fzdw11

Tornado has hit the nail on the head here, IMO, and I don't agree with him often. The Xbox One just doesn't seem right, and I will happily take the $60 I'm paying MS right now for XBox Live and give that to Sony for PS+. It's just the logical step. There are very few things that I feel MS has gotten right since they've announced the One. Having one Gold membership per box, and allowing up to 10 family members on said box to use its features? That is great. But that is about it. Titanfall? Coming to the 360 and PC. *shrug* The only real game that is going to make me sad about not getting a One is Halo 5. And unless 343 does something amazing with it, I don't plan on getting a One for just one game.

I'm gonna break this down with some logical thinking. Activision is producing the game. They ultimately will say when the game needs to be released. That being said, late in the year is when they release their annual CoD game, and they are not going to want two games competing against each other. With that in mind, I think a spring release is more likely. April or May would be my guess. But again, just logical thinking, and not all game companies, especially Activision, always think logically.

Coincidence? Unintentional? While I doubt it, and should hope that they would have seen it and had it changed it if was not Halo 5, we should just wait for confirmation. Though I fully believe it will be, for the fact that MS is going to want to get their flagship game out on the new system as soon as possible. They don't want another repeat of Bungie with Halo 3, releasing the game 2 years after the 360 came out.

Who doesn't? But seriously, watched all of these this morning. Thanks for posting them adam, awesome job as usual.

I have to agree with RSR, the XBox One seems... wrong. That is the best way to describe it. Technically speaking, on paper it looks like a great system. Almost on par with the PS4. The same thing could also be said about the 360. Not quite as powerful as the PS3, but almost, not enough to make a huge difference as far as graphics and gameplay are concerned, and I'm going to take a bet that the One will do the same. I absolutely loved the 360. It was the best purchase I made, and thankfully I only had to ever get 2 in the 7 years that I've owned one. When I started getting that itch for a new console, rumors were swirling around. A lot of them seemed outrageously wrong, some too good to be true. In the end, I was excited for what Microsoft should have brought to the table. Instead, we get the One. A box that claims to do all of these great things, and yet it wasn't right. I honestly could care less about the TV, unless they built the machine as a set-top box itself to eliminate the one I have to rent from my cable company. But no, they are not doing that, I still need that box. The Kinect, while fun at times, is a novelty item that should not be required to use the system. Yes, this is a way to get publishers to make use of its capabilities, but I don't think it was a smart move. None of the "exclusives" really caught my attention, except for Titanfall. And guess what? It's coming out to the 360 as well, and the PC. Don't need a One for that. Destiny, while not an exclusive, it will also be available on the 360, PS3 & PS4. Don't really need a One for that, either. And Watch Dogs? Not an exclusive, but available on the 360, PS3 & PS4. Don't need a One. You see where I'm going with this? AC4: Black Flag isn't an exclusive to the One, and is going to be available on current systems. Same with CoD: Ghosts, if you are really interested in it. Then we come to Halo 5 and now we have the exception. But do I really want to purchase a console for the ability to continue the Halo series? I dunno. Halo 4, while okay, wasn't great. Do I really want to let the chief go? Not really. But until they take down the 360 servers, I can always go back to it on that console. As for possibly seeing Halo 5 on PC? Chances are if that does happen, you better have Windows 8. -.- Now to respond to Caboose... Caboose.... *shakes head* 1. Just because you own an XBox doesn't mean you need to be faithful to MS. I owned a PS1 & a PS2, yet I don't own a PS3. Why? Because I felt they went the wrong direction. Just like MS is going now. 2. One game shouldn't be enough to keep you with a system. I know you mentioned others later one, but I'll get to that. 3. The price better drop. Plain and simple. I don't feel it is worth that price tag at all. 4. The voice commands are okay, but you live in the UK, you're not going to really have access to the TV functions as much as somebody in the US, if at all. In fact, I believe they only have deals in place with US TV providors. 5. The design is entirely personal choice. *shrug* Nothing bad to say about it, nothing really good, either, though. 6. Eh, if that is your thing so be it. 7. I dunno about this. While that has always been the case, with Sony now charging for online play, PSN might turn out to be better, only time will tell. I do like some of the things MS is doing, though, like eliminating having to have seperate Gold accounts on the same XBox. 8. The controller I can't argue with. I love the XBox controller, it just feels better in my hand compared to the PS controllers. But all the power to you. If you honestly want the One, nobody should stop you from getting it, that is your right as a consumer. All we can do is give reasons why we wouldn't purchase it.

I dunno about D-38 Boss, haven't talked to him enough, but I can already tell I like you. Entirely based on your profile pic, mind you. Have a late welcome to the site, and enjoy your time here. Edit: Oh and you just made my day again, once I actually looked at your profile and saw the background. Bravo.

