I would assume that was the result of Nintendo asking a price that Microsoft wasn't willing to pay (and while it was a nice enough inclusion, given just how radically different Team Ninja's game was, it's not building on the game the way the mission content did).
I don't really understand what Nintendo has to do with it/how they could ask for anything. They're not their games.
I thought they would have a hand in their distribution as Super Nintendo titles. I stand corrected if that's not the case.
First, re: the other post - Wait, what proposal?
Second: As far as I know, Nintendo has nothing to do with Ninja Gaiden, bar whatever bonus stuff might have been tacked onto the Wii U game.
As far as being Super NES titles goes, there doesn't seem to be anything stopping the emulation and republishing of SNES titles on non-Nintendo platforms. See: Mega Man X Legacy Collection, Konami's Anniversary Collections, among others.
Microsoft's own Rare Replay does unfortunately happen to skip the SNES era entirely, but given it does feature NES and N64 titles, I'm skeptical that the SNES is a special case.
The lack of SNES games in Rare Replay is probably simple logistics and funny decisions. Of the 7 games they developed for the system, 3 are the DKC series... duh. Ken Griffey Jr.'s Winning Run is probably mired in MLB rights, not to mention KGJ himself. Battletoads and Double Dragon might be... Arc Systems I think? That just leaves Battlemaniacs and Killer Instinct. Maybe they though nobody cares about KI when KI2/Gold is there, and that Battletoads is more remembered than Battlemaniacs. A... strange decision to make in a compilation with such remembered treasures such as Underwurlde and Knight Lore. Most other compilations will include part 1 even if part 2 was the marquee hit. Either way I can't see why Nintendo would ever step in for those 2 games.
Over here in the UK (Rare's native land, of course), to people of a particular age *ahem*, the old Spectrum games that Rare Replay includes, from the aforementioned two through the likes of Jet Pac, Lunar Jetman and Sabre Wulf, are (mostly*) absolutely remembered and iconic games that defined the early years of an extraordinarily popular platform that in itself blew the doors off computer ownership in this country. I appreciate that that resonance may not apply elsewhere in the world and they might be little more than curiosities, but they were absolutely instrumental here not only in building Ultimate's name (prior to Rare) but were defining moments in computer gaming in the UK as a whole. They were at least (and may have been more so) as important to the early years of the Spectrum as they ever were to Nintendo in subsequent years. As primitive as, say, Knight Lore looks now, no-one had ever seen anything like it before when it came out.
* - Underwurlde is kinda debateable, granted, but given the other Sabreman games included, it'd stick out if it wasn't there and there's no reason at all for it not to be.
Not really anything that stands out (though there was a time where Hydrophobic had shockingly good water simulations physics). I heard that Never Yield was as Switch game that gradually came to over platforms, but otherwise know nothing about it.
Hilarity is they still manage put out GWGs that I already own. ._.
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
Not really anything that stands out (though there was a time where Hydrophobic had shockingly good water simulations physics). I heard that Never Yield was as Switch game that gradually came to over platforms, but otherwise know nothing about it.
Hilarity is they still manage put out GWGs that I already own. ._.
Only one I own, I'm fairly sure, is Hydrophobia. It's a pretty respectable little game, and the water physics were indeed impressive, it just has the little problem of a kind of abrupt
I’ve been playing this, and I’m kinda considering buying a dongle and a drum so I could play it better since there’s no native drum option. It’s really fun, even with a controller.
If I had a drum for it, and if it had like... Actual taiko tracks, I would be so all over that. I'm just sad about the controller thing... (Also I don't really do anime, so most of the songs are completely lost on me. Except that thing about a railgun, that piqued my interest...)
I would assume that was the result of Nintendo asking a price that Microsoft wasn't willing to pay (and while it was a nice enough inclusion, given just how radically different Team Ninja's game was, it's not building on the game the way the mission content did).
I don't really understand what Nintendo has to do with it/how they could ask for anything. They're not their games.
I thought they would have a hand in their distribution as Super Nintendo titles. I stand corrected if that's not the case.
First, re: the other post - Wait, what proposal?
Second: As far as I know, Nintendo has nothing to do with Ninja Gaiden, bar whatever bonus stuff might have been tacked onto the Wii U game.
As far as being Super NES titles goes, there doesn't seem to be anything stopping the emulation and republishing of SNES titles on non-Nintendo platforms. See: Mega Man X Legacy Collection, Konami's Anniversary Collections, among others.
