Yep, games can be more expensive, while some games can be cheaper.

Reskins like FIFA can be cheaper, while RDR2 like games can be 100.

Can’t wait for this 5 hour long QTE game that I can watch on youtube.

I’m just not jumping on the show right away.  I will get to it eventually, jeez, chill out Netflix.

There’s a lot of misconception behind AI art. You don’t just type some words into AI and get a “GOOD” finished product. You get a base to work off of, and still requires plenty of artist time and work to complete it.

With that said, AI does help the artist a lot to generate a lot of “drafts” for the client to see so…

“BS double-standard.” No it isn’t. If sony bought COD, then that’s fine for gamers too, MS will have to come up with a competitor, which again is good for gamers.

“Partially due to offering a better product than XBox does”
PSN better than xbox live? Maybe, that’s opinion.

The accusation doesn’t add up right now.  Needs more evidence.  I going to err on the side of caution and not be quick to judge.

“Why is it only Sony is the one who has to develop a competitor?”

Because MS will buy COD. Life is not fair lol. I’m looking at things as they are, and not applying some unrealistic every developer is equal standard you somehow think matters. How is it fair that Sony PS has a much larger console market share? It’s not,…

Like I said, of all the microtransactions to shit on, this one is not the one.

Of all the microtransactions to complain about, this definitely isn’t it.  Again the game is free to play.

15 bucks for all the existing content on top of the missions, yes totally. And yes the game has quality.

Games are expensive to make. Honestly I think games should not get backlash for charging more. Quality and quantity of each game has gone up over 2 decades, but price of games have been stuck for a long time.

I never said MS bought COD to force a competitor in the market. I said MS buying COD is a good thing for gamers.

“you’d be open to M$ actually investing in creating a CoD competitor” I am open to MS investing in a CoD competitor. But we are not talking about that, we are talking about MS buying CoD, which will end up…

It is still a free to play game. They want to charge for some content, I don’t see what’s wrong with this.

Dude your logic is so wrong. Sony doesn’t have the money to buy them, MS does. Sony is also console leader by a huge margin. Also, if Sony does buy them and cuts MS out. Great! Maybe MS will finally make halo good again.  Would be a win for gamers if COD is off a platform.

“why don’t they make a CoD competitor to put in their walled garden? Sony doesn’t need to, they have CoD already.”

Precisely why removing CoD from one platform, SONY’s, is good for gamers, because they will have to make one.

Activision valuation is low right now, so MS wants to buy. Sony doesn’t want to make a competitor because they don’t want to take the risk.

MS buying COD would be a win for gamers.

So why don’t you want a COD competitor? Why don’t you want Sony to have a gaming console competitor as PS dominates the high-end console…

But the call by Dwan is still very insane. Queen pair to win is difficult to call at that size of a jackpot.

How does MS merging with Activision control the countries video game trade and industry? Sony PS is still miles ahead. If COD leaves PS entirely, which won’t happen for 10 years, PS should and will make a competitor.

It’s still a win for him.  If everything he got there was cheaper than 700, then the trade is worth it for him.