-Online Play and Cloud Saves both behind a pay wall, rather than being free
-Online still being as laggy as it was before
-P2P Connection still being a thing
-Cloud Saves not being in all games
-Cloud Saves being deleted once a week after subscription expires
-No Native Voice Chat nor Discord
-No Messaging System (like Miiverse)
-No YouTube, Netflix, Amazon Prime nor the Browser
-No Parties
-No Usernames
-Friend Codes still being a thing
-The App mostly still being bad
-No GB, SNES, N64, GBA and Gamecube games
-No Virtual Console (which leads me to my next point)
-No way to get NES games outside of the subscription
-Nintendo forcing you to check your Switch's online every week just so you can still play NES games
-Despite being a paywall still gets hacked regardless making the hacker excuse completely useless, even if they make it as expensive as Sony's and Microsoft's (both of which are hacked anyway)
Friday, September 21, 2018
Custom Robo is dead. Nintendo cancelled the trademark, series creator left
Custom Robo Trademark:
https://trademarks.justia.com/789/76/custom-78976078.html
The company that made the Custom Robo games is called Noise
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noise_(company)
Kouji Kenjou, the key game designer and creator of Custom Robo left Noise
He's currently working with a company called Thousand Games
https://gematsu.com/2018/09/custom-robo-creator-announces-competitive-3d-shooting-game-synaptic-drive-for-switch
and Kouji is designing a Custom Robo rip off game for the switch at this new company
https://trademarks.justia.com/789/76/custom-78976078.html
The company that made the Custom Robo games is called Noise
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noise_(company)
Kouji Kenjou, the key game designer and creator of Custom Robo left Noise
He's currently working with a company called Thousand Games
https://gematsu.com/2018/09/custom-robo-creator-announces-competitive-3d-shooting-game-synaptic-drive-for-switch
and Kouji is designing a Custom Robo rip off game for the switch at this new company
The iPhone XS Max doesn't come with a fast charger in the box
this is by design.
charging your brand new, $1100+ iPhone XS Max with a regular charger, rather than a fast charger, builds up a sense of anticipation with the phone.
imagine if the phone charged quickly as soon as you bought it, you'd be bored with the phone because it's so frequently accessible. but with the regular charger, your excitement builds for the iPhone XS Max to unprecedented levels.
Apple compares this concept to ordering a meal at a Michelin Star rated restaurant in Paris. You don't complain that the food is taking too long to cook, you wait patiently for each course because it's worth it.
basically you spend an extra $18 for the fastest fast charger.
To get fast charging on iPhone X, iPhone 8, and iPhone 8 Plus, you don't need anything over 18W, and you don't need a USB-C power adapter that's from Apple. The third-party options work just as well, but you will probably want to pick up Apple's USB-C to Lightning cable over the alternatives.
i doubt the xs max can take more than 18w.
the idea that you have to spend $70 on a macbook usb-c brick to get fast charging is disingenuous.
charging your brand new, $1100+ iPhone XS Max with a regular charger, rather than a fast charger, builds up a sense of anticipation with the phone.
imagine if the phone charged quickly as soon as you bought it, you'd be bored with the phone because it's so frequently accessible. but with the regular charger, your excitement builds for the iPhone XS Max to unprecedented levels.
Apple compares this concept to ordering a meal at a Michelin Star rated restaurant in Paris. You don't complain that the food is taking too long to cook, you wait patiently for each course because it's worth it.
basically you spend an extra $18 for the fastest fast charger.
To get fast charging on iPhone X, iPhone 8, and iPhone 8 Plus, you don't need anything over 18W, and you don't need a USB-C power adapter that's from Apple. The third-party options work just as well, but you will probably want to pick up Apple's USB-C to Lightning cable over the alternatives.
i doubt the xs max can take more than 18w.
the idea that you have to spend $70 on a macbook usb-c brick to get fast charging is disingenuous.