Microsoft's own Rare Replay does unfortunately happen to skip the SNES era entirely, but given it does feature NES and N64 titles, I'm skeptical that the SNES is a special case.
The lack of SNES games in Rare Replay is probably simple logistics and funny decisions. Of the 7 games they developed for the system, 3 are the DKC series... duh. Ken Griffey Jr.'s Winning Run is probably mired in MLB rights, not to mention KGJ himself. Battletoads and Double Dragon might be... Arc Systems I think? That just leaves Battlemaniacs and Killer Instinct. Maybe they though nobody cares about KI when KI2/Gold is there, and that Battletoads is more remembered than Battlemaniacs. A... strange decision to make in a compilation with such remembered treasures such as Underwurlde and Knight Lore. Most other compilations will include part 1 even if part 2 was the marquee hit. Either way I can't see why Nintendo would ever step in for those 2 games.
Oh, for sure -- I didn't even think I needed to elaborate on why the DKC games weren't on Rare Replay (though now I wonder if the Microsoft guy who thought they now owned Donkey Kong because they bought Rare is still there😹).
Sadly, I really liked SNES KI the best until the 2013 game, and even then, I still want them to re-release it. And Battlemaniacs, which I recall looking really nice, but being too hard to see much of (a little save state and rewind action would probably help that).
I keep my fingers crossed for a Rare Replay 2, or some a la carte releases. Especially Battletoads/Double Dragon in the latter case.
Like Mega Man Legends? Then check out my story, Legends of the Halcyon Era - An Adventure in the World of Mega Man Legends on TMMN and AO3!
I think I finally figured it out what's bothering me the most about this Acquisition (well, actually this started with Bethesda.)
Ever since the Xbox One tanked, Xbox has really felt like they were underdogs. Now don't get me wrong, that's kind of a dumb concept when Microsoft has always loomed behind them, but at the time they felt like an afterthought at MS. LIke the weird little project that got out of control but still lived apart. MS would throw them a big check here and there for vital stuff (like the billion to fix the Red Ring of Death) but ultimately they like they were one annoyed CEO away from getting axed.
And that was cool! So many awesome things came out of Xbox being on the backfoot; a refocus on games, a greater emphasis on powerful hardware, 360 and oXbox backwards compatibility and, of course, Gamepass/Xcloud.
Even the intial slate of acquisitions were cool; taking studios that were chronically stuck in the funding/publisher grind (Like Obsidian and Double Fine) and giving them the opportunity to stretch their wings without the fear of being stuck to a contract with a limited deadline and financing. The success of Psychonauts 2 is, to me, the proof of concept for these purchases.
But when MS was willing to drop 7.5 billion on Bethesda, that was kind of the beginning of the end. Microsoft has taken notice of Xbox in a big way and they're prepared to put their full titanic weight behind the endeavor. Dropping a figure like $70 billion on Activision (Which I'll contend is an anomaly that won't be repeated by any company any time soon. It was a perfect storm of opportunity and availability.) marks the end of Xbox as an underdog and now they're just another face, albiet, a much more pleasant and fun face, of the monolithic Microsoft. It also takes away from their successes; before Xbox was improving their standing by offering great services and hardware, and slowly improving their software lineup. Now, of COURSE they're going to succeed if Microsoft is buying out publishers. There's no suspense or intrigue left, just a big ol' dumptruck full of Microsoft money.
Basically it's no longer nearly as fun to root for Xbox, and that's a real bummer.
Oh I wouldn't bet on that. What with them boggling up Skype, Mixer, Nokia... just dumptrucks of money isn't enough to guarantee success. If they want to hit 50 mil gamepass subs they have a lot of work cut out for them. They aren't exactly scrappy underdogs anymore but victory is far from assured;.
Giant Bombcast had a viewer send in a very good question: So if Call of Duty stays multiplatform, does that mean Sony is going to have to send out Playstation 6 devkits early on to Activision?
Undead Scottsman on
+1
Options
anoffdayTo be changed whenever Anoffday gets around to it.Registered Userregular
Not really anything that stands out (though there was a time where Hydrophobic had shockingly good water simulations physics). I heard that Never Yield was as Switch game that gradually came to over platforms, but otherwise know nothing about it.
Hilarity is they still manage put out GWGs that I already own. ._.
Hey I remember band of bugs during the XBLA/play as your avatar days. Fun times.