I have to agree with Smokin here. I mean seriously, purchasing a console for 1 game is kinda ridiculous. Besides that, the only other game they showed that really caught my attention was Titanfall, and that is coming for the 360 and the PC as well. Plus Bungie is creating Destiny, again, also coming to the 360. The XBox One just doesn't really do it for me. We'll see as it gets closer to release if they decide to change things up a bit, but with a $500 price tag in the US, it seems... meh at best.

Of course it's familiar, Bungie is creating it, are they not, and it has been in the works since at least ODST.

Firstly, a game is not meant to be realistic. A game is meant to be enjoyed for fun. Not because something you do in game is real, looks real, or feels real. If you want to experience those things, then try going out and doing them. As for reloading an M-16 the same way every time, it's for the simplification of the matter. It's easier to code and render 1 reload sequence for 35 weapons than it is to code 3 reload sequences for 35 weapons. Just common sense. How often would you be running through a combat zone with your gun actually at your hip? Yes, it is called "hip-fire", but to actually think that is where your character is holding his weapon is ridiculous. He's holding it like he would normally be holding it, and it is simply called "hip-fire" because you are not aiming down the sites, just pulling the trigger and firing in a general direction, which is why it is way less accurate. As for the whole "carrying weapons from 8 - 100 pounds" - that comes back to the first point I made. A game is meant to be fun, not realistic. Sure, in real life a guy isn't going to hold his weapon there for as long as he does, but again, a game isn't real life. I decided to combine all of these, since they are fairly short responses. Weapon swapping is the way it is because if they made it more realistic, people wouldn't want to play the game. Instead of a 2 second weapon swap, it now takes 15 - 20 seconds, that leads to death in a game, especially a game like CoD or Battlefield. I know I wouldn't play a game that implemented this. Same goes for melee. If I use my knife once and then lose it, that would suck pretty hardcore. And as for my conclusion, games are not meant to be realistic. Therefore, they are doing exactly what they were designed to do/be. They were meant for fun and escaping the real world for a bit, not to try and imitate it.

I do plan on buying Destiny, though I'm not sure which console I will get it for. There are still a lot of questions to be answered, about the consoles and the games. Currently I'm leaning towards the 360, if they have a split-screen cause my wife would enjoy playing as well, and I really don't want to have to purchase 2 copies of the game and another 360 just so we can play together (come on Bungie!). If not, then I'm not entirely sure which direction I am going to take. I'm hoping that they're going to announce a PC version as well, and if they do and don't have split screen on the 360/One/PS4, then I'd definitely go PC. But as it stands, I cannot vote in your poll because I don't have an answer to the second question. But to answer the first question, yes, you should buy Destiny.

Because Bungie is working with Activision on this, and we all know how Activision can be at times. :/ I hope you are right, and I do plan on getting it either at release or shortly thereafter. It's actually one of the few games I'm looking forward too, to be honest, and I'm not terribly big on MMO's. But, a FPSMMO? That's something that could be interesting.

Ah, such a good day.. and the week before we ended the Eagles win streak too.

You know, I started reading your post and I got to the Steelers part and I grinned a little inside, knowing the discussions we've had about football. But that's not the point of this thread, the point is congratulating you on being MoM. Awesome job, well done, bravo. Definitely worthy of being MoM.

I wouldn't call them the same. They are similar, for sure, but not the same. In benchmarks, the 660 wins when comparing the reference cards, for sure. I'm not so sure that will be the case when you compare these two specific cards, though. Tom's Hardware compares the GTX 660 to the HD7870, and they say the 7850 is on par with a GTX 650 Ti Boost. *shrug* Just some food for thought. GSD showed me this site when I was looking at two different cards, definitely worth a look. http://www.hwcompare.com/13303/geforce-gtx-660-vs-radeon-hd-7850/ Again, that site compares the reference cards, the two you have selected have been adjusted by their respective manufacturers, so the numbers will be different. Here's the real question, with the GTX 660 you get Metro: Last Light. With the HD 7850 you get Bioshock: Infinite, Tomb Raider, and Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon. Did any of those games interest you in the least? If so, go with whichever one gives you what you want.

Right out of the box, yes I can fully agree that ATI's run louder than their nVidia counterparts, that would probably be the only downside to my recent purchase, but it is not enough for me to really complain about. Now, back to Equinoxe. Like Twin said, depending on your overall build, you may be better off going with a one over the other. Also, what are you planning on doing with this PC? Gaming? Editing? A combination of both? P.S. Twin, it's good to see your name back here.