Rumor is Telltale is shutting down
The Walking Dead Seasons 1 & 2, Wolf Among Us, Batman 1 & 2, all are fantastic games. But they are not so much games as interactive voice acted comics, to be watched rather than played. I don't know how anyone can say they "are the same thing", that's just asinine. If you don't like the stories, that's fine, but to say they have no value to anyone is entitled gamer horseshit.
Sadly, it seems like their company was severely mismanaged. I read not that long ago the former CEO is suing the company.
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/telltale-announces-majority-studio-closure-walking/1100-6461967/?utm_source=gamefaqs&utm_medium=partner&utm_content=news_module&utm_campaign=hub_forum
The article says Telltale has confirmed that they are definitely shutting down. Only 25 (of 250) staff remain to finish up the rest of the Walking Dead Final Season (the fourth game). One Episode is already out while three more are planned with the next releasing on the 25th. All other projects, such as a second season to The Wolf Among Us, have been cancelled.
Quite a shame. Granted, the Walking Dead Telltale series got worse with every season. Why they shifted the focus for Season 3 in particular to the unknown Javier boggles my mind.
I played the first two seasons of Walking Dead, Wolf Among Us, Game of Thrones, and the first Batman. I enjoyed all of them. There's not much game there at all but the stories were always well done. I never really cared that it always came to the same general conclusion, how much more work would have to go into the game to make all these different episodes for each path you take?
I feel like their big problem was releasing games in episodes and then when the game was complete, they always celebrated it with a sale. You had no incentive to buy the game until it was complete. Each episode took a month or two so you'd lose interest and forget some details if you played them once they were released. You were much better off waiting for the final product and buying it on sale. I'm not surprised they're going under with those kinds of business practices. I'm sure all those licenses weren't cheap either.
A very dumb business model. Licenses also come with things like a requirement to release X number of games and stuff. For example, WWE wouldn’t allow THQ to take those games to biannually, which would have allowed for lower production costs and more improvements.
Sadly, it seems like their company was severely mismanaged. I read not that long ago the former CEO is suing the company.
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/telltale-announces-majority-studio-closure-walking/1100-6461967/?utm_source=gamefaqs&utm_medium=partner&utm_content=news_module&utm_campaign=hub_forum
The article says Telltale has confirmed that they are definitely shutting down. Only 25 (of 250) staff remain to finish up the rest of the Walking Dead Final Season (the fourth game). One Episode is already out while three more are planned with the next releasing on the 25th. All other projects, such as a second season to The Wolf Among Us, have been cancelled.
Quite a shame. Granted, the Walking Dead Telltale series got worse with every season. Why they shifted the focus for Season 3 in particular to the unknown Javier boggles my mind.
I played the first two seasons of Walking Dead, Wolf Among Us, Game of Thrones, and the first Batman. I enjoyed all of them. There's not much game there at all but the stories were always well done. I never really cared that it always came to the same general conclusion, how much more work would have to go into the game to make all these different episodes for each path you take?
I feel like their big problem was releasing games in episodes and then when the game was complete, they always celebrated it with a sale. You had no incentive to buy the game until it was complete. Each episode took a month or two so you'd lose interest and forget some details if you played them once they were released. You were much better off waiting for the final product and buying it on sale. I'm not surprised they're going under with those kinds of business practices. I'm sure all those licenses weren't cheap either.
A very dumb business model. Licenses also come with things like a requirement to release X number of games and stuff. For example, WWE wouldn’t allow THQ to take those games to biannually, which would have allowed for lower production costs and more improvements.
Tuesday, September 18, 2018
Online Gambling, Casino's
I don't know much about the web design of online casinos since I've never been on one of the sites, but traditional casinos are designed to make it slightly physically difficult for people with gambling problems to walk away, even if they think they want to. They're labyrinthine, lack landmarks, and don't have huge signs pointing to exits or places to cash out. If you walk in any one direction, you'll usually find at least one game that catches your interest before you leave.
I would assume online casinos don't flash a big button for you to cash out right after a big win. On a personal note, I've seen enough videos of online blackjack dealers cheating to never want to even give these scummy sites a visit, so I can't say for sure.
