggesting that's what you're doing here, I'm merely looking for more than an unsubstantiated claim because as far as I'm aware, DICE never said they wanted Call of Duty to "rot from the core" or that they were "going dead at them”.

As I said in the status update, shit happens. Granted, this is a load of diarrhoea but I don't feel I need to realise anything. There's a bunch of ways that publishers and developers fuck us over and we likely don't know half of them. I've come to accept certain things out of futility this console generation. One of those things is that we will get nickell and dimed because the majority of console owners are parents who got them for their children, children and ignorant, nonchalant consumers who are more likely to buy something off of QVC in a drunken daze than use their noggins and say "No, I'm not going to be shilled by this company. I'm not going to support that shitty practice." So when publishers decide to change things up and give new game buyers benefits they may have had to pay for a year before in exchange for nickel and diming their non-consumer, I'm fine with it. In this case, Warner fucked up, royally. There's no denying that but one fuck up doesn't invalidate the practice in my opinion.

You wouldn't be pitting one against the other and then saying only a moron in a hurry would be misled. Instead you'd be showing how the general public recognises 'The Elder Scrolls' games by their subtitle primarily. If a game came out called simply 'Oblivion' then I'd say that Bethesda had some sort of a case but a game called 'Scrolls' or perhaps 'The Elders', I don't think there's any case at all.

Actually, EA spend a great deal of time trying to direct DICE away from the anti-CoD marketing. Really? Was it not EA that started the campaign rather than DICE. When DICE were saying "BF3 is going to be a true sequel", etc, EA, or rather Riccitiello, was still on about beating Call of Duty. Is this push in the opposite direction just recently? Did EA suddenly realise it could be hurting them more than helping?

Meh, I don't really care either. I wouldn't say I'm fine with it but I stopped paying heed to review scores a long time ago.

It's a shame that EA bought out DICE when they did. Had they held off, DICE may have had more success and freedom, even with EA, under the partners program. You're totally right about people not buying it because it's not Call of Duty. EA's insistence on going head-to-head with Activision is probably more of a detriment to sales as your average consumer starts seeing the two games in an "either/or" manner. They start thinking "If I get Call of Duty, there's no point in getting Battlefield, that's my multiplayer FPS for the year" but there's still a chance they'll get other FPS games throughout that year because they're not being told by marketing that you should pick any of them over any other.

But it takes away from my experience of the game...which I bought second-hand while expecting first-hand quality. That's like marking down a car because the lifetime service deal only counts for the first owner. It's one thing to have a problem with online passes et al, it's another to demand a game should score less because of it.

I picked up the commemorative edition of Necronomicon today, purely an impulse buy but you can never go wrong with Lovecraft.

It's not as frustrating to play as Demon's Souls was and it forces direction on you by placing difficult enemies into areas you shouldn't go just yet. I found the Knight to be a good class to begin with if you want to rely on swords. Thankfully, the starting class is just that and once you start levelling your stats, you can mould your character how you want. Tips: Take twin humanities as your gift at the start and get used to parrying as soon as you can. Always keep an eye on your stamina, make sure to keep enough to roll away from trouble. For direction, I'd suggest Firelink Shrine>Undead Burg>Undead Parish>Lower Undead Burg....and that's as far as I've gone so far.

There's a quick and easy way to solve this in court. Bring in 10 people off the street. These are the "reasonable persons". Ask them a couple of simple questions. Did you ever play/hear of the game: The Elder Scrolls Four? I'm willing to bet the majority say no. Then ask Did you ever play/hear of the game: Oblivion? I'm willing to be the majority say yes. I tested that theory on a friend yesterday and it turned out as I thought. Bethesda lessened their hold on their trademark by using a subtitle for each game and referring to those games most commonly by their subtitles. Considering this along with the fact that the case is being taken up in a home court for Mojang, I'm willing to bet that Bethesda will come away with nothing.

