TheMightyEthan

I feel I have a duty to the world to pass on my obviously superior genes into the next generation.

Actually, if they're crying for a dumb reason (mom won't buy me a toy!) then ignoring it is the best thing you can do. They learn pretty quickly that crying won't get them what they want, and they stop. *Edit* - By "pretty quickly" I mean it only takes a few times. They still might cry for quite a while the first couple of times.

You're assuming they'd put it in though. In the past, if they had a new awesome idea, either they'd put it in the main game or they'd just be like "we don't have the budget, so we can't do it" and not put it in at all. Now stuff that might have fallen in to that category they can release as launch DLC, charge separate for it, and so be able to include it. But they are developing it, they clearly have the budget to make that idea a reality. Does it require the developer to say "yeah we're totally cashing on on this" to convince you? No dev's going to admit to that. They've got the ideas during development, they have the funding to make it a reality, they have the framework to add it right into the game. However rather than doing they, they're selling it as a separate component. They have the budget to make it if they charge extra for it. That's all we really know for sure, whether or not they would have the budget without charging more for it is a guessing game. And no, they don't have to come straight out and say it, I just need some evidence beyond the fact that it's release-day. One of those things could be that it's content already on the disc, and the "DLC" is really just an unlock code. Another would be if the game feels significantly incomplete without it. Or if they advertise like it's built into the game, but then it's released separately. There are lots of things that could go into that. Question: What if it's release-date DLC, but it wasn't developed concurrently. Like the dev made the game, sent the final code to Q/A and to be pressed/shipped to retailers/whatever. Then, after that was done, they started working on DLC, but because the DLC is so much smaller and they already have the engine and game framework and stuff set up they're able to get the DLC done before the game actually releases and have it up for download day-one. Is that okay?

Yeah. I also don't like DLC that's really just a code to unlock content already on the disc. I can see limited situations where it might be justified (small publisher can't afford the data rates MS/Sony charge for distributing content), but it certainly looks shady.

You're assuming they'd put it in though. In the past, if they had a new awesome idea, either they'd put it in the main game or they'd just be like "we don't have the budget, so we can't do it" and not put it in at all. Now stuff that might have fallen in to that category they can release as launch DLC, charge separate for it, and so be able to include it. I'm not saying all launch DLC is that way, I know there's definitely stuff that they cut out in order to charge extra for later, I'm just saying I'll give them the benefit of the doubt until I see evidence that that's what this particular company has done.

I don't see why time frame has anything to do with it. If it's developed separately, then it's separate, regardless of WHEN it was developed.

Does that include negative rep? If so, should we make negative rep viewable on profiles as well, or would you prefer to keep it only viewable on individual posts?

This kind of thing doesn't actually bother me. I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that the DLC was developed separately on a separate budget, and actually is additional content rather than removed content, until I'm given reason to believe otherwise.

This one pisses me off. I saw that, unmarked and unprotected, on a Google search, before I actually played the game. It really fucked up the mood of the whole thing.

Yeah, the tower defense aspect is mostly like "our towers are down, build some more towers" than actually constantly worrying about your towers. If you ever played Tribes, the towers in MNC are more like the turrets in Tribes than the towers in a real TD game.

Yeah, I thought it was pretty good. Best Batman game I've ever played, and without a doubt worth the $1 I paid for it on the GFWL sale.

They can think that if they want to, I just was saying I don't understand it.

I probably would have changed it to Falconwrath.

But there are people who actually hold that kind of viewpoint.

For the most part I agree with this, though I didn't mind the one in Dead Space for playing the whole game with only the plasma cutter. That was actually one of my favorite weapons anyway.

I don't understand why other people's misconceptions about a game makes people not like the game (or movie or whatever). I'm referring to the "the fact that many dudes believe GoW started the genre makes me hate them and the game!" I mean, I can see that if something is super hyped up and then doesn't live up to those expectations it might hurt your opinion, because you expected too much, but why does something like people thinking it created a genre affect your opinion of the game? That has nothing to do with the game, it's just people being retarded.

That's true, but if he wants it for upcoming games he can just wait until those upcoming games are out or almost out...

I don't move like a knight on tile, but I do still try to avoid stepping on cracks. I won't go much out of my way to do it, but I will adjust my step.

I don't bother with online achievements at all unless it's really straightforward like "play 10 matches" or I can boost it fairly easily. In fact, games having online achievements can make me decide not to get a game (if I'm only a little interested) or change which platform I get it for (for some reason I don't care nearly as much about PS3 trophies as 360 achievements, and I don't care at all about Steam achievements).

Well they do have to try and make money at SOME point during the year...

Holy crap, that is completely awesome. I wonder what the Japanese ME2 box art looks like? I can't find it.

I think it looks pretty cute and cartoony on the US box too... But yeah, I do like the cell shaded Zelda style a lot.

Well, and there's a decent chance I won't do dual GPUs, in which case which brand I get will just be determined by me comparing price and performance.

I like some things about the US box art, and some things about the JP/EU box art. I can't decide which I like better overall. And I do like the US Spirit Tracks box art.

While generally I'm opposed to boosting like that, for stupid achievements it's the only way to go. For instance, there was some hockey game that had an achievement for quitting early in 10 online matches. The only okay way to do that would be to boost it. So I'd say get the private match going and all stab each other.