Online gambling is much worse than brick and mortar. You can do it at home in your underwear so it is much easier to tell yourself you are only going to play for a few minutes between chores. It is also much easier to hide from loved ones than going to a casino for hours at a time. The games are much faster online than they are in real life. Finally, pulling out a credit card to buy credits on a computer screen is much easier mentally than pulling out cash at an atm and then plunking bills down on a table for physical chips.
The discipline can be hard. And there are times I move my goal, but those are usually situations where I'm up a lot early in the trip. For instance, make 8pm dinner reservations before hitting the tables at 6pm (I do this a lot because it gives me a hard stop). If up a significant amount (like >50%) after dinner then only gamble with a portion of my winnings with the aim of double or nothing. So if I was up $500 after dinner, hit the tables with $250 with the aim of ending the night up in the $250-750 range. The tough part of discipline is setting your limits and sticking to them thru the highs and lows. Don't chase losses and don't get giddy on the highs.
Online gambling is much worse than brick and mortar. You can do it at home in your underwear so it is much easier to tell yourself you are only going to play for a few minutes between chores. It is also much easier to hide from loved ones than going to a casino for hours at a time. The games are much faster online than they are in real life. Finally, pulling out a credit card to buy credits on a computer screen is much easier mentally than pulling out cash at an atm and then plunking bills down on a table for physical chips.
The discipline can be hard. And there are times I move my goal, but those are usually situations where I'm up a lot early in the trip. For instance, make 8pm dinner reservations before hitting the tables at 6pm (I do this a lot because it gives me a hard stop). If up a significant amount (like >50%) after dinner then only gamble with a portion of my winnings with the aim of double or nothing. So if I was up $500 after dinner, hit the tables with $250 with the aim of ending the night up in the $250-750 range. The tough part of discipline is setting your limits and sticking to them thru the highs and lows. Don't chase losses and don't get giddy on the highs.
Online Casino (The Loss)
Lost $12,000 gambling in a week. Distressed, to put it lightly.
Money values are in USD.
28 year old male. Gross income per year of 80k to 90k. Independent contractor.
The past 7 days have been the worst of my financial life.
Before this past week, I was only an occasional gambler. I'd buy 5 to 10 dollars in scratch off tickets every couple of months at convenience stores. Last week I discovered online casinos. I wish I never had. I started off with a mere 100 dollar deposit. Lost it. Then another 100. Lost it. Distressed about losing 200 dollars, I was determined to get it back. I threw down $500 on a deposit. I managed to hit a high on the roulette wheel of over $6,000. I thought the game was broken. How was I doing so well? Naturally, I lost all of that. I didn't think I could lose. I was wrong.
$2,000+ in the hole later, and I am DESPERATELY chasing my losses, trying to get my money back by depositing more money into my casino accounts. This is no longer about fun or "striking it big," but about getting my money back. This has had DISASTROUS consequences. I have now maxed out a credit card of $6,000, in addition to thousands lost in my checking account.
$10,000 to $12,000 later, and here I am, wondering what the hell happened.
I have not told anybody about this. The shame and guilt is too great. I cannot believe I was so stupid.
My financial situation:
I have just $400 in my bank account. It was $2,400 this morning. It would have been $0 if the casinos didn't have weekly deposit limits.
I have 2 checks for contract work coming in soon with a combined total of $12,200. This is enough money to last me 3 months, but here's the problem: All of this was meant for taxes for 2017. I didn't set any aside. I already owe the IRS $10k and am on an installment agreement with them.
I have ~$24,000 in credit card debt, and $2,300 in available credit. Looking at 90% utilization. It was $18,000 before my gambling disaster. My father suggested paying $1,000/month on the highest interest card. This would eliminate all of my credit card debt in less than 30 months.
Here's my plan:
Plead with the IRS to let them add my 2017 tax debt to the previous installment agreement so I don't become homeless. This will bring the total I owe them to $20,000. I'll be paying off my car soon, so that will free up $380/month. The cost and interest rate for the IRS is comparable to a car, so I'll just pretend I'm leasing a car.