Ha! I can post on forums, I think! At least it appears I can, so we'll see. Stupid work computer not showing the site properly... Anyway! Of those two I would choose the MSI HD7850. However, if you can swing it, I'd grab this card: http://www.amazon.com/Sapphire-Radeon-PCI-Express-Graphics-11199-20-20G/dp/B00AWKYB1M/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1369842373&sr=1-1&keywords=radeon+hd+7870XT Reasoning is, the 7870XT editions use a slighly cut down Tahiti GPU which is what is used in the 79xx series cards, and that Sapphire one in particular is on par with a HD7950 for a bit less. Here's a review of it: http://www.techradar.com/us/reviews/pc-mac/pc-components/graphics-cards/sapphire-radeon-hd-7870-xt-1130535/review With the MSI that you picked, or the Sapphire that I linked to, you do get the Never Settle bundle, which comes with Bioshock Infinite and the new Tomb Raider, both of which I really enjoyed. Haven't played FC3: Blood Dragon yet, though it is something I'm going to check out eventually. When I was searching last month, I decided to go with a Gigabyte HD7970, but that was just me, and I could justify the cost, and I haven't regretted it in the least. What are some of the other specs of your PC, because that could play a factor as well.

But that is all determined based on the specs of the computer. I don't have any lag what-so-ever on my PC, average 57 FPS on Bioshock Infinite, 77 on Tomb Raider, and 62 on Crysis 3. I rarely see frame rate drops in MP, and almost never see them in single player, and that is playing with everything maxed out. As far as your XBox skills nearly doubling your PC skills, that's just a matter of giving the Xbox more time. My XBox skills far outweigh my PC skills as well, but that's because I played it a ton more than the PC. Now that I actually have a decent PC, I can see my skills slowly starting to catch up, and I absolutely see the benefits of using a keyboard & mouse as opposed to a controller.

MS threw a ton of money at Halo 4 and that trilogy is planned out for the next decade as well. :/ While I like Halo 4, I think it could have been a lot better, and it doesn't give me much confidence moving forward. So, in essence, just because somebody has a plan and a boat load of money doesn't mean they will end up producing something good. My hope is that Bungie makes a great game, and I do plan on getting it at release, or shortly thereafter, but that doesn't mean the thing will be the best game ever.

Reach armor by far. Halo 4's just looks like generic sci-fi crap, and it doesn't seem to fit the Halo universe.

Yep, and the fact that what happens in the game is suppose to help influence the show as well is kind of an intriguing idea.

I haven't played it yet, but I'm curious about it as well. It looks fairly decent, so I would like a rundown as well.

Actually, to be fair, the fact that Halo 4 is #5 on XBL is quite an impressive feat, considering how many "Tens of Thousands of Lost Gamers" are not playing the game. :/ What people are failing to realize is for every gamer that decides he doesn't want to play Halo 4 and moves on to another game, somebody new is picking up the game. In the eyes of the development team and the producers, what makes a game "good"? The fact that it has a loyal fan base, or the fact that they made millions? Is it a huge player population, or just the sales? These types of threads pop up all the time, everybody claiming the same thing, that they're speaking for the community. While the complain threads far outweigh the praise threads, that is just the nature of people themselves. People are more likely to go on the internet to complain than they are to go on and praise, simply because those who like the game are actually playing it instead of talking about it on the internet. I understand why people don't enjoy Halo 4. It was a giant step away from what Halo has always been. To be fair, with all of the hate that Reach received, people would have thought that 343 would take it to heart when developing Halo 4, but that obviously was not the case. I personally enjoyed Reach, and I enjoy Halo 4. Maybe not as much as I enjoyed Halo 3, but I enjoy it none the less. Does this make me any less of a fan than somebody who thinks Halo 4 is crap? No, it doesn't. It just shows that everybody has a different opinion. I posed this question in another thread, but I don't believe I ever got a response directly too it. What would show 343 what the community wants more, people complaining on the internet or people taking action? Right now, all we are getting is people complaining on the internet. The OP claims that people are still playing CoD. Is that the way to get the developer of Halo to change it back into what it once was, or is that a misguided sign to them that a CoD type game is what the community wants? If people really wanted to make a statement, it is better done not in an online forum, but within the games themselves. If all of these people want a game that plays and feels more like Halo 3, then why not show the developer this by staging an entire weekend or an entire week or longer, where all of those who are unhappy with Halo 4 actually go and fill the servers of Halo 3? Personally, a statement of that sorts is more likely to catch the eye of 343 than anything that is being ranted about in a forum.

:/ That is quite a unique situation... everything is still unlocked, but it defaults your armor and removes campaign progress. I honestly don't have a clue, and this is the first time I've seen somebody having this particular issue.

Then completely ignore my previous post, as that is not the issue. Could just be that your connection is getting slowed down by something, therefore taking a bit of time to actually get all of your info from the servers. How long does it usually stay like that?

Sounds like you are being thrown into the fallback hopper. This usually happens when your ISP is having a difficult time connecting to the actual 343 hoppers, or when there are issues with the 343 hoppers. It is a temporary thing and is only suppose to last about 10 minutes before the game automatically attempts to reconnect you to the actual game hoppers. In the shoutbox you said this has happened what, 3 times now? Over the past week? Month? 3 days? And since it has happened 3 times, how long has it generally lasted before everything has corrected itself?