Kind of off topic, but does anyone remember that totem pole game where you had to use the camera? That was pretty bad.
anoffday on
Steam: offday
0
Options
BRIAN BLESSEDMaybe you aren't SPEAKING LOUDLY ENOUGHHHRegistered Userregular
I think I finally figured it out what's bothering me the most about this Acquisition (well, actually this started with Bethesda.)
The thing about all of this is that it wasn't that long ago that we literally had reports that Satya Nadella was asking Phil Spencer as to whether or not Microsoft even wanted to keep the Xbox brand. Now, I don't think Xbox was truly in danger at any point but it goes to show that the success of Xbox was not guaranteed and that people had to fight to keep it going, and those people are finally being taken seriously for once. I think that's something fans should be excited about.
I kinda think this deal doesn’t happen in a corporate boards took their jobs half seriously. Once the board decided to abdicate its responsibility and not fire Kotick, there was no internal fix to any of the company’s problems to be had. It’s either just ride out the storm and hope everyone forgets or sell.
I kinda think this deal doesn’t happen in a corporate boards took their jobs half seriously. Once the board decided to abdicate its responsibility and not fire Kotick, there was no internal fix to any of the company’s problems to be had. It’s either just ride out the storm and hope everyone forgets or sell.
Jeff Grubb has been mentioning there was some financial reasons at the heart of this too. Basically now that Activision had gone all-in on Call of Duty and Blizzard, there isn't a lot of room for growth, especially with CoD's sales flagging. The pandemic is making this probably extremely difficult to solve, so combined with the all of the other shit, it made selling the obvious choice.
According to Grubb they were looking to sell well before this lawsuit came up. Mostly because they had painted themselves into a corner by trying to annualize everything, which had them running franchises into the ground until they were just left with call of duty. Without any other franchises they were running out of ways to grow beyond the annual CoD release and increasingly aggressive MTX. This is where they turned to laying people off and cancelling projects to juice profits but that isn't something you can sustain for very long. In that view the lawsuit was just the finishing blow for a dead-end strategy built on increasing share prices every quarter above all else.
I think I finally figured it out what's bothering me the most about this Acquisition (well, actually this started with Bethesda.)
Ever since the Xbox One tanked, Xbox has really felt like they were underdogs. Now don't get me wrong, that's kind of a dumb concept when Microsoft has always loomed behind them, but at the time they felt like an afterthought at MS. LIke the weird little project that got out of control but still lived apart. MS would throw them a big check here and there for vital stuff (like the billion to fix the Red Ring of Death) but ultimately they like they were one annoyed CEO away from getting axed.
And that was cool! So many awesome things came out of Xbox being on the backfoot; a refocus on games, a greater emphasis on powerful hardware, 360 and oXbox backwards compatibility and, of course, Gamepass/Xcloud.
Even the intial slate of acquisitions were cool; taking studios that were chronically stuck in the funding/publisher grind (Like Obsidian and Double Fine) and giving them the opportunity to stretch their wings without the fear of being stuck to a contract with a limited deadline and financing. The success of Psychonauts 2 is, to me, the proof of concept for these purchases.
But when MS was willing to drop 7.5 billion on Bethesda, that was kind of the beginning of the end. Microsoft has taken notice of Xbox in a big way and they're prepared to put their full titanic weight behind the endeavor. Dropping a figure like $70 billion on Activision (Which I'll contend is an anomaly that won't be repeated by any company any time soon. It was a perfect storm of opportunity and availability.) marks the end of Xbox as an underdog and now they're just another face, albiet, a much more pleasant and fun face, of the monolithic Microsoft. It also takes away from their successes; before Xbox was improving their standing by offering great services and hardware, and slowly improving their software lineup. Now, of COURSE they're going to succeed if Microsoft is buying out publishers. There's no suspense or intrigue left, just a big ol' dumptruck full of Microsoft money.
Basically it's no longer nearly as fun to root for Xbox, and that's a real bummer.
MS only bought Activision because Kotick's toxic culture came to light and dropped the value of the property by $20B. So they got it at a huge discount and expect the value to shoot up quickly to old levels. It's basically a way to make a free $20B plus a lot of knock off effects that will be beneficial for their Xbox program.
+2
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
Was CoD really run into the ground that badly? I've seen them spit and throw Overwatch off a building with my own eyes (while they keep saying look out for good stuff soon) but I thought CoD was still good. I mean obnoxious in the yearly release but they still made money and seemed to be balanced.
