Game makers hopeful of being able to update their worlds on the fly Share this Tweet + Submit Article To N4G Submit Article To Reddit Submit Article To del.icio.us Submit Article To Digg Submit Article To StumbleUpon Close Comments 28 By Tom Ivan for computerandvideogames.com
A number of developers have expressed hope that Xbox 720 and PlayStation 4, or whatever Microsoft's and Sony's next generation consoles are called, will be more open development platforms than their predecessors. 
While PC games can largely be updated on the fly relatively inexpensively to offer new content or fixes, making changes to console titles often requires cutting through a lot of red tape. Ultimately, the argument goes, these issues can affect the quality of the game and console owners get a rough deal.
"It's sometimes expensive, there's an awful lot of bureaucracy, even when you want to do quite small things," David Polfeldt of Ubisoft Massive, the studio behind Far Cry 3's multiplayer component, told Gamasutra.
"If I agree with [a suggested fix], I start to think 'Oh yeah, to change that I would have to -- oh shit, it's just too much work.' And I won't change it even if I think [the feedback] is right."
Crytek's global business development director Carl Jones agreed: "I think that'd be really helpful [if the consoles were more open], because certainly we're seeing a change in models in games toward more freemium content, and a quicker response to your community.
"We're always going to need quality control," he added. "We're going to need a decent submission process, to get the first version of a game out, and make sure it's solid and everyone gets a good experience. But during that period, if developers can be generating content that they know they can shoot out really quickly, on demand, well, I think the tail of that game becomes longer, the overall revenue from that game becomes higher, and everybody wins."
Capcom senior vice president Christian Svensson commented: "I'm hoping for a much more fluid means of providing updates to consumers, being able to have a much more rapid turnaround in between when content is submitted and when content goes live to consumers, to provide a higher level of service to them.
"I'm hoping that the networking and the processes in the future are built with that in mind. I'd like to see more server-based backends that are more under publisher-developer control, rather than being forced through systems that are bit more pre-defined by the first-party. That would enable experiences online that are not currently available in today's console marketplace."
PS4 and Xbox 720 are rumoured to be in line for release next year, and both are said to feature inbuilt anti-used games measures.
Microsoft's most recent comment on Xbox 360's as-yet-unannounced successor is that "there will be no talk of new Xbox hardware at E3 or anytime soon".
Asked last month about Sony's plans for new home console hardware, US PlayStation boss Jack Tretton played down the chances of the company launching PS4 any time soon.
computerandvideogames.com Tom Ivan Recommended Links From The Web Comments 28 comments so far... Post a comment
Report this post Reply with quote Paranoimia on 31 Mar '12 said: Yeah, that's just what we need - less red tape so devs like Bethesda can release even more buggy, incomplete, untested games and patch it all later.
If you're that sick of the 'red tape', here's a thought: how about you concentrate on creating games that work properly upon release so that you don't have to patch them later, thereby avoiding the red tape involved in getting patches approved.
The online aspect introduced with this generation of consoles is becoming more of a curse than a blessing; as well as virtually killing local multiplayer, far too many developers and publishers are adopting the 'release now, patch later' philosophy.
Report this post Reply with quote morikaweb on 31 Mar '12 said:[quote="Paranoimia"far too many developers and publishers are adopting the 'release now, patch later' philosophy.
Actually its more release now, say well patch latter, then when the customer has already bought it walk away laughing. Since there are basically no consumer protection laws because its "merely a game" they can get away with virtual theft. Instead of less red tape, we need more legal protections!
Report this post Reply with quote ted1138 on 31 Mar '12 said: What about those patches that break games that were working fine before? It's the console maker's reputation that takes a hit more than the publisher or developer...
Report this post Reply with quote Fr33Kye on 31 Mar '12 said:Yeah, that's just what we need - less red tape so devs like Bethesda can release even more buggy, incomplete, untested games and patch it all later.
If you're that sick of the 'red tape', here's a thought: how about you concentrate on creating games that work properly upon release so that you don't have to patch them later, thereby avoiding the red tape involved in getting patches approved.
The online aspect introduced with this generation of consoles is becoming more of a curse than a blessing; as well as virtually killing local multiplayer, far too many developers and publishers are adopting the 'release now, patch later' philosophy.
