dumpster

Bayonetta got a ten from Edge. It's a game I simply do not get at all. Whatever it is that people like about it goes straight over my head.

Just bought Revenge on the strength of this and it's great. I agree with everything that's been said, mainly how tight game design is way better than open world. It's lovely and smooth and can't see if it's just a great 360 game or if it's benefitting from being on the Series X.

I have a secret wish that the ongoing emulation scene on the Xbox Series Consoles could work like the whitelist function on the Vita. That is to say, we know the Series consoles are back compatible with the Xbox OG and 360, but only for the games they allow. Imagine someone taking the onboard emulation solutions and blowing the doors off so they play anything. The series X would be the best console ever made surely?

There's also the famous Sega covers where the faces are Arnold Schwarzenegger etc, all copied from photos. I'd Google for them and post them here, but I've been drinking gin.

Sawyer from Lost is definitely Leon in Resident Evil 6 (the best Resident Evil game).

It amazes me that Amazon takes it back. Someone decides to buy a 300 quid piece of hardware, unseen, pre-ordered instead of going into a shop after release to have a look, decides that they don't want a Switch with a better screen (despite that being exactly what it is) , returns it used, to Amazon. Why on earth should Nintendo or Amazon be footing the bill for that? They should charge a restock fee at least. It's entirely the customers choice to pre-order and it seems crazy to me that you can just change your mind and get a full refund on a used, expensive piece of equipment. I can understand if it's faulty or not as advertised. But to impetuously order an Oled Switch only to decide you don't want one? Someone is footing the bill.

Loving this game. 30 mins is all you need but a week later it begs to be played again. New vehicles and unlocks seem to make no difference at all, it is what it is, and what it is is a good fun arcade romp that cheers you right up.

As I was typing the Titanic analogy I knew I'd get picked up on it. It's not a fair comparison I'll admit. But the video games industry has matured - it's mainstream now, and most houses have a games console under the telly. Distribution is cheaper than ever, no boxes, no manuals, no cartridges to manufacture. Development is more straightforward with Unity, Unreal etc providing the engines for you. But the overall point is that development costs do not relate to product price. Harry Potter was written by an unemployed woman in a Scottish cafe, the sequels were written by a millionaire, but the books were the same price because "that's what books cost". It costs the same price to manufacture a dvd and a Blu-ray of the same movie but the Bluray will carry a £3 premium, because, better. We all saw DVD launch with movies at £25 but it didn't last because movies are supposed to be £10-£15. Titanic cost 100 million to make, involved hundreds of creators. But it still got released at the cinema for a £5 ticket price, it came out on DVD and Blu Ray, etc etc. Products get priced at what the market will stand. If McDonalds launched a Five Guys style burger at five guys prices they'd sell none because that's not what McDonalds burgers cost. If Steven King's new book is as ludicrously long as The Stand was, it wouldnt cost twice the price of his other books. Games used to be £40 to £50 in plastic boxes, on expensive cartridges, manufactured in the far East, shipped to the UK, sold to shops via distribution companies and then on to you for a 30% margin. Today you get games sent directly to your console from Sony, no middle men, barely any cost of manufacture or distribution, no packaging. And the marketplace is bigger than ever. And the games have dlc, season passes, loot boxes and so on. There's just no reason at all for a game to cost £70 other than they think they can get away with it. Games could be a tenner. Hell, Fortnight is free and look how much money it makes.

One bit of faulty logic in this thread, the line "Last of us 2 was worth £70 because I played it for a year and put 500 hours into it.". By that logic, Daytona USA is worth a thousand quid. Just because you played a game for hours and hours, doesn't justify an increase the shelf price. Imagine your favourite band bringing out an album and asking £100 for it because it has great songs. Goods are priced at what the market will bear. Games are stupidly overpriced. If James Cameron can make Titanic and sell it on a DVD for a tenner then there's no reason at all that a game should cost anywhere near £70. The closest I've been to buying a new game recently was when I got Cruisin' Blast for £30 on switch. That was a tenner overpriced but I enjoyed it for one night and I justified not waiting for a price drop because of not going on holiday for 2 years. But there's absolutely no justification whatsoever for a PS5 game to cost more than a PS4 game. £70 takes the piss, and I'd rather have 7 months of Gamepass for that.

Contraversial, but I'm going to say Theme Park on 3DO used the shoulder buttons to access menus, a mouse pointer that snaps to the next item with a tap of the D-pad, and digital placement of rides, paths, buildings etc. Being a conversion of a computer game that was mouse control, the 3DO joypad was probably the worst replacement for a mouse possible. But the design of the menu system made the 3DO game my favourite version.

See, some people still shop at Game.

This post, entirely on its own, has made me re-evaluate my opinion quite significantly. Possible contender for post of the year, that.

I've calmed down since last year and re-bought this at a cheap price and game it another go. Its interesting how many comments in this thread have a caveat. It's always, "this game is good, given that the developer had no money" or "this is great, I mean, we're lucky it even got made!". But it's not a great game in and of itself. There are some weird gameplay choices (getting hungry and not being able to run is game ruining alone), and the fact You Suzuki didnt move the story on at all is just mind blowing, but to me Shenmue has so much goodwill from the video game community that people overlooked the faults and tried so hard to love it. I did the same with Deadly Premonition 2, a truly fucking awful mess of a game but right up until the point I completed it I was loving it because it was Frances York Morgan and I was back in that world. Then, when the credits rolled I was quite stunned. That was it? Literally just loads of fetch quests in a row? All the things I expected to open up didn't and I suddenly realise all the good stuff I thought was coming... Wasn't. It's fair to say, I think, that if Shenmue 3 was a stand alone game with all new characters it would have been instantly forgotten. It's not a good game. It's not even a good Shenmue. There are too many bad decisions made in the design stages. But those who enjoyed it (and fair play to those who did) surely had their patience tested by the end as the story you'd been waiting 20 years to enjoy went absolutely nowhere. If they do a Shenmue 4 I'll be interested in seeing it, but it better conclude the story because part 3 cost them my goodwill and I'll be dammed if I'm playing another Shenmue with no significant story.

Picked up a PS3 with 20 games and 2 controllers for £15 on Facebook. Sold without a power cable but with a video of it powering up. Turns out... Every single aspect of the package was faulty. Disk drive didn't work, each controller doesn't charge.... What a swiz. But the games! Some crackers there. Just need a PS3 to play them on.

I always assumed the Prima strategy guides that we used to sell on day one, alongside the game, were written from information supplied by the publishers. They have everything in for 100% completion, loads of extras, maps, photos and yet they are available at the launch of the game and flogged alongside as a high margin add-on sale. It's surely impossible for a writer to be given a copy of the game in advance and be trusted to come up with a strategy guide themselves. I though the writer was merely rewriting the information they were already supplied , changing it from a pile of documents and maps and turning them into a book.