UMMM YOU CAN'T GET YOUR OLD DATA BACK IF YOU HAD THE YLOD. If you tried everythign to fix it (like turning it on and off in specific ways), im sorry to say man, your data is gone. If you put your old hdd into the new ps3, it will ask to reformat it (sony did this for who knows what reason!). The only thing that will stay is your online profile on games if it was kept with that specific game's servers, and also your trophies if you've synched them. Good luck!

Take it from someone who has now has had the YLOD 2 times now...buy a new ps3. The repair (by sony, or ANYONE else) is only temporary (will die soon after 6 months after repair). It is more cost efficient to buy a new ps3. The average ps3 life span is around 2 or 3 years. Say, 2.5 years. A new ps3 now costs 250$. If you get yours repaired by sony, and it costs around 150$ CAD to fix it, only to break down again after 6 months...you'll pay 300 for a years worth of ps3 play-time (2repairs*6months=1yearofps3).

I have my new slim after my 60 gb ps3 had the ylod twice, and I'm super happy with it. Except for the lack of backwards compatibility and card slots, but that's not that big of a deal - even if you do care about that stuff.

Wouldn't call it realistic, but it is extremely smooth, at least to me. Not extremely deep, but simple enough to still be enjoyable.

Legendaryscmt

I agree to a degree. It's smooth, but not deep. Mostly reflex-based. It's a bit overrated by reviewers, even jeff gerstmen (from giant bomb) considers it the best hand to hand combat of any game - BUT if you think about it, arkham asylum and city don't have much competition. The combat, form a visual standpoint, looks amazing. It feels good as well, except when batman leaps around like a frog.

if you guys dont care about his rant then why the f**k are you reading his post?? i read this thread from a neutral perspective and im just thinking, yup, sounds just like bad company. this isnt a call for all the battlefield fan boys to come to the rescue. everyone has their own opinion and mine is, the battlefield defenders all look like dorks in this threadgrand17

EXACTLY, totally agree with you man. The bf players really sound defensive here...hehhe, why so i wonder? I would say the same about cod players, but they haven't really posted in this thread yet (besides the tp).

I remember when I use to care about specific ratings certain games got, when i use to care about "system wars" in general, making ratings all the more important. But the older (or the more mature?) you get, the less you care about ratings, and the more about how much fun you can have with a game.

Honestly, when you see a game, and you think you might like it, you should play (buy/rent/borrow). Simple, kiddos.

Admittedly, the only times I got mad in the past few years of gaming is with gamespot's review of Infamous 2 (honestly that reviewer is...for a lack of a better word, "not bright", and also it makes me wonder where he learned to write [hey, that rhymes!]), the somewhat overrated MGS4 and Uncharted 2 (yes, some of you might be rolling your eyes right now, but when you're as jaded as I am, all you look for in a game is FUN gameplay, not cinematic presentation...uncharted only has cinematography, nothing else), an overrated Super mario galaxy 1 and 2 (ratings should reflect fun, not just overall tight gameplay), and...those are the few that come off the top of my head. I just don't like it when reviewers feel the need to bash or overrate the game due to buying into the "hype" (assassin's creed 1 anyone?). I guess that's my biggest pet peeve, which is reviewers buying into the hype - it just makes ppl scratch their heads and ask why games got the ratings they got after playing the games themselves.

I'm guessing this is only in the states, huh? Looking at the canadian website, they have no such deals. Unless the deal is only displayed on a magazine

vanquish Flash, king of the impossible! BibiMaghoo

Too true. Just look up the trophy list and it has a bunch of great other names

Dude... Reviewers aren't usually the best gamers... I remember I read in a review that the mindflayers on Demon's Souls were incredibly difficult but if you take 5 minutes to figure out how their attacks work they are easy... Also I don't understand how a game being long is great with Skyrim but when Dark Souls could take 60 hours its not good. Laser_Hunter

Dark souls is long b/c you are repeating segments of levels...that's not fun.

As for the actual topic, making the game too hard can actually break the game. Hopefully they didn't go overboard

*SPOILERS*

I asked myself the same question. But if you notice at the end of the good ending there's a lightning shock that comes from the sky, so maybe it's an indicator that he's still alive. I find the fact that only Zeke was on the boat to take Cole's body suspicious. So maybe Sucker Punch are using this to create a foundation for InFamous 3. Not to mention there's still the evil ending (which I haven't unlocked). If they do let him alive in the evil ending then I assure you he's staying alive in the good ending as well.

finalserenade75

The lightning bolt, if paused at the right time, resembles a big QUESTION MARK. So i hope so. I liked infamous 1 b/c it was simply fun, but I LOVED infamous 2 b/c it really brought it's lore to life

Oops, i didn't mean to imply that you specifically was hating, I was just trying to correct the idea that people have of cod. I know where you're coming from though, and I do admit, it's a bit too early for ANOTHER I.W. game. But who knows, when the fall rolls around, I might feel up like picking up on COD again, and I think many others will feel the same (if MW3 does good in reviews, that is)