Save money wherever possible. No more eating out. Halve my monthly food budget by buying groceries. Use the extra money to pay down debts.
Hustle my ass off to get more work and increase my income (I'm a freelance designer).
Join gambling addition online communities for accountability and keep a gambling addiction hotline on speed-dial.
Never fucking gamble again.
Thoughts on my plan? Words of encouragement? Criticism? This all feels like a bad dream that I'm just waiting to wake up from. The only thing that comforts me is that I only lost 12k before I wised up. Some people have lost way more to gambling.
Money values are in USD.
28 year old male. Gross income per year of 80k to 90k. Independent contractor.
The past 7 days have been the worst of my financial life.
Before this past week, I was only an occasional gambler. I'd buy 5 to 10 dollars in scratch off tickets every couple of months at convenience stores. Last week I discovered online casinos. I wish I never had. I started off with a mere 100 dollar deposit. Lost it. Then another 100. Lost it. Distressed about losing 200 dollars, I was determined to get it back. I threw down $500 on a deposit. I managed to hit a high on the roulette wheel of over $6,000. I thought the game was broken. How was I doing so well? Naturally, I lost all of that. I didn't think I could lose. I was wrong.
$2,000+ in the hole later, and I am DESPERATELY chasing my losses, trying to get my money back by depositing more money into my casino accounts. This is no longer about fun or "striking it big," but about getting my money back. This has had DISASTROUS consequences. I have now maxed out a credit card of $6,000, in addition to thousands lost in my checking account.
$10,000 to $12,000 later, and here I am, wondering what the hell happened.
I have not told anybody about this. The shame and guilt is too great. I cannot believe I was so stupid.
My financial situation:
I have just $400 in my bank account. It was $2,400 this morning. It would have been $0 if the casinos didn't have weekly deposit limits.
I have 2 checks for contract work coming in soon with a combined total of $12,200. This is enough money to last me 3 months, but here's the problem: All of this was meant for taxes for 2017. I didn't set any aside. I already owe the IRS $10k and am on an installment agreement with them.
I have ~$24,000 in credit card debt, and $2,300 in available credit. Looking at 90% utilization. It was $18,000 before my gambling disaster. My father suggested paying $1,000/month on the highest interest card. This would eliminate all of my credit card debt in less than 30 months.
Here's my plan:
Plead with the IRS to let them add my 2017 tax debt to the previous installment agreement so I don't become homeless. This will bring the total I owe them to $20,000. I'll be paying off my car soon, so that will free up $380/month. The cost and interest rate for the IRS is comparable to a car, so I'll just pretend I'm leasing a car.
Save money wherever possible. No more eating out. Halve my monthly food budget by buying groceries. Use the extra money to pay down debts.
Hustle my ass off to get more work and increase my income (I'm a freelance designer).
Join gambling addition online communities for accountability and keep a gambling addiction hotline on speed-dial.
Never fucking gamble again.
Thoughts on my plan? Words of encouragement? Criticism? This all feels like a bad dream that I'm just waiting to wake up from. The only thing that comforts me is that I only lost 12k before I wised up. Some people have lost way more to gambling.
Thursday, September 13, 2018
Bethseda, Switch
The problem with that is Switch isn't marketed or treated as just a handheld. Microsoft was willing to put Banjo-Pilot on the GBA while the detail on Conker's tail was blowing our minds on Xbox, or an isometric view of Viva Pinata with flat 2D backgrounds and basic 3D critters on DS when the real visual feast was on 360.
The Switch is competing more directly with XBO and it's outselling it big time. It's not unreasonable to think that it could pass it in lifetime sales by Black Friday 2019. And with diminishing returns becoming more apparent every hardware gen, a system that's a notch above the 360 really isn't that far behind the XBO in the grand scheme of things.
Halo may not be the giant that it once was, but Halo pretty much redefined the FPS genre, and it was revolutionary for the time. Many of the mechanics that are staples in modern FPS games owe their existence to Halo, and mechanics that existed beforehand which Halo adopted were made popular by Halo.
