Recently, the decision by Capcom to charge for the ability for players to play a "versus" mode of Resident Evil 5 has drawn fire from critics who state that charging for a feature found in most other games for free is silly, wrong, and in some cases, evil.
They don't make games like this anymore.
Too dated in my book. The AI is way too unpredictable to be acceptable today. It's definitely a game of its time.
Agreed with those sentiments. The quality of the CPU controlled characters make or break a stealth game and they are pretty poor in all the Splinter Cell games by today's standard. This is what led me to playing Spies vs Mercs all the time in later games just to get a better stealth experience from a real person. Arguably Sony are making better stealth games albeit not Tom Clancy stuff.
You should stick with fortnite or one of the countless bloodborne style games then. What a joke.
I had a good time with the game. It is a product of its time. But when it came out it was a must have game for a lot of people. I wish Ubisoft would make another game in the series or at least a reboot.
They are making a remake, I think. I loved the original game when it was released, but I tried to play it again in recent years and just couldn't get on with it. The same with the older Hitman games.
Yeah chaos theory still holds up though I gotta say. If you’re a fan of the series I highly suggest you go back to that one. Ubi has said they are remaking sc for “modern audiences”. I don’t have a lot of faith for the future of that company
Due to the lack of modern stealth games, and me constantly playing the MGS series, I've been looking for alternative stealth games to play, and went back and re-played the SC series recently. I wouldn't call SC1 or SC:PT masterpieces, there are AI issues, they're very much trial-and-error games, and that can lead to a lot of frustration. I also found the stories in this series to be boring, uninteresting, and just sloppily told. Cinematics are also of poor quality for both in-game scenes and CG cut-scenes, the soundtrack didn't leave any impression on me either.
Chaos Theory is better, but there was still a lot of room for improvement, and Double Agent (old gen ver.) was a sloppy mess that ended up a regression from CT. But still, at least they tried back then, these days Ubi-junk doesn't even try to make good games!
Skewed and Reviewed have written an Opinion Piece covering issues in the gaming industry, how current issues were issues years ago, and what can be done to help restore consumer trust.
Nothing. It's up to the gamers to stop consuming content from companies that they don't agree with.
How do you know if you agree with it or not unless you play it? Which without conventions forces gamers to rely on trailers. Perhaps Demos should be made more frequently. But companies need to do better as well.
But is that not what they have now? Tons of gameplay or are you talking about watching actual gamers play it versus the trailers and streams? The big issue is that some companies pay streamers and influencers and they create content but for me; that is hardly a fair, unbiased, and factual look at a game.
They usually are attached to the money sadly. It would be nice to have gamers in charge but you have so much money invested that business people are needed. Hence the issue; you need people who know business but are also gamers who know have an eye to the community. It sounds simple in theory that if you give gamers quality games that they want to play; money will be made. But that is not always so.
Marie Dealessandri speaks to Borislav Slavov and Gustavo Santaolalla about “the new golden age of games music”.
Idiots really are ruining gaming, you guys are getting charged for selecting VS on a menu..
just.. shocking.
CAPedformore$.COM
Who cares what some little sh*** says? Usually you can mute them anyways.
"A five dollar fee to play multiplayer instantly screens the lowest common denominator out of the process of annoying the **** out of me during a game. And I welcome the concept. I’ll gladly pay an extra five-spot to instantly be rid of the risk of running into the worst offenders during multiplayer play."
Yeaaah! That $5 really makes a hell of a difference, it's not like they've paid $40 for the game already, or (in the case of Live) $40 for a year's worth of online play...
If only there was a way to umm...I dunno, like, stop those annoying people from talking to you. Like a command you can send, or, or a button you can press that would stop their audio from coming through. Or, I dunno, maybe an option so that we can avoid that particular player?
If only.
do you knowon why kids are so angry on xbox live.
its because they went through the rings of hell(see what i did there :P) to justify the cost of xbox live to their parents.
Naturally they want to get the most out of the 50$ they can, so when they enter a game they are already stressed out, then with the nature of multiplayer games; added stresses come into it.
Then they begin to feel like that the 50$ isn't worth it, but since they are already frothing at the mouth from rage, they blame other people for this insecurity.
So charging extra for a multiplayer mode is a very bad move.
if you disagree than just say so, don't take away my bubbles...
its sort of like that with an xbox360, everytime you play you are going to be worried about red ring, disc scratching while having all these emotions while playing a game, it must be quite a stressful session emotionally.