I would not be surprised that inertia plays some part in whatever measurement of success CoD enjoys. It's expected to be 'good enough' and any flaws that do exist aren't a hideous shitshow that couldn't be erased by the next iteration. Otherwise, it fills the shotmans niche adequately untill the next one comes along.
Whatever general failure it has, real or imagined, probably stems from that. The whole not exactly doing anything groundbreaking. If such a thing is even possible.
Microsoft really needs to install creative directors that understand and give a shit about their properties. Halo hasn't been good until this year and even then it launched halfbaked. So my hopes for them taking over CoD are small, if they can't even manage their own major franchises like that.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
I think MS pumped Halo out the door because it's a tweener in terms of graphical tech AND it already had been in dev hell for years. They figured it's better to just get something out now that's pretty good instead of releasing a AAA flagship title with last-gen graphics.
Was CoD really run into the ground that badly? I've seen them spit and throw Overwatch off a building with my own eyes (while they keep saying look out for good stuff soon) but I thought CoD was still good. I mean obnoxious in the yearly release but they still made money and seemed to be balanced.
As a CoD person I’d say the quality has been dipping. Modern Warfare 2019 was good, well received, and sold like crazy. But the one after, Cold War, felt under-baked and this years game came in hot and it feels like it.
CoD sales are dipping. It's still enormous, but Activision has been run on the principle of increased growth and they're basically out of runway space at this point to accomplish that task.
CoD hadn't been destroyed, in the same way that stuff like Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk had. The problem here isn't so much CoD going down, even if it was. The problem was you had nothing going UP, and if CoD couldn't do it, what would? If you aren't making ever more and more money your stock price isn't rising.
One of the problems Grubb talked about was that every non-CoD project had to be pitched as if it was going to make returns in that direction, even when the pitchers knew that wasn't going to happen. So you had people lying to even make games, and then someone had to be left holding the blame when they inevitably fell short of unreasonable expectations, or taking the brunt of budget shortfalls through no fault of their own. That environment of manipulation and blame game makes for its own kind of toxicity before you even get to sexual harassment.
Well, I got a decent tax return and found out that I can snag a series X through the All Access program so I finally bit the bullet. Getting here on Friday!
Now I gotta upgrade my TV. Anyone have a suggestions? I don't need anything extravagant. Just something in the 42 to 50 range and that displays the games nicely.
Was CoD really run into the ground that badly? I've seen them spit and throw Overwatch off a building with my own eyes (while they keep saying look out for good stuff soon) but I thought CoD was still good. I mean obnoxious in the yearly release but they still made money and seemed to be balanced.
As a CoD person I’d say the quality has been dipping. Modern Warfare 2019 was good, well received, and sold like crazy. But the one after, Cold War, felt under-baked and this years game came in hot and it feels like it.
I...dunno, I felt the opposite? I really liked Black Ops: Cold War and thought it did a good job at being an arena shooter. Sure, there were balance issues, but the game felt pretty good (for matches where cheaters weren't in abundance).
I dipped into the Vanguard beta and felt that it was basically Modern Warfare with worse guns (even worse, none of the guns appealed to me). So... /shrug?
| Origin/R*SC: Ein7919 | Battle.net: Erlkonig#1448 | XBL: Lexicanum | Steam: Der Erlkönig (the umlaut is important) |
Was CoD really run into the ground that badly? I've seen them spit and throw Overwatch off a building with my own eyes (while they keep saying look out for good stuff soon) but I thought CoD was still good. I mean obnoxious in the yearly release but they still made money and seemed to be balanced.
As a CoD person I’d say the quality has been dipping. Modern Warfare 2019 was good, well received, and sold like crazy. But the one after, Cold War, felt under-baked and this years game came in hot and it feels like it.
I...dunno, I felt the opposite? I really liked Black Ops: Cold War and thought it did a good job at being an arena shooter. Sure, there were balance issues, but the game felt pretty good (for matches where cheaters weren't in abundance).
I dipped into the Vanguard beta and felt that it was basically Modern Warfare with worse guns (even worse, none of the guns appealed to me). So... /shrug?
Wasn't Cold War the one that didn't ship with a campaign?
EDIT: No wait, that was Black Ops 4. Too many Call of Duties. :biggrin:
Well, I got a decent tax return and found out that I can snag a series X through the All Access program so I finally bit the bullet. Getting here on Friday!
Now I gotta upgrade my TV. Anyone have a suggestions? I don't need anything extravagant. Just something in the 42 to 50 range and that displays the games nicely.
