Sadly I threw out all my other OS's. I've been running 8 for a week now, and it's pretty nice so far. I do notice a substantial performance increase, but that's also because my Windows 7 install was already a year old.

I agree that the jump will not be as dramatic, but it is inevitable. Good enough is a temporal assessment, is all I'm saying. And of course, huge advancements are marked by huge changes. You can't see into the future and thus you can't say that such a change will not be massive until it actually happens.

Your argument is sound except in the fact that there is now a "good enough" point. There was a "good enough" point in the previous generation, since that is only limited by what we can imagine to be "better".

I agree that the randomness is disheartening. I don't care if it's insanely hard to acquire, but ridiculously random != hard, it's stupid. I understand why WoW went this route though. It makes the most sense if you need to retain as many people as you can for as long as you can.

I wonder what he has to say about it, but afaik there's a few reasons its hard.

Yeh, you know it can really only be EA, since everybody else is on their side.

So, wait, what's the actual proof EA's even involved in this?

lol, to be fair the only part of your comment that is an actually refutable statement is exactly what he responded to.

I'm surprised at the whole "bap port" situation they got themselves in. They've got one of the biggest multi-platform engines in the world, that's more than capable of doing a PC justice, and they still manage to both it in that respect. Kind of a surprise to me.

There was a pretty interesting article on that about a year back. It's basically 20% on PC, 10% on consoles. Afair, it was along the line of: Even if a PC game is pirated 90% of the time, that's still only 20% lost sales due to the immense number of people that wouldn't otherwise buy the product at all.

If we could somehow finish this list, we would be able to store people in bit-arrays!

What I think ME3 did better than 2 was that in ME2 I very early on already got the "mid-section, the end is in sight" feeling. Even though I knew it would still take hours upon hours to go through the mid-section, it was a very clearly telegraphed chunk of content. I felt ME3 managed to obscure this more, making me…

So we're in agreement, we just have a bit of a different view. My position is that you should judge the game on its merits as a game, regardless of what franchise it is in. This goes both ways. Don't act like it's awesome just because it's a franchise game, and don't say it's utter crap because it's a franchise game.

Yes, I know the hate originates from fans being dismayed about the franchise's use, but the game itself should in all honestly be viewed as the game, and calling it "horrid" because of its apparent mis-use of a franchise is downright wrong IMO. That should have been a side-note, not a main point, IMO.

Aside from math functions we do a lot of things like overlay texture maps onto things, and combine the pixels in a certain way that it looks approximately like what we want. Often enough this involves rendering the entire scene more than once, and overlaying the outputs from various render styles in certain ways.

The upcoming console generation is not very likely to support this kind of raytracing engine yet. The GTX 680 is just barely able to pull off a decent real-time raytracer, and it's not even doing anything else yet.

I had a lot of fun with Shadowrun. Don't really understand where all this hate is coming from.

I agree. I very much enjoyed the game and I really don't understand the hate. Not getting what you may have wanted does not a bad game make. Welcome to Kotaku!

I see what you did there.

The problem with DLC, beyond on-disc DLC, is mostly an image problem.