Grindagger

@Col_McCafferty It's ok you can call me a robot. It's not the first time I've heard it.

Analytical thinking, not emotional. It's the way I was made. Also, I'm really not trying to denigrate anyone with what I'm saying, if people want to score stuff 10/10, go for it, it's just illogical.

Anyway, i'm peacing out of here, I think I agree with you, I've made my point about as crystal clear as I can, anyone who disagrees with it, is entitled to their views.

@Col_McCafferty Dude. I never said a game had to be perfect.

In fact I said quite the opposite. I simply pointed out that NO game should be given a 10/10 because the very premise of it, is asinine. That's literally it.

This is not a hate issue, it's a FACT issue. How anyone can possibly argue that 10/10 doesn't have to mean perfection is literally impossible for me not to ignore.

For the sake of argument. If i get 9 out of 10 questions right on a test, then I got 90% right, this score is not perfect, as I'd required 10 questions right to achieve a perfect score, however 9 questions out of 10 would still be exemplary. The problem with humans is they have to put 10/10 for things, even when they're not perfect, because their level of gushing love for something supersedes their ability to rationally use our own system as it was intended.

Then again, I do question humanity on these occasions, and maybe should (as you say) just take a step back, not everyone has common sense.

@Col_McCafferty I'm entitled to my views as much as you are.

@Mitsui Kind of disagreed with your own point there:

"nothing is perfect"
"so yes 10/10 is an outstanding achievement."

But if it's not perfect it can't be a 10. And there is room for improvement, so whilst something might be an outstanding achievement it is not a 10/10 as far as video games go.

A video game is not an exam sheet, it cannot be perfect.

Shame the game looks like complete garbage.

@Cloud39472 it's a fact that 10/10 denotes a perfect score. If it's not perfect it's not a 10 is it? How could you possibly argue to the contrary? There is no 11 out of a possible 10, therefore it is perfect, without question after process of simple elimination.

You can interpret 10/10 to mean something else if you so wish, but it is just that, your interpretation.

@Cloud3947 FYI those scores are rounded up, so they're not technically 5 star at all, because nothing is perfect.

Anyone who defends the position that a maximum score out of maximum is somehow a valuable distinction is not something I'm going to agree with, because there is literally nothing perfect and everything can be improved upon. Giving something a maximum score means it cant be improved on, which is... well complete and total bs.

@Nah900 People are entitled to think the game is a 10/10. It's their viewpoint, I just don't agree with it as a point of principal due to the fact that 95% of all reviews are given from a perspective of the individual writing it only.

When reading a good review, the person writing and relaying the information to their readers should try to incorporate all viewpoints, so as to ensure the readers are aware, and informed about every aspect of the game. The score most importantly should attempt to be levelled by an appropriate amount of objectivity, brought forward by looking at the game from several different angles, and not just their own.

If this is all done well, you'll end up with a well balanced, well described, and informative review. It's the up to the readers to make of it what they will, and what side of the multi-faceted coin they fall on, in regards to opinion.

@naruball Please try to read what I've put when responding to a comment I've made.

A simple mechanical score of a game can be objective because it can be provided in a format of a general consensus as opposed to a personal view only, and therefore unbiased. The review itself is what is the subjective part, but it shouldn't affect the scoring. You're conflating the two.

@Kasabian I mean, your comment makes the most sense out of what I've read in regards to scoring reviews for video games.

However, interpretative scoring isn't really something I'm an advocate of, because it just sullies the waters.

If you're going to interpret scores, kind of defeats the purpose of having them to begin with.

Mechanical scoring is the only true, tried, and tested way of scoring something definitively, that works, providing an objective score, even when you're giving a subjective narrative to support it.

This is a problem a lot of other people don't get, because they're maybe too short sighted, or just don't care.

The best reviewers of video games that I've read will attempt to incorporate their own idealistic views of the game, but also other peoples, because it provides a more well rounded, and accurate scoring of what the actual game is, rather than a biased view.

