It may very well be "in the Halo universe", but I personally doubt it will be Halo 4. The game will most likely play much differently.

Looking at Diablo III, I just wonder why they didn't up the ante on combat and animations. The gameplay I'm sure will be decent, but it looks like a game made 5-10 years ago in terms of combat. You run along and have two different buttons you can hit to attack. No combos, blocking, counters, etc.?

Don't get me wrong, I am stoked about this game. But why doesn't Blizzard try to do a little more with it?

Nearly 90 minutes? That is stupid. I bet this article is somehow wrong and we'll be laughing about this later.

The co-op could be half assed in the sense that one host player trips all cutscenes, picks up mission items, etc. while the other player(s) ran around driving and shooting to assist the host.

This way you could replay some of the more memorable shootouts and chase scenes with friends.

This is by far the only game she will even consider watching me play.

I am still working on the controls before I dive into the serious team stuff, where I assume the game will shine. Single player is great though. The physics of hitting people with the car are priceless.

How about someone makes a game on bluray that clearly couldn't be done on DVD. I'll buy it. I promise.

I just got a PS3 and want to love the looks of this game, but that video just busted my bubble pretty good.

Fortunately I am still stoked about the standard MGS4 game coming out here soon.

I played the multiplayer and co-op for 140 hours. It was awesome. The lag was horrificly bad and the game was borderline broken. Yet, it was still fun as hell.

But now there are really kickass multiplayer shooters out that run smooth as silk, namely COD4 and Halo 3. If Epic wants my money, then absolutely must get their online experience to run silky smooth, plain and simple.

For story, I thought the first was fine and I do want the questions answered, but I don't care if the quality of the story telling is better this time through.

Mass Effect had the best combat I can remember in an rpg, despite its numerous flaws. The story was incredible and I absolutely can't wait for its sequels. It has basically set the bar for RPG's for years to come.

2) "The only thing I got wrong was the breast size". Yes, you lied about the only controversial feature in your original claim. You twit.

3) Again, the scenes would be allowed in a PG-13 movie that teens can watch. They are very short and not at all graphic. There is girl on girl or guy on girl, no guy on guy as you state (though facts clearly are of no concern to you at this point).

4) Some teens will do everything that adults do even though they aren't supposed to. The game is clearly marked as 17+ (because of the violence I believe). Movies, books, cigarrettes, booze, and virtually everything on earth that adults do some teens will as well. This game was not specifically marketed any more towards teens than anything else.

5) At least you don't make up stuff for this one. But really, you clearly have no journalistic integrity based on how you acquired data and then twisted it and made up new stuff for it to write your little piece. Your "example" was also BS. I shouldn't have to go to a whore house to report on it, I agree. But I am not going to go saying "Dino's" makes a shitty gyro without running down there and trying it out.

In closing, this guy is clearly a moron. His argument skills are extremely weak and immature. He makes up facts, which is a journalistic no-no in my books. He also grossly misrepresents and exaggerates what facts do exist. What's worse is his biggest response to people pointing out obvious factual innaccuracies was to call his critics mean names. Seriously?

Just the style and themes in the game are geared towards adults. Most kids don't want to play story driven RPG's with no blood.

My problem is that this title seems to be a cash in. They are likely only setting it in Vegas to re-use graphical assets. I do admit, though, that Vegas turns out to be an awesome environment for a shooter with all the sounds and glass to break.

If Vegas 2 offers greater depth in co-op possibilities, I will consider a purchase. It can be noted that much of the first game was in Mexico and I am wondering if a big chunk of this one will take place elsewhere, preferrably not Mexico.

In an RPG, it isn't as big of a deal. I mean, it sucks, but you can still enjoy the hell out of an RPG despite framerate problems.

I absolutely love Mass Effect and consider it easily better than Oblivion, the last RPG type game I loved. I mean, it is totally fantastically awesome, despite the framerate chugging that I don't notice.

In related news, Mass Effect just got an update, but I only had an hour to play. Anyone know what it is about?

I'm pretty sure if I went to a GLBA gathering wearing a shirt that says "Heterosexual Christian", I wouldn't be getting very positive things said to me.

Granted, there wouldn't be many 13 year olds at a GLBA convention to scream immature obsenities at me the way you would find them on LIVE. But still, the general hatred of others towards me would be evident.

Also, this video is edited and thus can't be trusted AT ALL.

I'm not saying that gays are never discriminated against. I am just saying that when they display themselves in a way that screams "I am gay" in public I have no sympathy for the remarks. If a Catholic displays "homo is a sin", then I have no sympathy for them being chastised for their beliefs.

If you can't take the heat, stay out the kitchen.

1) Only buy a game that you are 100% sure you will like.

2) Only buy games with immense replay value or immense game length. Example: Mass Effect and Halo 3 are great to buy because there is more than you can do in a few weeks. Bioshock is not a great buy because it is once through and done. All three are must play titles.

