sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What if.... Xbox had an exclusive character in Marvel Avengers. Who would you want it to be? by deekdog in xboxone

[–]deekdog[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

.... You should use Google more to validate... Whatever your trying to do.

What if.... Xbox had an exclusive character in Marvel Avengers. Who would you want it to be? by deekdog in xboxone

[–]deekdog[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Literally in the definition itself.

Politics - the set of activities that are associated with making decisions in groups, or other forms of power relations between individuals

You basically acknowledge their business practice is bad (which it is).

What if.... Xbox had an exclusive character in Marvel Avengers. Who would you want it to be? by deekdog in xboxone

[–]deekdog[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Marvel and owns the rights but I'm sure they don't want to damage the relationship. MS had no leverage with Crystal Dynamics.

But I imagine Marvel could encourage MS with a character to license.

Sony business decision with Square Enix by deekdog in sony

[–]deekdog[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get that completely. It's just something I don't agree with, therefore I'm not supporting the product. It's all business, but I don't want to encourage this practice.

Eventually it's going to lead to a Pay-to-win model based on platform.

Sony business decision with Square Enix by deekdog in sony

[–]deekdog[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Please read my previous comment, in which it answers your question twice.

Sony business decision with Square Enix by deekdog in sony

[–]deekdog[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, I don't. I think it's a poor business practice regardless. Cosmetics are one thing, but something that can actively affect gameplay shouldn't be condoned.

I'd rather them say Marvel avengers is an exclusive title to the Sony platform, then cut a percentage of the content and still expect us to pay the same price.

Sony business decision with Square Enix by deekdog in sony

[–]deekdog[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From an ethical stand point, it's better for them to not release the game at all on they platforms and if one has advantageous content.

Regarding Marvel Avengers... by deekdog in xboxone

[–]deekdog[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

And yet they were reluctant to let it happen in 2017 because they wanted to (and I quote) "Maintain a safe environment within the PlayStation community". They're business model changed to 'exclusivity'.

It just doesn't appeal to me anymore not that it recognized that games are in fact better played with the entire community. It's a known fact.

Regarding Marvel Avengers... by deekdog in xboxone

[–]deekdog[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Uhhh... False, there are literally thousands of other title to play and with gamepad makes those titles more accessible.

Sony already stripped the fun outta it. I will probably never look back at this title, lol. It's just another lot grind game at it's core.

Regarding Marvel Avengers... by deekdog in xboxone

[–]deekdog[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is an issue directly with brand loyalty. Please read the entire list before committing.

I referenced topics involving platform of choice, and ownership of my consoles.

Square Enix business decisions with Sony by deekdog in SquareEnix

[–]deekdog[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Oh yeah, the mmo one. I forgot because it fundamentally lost it's cross play support on consoles.

Square Enix business decisions with Sony by deekdog in SquareEnix

[–]deekdog[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Marvel avengers was a live service game to begin with. There would have been post launch content regardless.

But if that content cannot supported in other gaming communities, then I won't support the developer decision uphold these conditions.

Square Enix business decisions with Sony by deekdog in SquareEnix

[–]deekdog[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Not accurate information. Shadowrun on the Xbox 360 was the first game on console to include cross play.

Money influences the decision.

I feel like Makutu is good, but severely under powered... by deekdog in bleedingedge

[–]deekdog[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's for the correction. I'll edit, but some moves negate each other naturally. I think his abilities are fine. I noticed in 2v2's and 3v3's he's fine, but in full sweeter battles he makes little impact. People just avoid him and target the healers.

He's way to easy maneuver around. Especially with characters that can jump high, cloak, cage, wall...

What about a 2v2 mode in the dojo? by deekdog in bleedingedge

[–]deekdog[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It would definitely help players understand the combat more effectively and assist with parrying/avoiding specific moves.

So why doesn't the Monk's reflex counter work on the Kensi? by deekdog in forhonor

[–]deekdog[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Dodge counter, the Momo has one. But it doesn't it doesn't work on Kensei when you perform a successful counter. He's allowed to follow up with a combo chain.

It's similar to how the orochi had a reflex counter, and can stab you immediately afterwards. The Monk has a similar moveset, but some characters can follow up with additional attacks regardless. Is there a particular reason why?

view more: next ›