Because it will truly pain me to see this jerk down yet another specific group of gamers he "disagrees" with and get away with it. I don't like free to play games but I'm not about to sit here and let this guy trash them and have no one stand up to him. People find enjoyment in all kinds of things. I don't like using facebook, but I'm not going to go write an article about how everyone who uses facebook is a mindless idiot with nothing better to do with their time. I understand his point in the article, but he doesn't know how to present it without being offensive to someone. I would let it slide if this was first article of his I read where he is blatantly offensive to some, but it seems everytime I find myself reading, it gets worse. This is NOT good journalism.
Right. Give this guy the Pulitzer Prize. He wrote a bunch of horse **** in an article and attached a Grand Theft Auto picture to it to draw attention. Well he got people to read it and talk about it, even though it isn't good, it's a success. I think you're the one who doesn't know what you're talking about.
Agreed. If somebody enjoys these games enough to spend their money on them, who are we...I'm sorry... Who is Sinclair to judge? It isn't his money, why does he care so much what other people are doing?
No. I don't play Smurf Village or any other free-to-play game for that matter. I personally don't care for them, but I am not about to sit here and watch this goon single out a specific group of gamers and pin them down, making them look ignorant and stupid. Especially when said goon is guilty of the same exact "crime" he is bashing these people for doing. Look, I have no problem with the developers of these games allowing their players to propel themselves by spending a few bucks. Nobody is FORCING anyone to pay. But to watch this guy who probably has that netflix account and HBO and SiriusXM make his own people look bad just because they are into something else, is just sickening. Seriously, Sinclair, stop writing these backward articles, basically downing a different group of people you disagree with one at a time, and work on getting yourself a real job, because you have clearly failed as a journalist.
That's the final straw for me, Brendan. This is the final article of yours I will read. This is terrible, absolutely pathetic journalism. Are you a marytr or are you just blatantly hypocritical? Entertainment is for just that. Entertainment. How is paying $10 on a bundle of berries any different from the $8 a month people pay to watch outdated movies (that weren't box office hits) on netflix? Or the $50 a month DirecTV charges for NFL Sunday Ticket? The $34 a month subscribers pay HBO to watch True Blood instead of waiting 2 months and buying the season box set on blu ray for $30? For that matter, why do Yankee fans pay (literally) boat loads of money for season tickets? Why do SiriusXM customers pay a monthly subscription fee to hear radio with "NO" (reduced, but still present) commercials? Why would I pay $12 for two tickets to see Sherlock Holmes when I can wait a couple of weeks and buy it on DVD for $20? How do you think pornographic websites make their money?
This is a very easy lesson to be learned. Enterainment. Always has and always WLL have value. It is NOT your place to tell people which entertainment they should see has value. In case you haven't realised, what you may like, others may not. What others may like, you may not.
... then again I guess I shouldn't dig too deep into this, as you aren't a real journalist anyway. You work for gamespot.
It's quite simple and reasonably understandable actually. BF3 Vanilla + B2k had maps that appeal to both ends of the spectrum. If you wanted a tight, infantry game with little to no vehicles, play metro or bazzar or seine. If you wanted a large scale war game play firestorm or caspian or oman. If you wanted something in between play tehran or damavand or karkand. Nobody is making you buy this DLC. If you don't want it, don't buy it. I personally like it. It's a change of pace every now and again from the overly boring %500 ticket matches of OMAN that I frequent. The next DLC maps will appeal to people on the other end of the spectrum. It's great for their entire fan base. BF3 is a game that you can pick up and play like COD or like BF2, I don't see a problem with that. If you don't want to play certain maps because they are too big or too small, then don't. There are plenty of matches out there that will fit your criteria.
Now if only we can get rid of the rent-a-server.Why they EVER went that route baffles me, that is what is truly holding this game back from being great.
They say it will be released BY the end of March 2013, not AT the end of March 2013. They could still release it in October. The fiscal year would still benefit from it's release whether they did it in October or March. Don't read too much into this, it's just filler news to help gamespot and other outlets like them through what as been a rather boring week of news.
Seriously? GTA shouldn't have to do anything until Saints Row outsells them, which, unfortunately for the fanboys, doesn't look like is going to be happening anytime soon. The best thing about the GTA series is that it stays true to itself. It doesn't need all this over-the-top cartoon action sequence to be great.
Rocthepanther89's comments