That's the problem with the majority of games journalism. The journalists are at the whims of the developers and publishers. It's fine to shit on a game after the reviews are in or if the developers have no great pull but don't you dare shit on a game in a preview or review from a big name dev or publisher because then you're hurting those lovely, lovely publishers and developers giving you the privilege of playing the preview. The system is completely backwards. Developers and publishers should feel beholden to the journalists, not the other way around. Game journalists, despite the current situation, have more power than the developers and publishers. Sure, they may threaten to deny access to a preview build or review copy but journalists can also threaten to give them bad press. Look at Gerstmann-gate. Who thinks as much of Eidos now as they did before that debacle? - Or Gamespot for that matter. If the big name journalists grew some balls, they'd find the industry acquiesce to their need for previews and review copies. Unfortunately, that's unlikely to happen and we're just going to see the industry tighten its grip on the gaming press to the point that the best hope for honest opinions will only be found on blogs and in metacritic user reviews

The guy you free? I didn't notice him. Does he only help the one time? I fell off the roof the first time I challenged the gargoyle. Maybe I missed the opportunity. I started again today, this time as a Knight. I've got to the bonfire in the Burg and kept the Merchant alive this time. I'll see how I get on with this character. He's the guy you encounter right before the bridge with the dragon. I've only encountered him again in the fight with the gargoyle, but I heard something about him aiding you several times throughout the game. Now I know the guy! No, I can't remember seeing him in the fight.

The guy you free? I didn't notice him. Does he only help the one time? I fell off the roof the first time I challenged the gargoyle. Maybe I missed the opportunity. I started again today, this time as a Knight. I've got to the bonfire in the Burg and kept the Merchant alive this time. I'll see how I get on with this character.

Ha! I knew you were lying. Grab 4500 souls, head back to the New Londo merchant and grab the Catalyst and the Heavy Soul Arrows - They take the Black Knights down in no time. I'm around the Undead Parish myself now. Want to make it to the Blacksmith. I really shouldn't have killed the Undead Merchant in the Burg. I got a nice sword but I never use it and that fucker sold arrows and bolts. Oh and this game needs to allow players to sell their items earlier. Why the fuck do I have to carry all this shit I'll never use around until well into the game before I can get rid of them for a profit?! Haha, no I beat the first guy through sheer will power and the second one through sheer will power and the Drake Sword! Why'd ya kill the merchant? I know he's a sneaky sounding fella but he's never done me wrong. Cept that time he called me a cheap bastard and told me to fall of a cliff........but in fairness I am a cheap bastard. You can sell shit eventually I think, after you ring both bells. I guess the reason it doesn't let people sell stuff earlier, is that its fairly easy to get a lot of some shit doing the first level run up to the bridge. I killed him for Uchigatana. I have to defeat the Belfry Gargoyle now, that's a tough fight.

Yeah, I'm not sure I'll get through the game this year myself. Today the game froze a few times and apparently it's a known issue so it might be better to leave it on the shelf for a while. I've enjoyed what I played of it so far though. We'll see how much BF3 catches my interest...

As long as they remember Asimov's three laws, I'm sure we'll be fine...

Ha! I knew you were lying. Grab 4500 souls, head back to the New Londo merchant and grab the Catalyst and the Heavy Soul Arrows - They take the Black Knights down in no time. I'm around the Undead Parish myself now. Want to make it to the Blacksmith. I really shouldn't have killed the Undead Merchant in the Burg. I got a nice sword but I never use it and that fucker sold arrows and bolts. Oh and this game needs to allow players to sell their items earlier. Why the fuck do I have to carry all this shit I'll never use around until well into the game before I can get rid of them for a profit?! It's still not P2P but rather it has multiple dedicated servers in the same region rather than one. It seems to assign you to a different server every session. What they're really missing is a way to transfer to different servers that still have room so friends have a better chance of being able to play together.

Hopping in the lifeboat before the ship sinks. I wonder who'll be next. Something tells me it's be Good.