This is how I look at it, and completely agree.flyinpiranha said:I don't mind the always on thing, but this basically means that I don't have the full game when I purchase it. Fuck that.
IlludiumQ36 said:First Carmack and now this. Is nothing sacred anymore?
evlcookie said:I thought the original game sold well? It sure as hell had a ton of sales over the past few years on steam that always pushed it to #1 on the charts.
Give me a break.Kuran said:Ugh.
And why does it need to be multi-console? It should've stayed on PC so it could actually, uh, evolve. Larger terrain/vehicles/etc. Not more confined and scripted like that Metro2033 garbage.
Exactly.jim-jam bongs said:This sucks. I have a great internet connection, but I don't buy games which require one for singleplayer because the idea of not being able to play a game whenever I want is a deal-breaker, no matter how rare that situation might be.
You're making an assumption that had Metro 2033 been developed on PC only, it would have been very different. Unless anyone has any insider info, impossible to tell.Kuran said:It's not about elitist, but the game will be limited in scope due to this. It is also worrying that the Stalker franchise can't just be ported to console.. it is a very 'hardcore appealing' series. I'm afraid it will be watered down/scripted hot mess such as the case with Metro 2033.
Time will tell.
markot said:So stupid. Will the console versions also need a permanent connection?