Hardest possible for the first play through, rarely have a problem

[QUOTE="xionvalkyrie"]

Pretty much all the big companies just copy.

Kiyobear

Achievements were totally unique. Again, like them or hate them or some place in between they are all over the place now. I enjoy them on the 360 because they are a log of everythingI have done but I have come to hate them. WoW achievements, gah, one more reason for me to hate what WoW has become. While not required most Steam games I get that are new games have Steam achievements. Including games like Champions online.

I seriously lol'd irl. MUST be joking right? Right?!

MS just gave achievements a title and made them more usable. The original Metroid had an achievement, you beat the game in less time you get Samus in a bikini as a reward (you told your friends about it at school, etc... it got you playing the game again and again just so you can boast). MS just made them more a part of a game and made them easier to do and in a better 'environment' (e.g. games can be coded easily on the 360 with achievements and can be easily linked online so you can show your friends or w/e). MS just took an old idea and made it flashy... And pretty much killed it by letting so many bad games abuse it.

Either way, Achievements are bad. Well, making them mainstream was. Making them core parts of games is beyond milking... WOW M$ came up with a better way to milk games... NO WAI!

Comparing a PS3 to PC standards is stupid, like someone noted earlier, they are completely different platforms. It just makes you sound... Well... Thick... 'oh pc needs at least 2gb ram so there ps3 isnt monster at all lol'

didn't surprise me, knew this game was hyped too much...

original ideas = good, original ideas well (or to near-perfection) used however is a totally other issue...

i never realy understood why everyone loved the dc. i didnt realy play it much back when they were still making gaem because i did not own one but my frinds did. I also played with it quite a few times after they stopped making games for it and i played recently with it as well. I dont understand why a lot of people make it sound like it was the ggreatest console of all time. The one thing i realy dont like about it is the controler. Its just too big for me and when holding it it feals like there is a missing alaloge stick. I never played a shooter on it i wonder how theywere played. Also i heard fighting games are good on there but the controler feals too big for those and i am not a big fan of fighting games ether. Also for somereason even trough its tecknelly last gen it dontfeal like it when i play with it it feals like its older.

EmperorZeruel

* Was the first console to fully embrace online gaming years before it became mainstream. Being more internet capable out of the box then the 360, since it came with a modem (so even if you had no internet at the time you could buy a DC that came with a modem).

* The architecture was also thinking years ahead, it was designed around Windows 2k so it was easy to develope for (hence why it lasted for years after they stopped making them in certain areas).

* Had similar capablities as all systems that gen yet was out before them.

* Software that was introduced with the Dreamcast was unique and quite vast considering its short lifetime.

Either way, it was most likely one of the (or the) most ambitious console because of the thought processors and the ideas (both in hardware and software) that went into it after Sega learned their lessons from the Satern. A bit like what Sony wanted to do with the PS3 and its large starting price even though DC wasn't massive in price, Sega wanted the Dreamcast to be the best console out of the box rather then having the need to buy addons and such for it.

It wasn't the greatest console of all time, but I think what people (your friends) are getting at is that it could have been one of the greatest. Maybe the present would have been different if Sega added DVD.

Because it's september maybe? Still gonna laugh when 360 outsells ps3 during holiday. DeadMagazines

ya all those RROD victims need to replace their 360s!

extremely funny one, bout time anyway he was starting to get a bit lame (e.g. old palin jokes)

My brother brought the game and I must say that the story and style are extremely addictive even though the gameplay is lacking. Meh, I don't think anyone was hyping up the gameplay to begin with. Played a Japanese version for a bit and it was shallow, I don't think anyone thought that it wouldn't be that way since the information existed anyway.

Anyway, like I noted I'm finding it addictive even if the gameplay is lacking and would call it personally a decent game to buy and get into.

For a generic, repetitive side scroller? Wow. I think I'm losing faith in IGNs scoring.psychobrew

That isn't the only way to judge a game (I personally wouldn't call it generic, since there isn't much else like this out there... repetitive, yes, but like IGN notes it brakes up the combat a bit, much of the time you do not relise it is repetitive).

And smart people had no faith in IGN to begin with, you are years behind if you are only losing faith now. :roll:

The one thing about the 360 version I liked the most was when my friends and I all hooked up a few 360's in the same room, and played split screen with eachother.

You really just don't get the same experience on the PC imo.

I've played the PC version a lot more than the 360 version (I don't have a 360), but still it's the ONE and ONLY Valve game I'd truly prefer on the Xbox.

treedoor

Yes because everyone knows carrying around TV and consoles is totally way easy then LAN parties... point invalid, people can move around their PC just as easily, without having to switch disks for each game

if you like 360 version solely because of your friends, get better friends! (a.k.a. friends that use PC, friends that are smart enough to use PCs... which doesnt take much brain power anyway, plug a into b without stuffing it up)... either way, friends are factors that have nothing to do with PC vs 360 since it has NOTHING to do with the quality of each one

[QUOTE="metroidfood"]

PC L4D >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 360 L4D

Why is this even debatable?

Trmpt

Requires facts. Opinion isn't the be-all-and-end-all dismissing all debate... if it was then there wouldn't be the masterpieces of art, music and movies. opinions need to be validated, PC version has much more validation behind it (cheaper [got my PC version for 25USD], better quality, better controls, etc)