Basically, people scoring it a 10 are just as bad as people scoring it a 0.

@naruball Nah.

You're just upset because I have an opinion. It's ok, welcome to the internet.

Oh, and for the record, since you're apparently having to give me reading comprehension lessons, and yet you couldn't conclude that me talking about objective scoring was MY opinion.

The fact part is that people don't give objective opinions, hardly any do, and that upsets me, because I think we'd have a much better view of scored games if we did. People rate more with their hearts than they do their heads. It's a fact of life, but not going to stop me voicing my disdain regarding the matter.

@KratosMD I don't agree.

Just because a system has a score up to 10, does not mean anything has to be scored thusly.

The 10 is simply there to denote a perfect score. There are many things in life that need to be scored, and all of them have perfect scores ratings in some shape or form. Some can be reached, some can't, but the one thing that unites the scoring systems, is that the top number represents a perfect.

It just so happens that the medium of video games is objectively difficult to hit a 10, because of the nuance involved. I see no reason why games cannot be scored as 8 or 9 and still be recognized as exceptional.

Indeed there are already many games that have reached over a 9. Now, getting over a 9 is exceptional. A 10 however means there is no room for any errors, or problems, it is completely void of anything that could be considered a negative aspect. It's meant to be unreachable, but the closer you get to it, the closer you are to perfection, even when it's unreachable.

When using a straight 10 as a benchmark of "Well it's nearly perfect", well then why is it a 10? If it's not perfect, then what if they were to improve on it, is it going to be a 10.1 out of 10?

The whole idea is absurd in my opinion, and completely illogical.

@naruball Please explain to me how this is a strawman? I'm literally just speaking facts.

Objectively, no game is ever a 10/10, it's impossible, because there is always some flawed aspect of a game which has been noticed by people playing it. This is only natural, because (A) No game can appeal to everyone - Hence why when reviewing a game, you should remain objective, and accountable for ALL viewpoints, whether you agree with them or not, and give your views without prejudice. (B) All games made include errors, bugs, faux-pas, poor design decisions, limited scope, lazy scriptwriting etc.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but TLOU 2 is not an exception, or an exemption from the rule no matter how badly you wish it to be. Simply writing retorts to my commentary with the equivalence of what could be summed up as "lol", or literal textbook definition auto-responses straight out of the "How to own people on forums with a simple one liner" book, does not really build a strong case for your argument.

@naruball And 10/10 is objective? Flawless? No, it's not, whether you agree with that or not is irrelevant. Not everyone agrees, and the game is flawed. These are the facts. No game ever, can be a 10/10. To give a 10/10 is the stupidest thing I've ever seen. It's blatant fanboying, without objective reasoning.

Less sheeping, more reasoning.

@mogwaiking Dude, get a life.

Your comments are not some sort of holy grail that all of the world needs to see. If indeed your comments have been removed, it's likely for good reason.

Trying to shame the editors of the site isn't going to score you any browny points, furthermore it just makes you look like an upset crybaby, who is demanding that their commentary be reinstated on site because the entitlement for your voice to be heard somehow overshadows site rulings.

Herd mentality. Someone says it's good, everyone has to agree.

I'm not saying it's a terrible game, because clearly it's not, But it's not the greatest game ever made, it's ridden the hype train well and truly to maximum potential, and people have been riding that train all the way to the bank, good on 'em, they've got that down to a tee.

Objectively speaking, this game is a 7 out of 10. 8 if you're feeling overly generous.

Equally, these idiots over at metacritic giving it a 0/10 need a short, swift slap round the head.

People fawn over this title. Personally, I don't see what all the hype is about, unless you're just factoring in graphics. Sure the narrative and storytelling is pretty good, but it's just another zombie survival game thats been done 1,000 times over.

