I doubt many people would argue that games can't/aren't better on the PC because they are more powerful and adaptable. But the thing that consoles are doing more of or better is likely sales because it's a cheaper unit that more people can own and therefore buy games for.

A libertarian however supposedly has the "live and let live" view on things as long as what you do doesn't affect me what I do don't affect you. Now, that's rarely the case in practice (aside of that being virtually impossible anyway), but that's supposed to be the allure of that political philosophy.

That is the pretty typical libertarian view: I have the freedom from doing it the way you like it and you have the freedom to do it the way I like it.

If the PC market is so large and great, why was the port poorly done and lacking support? Wouldn't Rockstar want to make a good game so that they'd pull in more PC sales? That's where all the hidden Steam money is, right?

Ok, so why are they developing for a console first rather than using those funds to develop for a PC and just port to a console later after PC sales have gone through the roof? Is it to spite uber-elite PC users or perhaps due to a more economic reason?

That's a fair point. However, digital sales for consoles are not included either.

Look at console based sales vs PC based sales for game. In particular, look at sales for GTA IV. Over 96% of the sales have been for consoles. The less than 4% of sales for the PC are not what's enticing companies like Rockstar to make these games.

Maybe you just need to practice playing the game a bit more.

Meanwhile in console land, sales continue to grow and fund development studios.

Ron Paul and conservatives everywhere are impressively immune to guilt by association compared to others.

They're primarily portrayed as racist because much of the predominant messages is one of xenophobia, isolationism, religious intolerance and racism.

I'm literally pissing myself reading this. Literally.

TigerBeatBrodie needs to move on from this Deadspin sucks and I'm going to comment on Deadspin about how Deadspin sucks because he thinks Deadspins sucks but doesn't suck enough that he'd actually stop commenting on Deadspin's sucky suck website of suck.

You mean we'll understand how it's simply part of a larger marketing scheme to get sentimental fans that think professional sports are noble rather than profit driven entertainment to give them more money?

Yes there is. Invest in Pisswasser. Or Hawk and Little. They've been growing from the start and you can still easily make money in them.

This is seriously your complaint? If you wanted to just show someone aspects of the game, play single player or online in solo mode. Solo mode will limit your ability to do missions that require 2 or more plays but everything else is open without having to worry about other players being assholes.

Case1781

Give online another try. I think the game world was absolutely made for GTA Online rather than the story mode. There are so many locations that are used in the online mode that you wouldn't even know about in the story mode unless were an explorer. And even then, in story mode they'd just be neat to look at whereas…

Maybe you should visit the world outside of Mississippi or the southern United States in general.

Then you should play Saints Row 4.