DadeMurphy
Dade Murphy
DadeMurphy

I picked up Sim City for $40 mostly so I could get a $20 discount on Dead Space 3. I figured I had to at least check out Sim City to see what all the fuss is about. I played it for a couple hours last night and it's actually pretty fun. I didn't have any server issues. There were a couple weird graphical issues with

I think you should be able to expect to play the game when you get it on release day but it doesn't seem to be the reality today. I think it's bullshit but I'm more commenting on the fact that a bunch of games lately have been nearly unplayable on release date and maybe we as gamers should recognize that the pressure

Should have made that more clear I guess. From the article, "...just in time for Amazon to drop the price to $40. For a game that's less than a month old, it's unusual to see major price cuts. But on Amazon you can pick it up for $20 less than list price and you'll still get EA's free apology game, if you activate

I'm happy with my purchase. Got two games for $40. Sim City will be patched and work fine eventually and I'll play some Dead Space 3 until then. I understand you can't afford to purchase these games and that is fine. No need to be a baby about it.

Because then I don't get to profit the free Dead Space game earned by everyone else's bad experience with the game. Dead Space 3 is $60 on GMG and Amazon (digital copy) so in conjunction with paying $20 less than everyone who pre-ordered, not dealing with the headache of the launch day/week/month server woes, I get a

You're welcome.

EA rewarded me for "fucking you over". I should probably thank you for the free game. Your inability to the play the game has equated to my prosperity and I'm just fine with that. I got the game cheaper than you by $20 plus a free game for your hardships and I will never have to deal with the bugs and issues you have

EA didn't screw anyone over. They released an unplayable game and that sucks for the people who preordered and expected to be able to play on day one but I do not fall into that group of people. I have not been affected by the crappy server issues so I have not been inconvenienced at all. You're just pissed because

Just picked up Sim City and Dead Space 3 for $20 each - seems like a good deal if you put it like that. Hopefully, I won't have any server issues with Sim City... but I might leave it sit for a bit while they work out the kinks and play Dead Space 3 in the mean time.

I don't think anyone should have to apologize - they should just be more honest. It is wrong to mislead people and show them features which do not exist in their products. Showcase the best your product has to offer, not what it doesn't/can't/won't offer and there won't be a problem. You can make any turd of a game

I don't think that is a fair comparison. The pre-release demo footage of the game had a ton of bells and whistles and graphical fidelity that the entire game, once released, did not have at all. A scene being removed from a movie is not the same. It would be more like if a movie was shown in the trailer as having

Considering most people use some sort of case on their phones, I don't really see why the back of a phone matters or for that matter, anything other than the screen. Sure the GS4 is plastic but why does that matter if you never see it? I personally like larger phones and I'm bored with iOS because its basically the

You did end awful.

The GTX 570 is a Direct X 11 GPU and tessellation is a Direct X 11 feature. Even my 2-3 year old ATI 5730 mobile GPU in my laptop has support for DX11 (although turning DX11 features on generally kills performance).

You've got it wrong. Its not Terabytes (TB), it's Terabits (Tb). The difference is massive. 100 terabits (Tb) is 12.5 Terabytes (TB). That said, your question is still valid because I am not aware of any tech which can access or transfer 12.5TB of data as quickly as this. We'd be better off using these wireless

Right, the point I was making was that Intel integrated graphics suck. I'm sure the dual core vs quad core doesn't help either. The 13 inch is too small for my tastes anyhow and the 15 inch is too expensive so I'm still rocking a windows PC with an i7 8GB Ram, 256GB M4 + 1tb and a crappy 1366 x 768 res screen.

Fair enough. But I definitely read a couple articles about some perceived slowness. Here's an excerpt from the Verge's 13inch macbook pro with retina display review; "The 2.5GHz Core i5 in the 13-inch Pro offers terrific raw CPU performance in benchmarks, running Geekbench at a solid 6700-6800 range, but the

1. I'm hoping for closer to $150 -$200 tops.