O.o Are you joking? The problem is patching something on consoles is not easy or cheap. And for bethesda games, there are going to be bugs, you just have to deal with that. Yes bethesda may drop the ball but no matter what for a game like skyrim it was going to be filled with bugs. If you want big games, expect bugs. Oh and just because they catch bugs doesn't mean they will be in time for release, deadlines and whatnot so i wouldn't recommend you blame developers. And sometimes it's not even bugs it's just fan feedback, even games that work well on release can still have things that need to be fixed. Games are software as well as media.
Report this post Reply with quote TheLastDodo on 31 Mar '12 said: Yeah, that's just what we need - less red tape so devs like Bethesda can release even more buggy, incomplete, untested games and patch it all later.
If you're that sick of the 'red tape', here's a thought: how about you concentrate on creating games that work properly upon release so that you don't have to patch them later, thereby avoiding the red tape involved in getting patches approved.
The online aspect introduced with this generation of consoles is becoming more of a curse than a blessing; as well as virtually killing local multiplayer, far too many developers and publishers are adopting the 'release now, patch later' philosophy.
Well said.
Report this post Reply with quote Mmmmgrolsch on 1 Apr '12 said: Yeah, that's just what we need - less red tape so devs like Bethesda can release even more buggy, incomplete, untested games and patch it all later.
If you're that sick of the 'red tape', here's a thought: how about you concentrate on creating games that work properly upon release so that you don't have to patch them later, thereby avoiding the red tape involved in getting patches approved.
The online aspect introduced with this generation of consoles is becoming more of a curse than a blessing; as well as virtually killing local multiplayer, far too many developers and publishers are adopting the 'release now, patch later' philosophy.
Excellent post, well said! If I had my way the whole industry would be regulated and games like Skyrim would never see the light of day until it was finished.
Report this post Reply with quote GeneralTechnique on 1 Apr '12 said: This isn't even coming from developers, as much as it's coming from money grubbing publshers.
Also, this isn't even about a more open development platform, as much as it's about greedy publishers wanting more freedom to drain their console-based consumers dry.
Think about how much more awesome it would be if publishers could release awesome MAP PACKS..... one map at a time. They could vomit out a map, weapon, or other piece of downloadable content, every other week. Conditioning their player-based into steady, impulse-puchasing, steams of revenue. With enough "freeedom", they could effectively steer their customers into obsessing over pay-to-win-style content systems.
Report this post Reply with quote billysastard on 1 Apr '12 said:Yeah, that's just what we need - less red tape so devs like Bethesda can release even more buggy, incomplete, untested games and patch it all later.
If you're that sick of the 'red tape', here's a thought: how about you concentrate on creating games that work properly upon release so that you don't have to patch them later, thereby avoiding the red tape involved in getting patches approved.
The online aspect introduced with this generation of consoles is becoming more of a curse than a blessing; as well as virtually killing local multiplayer, far too many developers and publishers are adopting the 'release now, patch later' philosophy.
along with (almost) everyone else i'd like to add my congratulations on an excellent post.
Report this post Reply with quote Fr33Kye on 1 Apr '12 said:This isn't even coming from developers, as much as it's coming from money grubbing publshers.
Also, this isn't even about a more open development platform, as much as it's about greedy publishers wanting more freedom to drain their console-based consumers dry.
Think about how much more awesome it would be if publishers could release awesome MAP PACKS..... one map at a time. They could vomit out a map, weapon, or other piece of downloadable content, every other week. Conditioning their player-based into steady, impulse-puchasing, steams of revenue. With enough "freeedom", they could effectively steer their customers into obsessing over pay-to-win-style content systems.
Excellent post, well said! If I had my way the whole industry would be regulated and games like Skyrim would never see the light of day until it was finished.
I feel insane. Here's a secret, you could spend a millions of dollars on quality assurance for skyrim, AND THERE WOULD STILL BE BUGS. Even if a team of testers rarely find bugs, a lot are going to be found when MILLIONS PLAY THE GAME. I understand that bugs are terrible, but what game has more content and scope than skyrim? I'm sure they could release an elder scrolls with much less bugs if it was a corridor hack and slash. And ps3's poorly designed blahblahblah. Also developers DO want this, because patching on consoles is expensive and apparently not very easy. Which is why pc's are mmo friendly, and why tf2 is possible, and it's why dust 514 is not on xbox. Developers want a more open platform as well.
Report this post Reply with quote Mmmmgrolsch on 1 Apr '12 said: I didn't say anything about bugs. But are you seriously arguing and defending Skyrims p**s poor QA? 
No wonder the gaming industry has become such a mess. The game doesn't/didn't work for months for s**t loads of people!