I've had decent experiences with Vizio. Okay, tbf, my last Vizio kind of exploded, but apart from that little incident it was a good TV. I will say that if you want proper HDR/dimming/etc, you'll pay a bit more overall. Rtings.com is pretty solid for reviews/benchmarking/tuning of your TVs, too.
0
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
For me Sony still makes the best TVs when it comes to picture (it's their android OS that gets shitty so I just turn off wifi and use Apple TV). Their 50" X85J will do 120hz and HDR classiness. Their Bravia line will give you better stuff (more 2.1 HDMI) and a cleaner upscaling on TV images but if you're just looking for a good gaming TV that should work fine.
Genre argument that I couldn't stop myself from posting despite my greatest efforts, sorry
Call Of Duty is not an arena shooter. It is somewhat fast, but does not have weapons on map nor does it have advanced movement, focuses entirely on hitscan automatic weapons, and the average time-to-kill is way too low.
For me Sony still makes the best TVs when it comes to picture (it's their android OS that gets shitty so I just turn off wifi and use Apple TV). Their 50" X85J will do 120hz and HDR classiness. Their Bravia line will give you better stuff (more 2.1 HDMI) and a cleaner upscaling on TV images but if you're just looking for a good gaming TV that should work fine.
Was CoD really run into the ground that badly? I've seen them spit and throw Overwatch off a building with my own eyes (while they keep saying look out for good stuff soon) but I thought CoD was still good. I mean obnoxious in the yearly release but they still made money and seemed to be balanced.
As a CoD person I’d say the quality has been dipping. Modern Warfare 2019 was good, well received, and sold like crazy. But the one after, Cold War, felt under-baked and this years game came in hot and it feels like it.
I...dunno, I felt the opposite? I really liked Black Ops: Cold War and thought it did a good job at being an arena shooter. Sure, there were balance issues, but the game felt pretty good (for matches where cheaters weren't in abundance).
I dipped into the Vanguard beta and felt that it was basically Modern Warfare with worse guns (even worse, none of the guns appealed to me). So... /shrug?
Came in hot = wasn't finished in time, was not concluded in a satisfactory fashion. It means it was bad.
Posts
Hell yeah Scalebound baybee lesgoooo
We're gonna Air Bud this thing.
I bet it'll be more of a Harry and the Henderson's thing:
Over here in the UK (Rare's native land, of course), to people of a particular age *ahem*, the old Spectrum games that Rare Replay includes, from the aforementioned two through the likes of Jet Pac, Lunar Jetman and Sabre Wulf, are (mostly*) absolutely remembered and iconic games that defined the early years of an extraordinarily popular platform that in itself blew the doors off computer ownership in this country. I appreciate that that resonance may not apply elsewhere in the world and they might be little more than curiosities, but they were absolutely instrumental here not only in building Ultimate's name (prior to Rare) but were defining moments in computer gaming in the UK as a whole. They were at least (and may have been more so) as important to the early years of the Spectrum as they ever were to Nintendo in subsequent years. As primitive as, say, Knight Lore looks now, no-one had ever seen anything like it before when it came out.
* - Underwurlde is kinda debateable, granted, but given the other Sabreman games included, it'd stick out if it wasn't there and there's no reason at all for it not to be.
Steam | XBL
Xbox One/PS4 versions definitely look low-rez, but everything else looks fine.
Hilarity is they still manage put out GWGs that I already own. ._.
Only one I own, I'm fairly sure, is Hydrophobia. It's a pretty respectable little game, and the water physics were indeed impressive, it just has the little problem of a kind of abrupt
Oh, for sure -- I didn't even think I needed to elaborate on why the DKC games weren't on Rare Replay (though now I wonder if the Microsoft guy who thought they now owned Donkey Kong because they bought Rare is still there😹).
Sadly, I really liked SNES KI the best until the 2013 game, and even then, I still want them to re-release it. And Battlemaniacs, which I recall looking really nice, but being too hard to see much of (a little save state and rewind action would probably help that).
I keep my fingers crossed for a Rare Replay 2, or some a la carte releases. Especially Battletoads/Double Dragon in the latter case.
Like Mega Man Legends? Then check out my story, Legends of the Halcyon Era - An Adventure in the World of Mega Man Legends on TMMN and AO3!
