Microsoft responds (Update) - Halo: Reach Doesn’t Run Very Well On Xbox One

[Ganoncrotch]

asqarkabab said:

Madword said:

asqarkabab said:

Madword said:

Lol really? I guess you havent been gaming for very long then, because I've made some very bad purchases over the years, and TLOU wasnt one of them.

How about:

 

• Alients Colonial Marines
• Spore
• Big Rigs (hah, i didnt buy this one, but thought I would throw it in ;)
• Duke Nukem Forever
• Elite Frontier - required you to send off for a patch disk in the post to make it work properly

 

 

No  youre guess is completely wrong lol

i play since my 5 th birthday 

Its a good game but not that great for that many praises it got post launch 

You may have been playing games since your first birthday, that doesnt make you old... you could only be 10 years old ;)

So... hold on a minute.... You had never purchased TLOU before, never played it until the PS4 remaster?

Yeah i never purchased tlou on the ps3 and wanted to plau this game that was praised as the best  game ever on the ps4 but aftet i played it i regretted my purchase 

Ok sounds more like you have a problem with consoles than anything.

Paying for online... thats nothing to do with developers, thats a Sony/MS thing.But this has nothing to do with remasters. I agree why Sony did this, they saw that MS made a lot of money last gen on this, and Sony having lost lots of money, thought we can hit MS in the pocket and make some money. Also it's not like you only get access to online, you also get to play games they give you every month. Yes I would prefer free multiplayer, but I can understand the cost of a server farm.

Remasters - as we already discussed, there is nothing wrong with remasters. Are you telling me you've never purchased a remaster or never wanted an older game brought back? I mean I just purchased HomeWorld remaster on the steam sale.... I had *never* played it. Just because you might have, doesnt mean that others hadnt. You are thinking about yourself and not other gamers.

Overpriced DLCS - some are, some are not. That is upto individual developers. Some are good DLCs and some are not.... this has nothing to do with Remasters though. Games are bloody expensive to make, and though some DLC is absolute crap, some is well worth the cash, for example the up coming Dying Light Expansion sounds like a good deal.

So I dont really know what you are getting at, as this hasnt got anything to do with Remasters or Halo running backwards compatibilty. If it runs badly in backwards compatibility, I would rather have a remaster running at 30FPS than going into the teens. Now one thing to remember here is that *You* do not need to buy anything that is for sale, you can choose to ignore it and play on a different platform or play other games.

Thank you sir !

So much this ^^

asqarkabab said:

Its a good game but not that great for that many praises it got post launch

So it's not the remaster the problem, it's just the game itself that didn't meet your expectation.

 

 

Yeah its the game itself 

There are games that deserve more the remaster and remake treatement than tlou

For example resident evil remake i have all the versions on gc wii and pc and the original on the ps1 and i didnt regret my purchase because i love this game and it brings back good memories on this game

When the game has value and is great in my opinion and my gaming friends i buy it 

I give no sh#t on what the gaming press says

I will buy a crash bandicoot and spyro remake in a heart beat

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

So... you're fine with remasters, even tho you told someone earlier in the thread here that he was throwing his money in the bin for buying remasters he wanted? http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=7687223 I'm so confused by the train of thought I think I'll just see if I can hop off at the next station and get a bus instead :o maybe a remasted bus, now running in 1080p and 60fps!