Whilst I wouldn't say it's a bad game, 10/10 is (in my humble opinion) an absurb scoring. Not to mention giving any game 10/10 is absurd, as if it has any flaws, it's can't be perfect, can it? I appreciate peoples excitement for a game, and the fact they may love it to pieces, but try to give an objective view, especially if you're a critic, reviewer or editor of any sort.

$599 for the disc drive version / $499 for the digital version. I feel reading these results these look suspiciously more like what people WANT it to cost, as opposed to what the reality of this is going to be. Unless Sony are planning on taking a pretty big hit on the cost of the console in order to rake it back in from loyalty sales (software, accesories etc - which is the only viable reason). I can't see this costing under those values. The SSD alone is an enormous cost, particularly since it's cutting edge SSD tech, not to mention the actual GPU and CPU power this behemoth is putting out.

Also, i understand at least some of that 1% is trolling, but the remaining few who legitimately think that either of these consoles are going to be under 300 bucks are seriously on some kind of drug.

Personally, never known why people gush over the Last of Us. To me, it's a good game, but very similar to a lot of other zombie apocalypse pop culture games, movies, books and TV series.

The one thing that distinguishes this from others is the scriptwriting, which I'll admit is second to none, but Naughty Dog has always been excellent in facilitating top tier storytelling. But there comes a point where perspective is lost, and rabid fanboying/girling takes over. This game has been hyped beyond it's actual recognition in my honest opinion, fawned over to the point where people wouldn't even consider criticizing it, or willing to accept it has flaws like other top tier triple A games that neither receive, or garner the same level of respect or hype that TLOU gets.

I guess that's just human nature at work.

The full black is infinitely better than the black and white.

Not to mention, the white will fade over time and end up looking like dogs**t.

I think you answered your own question, what happened to it? It was a rumour.

@Danloaded Yeah, I actually take back part of my comment, as slow internet I can imagine a game thats nearly 200gb must be a royal pain in the ass.

I have a 600mb line, and it took me about an hour to download the whole thing, so not nearly as irritating. If you've got anything less than like a 50mb line, must be pretty slow.

@eshy76 I guess it will be manageable to start with, as with all new consoles, lineup will likely be limited until we start getting a huge amount of content, so long as we can keep our PS4 libraries stocked up using old SSDs, i'm ok with that. Will there be a secondary bay? I.E one for PS5, and a secondary drive for PS4, would make sense.... Space is probably a problem though to do that. Oh well, guess we'll find out soon enough

Haha, almost comes across as sarcastic.... Can't tell if that was intentional, or was trying to come across as genuine and hope that people take it literally verbatim, I suppose it depends on what kind of person he is.

@carlos82 I agree, to a point, but MW is an immensely huge game, it has a lot of content. A lot of the content is optional download, so you can choose to download what you want to play. For example, you can get rid of the campaign d/l's once you've finished with the game, as well as other areas of the game, if you're the sort of person who only plays warzone or MP.

@Warspite2901 Valid point, I suppose if you have poor internet it can be a royal pain in the backside.

Here's hoping they optimize PSN for the PS5.

@Danloaded I don't personally see what's wrong with that. That's your permanent games sorted (if you're playing those all regularly). Then you have your perishable games...

@GADG3Tx87 Well well well, that's interesting. I must of missed that memo.

I'm assuming they'll support SSD upgrades though? If not, could get messy very quickly.

Anyone who believed this in the first place is gullible. Clearly a planned marketing stunt in the wake of a reveal to gather buzz.

Not sure why people get so upset with game file sizes. Yeah, ok, no doubt it is nearly 200gb, but even with a standard hard drive that leaves you with a good 300gb.

Presumably, if you're the sort of person who wants to have their whole library downloaded and available to you, then you (much like myself) would invest in a decent hard drive, external, internal, ssd whatever anywhere from 2-8gb.

Now, if you're not one of those people, then you presumably just download games as you play them, and delete anything else that you're either (a) not playing or (b) have finished. With a basic 500gb in all honesty you'll find yourself doing this pretty soon anyway, with or without games like Modern Warfare.

