By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Assassin's Creed III reviews in - no GOTY material here

S.T.A.G.E. on 29 October 2012
forevercloud3000 said:
Nsanity said:
forevercloud3000 said:
Proclus said:
I find it slightly odd how it seems to be totally ok for the PS3 versions to have several extra missions, and let us be honest, we all know why.

But when... that other company does it, its suddenly an outragous and filthy tactic...

Anyways, personally don't care about that, OT: Final meta: 90-92 I think.


Its ok for PS3 versions to come with more stuff because the PS3 has more disc capacity to fit more stuff on it, which Sony encourages devs to take advantage of, hence the reason they used BluRay in the first place. One of the most aggrevating things about this gen, when many PS3 owners heard that BR had such a large capacity to fit larger games, we expected to get just that. Instead we get games that get capped due to trying to meet requirements of the "lowest denomonator"  consoles.

MS actively works against the possibility of bigger games. They charge game devs more for using extra discs, and they also have contractual road blocks to stop devs from giving PS3 exclusive content. So yea, when devs actually take advantage of what is actually available to them it does make us gamers happy.

Sony paid for the exclusive content. Plain and simple.


I don't think they did. Sony stated some time ago that they do not pay for exclusivity or exclusive content like MS does. People started to believe they must have gone back on their word due to a few games giving exclusive stuff but  I beg to differ. Sony could never win a bidding war with MS, hense the reason they want to stick to their guns and not attempt it. The second they start, it will become common place for all . I do think they are giving these devs some kind of incentive to give them special treatment. I did hear that Devs make more money on every PS3 game sold in comparison to NIN and MS, maybe that is it, plus the free advertising during trade shows. If that is "buying them off" than i guess they employ different but similar tactics. Yet they will never "loan" a company 20million just to get exclusive stuff, it just goes against there core company beliefs. This is possibly why they just don't get nearly as many deals as MS does for exclusive content.


Can I see the link to this? I know Sony said that one time that they werent paying for the exclusivity of certain Japanese titles, but I don't know about the west.



Around the Network
loy310 on 29 October 2012
VicViper said:
I think based on reviews alone, this game will be GOTY.

It's either it or Halo 4

Nah, GOTY belongs to PSASBR.



d21lewis on 29 October 2012

Didn't we decide a long time ago that Microsoft refuses to allow games on the Xbox 360 if the PS3 version has more content? This whole "extra levels" crap is just something Activision made up because they know nobody will play both.



S.T.A.G.E. on 30 October 2012

I already have my AC copy.



S.T.A.G.E. on 30 October 2012

The base controls are still fundamentaly the same with slight changes, Ubisoft made it look like they drastically changed the controls.



Around the Network
Kresnik on 30 October 2012

Wow, guys. Sony have obviously paid for this exclusive content, I don't think there's anything to argue about it. Ubisoft certainly aren't doing it out of the goodness of their hearts...

... and it's crap.

Honestly, it's one thing making an exclusive - I mean, paying for it all the way through development, internal studio or external studio contracted. I encourage the big 3 to do that.

Then it's another thing 'buying' exclusivity. Unsure how I feel about this. Depends how much they assisted development either practically or financially (i.e. Demon's Souls; Journey - thumbs up) or not (Metal Gear Solid 4, questionable).

And then there's buying exclusive DLC or timed exclusivity. Honestly, a plague on the industry, I'm looking at you Call of Duty, Skyrim and now apparently AC3. Sony are responsible for it way back since last gen, but Microsoft are the biggest offenders at the moment.

Generally it doesn't bother me since I don't particularly buy any of these big-name games anyway and if I do, it's certainly not at launch (or new, ha) It's just the principle of the thing. Throwing money at the developers not to make extra content, but simply to keep extra content from the other side. Uff.



Find my website here

mantlepiecek on 30 October 2012

It's upto the gamers if they feel bad about it, they say something about it. I don't think xbox gamers are losing out on anything special anyway by not having access to the exclusive DLC on PS3.



Yonyx on 30 October 2012

There is no new reviews yet??



VicViper on 30 October 2012
Yonyx said:
There is no new reviews yet??


In two hours the embargo ends.



crissindahouse on 30 October 2012

those review embargos are getting more and more ridiciulous, now we don't even get reviews when the games are already released...even here in europe where the shopping time is almost over lol

i mean, as later as bigger the chance is that magazines will test the day one patch but it's not as if everyone is online with the console so there will be many playing the game without the patch.