@mlcarter815 I don't use team speak cause it sucks... a game where you need to communicate should have a fully functional featured VIOP system integrated into it. BF4 will have VOIP... BF2 had VIOP. **** TEAM SPEAK.
@xJackelx Nintendo saved video games in the early 80's, Nintendo's stock hasn't dropped 77% FYI, it went up 77% after the launch of the Wii, and has since slowly came back down... They are in same potion on the stock market now as they were before the Wii. And yes profit is the ONLY aspect of what makes a business successful.
@GamerOuTLaWz A masterpiece? NO WAY. Having to choose what add on I want to play ruins it. If I could just play any and every map with any and everyone maybe. Instead I have to choose AK or CQ or BC.... BF2 was a masterpiece... BF3 doesn't support VOIP either. are you sure you know what a masterpiece is suppose to be?
What is the point of your post? are you agreeing? did you read my post?
maybe someone should tell him that they actually see a profit after they sell one system and one game... Not knocking Atari or anything... but what was that POS that they released? the Jaguar? yeah that wasn't terrible or anything... What was the last Atari game worth playing? Tempest 2000.... yeah this guys opinion is worth noticing.
On March 15, 2012, it was announced that CBS Interactive had acquired the Giant Bomb and Comic Vine websites from Whiskey Media.[14] CBS Interactive is the parent company of CNET, which operates GameSpot. As part of the deal, the non-disparagement agreement between Gerstmann and CNET was nullified, allowing him to finally speak publicly about his termination over four years prior. Later that evening on GameSpot's On the Spot web show, GameSpot VP John Davison appeared on camera with Gerstmann, marking Gerstmann's first appearance on the GameSpot web site since November 2007. He explained that the reason for his firing was the result of long-standing tension between the editorial staff and the new marketing staff that had recently been put in place. According to Gerstmann, the new marketing staff in place wasn't familiar with video game journalism or how to deal with annoyed publishers. He revealed that the problems began after publishing the review for Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction that went live on October 23, 2007. The review was written by Aaron Thomas and scored a 7.5 (good). The publisher, Sony Computer Entertainment America, complained to GameSpot over the score and threatened to pull their advertising money. Gerstmann, as Thomas' boss, was "called into a room" to discuss the review. He said the marketing team freaked out over Sony's threats and didn't understand how to handle threats like that. Tension continued between marketing and editorial, coming to a head after Gerstmann published his review for Kane & Lynch: Dead Men on November 13, 2007 and scored it a 6.0 (fair). His frankness of the game's quality led to the publisher, Eidos Interactive, also threatening to pull their advertising money. At the time of the review going live, the GameSpot home page was covered in ads for Kane & Lynch. Gerstmann said he was once again "called into a room" where he was sternly admonished over the review. After over two weeks of even thicker tension between marketing and editorial, Gerstmann was yet again "called into a room" and was informed he was being fired on November 29, 2007 effective immediately. He said they essentially caved to advertiser pressure despite vehemently claiming they didn't just days after the firing.
During the show, Gerstmann claimed he ran into a few members of Kane & Lynch developer IO Interactive at a convention a few months after his firing. He claims one of the people he ran into said, "Yeah, Kane & Lynch wasn't a very good game." Gerstmann responded, "You should totally call up my old bosses and tell them that."
Just incase people on here have forgotten.... Gamespot now reviews games based on the amount of money the advertisers pay.
Assholes like Guy Cocker... "Developer Ken Levine reveals that, unlike Bioshock 2, the latest in the Bioshock series will not boast multiplayer features." Boast? You surely mean Lament... "Multiplayer was first introduced to the Bioshock series in 2010's Bioshock 2--an addition that GameSpot called "fun and engaging" at the time." Did anyone that played that game... that tried that MP feel like it was "fun and engaging"? What about tacked on completely obscured MP BS is engaging? You play the original big daddy in the single player, and a splicer in the MP... What? I miss Jeff Gerstmann, the last honest gamespot reviewer.
This is almost as good a news as it was bad news finding out that they tacked on MP to the last game.... Bioshock wasn't meant to be a Multiplayer game. Multiplayer games like BF3 don't need Single player components, like single player games don't need Multiplayer components. It will always just feel tacked on... to appease the reviewer most of the time.... That's right I said... its assholes like at gamespot that rag games for not making an effort at one or the other, that rarely praise a developer for just sticking to what that developer does best. BF3 would have been a much better game with more MP content to begin with and ABSOLUTELY NO SINGLE PLAYER "campaign".
I still don't understand why? I mean if it is illegal to modify a console in a way that allowed any of those people to access that content, why is it rockstars fault? If I recall correctly the first person to sue them was some dumbass grandmother that had bought the game for her 14 year old grandson thinking it was just a M rated game... Like that little child needed to play that game in the first place. In the Future when something like this happens they should embrace it, allow the game to be rated AO, start releasing AO content for it, unlock any hidden AO content and offer the game as a down load. Be like of you think this mini sex game is offensive, wait until your 14 year old Downloads and watches the Donkey sex minigame.
DemannameD's comments