Nov 4th 2011 3:42PM Exactly the reason I am going to be scanning for about a month as the price stabilizes, after that happens. . Then we can talk.
Nov 4th 2011 3:37PM This is why I love Nintendo. Thinking outside of the box is what they do best. As long as they keep their prices low and have that same imagination, I don't think they will fail. I think now what matters is properly implementing their ideas.
Nov 4th 2011 3:33PM This could turn out amazing or horrible. One of the key problems with doing the act which they are about to attempt is the negligence from the studio to imagine the game in move format. I don't know if this is the way to go about changing that, but if it works it might set a new precedent. I don't know of this happening before, and movies from games have almost universally turned out horrible. Maybe this will be what changes that. We will see.
Nov 4th 2011 3:29PM They should learn their lesson, throw out a half-assed singleplayer if it isn't any good. They really need to focus on releasing a game with less bugs as well. My final point is that if a map is going to support a certain number of players it has to be made with that in mind. What made Battlefield so great is the huge maps, this is particularly important when their competitor has much smaller maps, and thus the players want something different. We don't need now three companies making CoD. Stand out.
Nov 4th 2011 3:26PM This is a smart move by Nintendo. They need to focus more and more on bringing capabilities that their new smartphone competitors can't replicate.
Nov 4th 2011 3:25PM Definitely should have been F2P from the start. This game is specifically marketed to children who don't want to pay for these things, or whose parents do see it as worth it. Not to mention the huge amount of wasted potential. Considering the way Lego blocks work, this game could have had a unique Minecraft-esque destructible environment.
Nov 4th 2011 3:22PM I wouldn't usually agree with decisions made by the people behind CoD. But, for once I think this is the right move. I'd much rather have a service implemented correctly than coming out wrong. If it doesn't work, don't release it. The PC is quite insecure in this area, and yes there is VAC and such, but if their system is not up to the level, let them work on it. Now if only they could apply this to their bug testing on PC releases, which are from what I know a big mess in that area.
Mar 4th 2010 8:25AM I would like to win this, I even know what is in the box.