Actually, I’ve been quite unimpressed with Steam Sales within the past year.
Amazon/Origin/Uplay have actually been beating them out.
You might still prefer Steam as your platform of choice, but the sales are significantly better elsewhere lately.
If they were having a real sale we wouldn’t be talking about it right now at all.
Clearly, you know little about marketing.
What they should’ve done is made a “Not New” Cards against Humanity, relabel it, make its MSRP $100 and then have 50% off, which would make it $50.
It’s such a steal. How can you NOT take that?
That makes sense. It’s ambiguous. I have 30 days to decide.
And seriously, I own every one of your games. I’ve been a fan since the ORIGINAL Eets. Even when I’m skeptical (Ex. Don’t Starve) I end up getting blown away. Seriously, you deserve the praise.
Keep up the excellent work, and thanks for the info.
Esc-Toy? Good thing I read the kickstarter before I clicked buy. Screw whoever that is.
$50 is absurd for a plushy. Seriously, if anyone else tried this (except MAYBE Tim Schafer) I’d give ’em the big middle finger and tell them what to do with certain body parts.
The money will leave my pocket and enter Jamie Cheng’s pocket? Eh, I’m game.
(Seriously, I’m the biggest fanboy I am not even going to try to hide it. The industry needs more Jamie Chengs and fewer Phil Fisheseses.)
No. Let Crash die.
I loved him like the rest of you. But let’s be honest, the series died because it started getting stale. Either we’ll get a dated game, or “Crash Xtreme” or something. Or we could get Crash toys as physical DLC….
Revivals almost never work, except maybe when Nintendo does it. But Activision is SURE to mess it up.
My Astros work just fine with Xbox One. o.O
A50’s, at least.
Why not grab a gold one?
This is why I hate these bundles. All the deals assume you aren’t an owner. In the past I’ve wanted to buy a second Xbox for the basement (room to play Kinect) and I couldn’t find anything that wasn’t bundled with games I don’t want/had on PC.
Off topic, but I agree. I have noticed this trend as well, though it may just be the personal preferences of the staff in question. How a $15 game that’s 1-2 hours isn’t criticized for length but a 10 hour $60 game is (by the same critic) is beyond me. Indie==Bonus points111
It’s one of the reasons why, while I enjoy reading polygon’s articles and news, I really have been straying away from their reviews. Still a good site.
Is it really corruption if they are giving people what they want?
Since when was fun trumped by storyline?
Sigh. I guess for some people it does, but playing video games for storylines is like reading a book for the interactivity. Even the best pale in comparison to most books, or heck even movies nowadays. (Mainly as a negative commentary on video games, not exactly praising movies. It’s sad when Tomb Raider is a stand-out plot and it was basically Hunger Games minus any internal turmoil past the first 30 seconds + lots of explosions.)
To each his own, I guess. But there are still a lot of people who weigh the good ol’ “Is it fun?” above all else. It used to be the bottom line, now it’s just a single metric. =/
It WAS the anti-Dead Rising.
Dead Rising is intended to be fun. =P Sorry, I had to.
Temper your enthusiasm with the fact that this is made by Capcom. The same Capcom who brought us MvC3 and Resident Evil 6 recently. I mean… the fact that they didn’t fall flat on their faces is noteworthy.
I think by the time I get an X1, though, Capcom will have released the Dead Rising 3 Ultimate Deluxe Edition Alpha… that isn’t DLC. The people who bought the game initially will have to buy it 2-3 times before it gets to that point.
So what you’re saying is you’d rather have half the amount of zombies, horrible draw distance, and 1080p? Pretty sure DR fans would almost unanimously disagree with you.
I’ve given up on Poly being technical. They’re still a good no-bullsh** site. But yeah…
As of the time of this writing the Dead Rising series goes as follows on metacritic:
85, 79, 78.
Not bad, really. So we can expect something as good as 2 but not as novel as 1. While I don’t like using Metacritic scores to compare, say DR3 to Killzone, I think it can show the progression of a series which really IS directly comparing a RELATIVE score.
I liked 1, and I liked 2OTR (Which scored poorly only because people thought it should be DLC and not a new game) So it sounds like DR3 isn’t going to really change much. If you like 1 and 2 it sounds like you’ll like 3.
That’s as good as any fan can ask for.
“Most games with a large budget are better than mediocre”
Um…. where? Because I haven’t found many in the past year or so. (Except Batman. It wasn’t anything new, but I enjoyed it.)
MAYBE Tomb Raider. Which had good writing, but awful pacing.
The original KI wasn’t even worth an 8.
That’s some high hopes.
I’d be surprised if it was meant to be literal and not hyperbole. If so…
What can possibly be worse than Making you close your DS? (from Phantom Hourglass.)
Guild Wars 2’s was ANNOUNCED in 2007 and the game wasn’t released until 2012. That’s WITHOUT starting over. WoW was ANNOUNCED in 2001 and released in 2003.
Titan’s existence was leaked 3 years ago. Not even an announcement, and you’re getting antsy 3 years later? Apparently you have no idea how long it takes to make an MMO.
Edit:**** that was not meant in response to you Rathorial.
Those who remain loyal to the genre don’t care about single player because it’s always been half-assed and terrible. Kind of like how people who play Batman couldn’t really care less about multiplayer.
A few games have deviated, and found a lot of praise…. such as Soul Calibur or… one of the Mortal Kombats, and…. uh….. Smash Brothers?
While all the core fans of fighting games care about is human competition, perhaps that’s why Smash Brothers blows the competition out of the water. It gives a positive experience to both types of people.
I’ve finished SSB and Melee 100% with very little multiplayer. They’re the only fighting games that kept my interest since Tobal No 1 and its vastly inferior little brother Ehrgeiz.
They could tap new markets, especially those looking for a game to play on their X1. But they won’t.
Actually, I"d have to agree with you. Even though most insist Vanilla/BC was some sort of glory days, the mechanics were simple and every raid was NOTHING more than a gear check on the ones leading up to it (Except maybe AQ and Naxx, which did have some interesting mechanics but most people didn’t get to do either of them.)
I still feel endgame sucks regardless of what era you look at, though as I said above 1-60 post-Cataclysm is worth a one-month sub to look through, especially Hillsbrad on Horde.
It still feels horribly dated (because it is) but there are far worse ways to spend $15. (You don’t need to buy the expansion)
Well, better late than never. I hope this gives the players what they want, and that’s for it to be more like Diablo 2.
In other words, spend hours farming the same boss over and over to get a .5% chance to get an item worth anything, then if you do you have to spend 2-3 hours to sell the darn thing in a chat channel spamming with 100 other people selling the exact same item as you.
Those were the days…. o.o
How DARE they not communicate their every move to me. Wait until I tell their father about this.
1-60 is incredible.
If only 60-90 wasn’t godawful.
WoW IS the ruination of the wolderful world that WAS Warcraft. Blizzard didn’t need Activision’s help to take a bullet train to lore apocalypse.
My only question is why the hell did it take so long to do this important area of Warcraft history?
As a huge fan of Warcraft history (though not WoW’s scorched earth “storyline”) I would’ve actually been excited to play this expansion way before Deathwing or Pandas.
Except by this point I don’t really care. Though being boosted to 90 to just do the new content IS tempting.
this is a very good point. People have no problem spending $200 every 2 years for a phone that… what…. loads webpages margainally faster?
Yet $400-$500 on a console every 7-10 years is zomg money grab? o.O