My heart f**king bleeds for them because its expensive to patch games 
They should be fined for it! I don't want perfect games, just not s**te like Fallout New Vegas and broken CoD games.
It's like every developer in the last 3 years have forgotten all about proper QA. You can argue their side all day long, its not my problem to feel sorry for them. I don't care 1 bit about how much costs are for their uncontrolled budgets or how hard something is. I'm a customer so why would it be in my interest to take it up the arse?
I'm not blaming Developers here, its the greedy fat c**ts Publishers that are destroying the whole industry. It's all about mugging consumers today 
Only games that sell in the millions will even be patched anyway.
I think there needs to be some set standard in the industry as its all spiralled out of control.
Report this post Reply with quote fatherofthenoo on 1 Apr '12 said: In my opinion, there needs to be MORE red tape. When a game is released it should be in its complete form, fully checked for bugs and a solid piece of software. But since the patch/update culture emerged, thank you Mr. internet, games have become incomplete bugfests that developers can't be bothered to finish during the development cycle. So they try to cover up their laziness with patches and updates. I say, penalize them for their laziness. Make them finish their games properly, like the good old days, and then release them. And if they want to try and fix their mistakes through the internet, make it bloody hard for them to do so. Yes, this is just my opinion, but when every game I buy for my PS3 needs at least one update each, it makes me realize that developers just aren't releasing the finished product any more. And don't even get me started on Gran Turismo 5.
Report this post Reply with quote lordirongut on 1 Apr '12 said: Anyone defending Bethesda needs to spend some time with the unpatched PS3 version which was practically released in Beta. The RimLag situation made it quite obvious that Bethesda don't do any form of QA testing.
Report this post Reply with quote fatherofthenoo on 1 Apr '12 said: Just noticed the other comments on here and I agree with them, except yours, Fr33kye. You shouldn't be making excuses for Bethesda. If their games are too complex to ensure a high standard of quality, then they should make them simpler until they find a way to ensure that that high quality can be met. They chose to make it a complex game so the fault sits with them.
But publishers are also to blame in all this for pushing very tight deadlines on developers and stressing them out. In the creative industries it is happy, healthy workers that produce the finest products.
Report this post Reply with quote BruceFace on 1 Apr '12 said:It makes me sad that I still can't play Fallout 3 properly (PS3 goty edition and normal edition with the DLC downloaded), and The Pitt is still unplayable.
No chance of a patch happening any time soon, right?
they cant make good games the first time, especially western devs
Report this post Reply with quote TheLastDodo on 1 Apr '12 said: I didn't say anything about bugs. But are you seriously arguing and defending Skyrims p**s poor QA? No wonder the gaming industry has become such a mess. The game doesn't/didn't work for months for s**t loads of people!
My heart f**king bleeds for them because its expensive to patch games They should be fined for it! I don't want perfect games, just not s**te like Fallout New Vegas and broken CoD games.
It's like every developer in the last 3 years have forgotten all about proper QA. You can argue their side all day long, its not my problem to feel sorry for them. I don't care 1 bit about how much costs are for their uncontrolled budgets or how hard something is. I'm a customer so why would it be in my interest to take it up the arse?
I'm not blaming Developers here, its the greedy fat c**ts Publishers that are destroying the whole industry. It's all about mugging consumers today Only games that sell in the millions will even be patched anyway.
I think there needs to be some set standard in the industry as its all spiralled out of control.
I agree but don't tar everyone with the same brush, there are still many developers that take pride in releasing games that work properly (Naughty Dog, Valve, Nintendo, Rockstar to name a few high profile ones).
But I agree on Bethesda, that was all of their own making, they named a release date they couldn't make, they didn't test Skyrim PS3 to the extent they should've, they released it in that state then to top it all off they didn't send out PS3 review code in the hopes that no-one would find out, that is not on.
Fr33kye: You're out of line on this one. No one cares about a floating mammoth bug, it's immersion breaking, it's a minor annoyance but it's not game breaking, 'Rimlag' was and still we be for those not on the internet.
Report this post Reply with quote trooperdx3117 on 1 Apr '12 said:Why is everyone here so concentrated on skyrim, I know it was bad but think beyond that look at multiplayer games like battlefield 3 or team fortress 2. All multiplayer games will need to get patched either for bug fixes or balance fixes, by having this red tape it makes it much harder to fix games. And think about it as well, its because of this publishere certification that we dont get free dlc anymore for games, it all has to be charged for because sony and Microsoft wont let developers give stuff for free, thats exactly why team fortress 2 is in the state its in on ps3 and 360!
