killr0y

Yeah, Capcom would no longer make good games if MS bought them out... Just like Bungie Studios

I'm not sure what kind of achievement this is.. I mean, I downloaded the Windows Vista DVD ISO from Microsoft, which is 3 times that size. Do I win a prize too?

Oh yes, because we all know how Halo 1 & 2 were total flops, don't we, ominojacu & kmo?

Bungie was kind enough to release this footage so that Halo fans could get a glimpse into the game, not so some moronic dimwits could bash it in their feeble attempts to disuade someone from buying the game when it comes out a year from now.

To be honeset, Bungie needs more people like you to bash Halo.. Maybe that way, they can keep the hype to a moderate level so when the game actually comes out, people will be even more blown away then they would have been otherwise.

In other news, Joystiq is having a slow day...

Oh, and by the way, Microsoft has been turning a profit on Xbox 360's as of two quarters ago, and therefore for all intents and purposes, adding that extra 256MB of RAM is actually MAKING Microsoft money. :P

That billion dollar quote was a flippin' figure of speech, not to be taken literally! Microsoft would have to sell 67 MILLION Xbox 360's at TODAY's GDDR3 RAM prices in order to arrive at that figure! Chances are very high that the cost of the RAM would probably be halved within 2 years or less, meaning the Xbox 360 would need to sell almost 100 million.

Furthermore, ALL Xbox 360 games are benefitting from the extra RAM, not just Gears of War. Your argument is sad.

I could say that Blu-Ray has cost Sony $10 Billion, and I'd have a more realistic argument than yours.

Brian, besides the fact that you sound like a flippin' conspiracy theorist, paramedics by practice take your vitals before doing anything else. FACT.

Secondly, why would her friends risk moving her around to get to a car? Are they trained EMTs? Do you know how much damage moving someone with a dislocated bone can do to the surrounding tissue? Probably not, judging by the level of ignorance in your post :P

$1 Billion investment? Epic's Mark Rein is on record saying it cost them $10 Million to make. The highest production cost games are barely approaching $30-40 Million. Stop pulling numbers out of your ass.

$60 per game (on average, including the $70 collector's edition) times 2 million copies equals $120,000,000 (that's $120 MILLION).. That's about $100 Million profit after considering marketing & distribution. That's a 1000% return on investment you moron.

But according to our beloved Joystiq blogger, EVERY $10 Million game should be selling 2 million copies, even if there are only 8 million consoles to play it on, along with the other 100 games that came out this year.

The funny thing is, PS2 games aren't doing all that well considering how huge the PS2 installed base is. Xbox 360 games consistently rank high in the top 10 games sales, yet the PS2 has nearly 16 times the number of consoles out there.

So I agree with everyone else who thinks these Game Analysts are morons. The only thing Sony has that's moving units are the actual PS2 consoles themselves, and not the games. Tie ratios on the PS2 rank just above the PS3, which is the worst in the industry.

Yeah, sure.. the PS3 shortage is a "plus" for Sony.. And not having money is a plus for the homeless...

Caffinate, try to not be an ass. What Richard is saying makes total sense if you actually tried thinking about it. If there is no reason for game designers to try unorthodox techniques, then its less likely for innovation to thrive.

Developers aren't going to willingly spend the time to come up with new algorhythms for procedural texturing, music, etc. Or come up with new approaches to game engine design, or even gameplay mechanics if they don't have to.

Putting a constraint on a process is the quickest way to get someone to start thinking outside the box. Giving someone too big a sandbox tends to lead to squandering those resources. Just look at the urban sprawl of most US towns & cities compared to their much neater European counterparts. Why is that? Because Europe is forced to utilize their limited space more efficiently. I'm not getting into a debate on Europe vs the US, there are pros and cons for both situations.. I'm just using this as an analogy of how forcing constraints, whether real or imagned, can lead to some very novel and surprising things.

Maybe if you tried a little unconventional thinking yourself, you'd realize this.