I don't know how old you were when Halo 1-3 came out, but if you weren't around or were too young to remember, they were a big deal. I'm in my late 20s so these games came out when I was in middle/high school, and the impact they had on the gaming industry was measurable.
Master Chief is also iconic in a way that most FPS characters fail to be. He is immediately recognizable by anybody who sees him, and has a cool design. This is important in a time where most FPS characters are generic, forgettable nobodies. People loved Master Chief, and they still do — one of the reasons Halo 5's campaign is so poorly regarded is because he wasn't the main character. He's not replaceable by other Spartans, even if their armor is just as cool. Master Chief, and the game series he represents, will always have an important place in the history of gaming.
That being said, it would definitely be weird to have him in Smash (even though I would fucking love it) and I really don't see it happening.
Goldeneye was brilliant for the time, but it didn't impact the FPS genre nearly as much as Halo did, not by a longshot. Look at Halo and Goldeneye, and tell me which one's mechanics have transitioned into modern FPS games. Almost all of Halo's signature mechanics are still staples of FPS games, whereas Goldeneye and Perfect Dark feel extremely aged and outdated.
This, by the way, is coming from someone who was a HUGE fan of Goldeneye, and an even bigger fan of Perfect Dark. I love those games and I always will, but the impact that Halo had on the industry really can't be overstated; it was an absolute game changer.
Sure about the space thing but if Halo didnt exist Shooters would look nothing like they do today. Or the road to get here would be insanely different. Claiming Halo didn't have a massive effect on the gaming industry and the console/shooter genre as a whole is just ignorant.
Every single shooter that came out after halo wanted to be the "Halo killer", they revolutionized AI for the genre at the time, (Techniques that are still used today btw) and made console shooters an actual thing that are incredibly profitable and doable.
No they didnt invent them. But I already said that. They made it very mainstream, very appealing, and very accessible.
Remember Golden eye 64? Thats what console shooters were before Halo. Halo Changed it all.
Not really. Cloud is meant to represent Final Fantasy as a whole. Final Fantasy’s history is very tied with Nintendo, and Cloud happens to be the most recognizable character in the series. That’s why Sakurai picked him, but it was still a franchise that was had pretty massive connections with Nintendo.
We’ve got zero precedent that a series with literally NO connection to Nintendo can have much representation, if any. MGS comes the closest, and that still has history with the company and is more specific to Hideo Kojima asking Sakurai to make it happen.
I mean, Master Chief is Smash would be hilarious and amazing in its own right, but this whole narrative of Smash magically becoming about all video games with Cloud isn’t as true as people generally want to believe. It’s still rooted in Nintendo related IP from everything we’ve seen.
What a janky, dull crap game and controls with great quests, world building, dialogue, player choice, and replayability. New Vegas is 10x more intricate than anything Bethesda has released since Oblivion, but it looks like hot garbage now. Fallout 4 doesn't have a great story or choices or characters - but it plays great. The gunplay, the perks, the controls - it feels good. Only problem is how shallow the game is as far as player choice, dialogue options, and questlines go. The DLC changed my mind about the overall experience, but Fallout 4 isn't my favorite anything. Big as an ocean, deep as a puddle kind of game. Bethesda are also notorious for making unbalanced broke as fuck games that are just fun and immersive, not well designed and balanced. Skyrim still blows my mind with how unbalanced and shitty the overall game design is, but how fun and immersive it can be despite that.
The Switch is competing more directly with XBO and it's outselling it big time. It's not unreasonable to think that it could pass it in lifetime sales by Black Friday 2019. And with diminishing returns becoming more apparent every hardware gen, a system that's a notch above the 360 really isn't that far behind the XBO in the grand scheme of things.
Halo may not be the giant that it once was, but Halo pretty much redefined the FPS genre, and it was revolutionary for the time. Many of the mechanics that are staples in modern FPS games owe their existence to Halo, and mechanics that existed beforehand which Halo adopted were made popular by Halo.
