surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
and then there was a news story every day bitching about Mass Effect 3 because there is literally no other games being developed or released in the future
Hey, Jim, this is the second time you talked about the multiplayer being shoehorned in ME3. Have you had a hands-on with it to call it that? If so, will you share your impressions with us? If not, what make you believe it will be bad?
@DinnertimeNinja
"$10 for the use of my limbs sounds like a pretty good deal, really."
This + your avatar = hilarity.
"$10 for the use of my limbs sounds like a pretty good deal, really."
This + your avatar = hilarity.
Jim Sterling, you waste your talent being a game reviewer... Your calling is obviously to be an artist.
Your style reminds me of a great man, Edward Laertsky, he's a musician mostly and a very smart man, much like yourself, but sometimes he draws very inspiring paintings. Here are some of my favorites:
^The gift of staying optimistic^
^Cause of president's death^
^Abortion^
^The gift of staying optimistic^
^Cause of president's death^
^Abortion^
That picture is really turning me on. Is it the fact that both her arms and legs are missing or is it the blood? I'm not sure!? Quick someone help.
Should we really slag off ME3's multiplayer until we have actually played it? To quote Adam Jensen " I never asked for this", but that doesn't mean it has to be bad (although the on-line pass is admittedly shit). Assassin's Creeds multiplayer was good fun and everybody thought that was going to be a bad idea.
IT honestly should not come as a surprise to anyone that Mass Effect 3 has an online pass. Dragon Age and Mass Effect 2 are the games that practically invented the $10-15 online pass
@jmoschmo
This isn't about being surprised or not. Just because we should have expected it doesn't make it acceptable.
This isn't about being surprised or not. Just because we should have expected it doesn't make it acceptable.
Looks like FemShep has been missing a pelvis since birth. That or in the future our legs are attached to out stomachs. I'm hoping for the latter.
Jim Jim Jim, i loved you so much when i started coming to Dtoid. But now, you only dissapoint me. Tsc tsc tsc...
Any game with any sort of online pass = Buy used or rent
Don't support anti-consumer practices. Don't be fooled into thinking the used market is hurting the industry in any way. Don't allow yourself to be lied to and manipulated.
Don't support anti-consumer practices. Don't be fooled into thinking the used market is hurting the industry in any way. Don't allow yourself to be lied to and manipulated.
Except that's an outright fabrication based on nothing. You pay $60 and you get the full game. Period, end of story. You buy used, you pay $10 and get access to optional things that new buyers get standard. Keyword being OPTIONAL, like the multiplayer. Any DLC released is optional and not required to get the full story.
Jim you are really going off the deep end about online passes and DLC lately. Buying a game new lets you put in a one time code ONE TIME that takes a few extra seconds (minutes if you're terrible at putting in letters on the stupid system they have) and that's it, you have content. If you buy used, you're not being dealt a shit hand from a greedy developer. They get $0 from a used sale. You don't even have to give them $10 for the content, it's optional. So if you buy a used game at $30 and spend the $10, guess what? You're still saving $20 off a new game price. This isn't exactly quantum mechanics. Why knock a company for trying to keep profits from a game they make instead of giving it over to Gamestop or Best Buy or whoever? EA paid to make the game, paid to print the discs and paid to ship it to retailers. They should get a chunk of it, even if it's second hand. Why NOT? What's your argument there?
And don't compare it to a car or a house or some stupid shit like that, it's not even close to the same. A game doesn't lose quality after it's been played for a year like a car. It also doesn't go up or down in value according to outside variables like a house. Plus, you don't buy a used car and have to pay Ford for an air conditioner because it locks it down for used car sales.
Jim you are really going off the deep end about online passes and DLC lately. Buying a game new lets you put in a one time code ONE TIME that takes a few extra seconds (minutes if you're terrible at putting in letters on the stupid system they have) and that's it, you have content. If you buy used, you're not being dealt a shit hand from a greedy developer. They get $0 from a used sale. You don't even have to give them $10 for the content, it's optional. So if you buy a used game at $30 and spend the $10, guess what? You're still saving $20 off a new game price. This isn't exactly quantum mechanics. Why knock a company for trying to keep profits from a game they make instead of giving it over to Gamestop or Best Buy or whoever? EA paid to make the game, paid to print the discs and paid to ship it to retailers. They should get a chunk of it, even if it's second hand. Why NOT? What's your argument there?
