MN Guy

You can never have too much RAM. Consoles can always do more with less when it comes to CPU and GPU. 8 Gb RAM should be standard given the cost/value relationship for a gaming rig. Even if you only need 4Gb to run the game, you should include 8Gb to minimize loading screens. Think if you are playing Skyrim 2 and it runs on 4Gb RAM, but as you approach a door to the next part of the dungeon it is loading that section off the disk or HDD onto your remaining 4Gb RAM and when you open the door you walk through it instead of 15 second screen. Or when you are running around towns you open doors and walk in. That kind of thing.

GPU obviously has to be very powerful. CPU can get by on the cheap if you aren't trying to do any computer-style multitasking. One thing I'd like to see is a PPU combined with a lot of RAM so game developers can build worlds that fully function with physics. Every body, item, etc having real physics behind them.

Personally I think the visuals on current consoles are already plenty good, or what BF3 does on PC is certainly as good as it needs to be. Resolutions, shading, etc are adequate. At this point I'd just like to see smoother framerates, better stability, less loading, more physics, and just generally more complex worlds with more NPC's, enemies, etc depending on the game. I think the visuals are already as good as they need to be and it should be about adding gameplay with processing.

Kinect for 360 could conceivably require more CPU and/or PPU power relative to GPU size.

Wow. Talk about arguing semantics. You are shipping a game with content locked from people who buy it used. It doesn't matter how you try to sugar coat it.

Online passes reduce the resale value of a game. I'm buying this used and I'm personally happy they did this because now I can get it cheaper. With a game this large and repetitive, who cares about 7 quests? The funny thing is that the people this hurts the most are those who buy it new and want to sell it when done. These online passes generally lower the resale by $5 to $10.

In my opinion, this is a really stupid move on their part. They are trying to build a new franchise. The stupidest thing they can do is try some cheap BS to screw over their paying customers hoping to cash a few extra bucks on the front end. This irritates the hardcore gamers and creates a lot of negative press. Just dumb imo.

You ask a good question, but one you should already know the answer to. It comes down to abuse and misuse. If all that was ever censored was websites that existed for the sole purpose of distributing pirated content, then that wouldn't be that big of a deal. But you bet your butt that isn't how it will go down. At least not how this bill is written. And it is a slipperly slope and sends such a terrible message.

"If corporations tell us that their profit margins are falling due to freedom of speech and information then we as the government will enact censorship laws at their request."

People don't want this. Just some corporations and politicians that serve them. The average Joe doesn't want to be censored.

It would be much better if these companies just did their best to protect their content without government censorship, or just stop making content altogether. Gaming is as big and profitable of an industry as it ever was, I don't think we need to throw away our freedoms just to make them more profitable.

In fact, I think we should be going the other way. Every year we add more restrictions and take away certain freedoms and I don't like that trend.

I have family members who gave their lives fighting against this sort of thing. Giving government/corporate powers the ability to censor our information at their discretion is pissing on the graves of every American soldier who has died since the Civil War.

The mere fact that our government is behind an act that trades freedom of information for a slightly higher profit margin for mega corporations, many of them foreign owned, is highly disturbing.

Hate to sound like a crazy conservative, and I do understand that many republicans are behind this as well, but this is exactly the type of crap I was worried about once Obama was voted in on the platform of expanding the role of government.

Are people f'ing blind?

Yes, the inability to protect digital IP is an unfortunate byproduct of a free society. But the very foundation of our society is the fact that information is supposed to be free and uncensored (if it is appropriate and safe). For us to evolve as a society we need to get to a point where digitial information is free to share and distribute, no matter what.

Will movies and games have lower production values? Maybe. Will more people pirate? Probably. Will massive corporations make slightly less massive profits while the average person gets poorer to a smaller degree than they would otherwise? Yes.

