Given that Euro-American gaming these past couple of years has been either focused on the dudebro segment, on experimental/indie, on F2P and on mobile, I'd say "Japanese" is a welcome distraction.

Thank goodness for that.

More Witcher 3 gameplay:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sufwxU_Uaz4

Hahahah.

Actually, dragons/Lindwürmer in mythology didn't have limbs but were initially more like giant (mostly swimming, sometimes flying) snakes in most cultures afaik.

Yeah there's a massive difference per region. Eastern vs Western mostly. Eastern dragon depictions are more like Shenron in DBZ.

He was so heartstricken from the dissipointment that it made him bleed from the mouth. This is funnier than Spoony's Betrayal!
Are you not suffering from Carpal tunnel syndrome on your wrist thus preventing you from fully playing PC games?
basically snake-like with tiny limbs and whiskers. They were also bringers of water and rain.

I'm having a blast with Hardline. And this is coming from someone who did not enjoy BF3 and BF4 that much. After the disaster that was BF4 i decided not to buy a BF game on launch again, but i might change my mind. Not to mention that the beta is less buggy than BF4 currently is.

Please tell me is Battlefield 4 better now?


Is it gameplay-wise better than 3? How does Commander Mode work on the PC version? Is the System Requirements higher than 3?

About the E3, well, for me the winner is Nintendo. They offered way more compelling games than the competition, and they even announced some pretty original stuff like Captain Toad and Splatoon. Also, they did a great job with their E3 video. The pacing was good and it didn't feel boring to watch (unlike other conferences).
Definitely. At launch i couldn't even play the game because it kept crashing all the time. It was completely unplayable at launch. It still has some bugs and the performance is far from stellar, but it's definitely playable now.

In my opinion it is slightly better, but it's really not that different from 3.

Never played as the commander. Not even in BF2.

I don't know about the minimum system requirements, but the game is much more demanding than 3 at higher settings. I could run BF3 with everything set to maximum at 1080p with around 50-70 frames per second. If i set everything to maximum on BF4 i get quite a few drops below 30 frames (on an i7 860 with with a GTX680).

Nope, they were like this in western mythology too.
The massive differences can be found between mythology and modern fantasy and hasn't much to do with eastern/western.

For both Multiplayer and Campaign?

Speaking of the Campaign is it a lot better than the last few Campagins from Battlefield I seen vids where the added tactics and bigger arenas sort fo like Halo.

Yes, for both.

No, it's not any better. If you go into BF4 for the campaign you'll be disappointed. There are no tactics involved, just the usual shoot everything that moves. It does have larger maps than BF3 did, though.

I don't know about StingingVelvet, but I use a controller for my PC games anytime I can, and xpadder-fy sometimes when I can't. Plenty of games nowadays which show you can have complex gameplay with controllers, so to not allow controller use is just limiting, primitive, and a backwards way of designing games.