Royal

I played this online a few times, but I play it offline a bunch. It's a great game, kinda like NBA Jam with cars and convicts.

Do any open beta players like this game? I played it for a few hours and quickly cancelled my preorder...

For some reason I feel like Alan Wake's going to be a disappointment. One of those good, but why the hell did it take so long to make this, kinda games.

Valve has another home run in this game.

Calling Valve poor developers....I guess there's a first for everything.

@tmac
I know there's no use in arguing with a troll, but to claim that L4D2 is badly designed is really off the mark. It's designed to be punish poor teamwork. If you go off by yourself, you'll be killed. If you stroll slowly though the level, you'll be killed. I've never played Demon's Souls so I can't comment on how its designed but any game that is difficult enough for me to feel like I've accomplished something after beating it is good in my book.

The game is really laggy on xbox live. Hopefully it gets patched (again) soon.

The framerate is a mess in some parts, gets pretty distracting (xbox version btw). The visuals are lackluster and I've hit a few bugs so far but nothing serious. As always with bioware the story is good and the world is engrossing, but the game's not perfect. 7/10.

"Perhaps they do have a credible source...but they didn't even so much as hint at one. Not even "sources say..." or "according to an inside source..." Nothing."

Apparently you've never read a newspaper, because a journalist doesn't reveal his sources, since then they wouldn't be sources very much longer.

"And I don't hold the WSJ up higher than anyone else if they're not going to cite their sources."

So you're saying some blog and the WSJ/NYT are equal unless the newspapers reveal their sources in the story? That's the most foolish statement I've heard in a long time.

"Ever heard of the New York Times? It's a fairly large newspaper. And they've had reported who have fabricated stories or failed to properly vet their sources in the past."

I'll assume you meant reporter instead of reported there.... Yes, The New York Times had Jayson Blair plagiarize parts of his stories and fabricate other sections. His stories were human interest stories, not claiming that a CEO of a major tech company had a major organ transplant. The implications of reporting such a story that wasn't vetted would be disastrous. The WSJ would be sued by Apple, the effect on the stock price could bring investigation, etc.

"Just because it's the WSJ doesn't mean it must be true."

It appears to have been true. What a shock! Maybe next time they'll concoct a big news story. When that happens, let me know....

The WSJ isn't some random unqualified blog. Even though once in a while, big newspapers like The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal get small details wrong, something as big as this would have multiple credible sources.