The thing you're missing is that complaining MP3 isn't noir enough was just shorthand for "it doesn't look or feel like Max Payne as we know it". I think that this trailer is really fucking cool and it's got me very interested in the game, but even with hearing his voice, it still doesn't feel like Max Payne to me.
I'm not entirely sure if it's what you're asking, but you won't be able to play through ME1, keep your existing ME2 save file and import the whole lot into ME3. It's a sequential thing, you have to import an ME1 save into ME2 and the resulting ME2 save into ME3.
There were only two DLC packages for ME1: "Bring Down the Sky" and "Pinnacle Station", neither of which were particularly worthwhile. The first is included in the Platinum Hits/Xbox Classics re-releases as well as the PC version. The second is a poorly-reviewed combat arena, and hasn't been included in any package -- but by all accounts you wouldn't be missing much.
I believe Just Add Water have announced plans to make new Oddworld games once they've finished the HD updates for Munch and Abe. They apparently intend to finish the quintology, although I think they're focusing on spin-offs (such as The Hand of Odd and The Brutual Ballad Of Fangus Klot) before they get onto Squeek's Oddysee and the series proper.
I don't like the yellow emblem at all, but the explanation in the comics (at least in The Dark Knight Returns) makes a degree of sense: the yellow emblem is intended to be a target. If he's going to risk getting shot, it's a good idea to draw the aim away from his partially protected face, and to his heavily armoured chest.
And to be completely fair about the belt, the gold (I'd call it bronze myself) colour is much more muted in the films and doesn't draw nearly as much attention to itself as it does on that model.
The source for that strangely edited quotation on wikipedia actually mentions only "moments that recall Quentin Tarantino's Pulp Fiction" -- moments of sudden violence perhaps? I don't recognise anything else that's even a tiny bit comparable. Terse/wordy. Serious/witty. Tight/sprawling. The two films are chalk and cheese to me.
What is it that reminds you of Tarantino?
How on earth are you equating Drive with Tarantino on any level? The former is about one man who barely speaks, the latter is built around ensembles who never shut up. They couldn't be more different. And as someone who has liked a lot of Tarantino's work, I have to say that "It was a mashup of things I'd seen before, done with less vision" is an odd criticism to make of Drive if you're going to claim he delivers more.
Collateral is not a bad call though. Michael Mann, much like Nicolas Winding Refn (at least as far as Drive is concerned), is all about creating and maintaining a certain moodiness. It doesn't really matter if the story they're telling is rote and unoriginal, the only important thing is how they're telling that story (i.e. with an overdose of style).
The "Galaxy at War" thing appears to be a way to boost your chances in ME3's endgame, in a similar way to how upgrading the Normandy in ME2 made it easier to save more crew members in the suicide mission. So basically, play this and/or ME3's multiplayer, and the occasional screw up in your singleplayer decision-making might not result in the Reapers winning.
It's a gag. Not a particularly funny one, but still a gag.
I think perhaps you tried to read too deeply into it.
If you pick the two versions of GT5 you only get 1 game.
If you pick one version of GT5 (doesn't matter which) and the Team ICO collection, you get 3 games (GT5, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus).
If you pick one version of GT5 (doesn't matter which) and the Team ICO collection, you get 3 games (GT5, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus).
Already happened. The novelisation of last year's Red Riding Hood film intentionally excluded the final chapter, and you had to download it to find out the ending.
It's possible at some point, but there's been no word to indicate that might happen.
If you want to play it and don't have a gaming PC it might be worth giving the OnLive cloud gaming thing a try. Last week I stumbled across it in their rental bundle for about £7/$10 a month, and I've been pleasantly surprised by how well the whole thing works.
The 720p video output has plenty of blur and artifacts, but still looks reasonably good on my laptop screen. There's a degree of control lag, which seems to manifest itself mainly by making FPSs feel floaty regardless of mouse sensitivity -- I rarely notice it in The Witcher.
It's not a perfect service by any means, but The Witcher is more than playable, and I don't think there's a cheaper way I could've played it (and I get BioShock thrown in too, which I never got around to before).
Drew Karpyshyn wrote all three previous Mass Effect novels. Mac Walters has written several Mass Effect short comics and plotted the three comic book series so far. David Gaider wrote all three Dragon Age novels.
