@wexorian: If you're going to complain about the price, at least get it right first. XD

@Thanatos2k: One day, they might make a game about the movie that was never made. >__>

@dev-raid1: If it involves the Infinity Gauntlet/Gems, then the "how" becomes quite a simple matter.

@ps3gamer1234: I could swear I heard my brain cells groaning when I read that line. Lol.

"Lacks any sort of new quests or additional storylines"

They did actually add new quests and areas with the Necromancer patch, however, it was free extra content and not part of the DLC price.

That being said, I think the price for the character packs would be fine if Blizzard showed a renewed commitment to the game. If they add lots of free content alongside paid for character packs, then I don't think anyone would mind paying 15 dollars now and then, because they know they'd be getting more than 15 dollars worth of content in the long run.

But that's also the main problem here. Blizzard hasn't detailed their plans for their long-term support for the game. If they had maybe presented a content structure or timeline, and given the community more of an idea of how they're going to proceed from now on and just how committed they are (or perhaps are not), then it might be easier for some people to decide whether or not to take the plunge. Right now, we're left in a bit of a state of limbo. The appearance of the Necromancer DLC hints at the idea of renewed focus in Diablo 3. The lack of communication, however, dampens hope.

@RaveNRolla: The only shooter type FF game I can think of is Dirge of Cerberus.

@millionsedge: I don't know, GW2 doesn't have a monthly sub, but the community in there is quite pleasant compared to some of the other games I've played.

I think in many cases, the quality of the community has less to do with a paywall and more to do with the nature of the game itself, and whether the game's mechanics cultivate toxicity (no, I won't divert a player's behavior from the player itself, but it is quite common that games that have less forgiving mechanics that punish mistakes tend to have more toxic or elitist players).

I personally like the new direction the series is taking. While the GoW formula was great during its peak, it did start to feel a bit tired as things moved further along.

The trailer itself was epic. This is by far the game I am most excited about from E3 this year.

@illage2:What you are saying doesn't really make sense. The new series takes place 10 years before the voyages of the Enterprise. Not ten years before Nero originally arrived in the past, which is the event that changed the timeline. Those are two different matters entirely. Keep in mind that Nero's arrival and influence on the timeline precedes the launch of the Enterprise by almost 3 decades.

@Bamda: Just because a story has existed for a while, that doesn't mean everyone has seen or read it. In fact, if you were to compare the amount of people the movies reached, to the overall population that has access to media in some form or another, I'd bet you'd find the overall percentage of those who have actually watched the movies or read the books is relatively low in the grand scheme of things.

There are lots of older, more well known stories that I have still not read, or seen movies for. I wouldn't want to be blatantly spoiled for them any more than I'm sure others would want to be in this particular case. In fact in this very thread you see a number of people complaining about it. Are you going to overlook that in your effort to justify your own views? You're being unrealistic if you expect that just because something was popular, it means EVERYONE must know what happened by now.

And even then, I actually have no issue with people discussing it, or reporting on it. Hell, I don't even have an issue with spoilers, so long as there is some sort of warning for them. The author for this post could have easily removed the reveal from the title of the article on the front page, put a spoiler warning and simply discussed the spoiler in the article itself. Then I'd gladly say if people still read it after all that, that it was their own fault and they can't complain if they were spoiled. But the author did not even have the integrity to do something so simple, which could have easily avoided any potential issues for a lot of readers. That to me just shows a lack of care or respect for the readers.

If you don't like that I put words to my distaste in that regard, too bad, but it doesn't make what I am saying any less relevant.