TL;DR - Get a bigger harddrive if file sizes are bothering you, and if not, just delete content. Giving companies more freedom to increase file size without causing detriment to the game quality is something I'd much rather have, than a game not functioning optimally just to save some GB on my harddrive.

You know what's going to potentially destroy PS5s capability.

People buying external standard harddrives, and then installing games on it that were made to run on SSDs, and they're going to realize it takes centuries to load the games up.

I'm surprised over 50% of people think there will be a reveal of PS5 on this games extravaganza reveal.

I think they're not ready yet to release the PS5 reveal, probably holding that card close to their chest.

Acknowledgement for the track is still far away from the compensation that was initially being called upon when this first became an issue.

She should be acknowledged for the inspiration for a track, but that's where it should begin, and end.

FYI video has now become private, so cannot view.

@Col_McCafferty Sure, but I would still like to point out that whilst there have been attempts to remove the statue previously, they were not unanimous votes amongst the society that held the votes. At the time before the statue was vandalized, they were in the process of extending the vote out to a larger portion of the society, as the mayor did not have a clear cut case at the time. I have no doubt that they would of reached a consensus of agreement, as the voices for the removal had slowly been gathering over time since 1990. Change doesn't happen all at once, but if it's meant to happen, and its for the good of society it will, in due course. Anyway, thats the last thing I have to say on the matter. Toodles.

@Col_McCafferty Mate, with due respect the petition was created literally hours after the event took place.

I'm all for quick, affirmative action, but, realistically, these things don't happen in a matter of hours. They have to go through due process. Taking the process into your own hands is not the right way to do things. If the answer you're providing is just do whatever you please, and to hell with the system, this is what brings about complete anarchy. No, if we want to be a civilized nation, and not send ourselves back to the dark ages, we take the necessary democratic process, and resolve the matter that way. Not vandalizing public property, vigilante style.

@JohnnyShoulder Yes, i'm not confused. This is exactly how I understood it.

Why does it need to be streamed live? Can't it just be released an an event for people to watch in full 4k glory, rather than an unnecessary live stream?

From my understanding, a live stream is mostly necessary for events that are, well, live.... and on site at a location somewhere, like E3 for example, secondly, for those people who are actually doing something live, and/or interacting with the live audience in real time.

From what I can see, this is a faux live event, that serves no purpose other than it being "live" for the sake of it.

@nessisonett Whilst I agree that what the statue stands for and represents as legitimate, and a abhorrent reminder of the slave trade, and everything it encompasses.

However, we live in a civilized, democratic society, not a backwashed, prehistoric "mob rules" dystopia. This kind of behaviour is unacceptable in a modern society.

Campaign to remove it, get a petition going, sure. 100%. I think it should be removed, and glad it has (although it will likely be recovered and end up in a historical museum somewhere - which is where it belongs in the first place).Whilst Colston was indeed a slave trader, during the time he was alive, a lot of people were, as it was unfortunately (at the time) the status quo. There are things that are currently acceptable in our modern day, that will almost certainly be looked at abhorrently by our future kin, aghast at the barbaric injustices of our basic neolithic practices. But at this time, it would be considered civilized.

I digress, as my point is that, the actions taken are not justified. You do not right one wrong, by creating another one.

@carlos82 Oh i see...

So, the actual footage is only in 1080p because of the actual stream, not the footage itself being the limitation.

Hmmm, well...Not sure how I feel about this. I don't get why it's got to be live in that case, it's not like there is a live Q&A taking place, or any interaction from fans during the event, so what exactly would be the difference between a prerecorded conference, and a live one in this particular instance, other than just being obstinately stubborn about it being a live event?

@carlos82 I'm pretty sure the footage will be prerecorded. Especially considering the nature of the current situation.

It's highly unlikely it's going to be a livestream of someone playing in real time. And if it is, that doesn't make much sense, because you could just script the gameplay to make it look like its live, and keep the fidelity and image quality decent.