All three of those were writers on the games in question (and there's a fourth Mass Effect comic book series coming that's written by yet more BioWare writers). Mass Effect: Deception is the only recent tie-in that wasn't written by someone from BioWare.
I think you missed all of my points.
Previously the option was Steam, now the option is Origin. That's one choice before and one choice after, or to put it another way -- the same amount of choice.
"If it were truly a competition, both services would have the games and the better service would offer better incentives."
Yes, which is why I pointed out that "given the choice people generally stick with what they're used to". New Coke beat regular Coke consistently in blind taste tests, and yet it still failed. Unless you have a great idea that's going to change the landscape, you need a foothold in the market before it's worth the time and effort of trying to improve on the competition in any meaningful way.
Origin could have launched with all of Steam's bells and whistles and a hundred improvements and most people would stick with Steam anyway. Not out of any loyalty to Valve. Not out of any anti-EA sentiments. Just because they're already using Steam.
If you want a competition, you've got to wait until EA feel like Origin is on (or at least heading towards) a level playing field with Steam, and games that require Origin or are exclusive to it are the only ways they're going to get there any time soon.
"Origin actually creates less choice and competition for customers for EA games"
Maybe I'm missing something, but removing Game X from Steam and putting it on Origin is not "less choice". It's exactly the same amount of choice. And I think you'll find that EA would've had a pretty big say in their prices on Steam too.
Unless you didn't notice, EA is trying to set up a competitor to Steam. What they're doing now is leveraging their own products to get a foothold in that market, without which they have no incentive to even attempt to better Steam, because given the choice people generally stick with what they're used to regardless of any improvements (see: New Coke).
I think you're missing the point of those scanlation sites. Publishers as a rule follow trends, and publish endless variations of whatever's already been a big hit. Scanlation allows those who don't understand Japanese to read some of the more off-beat/interesting stuff that would never be translated otherwise.
Also, in my experience most of the sites are very good about taking down anything that gets licensed for release in English. They certainly exist in a state of dubious legality, but it's not the same thing as piracy.
I don't understand why this is such a problem. Don't get me wrong, I do find it mildly annoying when five different retailers give you five different bonuses when you pre-order and there's no definitive package (or if there is, it's horrendously overpriced), but on the other hand have you looked at what these bonuses actually entail?
Sometimes you get overpowered weapon variations (or multiplayer XP boosts) that make the game a easier for 2 or 3 hours before the difficulty level inevitably catches up, at which point they become pointless. Other times it's armour that might look cool, but will only occasionally look like it came from the game you're actually playing, and you can't wear it until you reach a certain level, by which point you'll already have looted or bought a more effective set. And the final variation is gold skins that only serve to break the aesthetic of the game.
These are all things you can (and should) do without.
(Also, publishers generally deal with this promotional hooey, not developers, so bringing up Brink as a Bethesda game is perfectly valid -- albeit I'm not sure there was any point to be made by doing so.)
Poor Cyanide. As if it wasn't hard enough to live up to the books and the TV series and Dragon Age: Origins and The Witcher and Skyrim and countless other action fantasy RPGs, now they'll have the what-might-have-been of BioWare's own version hanging over every imperfection that slips into their game.
I'm more forgiving than most when it comes to flawed games (really enjoyed Dragon Age II and Alpha Protocol), but those are some awfully big shoes to be filling.
Ooh, ooh, can I be your friend? Literally two days ago I started looking for a machine along these lines. That is, a (hopefully) inexpensive PC with reasonably good gaming specs and HDMI output to my TV rather than a monitor and speakers.
I've not done any real gaming on a PC since Half-Life 2, and whilst I'm not completely baffled by PC technical specs, I find it impossible to keep track of the various competing/evolving components and which ones are currently "good enough".
I just want to play the Witcher games at a reasonable level of graphical quality. I'd cope with sub-par console ports, only it doesn't look like the first one is coming to consoles anytime soon/ever.
Reconking is a great name for a game, someone should get Tim Schafer working on it (as long as it's pronounced re-conking; recon-king would be much less good).
How about if they set up time sensitive parts of the game? So you have plenty of time to wander but occasionally (where it makes sense) one story mission will feed straight into another in a time sensitive manner.
e.g. You're looking for someone, main mission A involves tracking down an informant who tells you where you can find them, and main mission B involves going to that location to get them. There's nothing stopping you going on a sidequest between the two, but if you do, your target will have moved on by the time you arrive.