Ever since the Xbox One tanked, Xbox has really felt like they were underdogs. Now don't get me wrong, that's kind of a dumb concept when Microsoft has always loomed behind them, but at the time they felt like an afterthought at MS. LIke the weird little project that got out of control but still lived apart. MS would throw them a big check here and there for vital stuff (like the billion to fix the Red Ring of Death) but ultimately they like they were one annoyed CEO away from getting axed.
And that was cool! So many awesome things came out of Xbox being on the backfoot; a refocus on games, a greater emphasis on powerful hardware, 360 and oXbox backwards compatibility and, of course, Gamepass/Xcloud.
Even the intial slate of acquisitions were cool; taking studios that were chronically stuck in the funding/publisher grind (Like Obsidian and Double Fine) and giving them the opportunity to stretch their wings without the fear of being stuck to a contract with a limited deadline and financing. The success of Psychonauts 2 is, to me, the proof of concept for these purchases.
But when MS was willing to drop 7.5 billion on Bethesda, that was kind of the beginning of the end. Microsoft has taken notice of Xbox in a big way and they're prepared to put their full titanic weight behind the endeavor. Dropping a figure like $70 billion on Activision (Which I'll contend is an anomaly that won't be repeated by any company any time soon. It was a perfect storm of opportunity and availability.) marks the end of Xbox as an underdog and now they're just another face, albiet, a much more pleasant and fun face, of the monolithic Microsoft. It also takes away from their successes; before Xbox was improving their standing by offering great services and hardware, and slowly improving their software lineup. Now, of COURSE they're going to succeed if Microsoft is buying out publishers. There's no suspense or intrigue left, just a big ol' dumptruck full of Microsoft money.
Basically it's no longer nearly as fun to root for Xbox, and that's a real bummer.
Hey I remember band of bugs during the XBLA/play as your avatar days. Fun times.
Kind of off topic, but does anyone remember that totem pole game where you had to use the camera? That was pretty bad.
The thing about all of this is that it wasn't that long ago that we literally had reports that Satya Nadella was asking Phil Spencer as to whether or not Microsoft even wanted to keep the Xbox brand. Now, I don't think Xbox was truly in danger at any point but it goes to show that the success of Xbox was not guaranteed and that people had to fight to keep it going, and those people are finally being taken seriously for once. I think that's something fans should be excited about.
(And it certainly hasn't deterred its detractors)
Jeff Grubb has been mentioning there was some financial reasons at the heart of this too. Basically now that Activision had gone all-in on Call of Duty and Blizzard, there isn't a lot of room for growth, especially with CoD's sales flagging. The pandemic is making this probably extremely difficult to solve, so combined with the all of the other shit, it made selling the obvious choice.
MS only bought Activision because Kotick's toxic culture came to light and dropped the value of the property by $20B. So they got it at a huge discount and expect the value to shoot up quickly to old levels. It's basically a way to make a free $20B plus a lot of knock off effects that will be beneficial for their Xbox program.
Whatever general failure it has, real or imagined, probably stems from that. The whole not exactly doing anything groundbreaking. If such a thing is even possible.
One of the problems Grubb talked about was that every non-CoD project had to be pitched as if it was going to make returns in that direction, even when the pitchers knew that wasn't going to happen. So you had people lying to even make games, and then someone had to be left holding the blame when they inevitably fell short of unreasonable expectations, or taking the brunt of budget shortfalls through no fault of their own. That environment of manipulation and blame game makes for its own kind of toxicity before you even get to sexual harassment.
Now I gotta upgrade my TV. Anyone have a suggestions? I don't need anything extravagant. Just something in the 42 to 50 range and that displays the games nicely.
I...dunno, I felt the opposite? I really liked Black Ops: Cold War and thought it did a good job at being an arena shooter. Sure, there were balance issues, but the game felt pretty good (for matches where cheaters weren't in abundance).
I dipped into the Vanguard beta and felt that it was basically Modern Warfare with worse guns (even worse, none of the guns appealed to me). So... /shrug?
I've had TCL as well and they're good value
Wasn't Cold War the one that didn't ship with a campaign?
EDIT: No wait, that was Black Ops 4. Too many Call of Duties. :biggrin:
I've had decent experiences with Vizio. Okay, tbf, my last Vizio kind of exploded, but apart from that little incident it was a good TV. I will say that if you want proper HDR/dimming/etc, you'll pay a bit more overall. Rtings.com is pretty solid for reviews/benchmarking/tuning of your TVs, too.
Bravia is hands down my favorite but v expensive
Came in hot = wasn't finished in time, was not concluded in a satisfactory fashion. It means it was bad.