Report this post Reply with quote Fr33Kye on 2 Apr '12 said:I didn't say anything about bugs. But are you seriously arguing and defending Skyrims p**s poor QA? No wonder the gaming industry has become such a mess. The game doesn't/didn't work for months for s**t loads of people!
My heart f**king bleeds for them because its expensive to patch games They should be fined for it! I don't want perfect games, just not s**te like Fallout New Vegas and broken CoD games.
It's like every developer in the last 3 years have forgotten all about proper QA. You can argue their side all day long, its not my problem to feel sorry for them. I don't care 1 bit about how much costs are for their uncontrolled budgets or how hard something is. I'm a customer so why would it be in my interest to take it up the arse?
I'm not blaming Developers here, its the greedy fat c**ts Publishers that are destroying the whole industry. It's all about mugging consumers today Only games that sell in the millions will even be patched anyway.
I think there needs to be some set standard in the industry as its all spiralled out of control.
For the record i dont think the developer handled the QA for new vegas. I think that's usually the publishers job, they sometimes hire third parties to do it. I'm just saying that games are a technical product as well as media and if we want them bigger and better and more open with more choices then expect bugs.
Only games that sell in the millions will even be patched? Isn't that a good reason consumers should want lower costs for patching? Because for games that dont sell incredibly well patching may not even be worth it in the eyes of the devs/publishers. So maybe we should care that patching is expensive, because it affects us as well.
Report this post Reply with quote Fr33Kye on 2 Apr '12 said:Dodo: I thought that's why i said blah blah blah ps3 blah blah biggest game ever.
In my opinion, there needs to be MORE red tape. When a game is released it should be in its complete form, fully checked for bugs and a solid piece of software. But since the patch/update culture emerged, thank you Mr. internet, games have become incomplete bugfests that developers can't be bothered to finish during the development cycle. So they try to cover up their laziness with patches and updates. I say, penalize them for their laziness. Make them finish their games properly, like the good old days, and then release them. And if they want to try and fix their mistakes through the internet, make it bloody hard for them to do so. Yes, this is just my opinion, but when every game I buy for my PS3 needs at least one update each, it makes me realize that developers just aren't releasing the finished product any more. And don't even get me started on Gran Turismo 5.
Do people realize that if games take MORE time in development that means they have to sell more? Is that a good thing with struggling sales already? Do you know why enslaved didn't bankrupt ninja theory? Because they spent half the time they spent on heavenly sword. The game might actually have a future rather than another closed developer. Although i dont think ninja theory or that big and i doubt they would be bankrupt if this were the case but my point still stands! There are a lot of f**king problems in the industry and limiting developers isn't going to solve them. It's just going to cause more bugs and more deaths.
Report this post Reply with quote agentxnofx on 2 Apr '12 said:Imagines forced broken updates...
/shudders in fear.
Yeah, how about no. Basically they're saying, "Boy, I sure do wish there were even less standards for our updates.".
Report this post Reply with quote snake2011 on 2 Apr '12 said:Yeah, that's just what we need - less red tape so devs like Bethesda can release even more buggy, incomplete, untested games and patch it all later.
If you're that sick of the 'red tape', here's a thought: how about you concentrate on creating games that work properly upon release so that you don't have to patch them later, thereby avoiding the red tape involved in getting patches approved.
The online aspect introduced with this generation of consoles is becoming more of a curse than a blessing; as well as virtually killing local multiplayer, far too many developers and publishers are adopting the 'release now, patch later' philosophy.
great post you read my mind.
Report this post Reply with quote Mmmmgrolsch on 2 Apr '12 said: I didn't say anything about bugs. But are you seriously arguing and defending Skyrims p**s poor QA? No wonder the gaming industry has become such a mess. The game doesn't/didn't work for months for s**t loads of people!
My heart f**king bleeds for them because its expensive to patch games They should be fined for it! I don't want perfect games, just not s**te like Fallout New Vegas and broken CoD games.
It's like every developer in the last 3 years have forgotten all about proper QA. You can argue their side all day long, its not my problem to feel sorry for them. I don't care 1 bit about how much costs are for their uncontrolled budgets or how hard something is. I'm a customer so why would it be in my interest to take it up the arse?
I'm not blaming Developers here, its the greedy fat c**ts Publishers that are destroying the whole industry. It's all about mugging consumers today Only games that sell in the millions will even be patched anyway.
I think there needs to be some set standard in the industry as its all spiralled out of control.
