everyone that is saying the "game" looks terrible, are fuckin' morons.
This is clearly for one (1) Not a "Game", i would be surprised if its even a pre-alpha build. And, for two (2) anyone that knows of game development, should know that all the glamour and polish is done to a final product... not to something that is merely just a proof of concept.
stop your bitching, and judge the final product, not a months or years old piece of concept, that was not even suppose to be viewed by the general public... basically for this very reason. (the whiners)
with all that being said... i do agree R* does deserve this a bit, not the developers, but the board of directors and the higher ups at take-two... **** them and their greed.
Sorry to the actual developers that put their hearts in to their craft.
Evga is one of the best companies in regards to RMA and warranty, it is a shame, bought a 3090 with them have a 1080ti that is still alive to this day.
Shame that Nvidia treats partners like this...
Hints, one of the reasons why their leaving the market...
They probably couldn't afford losing on returns or warranty inquiries anymore.
It is a shame though, I also had a 1080ti and a 2080ti through them, and worked all the way up to when i sold them, to help pay for my 3090... for all i know they still work.
Enjoy these timed exclusive betas and releases while you can PS fans... They will be gone in a blink of an eye, and chances are you may never see another one again for your precious CoD (among others) hehe...
Do the MS fans out there see the beads of sweat trickling down the PS fanboys heads out there?! Do you?! lol
I don't give a shit either way, I stopped playing CoD after all the "futuristic" bull shit was added to the games, and never looked back.
@j3diknightdave: The original Cinderella — well, the famous Brothers Grimm version, though even that was predated by other versions — had the step-sisters mutilitating their feet to squeeze into the slipper.
Pinocchio killed Jiminy Cricket in the original book, who came back as a ghost.
The Hans Christian Anderson "Little Mermaid" has the titular mermaid kill herself and become a spirit rather than kill the prince.
You apparently have no problem with adaptation until it involves the color of a character's skin.
those all sound pretty dope... Now if the adapted those in to movies, I'd give them a shot (no matter the skin color) for 2 reasons,
1. Because it'll feels more like a fresh story, that the majority probably don't even know about.
and
2. Wouldn't be so obvious why Disney is even remaking the property in the first place. (someone below in the comments had the perfect word, Inclusion.)
Disney is doing the same thing with everyone, not just race, but sexuality.
America Chavez parents in Doctor Strange and the multiverse of madness. Korg in Thor Love and Thunder...
My issue isn't with race or sexuality for that matter, it all comes down to Disney and how they feel they NEED to include, and make it blatantly obvious to everyone, just to make a buck, When in fact, the LBGTQ+ community and any race of people will still see the movie, if it's any good, regardless of the obvious "inclusions"
Could have "The NEW Mermaid" a sequel or something to "The Little Mermaid" with a Black, Hispanic, Asian ect main character, but yet we have a remade "Little Mermaid" with the same Ariel, but black now, Why?! Inclusion. Instead of just making a new property with a person of color... Why?! Because "Little Mermaid" is already a proven property.
Same for Pinocchio, and why Disney just didn't make a new movie starring Pinocchio's brother or sister later made by Geppetto or whatever. Again, with Cinderella and Brandy.
Some of us may have read the articles a while back, here on GS about Willy Wonka possibly being Black in ANOTHER remake, or Dorthy being black in another Wizard of Oz. Again, inclusion.
Inclusion is fine, but why do these production companies feel they have to change the material on which they're pulling from? The changes from Book to the original movie, I can see, because the gruesome differences, don't fit the "family friendly" nature.
Plus, i have a feeling, that some black folks wouldn't take to kindly if some of their favorite characters changed from Black to White, for no reason, other than to get the White dollar. Again, Black Panther being played by a white actor, or how about Miles Morales, just out of the blue becoming White.
and, as far as Miles Morales/Spider-Man, There's a character in my defense, that I'm cool with how was changed, and in my opinion, was done the right way.
Spider-man was originally created as white Peter Parker, something or another happened in the comics, and Miles Morales (who is black) became the new Spider-Man, with the "Spider-Man" name.
Why is this okay?! (IMO)
Because the writers didn't just make "Peter Parker/Spider-Man" Black... They made a NEW character, and he carries on the legacy of Spider-Man.
Not just changing the main characters race or sexuality for the sake of inclusion. A NEW character was created.
oh well, i said my say. Some people will understand, some people will take it out of context, some people will flame. I can give 2 shits regardless. Everyone is untitled to their own opinions, know matter how right or wrong they may be.
j3DiKNiGHtDAVE's comments