And don't compare it to a car or a house or some stupid shit like that, it's not even close to the same. A game doesn't lose quality after it's been played for a year like a car. It also doesn't go up or down in value according to outside variables like a house. Plus, you don't buy a used car and have to pay Ford for an air conditioner because it locks it down for used car sales.
@jargy1: your last point seems to go against your main argument. It's true, you don't buy a used car and then pay Ford (the makers of said car) for an optional feature, in the same way you shouldn't buy a used game and then pay EA (that makers of said game) for an optional feature.
To be honest, I don't mind online passes nearly as much as Jim does, but your argument there is entirely counter-productive.
To be honest, I don't mind online passes nearly as much as Jim does, but your argument there is entirely counter-productive.
honestly the multiplayer doesnt seem shoehorned at all, they got different bioware location to work on it so it doesnt take away from the single player. it actually adds a lot to the single player with "galactic readiness" and being able to costumize my own asari vangaurd just sounds awesome. Mass Effect 2 had an online pass and no one cared so saying they added multiplayer just to add an online pass is a bit of a stretch. Im buying this game new anyway so the online pass barely affects me other than having to enter a code to unlock it.
@ManWithNoName:
ME3 could have the greatest multiplayer in the world, and Jim would still slag it. It isn't adding multiplayer, it is that adding online multiplayer means that they can add an Online Pass.
Jim is obsessed with the idea that Online Passes are the purest form of evil in existence, an assault on the ability to buy and sell used games, and that they will mug him in an alley and leave his corpse for the rats to gnaw upon. As such, he will rabidly attack games that use them and continue to spread disinformation about them until he finds some new thing to rage against.
ME3 could have the greatest multiplayer in the world, and Jim would still slag it. It isn't adding multiplayer, it is that adding online multiplayer means that they can add an Online Pass.
Jim is obsessed with the idea that Online Passes are the purest form of evil in existence, an assault on the ability to buy and sell used games, and that they will mug him in an alley and leave his corpse for the rats to gnaw upon. As such, he will rabidly attack games that use them and continue to spread disinformation about them until he finds some new thing to rage against.
@Jargy1
Exactly. The only people who should be angered should be electronic retail employees and their shareholders. The average gamer is still paying the same price as they would for any other game.
@ Darren Nakamura
I think he means that if you want a new air conditioner in your car, it's an optional feature. So if you buy a used car, nobody is forcing you to buy the air conditioner (presumably purchased from the manufacturer/dealership).
I think the main reason Jim is mad is because he has to pay to review video games all the time, and this would force him to buy new, driving his costs for game reviews up slightly.
This isn't anticonsumerism because people who buy used games are not consumers to the game developers.
Exactly. The only people who should be angered should be electronic retail employees and their shareholders. The average gamer is still paying the same price as they would for any other game.
@ Darren Nakamura
I think he means that if you want a new air conditioner in your car, it's an optional feature. So if you buy a used car, nobody is forcing you to buy the air conditioner (presumably purchased from the manufacturer/dealership).
I think the main reason Jim is mad is because he has to pay to review video games all the time, and this would force him to buy new, driving his costs for game reviews up slightly.
This isn't anticonsumerism because people who buy used games are not consumers to the game developers.
Bravo Jim.
This is indeed an incredible work of art.
If this were a painting it would hang over my fireplace.
I would gaze apon it while wearing a red smoking jacket, swirling a glass of wine while pondering the great mystery...
Why the fuck doesent this lady want her arms back?!?
This is indeed an incredible work of art.
If this were a painting it would hang over my fireplace.
I would gaze apon it while wearing a red smoking jacket, swirling a glass of wine while pondering the great mystery...
Why the fuck doesent this lady want her arms back?!?
If it's on the disc, it's not "optional". It's part of the game. I expect to be allowed to access all of the content that's on the disc when I purchase the disc, new or used. Trading in a game does not magically remove the multiplayer content from the disc. All this is doing is making consumers jump through hoops and pay extra money for something that should be provided with the original product they already paid for.
And yes, they are paying extra - if the person could afford to pay $60, they would buy new. There's a reason they go for used - because it's cheaper. These people shouldn't be punished just because they are buying a second-hand copy WHICH IS COMPLETELY LEGAL, BY THE WAY by putting a lock on the content they have rightfully purchased.
And yes, they are paying extra - if the person could afford to pay $60, they would buy new. There's a reason they go for used - because it's cheaper. These people shouldn't be punished just because they are buying a second-hand copy WHICH IS COMPLETELY LEGAL, BY THE WAY by putting a lock on the content they have rightfully purchased.
follow