But is that really such a bad thing? The wealthy corporations in our nation control a larger percentage of the pie with every passing year. It is because we consistently pass legislation that favors them more now than it did in the past. This would be yet another example of this. Why do we need to give up our freedoms that our ancestors died for just so Sony and Nintendo can make more money?

At some point we need to put our foot down as a society. We have foreign companies financially backing legislation that enacts blatant censorship rights to our government. I'm not going to throw away my PS3 over this but I sure won't be buying a PS4. No way in hell. This is a way bigger deal than many probably give it credit for. We NEED to over react to this as consumers. Seriously.

It is a slippery slope.

It was obvious all along that "anonymous" was behind this. I realize that it is a decentralized structure or whatever, but there were still a bunch of people who think of themselves as being in that group who were coordinating online attacks together.

Hopefully these bunch of wreckless vandals are brought to some degree of justice. This type of crap accomplishes nothing except to lose a company money, and in this case a bunch of regular folks lost their private information to hackers who could not have otherwise pulled this off without all the help and coordination.

It would be best for the FBI to have some of their cyber specialists infiltrate organizations like this so it is easier to stock future attacks and imprison the criminals behind them.

Is it bad that I'm in my late twenties, never played a Duke game, but still think this looks like fun? I don't know about 60 bucks but it definately looks worthy of a rental.

It depends what was one the servers. If those servers were just used for games and distribution, then who really cares. But if those servers housed the sensitive information that leaked, then that is a big problem.

Furthermore, Sony never invited hackers or anonymous. Gamers never invited them. They are unwanted. Why can't you tools just stick to your PC's and make them do neat stuff like play pirated games.

We don't want you on our PS3's. You are costing us money and time lost on gaming. All because you guys want the right to take a subsidized piece of equipment and make it do stuff the company doesn't want it to do.

These guys are ridiculously selfish. Anonymous sucks.

It makes no difference to me whether or not they deny involvment.

The bottom line is they have attacked Sony, and I am a customer of Sony. Their attacks cause problems for Sony, and therefore cause problems for me. I didn't ask for their "help" in the first place either. Their goals are to make the PS3 a PC. That hurts my interests.

What they are fighting for is people's right to take a PS3 and try to make it do things that PC's already allow you to do. Sony doesn't like this. Sony doesn't like this because they subsidize the cost of the PS3 hardware hoping to recoup on game costs. But people who buy PS3's just to hack them aren't giving any game payments because the whole purpose of hacking a PS3 is to play pirated software and/or get the PS3 to do things other than play games. Sony has every single right in the world to do what they are doing, and there is nothing unethical about it. Their games business depends entirely on the PS3 being a controlled system that just plays things they control. Otherwise they have no way to recoup the subsidized cost of the console.

These hackers deserve zero sympathy. They deserve zero credit or props for what they are trying to do. Sony could easily sell the PS3 for $700 and make it free to hack. But then I have to pay more for my system, and suddenly the hackers wouldn't care about it because it is now just as expensive, more so actually, than a PC.

Hackers are after the PS3 because they see it as a cheap piece of hardware that they can make do things out of boredom and selfishness. But if console manufacturers don't do anything to restrict hacking, then all the console becomes is a PC sold at a loss. Console owners like myself DO NOT want our industry to become what the PC gaming industry has become. Console games are better because the developers don't lose as much out to piracy, because of how hard the console is to hack.

I can get a PC to play a pirated game. I can't get a PS3 to play a pirated game. I'm an average consumer, with some tech savviness.

It is pretty simple. Anonymous coordinated a massive attack and one of their members went a little too far. They claim to not have any responsibility. Okay, then give us the names and handles of all of your users, along with their IP addresses, and let the authorities figure out if what you are saying is the truth.

Yeah, thought so.

Throwing rocks through store windows and stealing identities. That is what you bring to the world. All under the false claim of fighting for the average person's rights. Yeah, you guys sure are cool.

Rule of thumb. Any group that HAS to remain anonymous to exist is not up to one damn bit of good. No matter what they put into their carefully crafted messages.