For the record i dont think the developer handled the QA for new vegas. I think that's usually the publishers job, they sometimes hire third parties to do it. I'm just saying that games are a technical product as well as media and if we want them bigger and better and more open with more choices then expect bugs.
Only games that sell in the millions will even be patched? Isn't that a good reason consumers should want lower costs for patching? Because for games that dont sell incredibly well patching may not even be worth it in the eyes of the devs/publishers. So maybe we should care that patching is expensive, because it affects us as well.
Not at all. If it becomes easier and cheaper all that it will do is encourage much more laziness and a bigger step up in the 'take money now, fix maybe later' attitude most publishers have taken on. I say they should be forced to finish their games or be severely punished.
Report this post Reply with quote Mmmmgrolsch on 2 Apr '12 said: Imagines forced broken updates...
/shudders in fear.
Yeah, how about no. Basically they're saying, "Boy, I sure do wish there were even less standards for our updates.".
I'm glad theres a few people on these boards like yourself with brains to see this.
Report this post Reply with quote BruceFace on 2 Apr '12 said:The mindset of developers this generation: "If I agree with , I start to think 'Oh yeah, to change that I would have to -- oh s**t, it's just too much work.' And I won't change it even if I think is right."
Screw fixes for the customers (even though you're the ones that brought out a broken game): too much work.
"But during that period, if developers can be generating content that they know they can shoot out really quickly..."
Fixes? Nawwww! DLC! And lots of it >: D
Report this post Reply with quote Fr33Kye on 2 Apr '12 said:
Not at all. If it becomes easier and cheaper all that it will do is encourage much more laziness and a bigger step up in the 'take money now, fix maybe later' attitude most publishers have taken on. I say they should be forced to finish their games or be severely punished.
Do people really believe that the only thing preventing developers from breaking games with updates is the red tape of platform holders? That's complete bulls**t. Do you actually think developers are just too lazy to fix their bugs? Even if bugs are found that doesn't mean they have the time to be fixed. And all more red tape will do is mean the biggest games can afford to patch them later, and everything else would be f**ked. Also it makes mmos and multiplayer games extremely difficult.
The mindset of developers this generation: "If I agree with , I start to think 'Oh yeah, to change that I would have to -- oh s**t, it's just too much work.' And I won't change it even if I think is right."
Screw fixes for the customers (even though you're the ones that brought out a broken game): too much work.
"But during that period, if developers can be generating content that they know they can shoot out really quickly..."
Fixes? Nawwww! DLC! And lots of it >: D
Alright i'm going to try to explain this to you. Quality assurance, is a different team. Dlc is likely done by people who would otherwise be doing nothing. Even if problems are found, they might not have time. If they take more time, they need more money. Who is that f**king stupid to believe that developers consciously choose not to fix bugs?
Imagines forced broken updates...
/shudders in fear.
Yeah, how about no. Basically they're saying, "Boy, I sure do wish there were even less standards for our updates.".
I'm glad theres a few people on these boards like yourself with brains to see this.
Do you really believe that platform holders are the only thing preventing developers from breaking their games? Are they that incompetent? If you believe a developer is that incompetent then dont buy their games.
Red tape is the reason dust 514 is on ps3 and not xbox. It's the reason many games aren't on wiiware. So what happens when publishers aren't seeing enough return and consoles are seen as archaic and not the "hot" platform? They move to browser, social, casual and mobile games. Then suddenly big console titles aren't anywhere near as attractive, a business model that doesn't work and red tape that doesn't allow for it to change, what do you think is going to happen? If there is more red tape they are going to play it even safer than before and the only games that get patched are going to be sequels that sell well into the millions. And even when they do patches WILL TAKE EVEN LONGER, if they come at all.
Report this post Reply with quote BruceFace on 2 Apr '12 said:
Alright i'm going to try to explain this to you. Quality assurance, is a different team. Dlc is likely done by people who would otherwise be doing nothing. Even if problems are found, they might not have time. If they take more time, they need more money. Who is that f**king stupid to believe that developers consciously choose not to fix bugs?
"If I agree with , I start to think 'Oh yeah, to change that I would have to -- oh s**t, it's just too much work.' And I won't change it even if I think is right." That and games with huge problems still aren't fixed, and will never be (an example being Fallout 3 and it's DLC.)
