Shagger

Well, technically this isn't my own artwork or customisation, but my current PS4 Pro is a pretty sweet Star Wars themed limited edition. I actually found it second hand at my local CEX (or Entertainment Exchange) store for about £200 I think a year or two ago. I was only looking for a replacement for my broken console, so I was pretty chuffed to find this.

These days, you can use just about any controller on a PC. I even saw an article just today that confirms Sony now make Dualsense controller updates available for PC players without needing a PS5 console. Not that your wrong @Heatman, far from it. Xbox controllers have been the accept default for gamepads on PC for quite some time, so a lot of games, especially games that are a little older. Many games never had PlayStation button prompt graphics added to them at all, whilst using a PS4 or PS5 controller will work just fine, it's not without it's problems. Back to original topic. The best thing that Xbox and (Windows) PC's share is indeed your Microsoft account, making a lot Xbox games you bought digitally available on your PC as well. And then there is Gamepass. It's been discussed a lot on the forum, so I won't go into the details, but It really the best thing about the Xbox brand right now.

I'm not so sure about that. If somebody does a painting of a view that includes, let's say, a country house or a a landmark, the owners of that landmark can't claim to own that painting. I see a similar issue with game developers claiming ownership of works created using a photo mode, not to mention it would be terrible PR and probably not very economical to bring to court anyway.

This is quite the undertaking. Please keep us posted on this journey. I have similar love/hate relationship with some older PC games. The outdated interfaces and primitive graphics, but they a certain charm.

Welcome to VGR. Let me know id=f there is anything you need help with.

I don't know if I'm reading this all wrong or something, but it looks you're defending this sort of thing. Pay-to-win is never acceptable under any circumstances. It's takes away the accomplishment of victory, it removes any sense of fairness and valour in defeat, it invalidates competition, it's lazy and it's greedy. It makes a game worse if not ruin it completely, pure and simple and every time. And as I explained earlier, cosmetic microtransactions aren't much better.

It's playing the games in the correct chronological order of the story that's the issue. I can't just choose one at random to start. If you knew anything about how the games have has add-on, re-releases, new versions and compilations added to series over years, you would know how complicated it is. And since you clearly didn't know any of this I must ask, and this is will all due respect and with full knowledge that you were only trying to help (and I genuinely apricate that), but why try to answer a question you obviously didn't know the answer too? EDIT: You know what, never mend. I think I answered my own question by looking your recent activity. 25 posts in the space of 36 minutes. That's 1-3/4 of post every minute. No wonder that reply felt pointless and rushed when you didn't even give yourself two minutes to think of what to say and type it out. You know what, if I'm only worthy of that kind of effort when you address me on this forum, please don't bother replying to my posts.

Can you elaborate? What are differences between the old Lara and the new Lara that bring you to that conclusion. What are changes and why are they to the characters detriment in you eyes? You as well @Awesomeninjagamer, I'd like your input as well for same reason.

If you don't mind, can you please stick to video games, here? This thread is on gaming sub-forum.

I'd disagree. The skins are more manipulative and more diabolically clever than you might think, especially on game aimed a younger audiences like Fortnite is. It's all about a kind of unspoken class structure. If you're a teenager playing session on Fortnite in lobby full of your School mates donning standard skins, bulling and kind of peer pressure that could put real pressure on vulnerable people to spend money. I remember when I was in high school that kids got made fun of when they wore cheap brands of clothing or shoes, this the same sort of thing in more modern guise. If a lot of ways, the cosmetic microtransactions may be even worse than pay-to-win. I'd say they are even predatory and manipulative, especially in a game aimed at a younger audience.

Wrong, they can work without them. If these game couldn't work without the adds, why would it possible to spend money to stop the adds coming up, which is exactly what these adds are deigned to harass you into doing?

Wow! That is pretty sweet. Nice to see ReCore in there, that games is seriously underrated. It did have a bit of a dodgy though with some the worst load times I've ever seen.

Thanks, @Crazycrab. I feel like I'm understanding this a little better now.

This thread seems more appointee as a "Gaming News" topic, so I'll move the thread to the relevant sub-forum.

You can access the same menu, that's not a mod' only tool.

The same menu can be accessed form a phone or tablet on the mobile version of the site, it's just the layout is slightly different. Here's how it is on my phone and I see no reason it should be any different for yourself. EDIT: Looking at this again, I've noticed how alarmingly low my phone battery is, I'd better charge this bastard.

Well put, and welcome back.

For me, it's Burnout. The games were intense, felt fantastic to control, unique, great soundtracks and massive fun. Apart from Burnout Paradise, that game can suck a smelly toe, but the rest of them are great. Burnout 3 in particular is, in my humble opinion, the best arcade racing game ever made, and given the decline in the genre, will probably be best we will ever see.

And by the way @Awesomeninjagamer, welcome to VGR. Feel free to introduce yourself in the Introductions sub-forum if you wish. Glad to have you here.

I actually prefer the new Lara. She's more complex and fleshed out, yet more relatable and realistic. I'm not saying that there was anything desperately wrong with the Lara from the older games, but she was built to be something of a fantasy realized rather than a more genuine character. She was a product of her time, but that time has passed and I'm glad because we got a character that had a lot more work out into her in the end.

I actually think this question is more easily answered not by saying why consoles charge, but by understanding why PC services don't. When you play a game online, it not as simple as playing a game through the internet. The internet is the physical part of the system. The fibre optics, cables, satellites and so on that connect all these devices together. This physical network needs more than just itself to function, there is also software that allows people and devices to re-encode whatever information a person or device wants to transmit along the physical network known as the internet. That is what is known as a Wide Area Network (WAN). There is a number of different WAN's out there. More specifically, when you access online services on a PlayStation, the WAN that is accessed is called PSN or PlayStation Network. On Xbox, the WAN used is Xbox Live. These two were built and are being maintained by Sony and Microsoft respectively at cost to them. They own them, so like it or not they have a right to charge for people to use them. Whether they should and how much they charge is open to debate, but it is what it is. Playing online games on a PC, like through Steam or EGS or whatever, is a little bit different because the wide area network they use is called the World Wide Web. No single person nor entity can own this WAN, only bits and pieces of it, more specifically the domains of websites being hosted on that network. Each little piece of the World Wide Web get's maintained by those that own that little piece of it, so just like how no one person or entity can own the whole thing, it also means it is not the responsibility of any single person nor entity to maintain the whole thing, not like PSN or Xbox Live. So you see that Steam, EGS and other PC based game services can't charge you to use thier network (and trust me, this is the ONLY reason) simply because they don't own that network.

The functionality of smartphones and tablets isn't he only issue with that. If you were to, for example, buy a PS5 and then a cheep computer to used as a utility, that would would still work out as significantly cheaper than buying or building a gaming PC to match a PS5's performance. I even challenged @skyfire to prove me wrong on that on this other thread and instead he through a hissy fit.

Don't get me wrong, it was still brilliant.

That was almost perfect, it should have been;

With all due respect, you're wrong. A few voices can have more of an impact than a thousand voices. A community, especially online, is not measured by quantity, but by the connections that exist within it's members. When I talk to you, I try to be as clear as I can, but you still don't understand that posting as much as you can is not what being active and valued in this community means. Quantity over quality. It is not about posting as much as you can, it's about making posts that add value. Stop posting anything just to post something. How many more ways can I say it? If you are struggling with posting in English, that is all more reason for you to take you time. You of all people should not be making a post every couple of minutes. I literally could not do that, and English is my first language. If need you need help, please ask. But either way, post like you care about what you post and take your time.