Google+

91 comments

  • iRideAPalmer - June 14, 2014 5:36 a.m.

    I don't understand why so many people hate the Wii U. I have a ps4 and a wii u and until Watch Dogs came out my Wii U got a lot more use. Actually it still does because i can play while watching netflix
  • freeden - June 14, 2014 2 a.m.

    Actually, Flex's statement about Hardline is pretty accurate. The beta was awful and it has nothing to do with bugs or beta-ish stuff. The design is terribly mediocre. The idea of cops versus robbers is great, but the game will be a mediocre pile of rubbish.
  • universaltofu - June 14, 2014 12:38 a.m.

    Hate hate hate hate!
  • reload2456 - June 14, 2014 12:32 a.m.

    to be completely fair the new fable game and the dev team and everyone involved in anything after the first game deserve as much shit as people can hurl at them they slowly ruined a great world that began with a fantastic game and made into a pile of shit so massive i would not even consider buying another one. i was so fucking done with fable after fable three. which turned out to be a good thing cause then they released that shit arcade game and a kinect only game(which is the literal definition of a rail shooter. hurr durr yes i would like to play a game where i just sit on a cart watching shit go by while i cast spells)
  • LoboMau - June 13, 2014 9:40 p.m.

    I already have a one-liner that will certainly be on the next year's list.
  • Shigeruken - June 13, 2014 9:01 p.m.

    This list never fails to make me chuckle.
  • shawksta - June 13, 2014 7:44 p.m.

    Its a tradition, and Grady outdid himself this time XD
  • treeroy - June 13, 2014 6:11 p.m.

    the 60fps comment isn't unreasonable. I too refuse to buy games if they run at less than 60 fps.
  • GrandTheftAuto - June 14, 2014 3:21 a.m.

    Because you're a bighead.
  • treeroy - June 14, 2014 5:55 a.m.

    No, because I don't like playing games which make me feel uncomfortable.
  • ZeeCaptain - June 14, 2014 8:28 a.m.

    You do know that you live life in 30 fps. The human eye can only see at 30 frames per second, and when it comes to videogames or movies it would much rather prefer consistency than high fps that can fluctuate. So I guess you live an uncomfortable life :P
  • Forsakenday - June 14, 2014 8:49 a.m.

    -citation needed- Also fuck you GR. How is it misogynistic to say "I bet he banged that chick". Is sex misogynistic now? Fucking idiots.
  • Sebastiaan - June 14, 2014 11:14 a.m.

    "Banging a chick" does not exactly conjure up images of a man and a woman engaging in mutually pleasurable sex. It sounds like something a man does TO a woman (whether she likes it or not) instead of WITH her - a male power fantasy. So yeah, that's reasonably misogynistic.
  • treeroy - June 14, 2014 8:51 a.m.

    And do YOU know that you're wrong? (Well, probably not) If you can only see at 30fps, then why would so many developers even consider running their games at 60fps and sacrificing graphical fidelity? Why would tech companies bother designing 144Hz monitors, and why would 60Hz be the standard, if only 30Hz can be seen? Why would Peter Jackson have filmed The Hobbit in 48fps and why would people have said they felt uncomfortable watching in 48fps, if it's actually no different from normal? If we only see in 30fps, then there's no difference between these videos: http://30vs60.com/ And there's no difference between the second and third moving objects on this site: http://boallen.com/fps-compare.html I like consistency, yes. But 30fps is not smooth enough for me, so I play every game at 60fps, to remove fluctuation and have it at a smooth display. If you read this comment and check the links I posted and come away from that thinking the eye sees in 30fps, then, well, I'd love to hear your reasoning. Oh, and if you're wondering why movies run at 24fps but look smooth, that's due to motion blur. Have you ever paused a film while something is moving? You don't see the frame, you see a blurred frame. That's because if the film just displayed 24 frames each second, it would be very stuttery, so motion blur is used to create the effect of having many more frames.
  • ZeeCaptain - June 14, 2014 8:07 p.m.

    What Reborn Kusabi said is correct the eye sees in lights not frames so on and so forth. Still I stick by what I stated earlier, consoles like the PS3 cap their games at a 30 fps limit and it is incredibly smooth, that is because of the use of motion blur, the reason for developers pushing higher frames and the use of better monitors to reduce latency problems with games, so that motion blur isn't necessary and that you feel like the controls respond much faster. 60 frames is only ideal so that blurs together a little. But whatever, I man be incorrect and I'm sorry if you took my earlier comment the wrong way, i'm basing my argument on something I learned in class, I believe it was called the Flicker Fusion Frequency, but again I plead ignorance. I do however know that the reason film was at 24 fps was because it was a good middleground for films with sound, when there were first introduced, because at the time silent films were displayed at 22-26 frames. Also the limitation of magnetically created film grain and the projectors were at 24 frames.
  • treeroy - June 15, 2014 4:12 a.m.

    Right, so you initially tell me that the eye only sees up to 30fps, I then explain you're wrong, and now you're claiming you never thought the eye sees in frames in the first place?
  • ZeeCaptain - June 15, 2014 1:38 p.m.

    The eye sees in light but it perceives frames ect... Still I don't want to make an issue out of this so I concede that I have been humbled by YOU. Good luck with your 60 fps thing.
  • RebornKusabi - June 14, 2014 9:26 a.m.

    The human eye doesn't see in frame. Movie and Computer frames are processed images assembled into a coherent linear timeline, such as gameplay and video. Humans see by light entering the eyes and their brain processing it accordingly. Furthermore, movies are a set sequence of events, so their lower frame rate is acceptable while games have to be higher to take k.to consideration player control, motion blur, AA/Anisotropy, texture levels, AAAAALLLL of that which take resources from whatever machine you're playing on. So.. yeah, whatever.
  • TanookiMan - June 15, 2014 2:48 p.m.

    A preference for 60 fps makes sense, but it seems a little harsh to not buy games that run less than 60... there are some really great games that cap at 30 fps. Isn't that like never watching movies that are in black and white? Sure, you might prefer color, but if I only watched color movies I'd never get to watch Citizen Kane.
  • watevermanimlost - June 13, 2014 4:35 p.m.

    "Nintendo needs to GTFO out of the gaming business" Get the F out out of the gaming business..... I'll just put that there.

Showing 21-40 of 91 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.