They said from the very beginning that he was ps exclusive....if you chose to play PC that's on you. Contracts. You can't make believe a reason why they should change their mind when they told you what it is.
I have zero expectation on any new characters coming to that game. They had to deliver Spider-Man, but for me after that they're done. They certainly already have a minimum number of people working on it, they'll send them to projects that can make money, like any studio would. That's why there's no roadmap.
I was playing avengers on ps4 at launch and then when I was lucky enough to get a ps5 and I downloaded the ps5 version all my progress was gone. I had the skins but all my characters were back to level 1. As soon as I saw that I uninstalled
Here's the thing(insert picture of Ben Grim😂): we don't fully know how they incorporated Spiderman I saw somewhere that Spiderman is gonna have more cutscenes for him like black panther expansion and I think while Spiderman is Sony exclusive is gonna be like the other characters in avengers. And for the backlash over Spiderman being Sony exclusive in the avengers game makes sense but I say people should just get over it and buy a ps4 if they don't have one.
Ok, you conviced me, I'll google what the term actually means since apparently, we don't know it's "official" definition, ah found it, first result from google, copy and pasted word-for-word, no edits (other than italics and line spacing) nor cherry-picking, this is as raw of a google search as you can get, without any signs of favoritism one way or the other: _"Definition of anti-consumer:_ _not favorable to consumers : improperly favoring the interests of businesses over the interests of consumers_ _anti-consumer practices_ _First Known Use of anti-consumer_ _1936, in the meaning defined above"_ This definition is brought you by merriam-webster, the online dictionary and first result on google when searching "define anti-consumer" as "define" is supposed to be the term you use when looking up the meaning of a word or phrase. Once again, no edits, no cherry picking, nor even multiple searches, as that would be cherry-picking. 100% unbias search. From how much you played it up, I was actually expecting something different and expecting you to be right, so I was going in with the bias AGAINST this definition. People aren't using the term wrong, you are just personally using it too exclusively (perhaps in a legal case rather than for it as an actual TERM maybe?). It's pretty much a nothing term as ANYTHING can be labeled as this. . . but that doesn't make it "inaccurate" like you're trying to insinuate. It just means the term has alot less weight to it than people (not unlike yourself personally) are trying to make it out to be. This incorrect connotation you have when talking about this topic followed by you putting the people down who are actually use the term based on it's textbook definition correctly, always trigger a small pet peeve of mine every time this topic comes up from you, calling people out for not doing their research after you didn't look up the "term", not the legal ramification part, if there even is one (which, if there is, no one is saying it in that way, they literally are just saying that it's scummy and that's it). Please put your inaccurate definition of the GENERAL term (not legal term) out there so this dumb issue of semantics can finally be over and done with.
For the algorithm!!!!
I though I was the only one to comment this
HUZZAH!
I love the screen freeze rant! 😂🤣😂🤣😂
They said from the very beginning that he was ps exclusive....if you chose to play PC that's on you. Contracts. You can't make believe a reason why they should change their mind when they told you what it is.
True. It doesn't make the end result any less disappointing though- Shank
Spider-Man should be available to everyone not just one console.
I agree they really need cross save
I have zero expectation on any new characters coming to that game. They had to deliver Spider-Man, but for me after that they're done. They certainly already have a minimum number of people working on it, they'll send them to projects that can make money, like any studio would. That's why there's no roadmap.
I was playing avengers on ps4 at launch and then when I was lucky enough to get a ps5 and I downloaded the ps5 version all my progress was gone. I had the skins but all my characters were back to level 1. As soon as I saw that I uninstalled
Here's the thing(insert picture of Ben Grim😂): we don't fully know how they incorporated Spiderman I saw somewhere that Spiderman is gonna have more cutscenes for him like black panther expansion and I think while Spiderman is Sony exclusive is gonna be like the other characters in avengers. And for the backlash over Spiderman being Sony exclusive in the avengers game makes sense but I say people should just get over it and buy a ps4 if they don't have one.
Ok, you conviced me, I'll google what the term actually means since apparently, we don't know it's "official" definition, ah found it, first result from google, copy and pasted word-for-word, no edits (other than italics and line spacing) nor cherry-picking, this is as raw of a google search as you can get, without any signs of favoritism one way or the other:
_"Definition of anti-consumer:_
_not favorable to consumers : improperly favoring the interests of businesses over the interests of consumers_
_anti-consumer practices_
_First Known Use of anti-consumer_
_1936, in the meaning defined above"_
This definition is brought you by merriam-webster, the online dictionary and first result on google when searching "define anti-consumer" as "define" is supposed to be the term you use when looking up the meaning of a word or phrase. Once again, no edits, no cherry picking, nor even multiple searches, as that would be cherry-picking. 100% unbias search. From how much you played it up, I was actually expecting something different and expecting you to be right, so I was going in with the bias AGAINST this definition.
People aren't using the term wrong, you are just personally using it too exclusively (perhaps in a legal case rather than for it as an actual TERM maybe?). It's pretty much a nothing term as ANYTHING can be labeled as this. . . but that doesn't make it "inaccurate" like you're trying to insinuate. It just means the term has alot less weight to it than people (not unlike yourself personally) are trying to make it out to be.
This incorrect connotation you have when talking about this topic followed by you putting the people down who are actually use the term based on it's textbook definition correctly, always trigger a small pet peeve of mine every time this topic comes up from you, calling people out for not doing their research after you didn't look up the "term", not the legal ramification part, if there even is one (which, if there is, no one is saying it in that way, they literally are just saying that it's scummy and that's it). Please put your inaccurate definition of the GENERAL term (not legal term) out there so this dumb issue of semantics can finally be over and done with.
Yes cuz