mmseng
mmseng
mmseng

My point is, if you want to factor in psychology, you can go a lot further than even you are going. If I wanted to, I could factor in that the CEO is a risk-taking adrenaline junkie who ruins the company with poor risky decisions. That kind of makes the psychology aspect moot, because it's too unpredictable. That's

There are other ways to do multiplayer than building the game around having more than one "Hero" in it. MMO's are the perfect example. In many of them, you are always the main character, no matter how many other players are in the game. Everyone is the hero, and everyone completes the story at their own pace. You just

Realistically I agree with you. And I would not forgive Bethesda for adding multiplayer at the sacrifice of the singleplayer component, but I don't understand how you could hate on an additional playmode, assuming it doesn't affect your sacred singleplayer in any way.Clearly I want my cake and I want to eat it too,

There is such a thing as playing games with people who aren't assholes... I dunno, like... friends maybe?

I would call myself a somewhat modern gamer (at least in comparison to yourself), and I agree that I'd rather play a rich singleplayer game than a poor single player + good multiplayer game.

Thanks for giving me a reason to post this screenshot from ages ago.

ABC also recommends you get the salesman to name the price first before making your offer. This helps you gauge where they're coming from and makes it easier to counter-offer.

I guess that's where we disagree then. To me, games are not just stories you are walking through (although later Zeldas are testament to how well that can be done). If I wanted a story I'd read a book or watch a movie. On a very fundamental level I equate games with challenge. Playing a game with no challenge is like

Clearly we come at statistics from two very different viewpoints. It's all math to me, whereas you are factoring in perception and psychology.

OoT was the first Zelda I played, and I loved it, as I did TP. I still agree with most of this article.

I feel that the necessary extra work in 3D modeling and the assumption that copy-pasta'd models and areas are turn-offs to modern gamers is an (if not THE) inherent problem in 3D games which limits the ability of developers to create open worlds that have the same wondrous expanse as those found in 2D games.

There's a difference between difficulty and challenge, which both you and the author are conflating, if only in grammar. Taking a boss fight and giving the boss more health is making the fight more difficult, but doesn't necessarily add anything. Giving the boss more strategies that require the player to change up his

Thank you EUAN for being the rare voice of reason in the hormone-filled sea of Kotaku.

I don't think risking the drive to work is a fair comparison. I go to work because I need a paycheck to live. On the other hand, these companies have people whose sole job it is to minimize financial risk. As I've gathered, investors don't like risk. The fact that we are naturally a risk-taking species doesn't change

You have to admit the song really lends itself to Eagles-style guitar.

In my RSS reader this showed up as "Unlock Your Car From the Outside With A...", and I facepalmed over the inevitable downfall of Lifehacker as my brain immediately finished the sentence with "Tennis Ball".

Those bouncy chairs look like pure essence of stimulus injected directly to the heart. When I was a kid we had to pretend we saw colors in the fireplace to have something interesting to do.

I've always wondered how companies like this factor risk into their equation. Even if you ignore the obvious humanitarian concerns, a company could still potentially face a devastating loss in worst case scenario.

Not sure if troll or just insane.

Anyone saying "duh" didn't read the article. Clearly, it was mis-titled, but the tip about separating by wax paper is the key. I would have recommended "Separate Bacon with Wax Paper Before Freezing for More Convenient Usage" or some such.