ethomaz said:
Yes IMO. |
Any arguments for this? The game looks really fun to play. If you have an opinion, you can go into detail.

ethomaz said:
Yes IMO. |
Any arguments for this? The game looks really fun to play. If you have an opinion, you can go into detail.

badgenome said:
$ure they were. And Arkham Origins is getting PS3 exclusive skins because so many Playstation fans grew up watching the 1960's TV series. |
Dear Badge, why do you think I use the quotation marks? 
| o_O.Q said: is he saying that the game had to be scaled back for the more powerful console? anyways its good that ms is funding it for them, the presentation was very impressive |
he said it was scale back because it was unfun with too many zombies
"The developer also had to scale back the amount of zombies it had on screen due to the game 'being completely unfun to play' such is the number it can now get on screen."
| NiKKoM said: Well.. I was totally expecting first: Capcom: "Deep Down couldn't have been achieved without Sony" unless Deep Down is also for X1 |
I think Sony is helping them technically (and not with money) in achieving that kind of graphic fidelity; if Capcom manages somehow port the engine the the XBO, then yes it will be also available for it.
badgenome said:
Seems like you are confusing the best selling SKU with the best selling game. |
When it come down to basic numbers the best selling SKU is the best selling game Dead Rising sold 2 million copies no other SKU came even close.
| Chris Hu said: When it come down to basic numbers the best selling SKU is the best selling game Dead Rising sold 2 million copies no other SKU came even close. |
When it comes down to basic economics you can produce additional SKUs much more cheaply than you can a whole new game. So that's not really how it works.
Heavenly_King said:
I think Sony is helping them technically (and not with money) in achieving that kind of graphic fidelity; if Capcom manages somehow port the engine the the XBO, then yes it will be also available for it. |
What? So Sony can help technically and MS can't? Really? You can't be serious.

|
walsufnir said: Any arguments for this? The game looks really fun to play. If you have an opinion, you can go into detail. |
DR for me always had potential to be a great game but it always ends close to a bad game... I didn't like the story (it is really bad), the SurvivorAI is retarded, weapon durability is not good, the overall clock is a bad ideia, and killing zombies after some time gets boring.
It's personal... I just don't like the game but I can see why some guys loved it
.
Anyway DR3 seem to change everything you played in previous games... so who knows if now Capcom is doing a great game?
ethomaz said:
DR for me always had potential to be a great game but it always ends close to a bad game... I didn't like the story (it is really bad), the SurvivorAI is retarded, weapon durability is not good, the overall clock is a bad ideia, and killing zombies after some time gets boring. It's personal... I just don't like the game but I can see why some guys loved it Anyway DR3 seem to change everything you played in previous games... so who knows if now Capcom is doing a great game? |
One thing I think I heard "no loading-times"! I think the most fun is just to slaughter zombies :D

badgenome said:
When it comes down to basic economics you can produce additional SKUs much more cheaply than you can a whole new game. So that's not really how it works. |
I'm sure that MS also paid a good chunck for the development for the first game so its still the most profitable game in the series.