I don't know how old you were when Halo 1-3 came out, but if you weren't around or were too young to remember, they were a big deal. I'm in my late 20s so these games came out when I was in middle/high school, and the impact they had on the gaming industry was measurable.
Master Chief is also iconic in a way that most FPS characters fail to be. He is immediately recognizable by anybody who sees him, and has a cool design. This is important in a time where most FPS characters are generic, forgettable nobodies. People loved Master Chief, and they still do — one of the reasons Halo 5's campaign is so poorly regarded is because he wasn't the main character. He's not replaceable by other Spartans, even if their armor is just as cool. Master Chief, and the game series he represents, will always have an important place in the history of gaming.
That being said, it would definitely be weird to have him in Smash (even though I would fucking love it) and I really don't see it happening.
Goldeneye was brilliant for the time, but it didn't impact the FPS genre nearly as much as Halo did, not by a longshot. Look at Halo and Goldeneye, and tell me which one's mechanics have transitioned into modern FPS games. Almost all of Halo's signature mechanics are still staples of FPS games, whereas Goldeneye and Perfect Dark feel extremely aged and outdated.
This, by the way, is coming from someone who was a HUGE fan of Goldeneye, and an even bigger fan of Perfect Dark. I love those games and I always will, but the impact that Halo had on the industry really can't be overstated; it was an absolute game changer.
Sure about the space thing but if Halo didnt exist Shooters would look nothing like they do today. Or the road to get here would be insanely different. Claiming Halo didn't have a massive effect on the gaming industry and the console/shooter genre as a whole is just ignorant.
Every single shooter that came out after halo wanted to be the "Halo killer", they revolutionized AI for the genre at the time, (Techniques that are still used today btw) and made console shooters an actual thing that are incredibly profitable and doable.
No they didnt invent them. But I already said that. They made it very mainstream, very appealing, and very accessible.
Remember Golden eye 64? Thats what console shooters were before Halo. Halo Changed it all.
Not really. Cloud is meant to represent Final Fantasy as a whole. Final Fantasy’s history is very tied with Nintendo, and Cloud happens to be the most recognizable character in the series. That’s why Sakurai picked him, but it was still a franchise that was had pretty massive connections with Nintendo.
We’ve got zero precedent that a series with literally NO connection to Nintendo can have much representation, if any. MGS comes the closest, and that still has history with the company and is more specific to Hideo Kojima asking Sakurai to make it happen.
I mean, Master Chief is Smash would be hilarious and amazing in its own right, but this whole narrative of Smash magically becoming about all video games with Cloud isn’t as true as people generally want to believe. It’s still rooted in Nintendo related IP from everything we’ve seen.
What a janky, dull crap game and controls with great quests, world building, dialogue, player choice, and replayability. New Vegas is 10x more intricate than anything Bethesda has released since Oblivion, but it looks like hot garbage now. Fallout 4 doesn't have a great story or choices or characters - but it plays great. The gunplay, the perks, the controls - it feels good. Only problem is how shallow the game is as far as player choice, dialogue options, and questlines go. The DLC changed my mind about the overall experience, but Fallout 4 isn't my favorite anything. Big as an ocean, deep as a puddle kind of game. Bethesda are also notorious for making unbalanced broke as fuck games that are just fun and immersive, not well designed and balanced. Skyrim still blows my mind with how unbalanced and shitty the overall game design is, but how fun and immersive it can be despite that.
Nintendo Voice Chat, Direct Thoughts 9/13/2018
Nintendo, please listen to your consumers. No one wants to use the moblie app for voice chat.
Doubling down on the app would literally have to be one of your biggest mistakes as a company, and a complete turn-off from your online service. It is incredibly inconvenient and a hassle to use a feature that has already been easy to use and understand for years, as well with rooms and messaging. A better online experience would be having all of these features built into the switch itself. We gave our grievances about it when it launched, and you developers have done nothing this past year to improve on it. We will not support your service until you fix your service.
It's kind of mind-blowing how little Nintendo seems to care about online play, given that so many of their first party games have such a strong multiplayer focus.
