We want a world where people - specifically non-gamer types - recognize that a game can be critically brilliant, worthy of play, and totally inappropriate for children. The two run on totally different tracks.
That's what's happening here. Admittedly, I think the review score is based off of the attached player reviews, so it doesn't bear as much weight. But I think this is awesome, and what we need to see more of.
I somehow accidentally posted this on the Windows 7 post. doh.
We live in a victim society loaded with people that have been spoon-fed everything to them for so long, that common sense is the exception instead of the norm.
When companies have to put warning labels on things such as "May contain Benzene" on a bottle of... Benzene, and "Caution: May Burn" on a CEDAR wood cooking board for Salmon...
Well...
Let's just say that needing to put warnings on overly violent video games in an effort to keep them out of childrens' hands is as unsurprising as baseball players admitting to using steroids.
Instead of forming a committee, parents should actually spend more than 5 seconds with their kids before plopping them down in front of a TV. Ask them what they are playing, sit down and watch them play, or, *gasp*, play with them and see what they are doing.
If your kids have video games in the house, spend 10 minutes on google educating yourself about ratings and the like. Take some responsibility. Stop relying on the media to tell you what is good for your kids.
When a parental watchdog organisation behaves responsibly (for once), we should just be happy about it. It's nice to see that "Common Sense Media Group" is not just a name.
(Unfortunately, I'm not sure these are the people that Glenn Beck will interview the next time he decides to go mental on video games.)
kept away - far away - from children. It makes my brain bleed to think that parents still might not be entirely sure if GTA games are right for their young children. Even as DLC, would anyone think that The Lost and Damned replaces all the "bad" with rainbows and gingerbread men?
At least this group isn't psychotic about its warnings.
Too bad. Also too bad as I personally prefer to get something that actually exists when I give money to people. Ah well, it's XBox exclusive anyway, isn't it? I swear, some developers, you could walk up to them and throw wads of cash in their face and they'd still ignore you.
I honestly don't care what Microsoft paid for it, but in my opinion this exclusive DLC stuff is just bullshit. People who bought it on the 360 get a better deal than people who bought it on the PS3, which, at least in my eyes, makes the people who came up with this idea look like garbage. I bought this game and Fallout 3 for the 360, so I don't have much to complain about, but seriously, if the game is on both systems, give everybody who bought the game the same value.
But... bikes were practically the only working vehicles as it was! Before the rework I've never encountered the issues they mention in TLaD, so they broke them?
Ah well, I can't get the expansion anyway because of petty exclusivity deals.
The game costs 1600 microsoft gamer points. MS doesn't let you buy that amount, instead the force you to buy they packs of 1400($19.99) or 3800(39.99).
I just got the GTAIV:LoD download code in Futureshop (canada) for $24.99 since I realised its cheaper that way.
Otherwise I would have to buy 2800MS for 39.99.
Just suggestion for anyone who wants to save some cash and not be ripped off by Microsoft.
@Evan Pretzer: That'd be cool, I know I was disappointed that the Gerry storyline, and his missions, ended the way it did. It'd have to be done differently than that mission where you rescue & kill that old friend of Derrick's, though.
Just one question, is this what MS paid 50 mil. for? Is there more exclusive content on the way?
I mean, it would be fucked up if MS paid that much for just this, then Rockstar brings out two more non-exclusive episodes that are just as good or better.
When it was first announced that MS paid for exclusivity it was said that there were two in the works. One for Fall of 2008 and then the other in the Spring of 2009. Since the first one got pushed back you can assume that the Spring '09 one did as well.
"The first 25 is for the first episodic content package that's supposed to go out and that is in March of '08. That's why it moved into current because it's in the next 12 months. The second 25 will be for the second episodic, the episode, and that will be later in fiscal '08."
02/23/09
This is the world we want.
We want a world where people - specifically non-gamer types - recognize that a game can be critically brilliant, worthy of play, and totally inappropriate for children. The two run on totally different tracks.
That's what's happening here. Admittedly, I think the review score is based off of the attached player reviews, so it doesn't bear as much weight. But I think this is awesome, and what we need to see more of.
02/23/09
We live in a victim society loaded with people that have been spoon-fed everything to them for so long, that common sense is the exception instead of the norm.
When companies have to put warning labels on things such as "May contain Benzene" on a bottle of... Benzene, and "Caution: May Burn" on a CEDAR wood cooking board for Salmon...
Well...
Let's just say that needing to put warnings on overly violent video games in an effort to keep them out of childrens' hands is as unsurprising as baseball players admitting to using steroids.
02/23/09
If your kids have video games in the house, spend 10 minutes on google educating yourself about ratings and the like. Take some responsibility. Stop relying on the media to tell you what is good for your kids.
02/23/09
When a parental watchdog organisation behaves responsibly (for once), we should just be happy about it. It's nice to see that "Common Sense Media Group" is not just a name.
(Unfortunately, I'm not sure these are the people that Glenn Beck will interview the next time he decides to go mental on video games.)
02/23/09
At least this group isn't psychotic about its warnings.
02/23/09
If those names don't sound like wholesome family fun than I don't know what does.
02/23/09
Too bad. Also too bad as I personally prefer to get something that actually exists when I give money to people. Ah well, it's XBox exclusive anyway, isn't it? I swear, some developers, you could walk up to them and throw wads of cash in their face and they'd still ignore you.
02/23/09
02/23/09
02/17/09
02/17/09
Of course, I'll probably download this anyway.
02/17/09
02/17/09
02/17/09
02/17/09
Ah well, I can't get the expansion anyway because of petty exclusivity deals.
02/17/09
The game costs 1600 microsoft gamer points. MS doesn't let you buy that amount, instead the force you to buy they packs of 1400($19.99) or 3800(39.99).
I just got the GTAIV:LoD download code in Futureshop (canada) for $24.99 since I realised its cheaper that way.
Otherwise I would have to buy 2800MS for 39.99.
Just suggestion for anyone who wants to save some cash and not be ripped off by Microsoft.
02/17/09
Ugh, I hate the point system. I wish they would cover all of the possible DLC prices.
02/17/09
02/17/09
02/17/09
02/17/09
I mean, it would be fucked up if MS paid that much for just this, then Rockstar brings out two more non-exclusive episodes that are just as good or better.
02/17/09
02/17/09
You have a link about that? First I've heard.
02/17/09
When it was first announced that MS paid for exclusivity it was said that there were two in the works. One for Fall of 2008 and then the other in the Spring of 2009. Since the first one got pushed back you can assume that the Spring '09 one did as well.
"The first 25 is for the first episodic content package that's supposed to go out and that is in March of '08. That's why it moved into current because it's in the next 12 months. The second 25 will be for the second episodic, the episode, and that will be later in fiscal '08."
[arstechnica.com]
Granted the dates are wrong because that was early on in the history of the deal and development, but the 2 episode things remains.