That won't happen. The system can't keep an entire game locked up in cache/RAM while playing another. The current game being played would suffer badly, if it's pushing the hardware anywhere close to high performance.

Sort of! It's got the same sort of indirect control idea, but you create Quests to fight certain enemies, or Expeditions to explore new areas or Raids to progress the story in a region. It's got a deeper item system, with resources fueling creation of new weapons and armour that the heroes will purchase.

I think Destiny's are absolutely the worst exclusive. We all pay the same price, but Xbox owners are stuck with repeating the same 5 Strikes for PvE endgame while Playstation gets 7. Yes, we get them later... a year later. If the DLC were a bit cheaper and had more Strikes I might get it, but as it stands, Destiny has…

I love builder games with resources and production chains. I get bored of games that are too "soft," where you just plop stuff down and it's always an improvement and the only real strategy is in how you space out your buildings that provide radius coverage.

Yeah, so many complaints that I rolled my eyes at. "Ugh I had to revisit areas to go through newly-unlocked doors... what a load of crap." *looks at every Silent Hill game ever and how nobody mentions it as a negative*

Wow... that is awesome. I mean, I probably would have been on board anyway, but being able to use the old instruments and songs? Beyond amazing. I didn't have a giant DLC collection by any means, but bought all the disc games including Green Day and Beatles.

I played around in the loot cave for maybe a total of 5 hours added together because my friends insisted. I stopped playing with them after that. Sure, it was nice having an inventory full of Engrams to decode, but it was almost never anything good (back then, good loot was rare as heck anyway). And I spent too many…

*hands you your hipster fedora, glasses and stubble-beard*

Yeah, it's more of a portable user ID than a true Sharing thing. I had high hopes for Microsoft's Family Sharing plan before the offline requirement hamstringed it. I'm still crossing fingers it comes back.

Often times, performance. Adding mechanics to a game eats up resources normally used for other mechanics, models and animations, etc. I would think that's why the DLC was set on separate worlds, so they could scale down some of the Nemesis mechanics and graphics requirements in order to squeeze something new into the…

Yeah, the store clutter is a bit much. I wish they'd group releases by game in a single tile. I was surprised to see Evolve be a full $70 (in Canada) game and release all the sort of DLC I'd expect to see from a Free-to-Play or at least lower-priced admission. It looks mostly like skins and such, so I guess most…

It has nothing to do with quality. Most games don't see the success of the examples provided, or if they do it's a big surge of sales near release until it tapers off to almost nothing. Providing ongoing support, online features and new content requires money. Minecraft and Witcher 2 had no ongoing costs, because…

Anyone comparing today's game content issues to the "old days", whichever they may be, needs to stop. In the early days, games were relatively cheap to develop and didn't need to sell a lot of copies to turn a profit. They were normally made by a small team and (from a programmer's perspective) fairly simple to build.…

Unfortunately, their model does nothing to pay the bills unless your game continues to sell well for months/years after release, or is supported by other titles being launched.

Because that would require a constant flow of 3-4 games being built at the same time in one company, as well as the presumption that development takes as long as pre-development if you just throw enough people at it.

I may sound like an Ubisoft rep here, but I've always enjoyed their games. They take risks, they mix up the formula and try new things in interesting ways instead of pumping out texture-swap sequels. Being a software developer, I love intricate game systems and appreciate the work that goes into the "little things"…

I was being facetious about "happening", because while I've done some art training in high school and game design courses, my skills are not practiced enough to make good game graphics. My game is a city-building/RPG hybrid, a genre which doesn't do well with VVVVVV-style graphics. I need detail-at-a-distance, not…

Oh, THAT'S what it's referring to! I figured it was some new Nintendo thing I didn't understand, like all the Animal Crossing and Smash Bros. stuff.

The game can be played completely without touching a gem. PC players pay more cash up front for a game where they can earn Gems through gameplay. Mobile gamers play it for free, and maybe 2% will buy gems to get resource cards.

But... but... if you have an idea, you just type a few lines of code to make it work and test it the same day, right? I mean, I built a whole WEBPAGE in less than a day, how tough can a game be?