3) Buy your must have titles right at launch and play the crap out of them. Once they get a bit stale and you want to hit up some things you missed, start renting or open up a Gamefly account for a few months.

For example, I am playing Halo 3, Orange Box, Mass Effect (awesome btw), Galaxy, and COD4 right now. They were must buy for me and will take me a couple months probably to play out. Once they are taken care of, I'll re-open my Gamefly account and play AC, Kane & Lynch, PGR4, etc. That is, I'll play solid games that weren't really worth buying and I didn't have time to rent during the holiday AAA game blitz.

4) If you are going to sell back, wait for a better deal at EB or wherever you want to sell them to. Or, try to sell them through Ebay or to a friend.

I want games that are so engaging and engrossing that I BLOCK OUT the other crappy parts of my life while playing them! Not the other way around as this guy states.

I will admit that sometimes I am in the mood for an ultra-competitive online shooter like Halo. There you must constantly think and react and it is quite intense. Other times, I like a game like Mass Effect where there are some intense battles but mostly you are casually roaming about and talking to people with no particular necessity to do it fast.

This is a little different though. Here some company has a powerful server that runs your game for you. I can't imagine this would work with an action game or shooter very well because of lag and no way to really hide it.

I will admit that I may be biased because I have so many friends playing Halo and is funner to play online with people you actually know. Maybe COD4 will eventually become that big amongst my friends, but I sorta doubt it.

Mass Effect looks great. If you think it is "just another TPS for 360", then you are ignorant. Read the Game Informer review. The story and universe that this game takes place in is apparently quite awesome.

Another GOTY candidate for 360. That is the only "just another ... for 360" thing about it.

You just have to learn how to make the reviews work for you, not bitch about how you'd change it. I mean, adopting some system where nobody gives 100% because perfection is impossible or saying everyone has to score on a 5 scale or 10 scale or 20 scale or a 4 scale is just trivial. That only makes it convenient for people who only want to look at a number and not read. We shouldn't cater the system to those people because they probably don't even know what they like anyways and just go with the crowd.

Let sites review however the hell they want. I don't have a very hard time sorting through it all and getting a good idea of whether or not I'll like a game. And why does it matter if big sites don't pay attention to little sites? You have to earn respect, not have it handed to you because you whine a lot.

Also, you quote this gamenode.com site. They don't even deal with big time games, just casual stuff from the looks of their site. How is their opinion that relevant? Or is the editor a former full game reviewer? My point just is that you could take any geek off the street at that point.

The 360 has been consistently played a bunch since I got it. Certainly it is an incremental improvement over last few gens, but that is the gaming I've grown to love.

Don't yet have a PS3. My friends have both and the PS3 absolutely never gets played. All they play right now is Halo, but the PS3 went cold before that.

With COD4 it all depends on the multiplayer. That is the best way to play a shooter anyways.

Seriously, a good shooter you can get 50 hours easily out of the multiplayer before it is close to boring. Why bitch over the single player being 3 hours shorter than we'd expect from a AAA potential game?

It makes sense.

The host or some third person, sometimes two of them, play more the part of the person just trying to form his/her opinion (this is the person you are supposed to relate to especially). The Fox News opinion wins out on the debate and you are now an "informed" person that agrees with their view.

Video games have never been statistically linked to violent crime. Lots of studies are thrown around but nothing really concrete has ever been shown. The Columbine killers played Doom. But statistically, that is looking at the big picture, there is no criminal profiling evidence bent against gaming. Yet, there are dozens and dozens of other factors that are statistically linked to violent crime. We know that drug abuse, gang association, child abuse, mental illness, abusing animals, peer rejection, and many other factors are statistically linked towards violent crime. Video games are not, period.

Our murder rate is around 40% lower today than when DOOM was released. I mean, people are basically saying that violent crime would be down even more if it weren't for games. Hell, those people probably typically believe that America is more violent today than 10 years ago, which is completely false.

It is just blaming something you don't like anyways for societies problems. Nothing more, nothing less.

It is all a bunch of BS, to summarize my argument.

RFOM had the benefit of no competition and a decent amount of gamers experiencing HD and next gen for the first time. COD4, UT3, maybe K2, maybe Haze, and some other shooters on the PS3 will make Resistance look mediocre.

In any case, they obviously were going to fix it eventually. Now we are there, about a year later than it should have taken them. (well, they shouldn't have had a problem in the first place but that's a different story)

Until a game comes out that you play and actually go "whoa, that WAS too big for DVD9", we can just pass this off as misleading PR propaganda to make the game sound extra awesome and worth buying, just like with Heavenly, Lair, Motorstorm, and Resistance.

Not saying those games sucked, but we were told they were too big for DVD and none of them seemed to be. They were just jam-packed with unnecessary amounts of uncompressed audio and textures. Whoopity-doo.

Not saying extra uncompressed audio and textures aren't worth anything, but it seems like a retarded advantage at $120 cost for a system that only has 512Mb of total RAM. It's like having a spoiler on a car that can't even go 80mph.