Nothing in humanity suggest man was meant to kill man? I'm sorry, it's actually human nature. Kind of like pack behavior in wolves or lions. It is in our instincts/behavioral patterns. We should be better than that having more intelligence and not going to our base instincts, sure, but it is very much natural.

OMG... it took me a second to realize you were serious and not writing satire or being facetious.

I agree though sometimes it is not a good thing.

Nintendo right now is looking very defensive and it makes them look weaker when all I can see is news of them saying "meh" to the competition and not even focusing on anything they are doing positive. I'm not mad they are doing this, I just think they need to shape up…

I dunno. I kinda appreciate that they shared the "clicker" pic as appreciation of a good cosplay regardless of which game the cosplay was from (and if it was an xbox game). To me that just shows good sportsmanship and I don't think they did it cause they didn't realize it was a Sony game, I think they just thought it…

Problem is I never really sympathized with Walt but I think I already saw where the direction was going with him (which is honestly I think kudos cause the writers/creator already showed the tendencies that have made him what he is today even when he was not selling meth. His personality is very much what let him get…

Actually though, I like the ending cause it fits with the theme. It's kind of like how Grapes of Wrath has a very down ending but the story was about people trying to survive when the world was crashing down around them (the Great Depression). Same thing here. It gave it a lot more meaning. No, it isn't a happy, I…

Really? That's what games used to be about, making your own story? Cause Mario brothers from what I remember you just played through the story. Same with Sonic, Crash Bandicoot, Spyro... Hell, asteroids you pretty much shot or died, no story and no roleplaying any character at all. Same thing with Centipede. Or ...…

Ok, I've seen F2P done in a way that doesn't kill gameplay, but not very often and in general I object because it seems to encourage game designers to design gameplay to encourage people paying more, not to design gameplay to actually be challenging but fun (not challenging in a frustrating kind of way). I think I…

You know, I think part of the problem with these people who bitch, "This game shouldn't be for children" and ignoring the fact the game isn't rated for children is they have this idea that games are just for children and don't realize a lot of older people play video games too. They probably also assume you're just…

Honestly, I think the problem there was two fold. Careless placement of gun (not paying attention to if the kid could get access to it), and letting an 8 year old play GTA ... nevermind letting him play with no supervision.

Sorry, but if I had a kid they'd have to be 12 or 13 and show some maturity and I'd still want…

I already pay for Netflix for their service and I pay my internet provider for the internet access. What is Microsoft providing to help me access Netflix? The xbox? I already paid for that. What exact service are they offering me that helps me access Netflix (or HBO go. I suppose you could argue the web browser is…

Not really. I may agree with you on the bad side of freemium, but I'm nowhere near as optimistic as you. The developers will do what pays best and I am cynical and think that people will fall for the more profitable (easier to make profit anyways) and crappy gameplay type freemium. I mean so far I've only ever seen…

The problem is that freemium actually makes the gameplay itself not so good (in general, it can be done well but most companies go the easy route, or the route the OP pointed out where it's just designed to get you to pay more vs. designed to be fun to play). A reward in game is much more satisfying when you play in…

I agree. I've played one F2p game that did it right where they didn't ruin gameplay in order to encourage you to spend more (no making you grind if you don't pay, no huge advantage if you spend money). It's the only f2p game I've spent money on actually because it was a good game and I don't mind paying if the game is…

Heh, this whole thing reminds of way back (before I was born) when it was postulated women were dumber cause we had smaller brains. When it was found out that we actually had same size/larger brains, it all the sudden was how much percentage of the brain you used that matter.

Which may or may not work depending on if the hardware is good enough. Emulation is far inferior to actually having the hardware and can easily mean the games run like crap and maybe Sony didn't want to deal with people complaining that the PS3 wasn't running PS2 games very well (in fact I actually read the PS3 wasn't…

No, your analogy isn't right.

How about this. What if MS charged you to use Internet explorer on your computer (or Apple if you have a Macintosh)? Oh, and netflix. Oh, and any other app they don't run nor provide the service for they want an extra charge just for using the OS that you already paid and supposedly…

Seeing as how the PS3 had backwards compatibility specifically because Sony put in those parts, I don't see how it would magically still have it when they took them out. Care to explain how 360 would do it without having the same type hardware? Keep in mind, PS2 had backwards compatibility because they actually…

There's only one reason for me not to buy xbox. MS's attitudes towards their customers, at least their customers who don't want to pay for Live Gold. It's quite obvious they'd almost rather you not buy their stuff at all rather than buy and not pay for their "rental" fee of their xbox 360/One. After all, you get one…

I agree with you. But what is important when spending your money now, is who is the one being the "good guy" at the moment (and also offering you what you want ;) ). Right now MS is being crappy and Sony seems to have learned from their arrogance (for the moment). And I honestly don't think MS has learned at this…