@Tseng There's a little "like" button to the lower right of each comment, and a count of how many (and who) have used it. I like that it no longer censors unpopular opinions, but I'm not too fond of this altogether.
@WafflePrime How is this exactly? You may not like the games they produce, but Activision's business practices are certainly not as bad as EA's. I'm not saying Activision has good practices, per se, but EA puts them all to shame.
@tachsniper That's a ridiculous inference and you know it. That could easily be said about any shooter that doesn't get an outstanding score (6 isn't bad, by the way), that doesn't make it true. I only played the demo, but it seems like this score is a reasonable one. If you think it deserves an 11 or something, that's your opinion, and no one needs to agree or disagree. So no need for those logical fallacies. When will people learn that this is not a 7-10 scale?
@buccomatic This looks to me like an actual expansion. Skyrim had no shortage of content, and it would be odd if they'd had this stuff done before release.
@Robertle419 What, you mean like [URL=http://www.gamespot.com/battlefield-2142/platform/pc/]Battlefield 2142[/URL]? Anyway, I'm hesitant to admit it, but I'm actually kinda interested now. These are the kinds of steps the series should have taken awhile ago (not just the setting, but themes as well).
"Everyman" means something a whole lot more mundane than just what's possible within reality. A theoretical physicist, for example, isn't an "everyman". Freeman may not be a superhero, but nothing about him is average. That said, a game that doesn't let you do something beyond your own capabilities is a bad game (provided it emulates reality in any meaningful way). This CAN be accomplished with an average person, but the more extraordinary the individual, the more believable an extraordinary act or setting will be, so it makes perfect sense how often we see the "everyman".
parrot_of_adun's comments