Sounds a bit dubious to me.

I get that 4k files are big, but it's not like they haven't had time to sort this kind of stuff out. Sounds like they're not confident with the graphical fidelity of the games in their current state to showcase at 4k, and at a steady frame rate. I'd love to think that this is me just being overly cynical here, but I fear that it's more than that...

Edit: Also anyone here who says they can't tell the difference clearly has never really used or played with a decent 4k television before. Or if they have they have diminished eyesight, because there is a significant difference between 1080p and 4k, the fidelity and crispness of the picture is easily noticeable.

@get2sammyb Debate is the spice of life. We'd all be very boring if we had the same perspectives!

The things i've learned most in life have come from differing perspectives. But more than that, it's been those willing to hear others perspectives with a level of maturity and understanding that often have the greatest impact. Even if you disagree on a matter, there no reason not for it to remain respectful.

It's great that they're implementing these initiatives.

But, it does leave me wondering why these weren't added in the first place?

@MattSilverado Er, for the most part those are the same notes that are sung in the original song, it is a cover after all. Not surprising that the covers follow the original melody.

This is the stupidest thing I've ever read.

How can someone plaguerize a song that's not even theirs to start with?

Secondly (and I must admit I'm not an expert on law when it comes to music copyright, so correct me if i'm wrong), but there are loads of songs that bear similarities, hell there are youtube channels that purposefully showcase the similarities between certain songs. But these are people copying other peoples songs.

How can you copyright a cover of a song? It's not theirs, so it's just down to a stylistic play, which is open to huge subjective process, especially when you're just doing covers of an original, of course people are bound to create songs that sound identical, as many people are going to try and use similar styles.

Bottom line, if you're doing a cover of someone elses track, you don't own jack.

Are you guys trying to rub it in? lol

Some people here are clearly missing the point.

No one here (at least I damn well hope not) is saying that the movement BLM isn't important. What most people have a problem with (myself included) is that this has turned into a choo choo train of empty platitudes from corporate execs trying to raise their own profiles by bandwagoning.

These BS statements that are being thrown around (almost farcically at this point) undermines the actual severity of the real subject at hand, which requires serious societal readjustment, and a lot of funding for any real systemic injustice to be weeded out of the system for such a vast country.

The truth of the matter, is that these false statement do nothing but steal the limelight from the movement, and generate negativity and controversy amongst the ranks. Just look at the disagreements here between people on whether these are a good or bad thing.

@ApostateMage My view is the same for both.

@wiiware Yeah, it's been a rough year.

I genuinely am just trying to give my perspective on corporate greed, and how they use platforms like this to manipulate the general public by using sympathy to boost their image.

EA, particularly, I have a bone to pick with, because they use any underhand tactic they can to keep the general public coming back time after time, even when they've proven themselves to be a diabolically reprehensible company, and morally corrupt to the core.

It's hard to consider EA, and not immediately think of a pejorative as an explanatory word, and yet, they bandwagon like this, and suddenly they're the light of the life, people flock to it, like sheeps, hit with instantaneous amnesia about all the crap the company had done beforehand, immediately relinquished of any wrong doing.

This is textbook corporate manipulation, at it's finest, and people should see it for what it is.

@wiiware I don't think anyone is doubting the issue at hand as being nefarious. However, companies like EA have stakeholders, and stakeholders only care about profit margin, particularly this company.

Any, and all decisions made by corporate industry leaders are made with the bottom line in mind. So, I can assure you that this decision is almost entirely made with the companies image in mind, and NOT because (as someone already said) they have a conscience.

If these companies really do care about BLM, then they should make a significant donation to the cause that will actually contribute towards a measured change. If all these massive conglomerates did, the BLM movement would have enough money to make immense strides in combating this embedded tyrannical regime that runs rampant across America's policing system, rather than, empty platitudes that only looks like bandwagoning, and scheduled passive self-aggrandizing.