Post a comment Related content
Xbox 720 360 Microsoft 32 more Latest News Next-gen consoles 'aren't the answer' - Spector Xbox 720 has Blu-ray, 2 GPUs, always-on internet - Rumour Features & Interviews If Xbox 720 cans pre-owned, we all lose Opinion: Don't declare war on the used game market, says James Jenkins
Xbox 720: Inside the next Xbox - Every rumour about Xbox 720Updated: Specs, release date, games rumours and more for Xbox 720
Xbox 720: Why it's already hereMicrosoft's new Dashboard is an indication of where Xbox is headed next...
Popular Now 1 Xbox 360 gets special edition chrome controllers 2 Mass Effect 3 complete scanning guide - and how to get the best possible ending 3 BioShock Infinite: The possibilities are endless in Irrational's secretive sequel #filler_container { width: 130px; height: 600px; } #filler_controls { display: block; position: absolute; top: 576px; left: 90px; z-index: 1000; width: auto; } #filler_slides { position: relative; overflow: hidden; } img.filler { border: none; width: 130px; height: 600px; } a.filler_prev1 { width: 10px; height: 14px; background-position: 11px 0px; background-image:url('http://cdn.medialib.computerandvideogames.com/misc/sprite_filler.png'); display: block; float: left; } a.filler_prev1:hover { width: 10px; height: 14px; background-position: 11px 16px; background-image:url('http://cdn.medialib.computerandvideogames.com/misc/sprite_filler.png'); display: block; } a.filler_next1 { width: 10px; height: 14px; background-position: 0px 0px; background-image:url('http://cdn.medialib.computerandvideogames.com/misc/sprite_filler.png'); display: block; float: right; } a.filler_next1:hover { width: 10px; height: 16px; background-position: 0px 16px; background-image:url('http://cdn.medialib.computerandvideogames.com/misc/sprite_filler.png'); display: block; } div.filler_control-buttons { width: 30px; height: 16px; } div.filler_clear { clear: both; }
Got a hot tip or a piece of news you think we should cover? Email: news@cvg.co.uk
OPM EDGE Games Radar Skullgirls release date set for April Xbox 720 will be a powerhouse, require always-on internet connection [Rumor] Rampage movie finds a scribe Super Meat Boy: The Game unveiled for iOS GAME not dead - jobs and stores saved as high street retailer finds buyer Mass Effect 3 update: Cupcakes for hungry kids, because Mass Effect Zipper Interactive, Unit 13/SOCOM developer, has closure confirmed by Sony World of Warcraft: Mists of Pandaria beta opens up to 100,000 new players Devil May Cry HD Collection release date jumps forward to... right now NIS America announces Legasista, Mugen Souls and The Witch and the Hundred Knights
Get more from CVG BioShock Infinite: The possibilities are endless in Irrational's secretive sequel Crytek interview: 'We don't want to be the company that just does sci-fi shooters' Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Online free beta key giveaway! GAME saved: Comet parent rescues 333 stores The 15 worst decisions in Nintendo gaming history Around the network - spring tail ender The face of tomorrow: How PS4 and Xbox 3's visuals will change gaming GAME 'unlikely to honour gift vouchers' despite rewards backtrack Max Payne 3: 4 hours with Rockstar's seriously impressive multiplayer I play games. I am not a 'gamer'. Dragon's Dogma video guide: Delve deeper into Japan's answer to Skyrim 
CVG Gaming since 1981 Top of page Navigation Xbox PlayStation Nintendo PC Forums News Reviews Previews Features Interviews Competitions Game A to Z Contact us Sitemap Find us online Twitter Follow us on Twitter @CVG_UK Facebook Join us on Facebook fb.com/ComputerandVideoGames YouTube Watch us on YouTube youtube.com/user/cvg RSS Keep up to date RSS Feed Top games Mass Effect 3 Mass Effect 3 Mass Effect 3 PS Vita Resident Evil 6 Top reviews Ridge Racer Unbounded review: A series reboot that's slow off the grid Kid Icarus Uprising review: Daring reinvention is 3DS's most exciting game yet Silent Hill Downpour review: Promising ideas buried by lack of focus Resident Evil: Operation Raccoon City Review: A braindead romp with an itchy trigger finger Ninja Gaiden 3 review: Less brutal, less sadistic - and better for it Staff John Houlihan @johnh259 Andy Robinson @Espio1 Tom Ivan Tamoor Hussain @tamoorh Thomas East Edwin Thirlwell Evans Mike Jackson James Jarvis David Boddington Gav Murphy Darren Wells @DarrenWells Shaun Prescott @shaun_prescott Rob Edwards @roblastcav View the Original article
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment