Azzanation said:
Games cost just as much in the 90s with alot lower standards. Its just as sad as when gamers point out 1 frame drops in tech analyst and claiming something is unplayable because it dropped 5 frames from 30 to 25fps. |
This isn't one of those cases though. Nobody's crucifying the game over a 1 frame per second dip. The reason its catching flak is because it is quite possibly one of the most technically atrocious games to see a console release since the N64 era. It is simply not acceptable to charge $50 for something so massively below par. This isn't 1994.