I mean, sure, Mario Kart is always going to be more fun with my friends on the couch with me. But for the most part, when I'm hanging out with people in real life, we're doing something other than playing video games, so it'd be really nice to have some good streamlined online features.
Someone please explain to me how nintendo thinks they can get away with what was an outdated system 10 years ago? What the fuck is the thought process. How did a group of presumably intelligent people come together and say "Ok so we all agree this is just perfect right good. No outside opinions. lets ship it." How did this terrible system happen.
It's not even a japanese pride thing because Sony figured it out. Some one needs to go into every major executive meeting and have a sound board with one button that just says "it is [current year] think about that." this man's job is to push the button every time some one talks about an idea better suited to over 10 years ago.
No HDCP.
Another parasitical hollywood Macrovision type scam bullshit requirement making things worse for consumers and adding unnecessary cost to device manufacture. The technology was cracked almost a decade ago, and you can trivially buy inexpensive chinese HDMI "splitters" with multiple outputs, one of which will have a HDCP-free signal.
Voice Chat tied to a Mobile App.
Friend Codes.
Online will support only 20 NES games.
2 years of no cloud saves and countless data lost (including my own BOTW save data).
Third party support is glorified game ports from years past and games people have moved on from a year prior.
Amiibos being dropped almost entirely outside of now being just statues. You can literally just buy one and it has the same function as any other same named Amiibo.
Nintendo has made plenty of mistakes and has plenty of flaws.
Nintendo consistently fails in the networking department. It's like clockwork.
Started with Gamecube being internet-compatible but never delivering (except for Phantasy Star Online). Then we got wonky networking systems and lag on the Wii, the WiiU, and now the Switch.
They will go to painstaking lengths to make a quality game, but they don't take anywhere near that same approach to making online features work, and it's really saddening.
What’s crazy is that the WiiU and 3DS actually had more capable online features. The wiiu did away with friend codes and we could still use our names. It had video calling, video services, miiverse, which was great except for all the children on there, and actual virtual console although it wasn’t the greatest. The 3ds had drawing apps where you could somewhat send messages to friends, and miiverse.
THE WII HAD BETTER ONLINE FEATURES. It had video services, messaging using the wii bulletin board thing, and random online channels like weather. In fact Japan had a bunch of channels that expanded its use in a pre smartphone world like a delivery channel.
The problem is that one of Nintendo’s tenets is that consumers don’t know what they want. If they decide on doing something they almost always stick with it because any backlash is just people not understanding their vision. So this results in awesome innovation, unique games, and a mysterious cult-like company that makes a lot of dumbfounding and seemingly stupid decisions. The problem is just that those stupid decisions are actually very well founded from their point of view, and they don’t even feel the need to explain themselves to anybody.
Nintendo invest millions in market research and product development. The 10% out of the 1% of Switch users that, being generous here, make up this sub, do not influence how that turns out at all. As much as I agree voice chat shouldn't be relegated to an external device, I realise that they don't cater to me or anyone else here.
My best guess is that the majority of users aren't particularly interested in online, and as a result simply don't care how voice chat is handled. This is what Nintendo sees, and this is what they act on.
Because why spend time on a feature when their target demographic doesn’t care and it doesn’t affect their bottom line? They’ve done the math and theyre not interested. Why would they when the console sells this well? Why not release overpriced ports when people buy them to the point that they sell dramatically better than the originals? Frankly the consumer is partially at fault for the fact that Nintendo has been able to get away with its stubborn ways.
Doubling down on the app would literally have to be one of your biggest mistakes as a company, and a complete turn-off from your online service. It is incredibly inconvenient and a hassle to use a feature that has already been easy to use and understand for years, as well with rooms and messaging. A better online experience would be having all of these features built into the switch itself. We gave our grievances about it when it launched, and you developers have done nothing this past year to improve on it. We will not support your service until you fix your service.
It's kind of mind-blowing how little Nintendo seems to care about online play, given that so many of their first party games have such a strong multiplayer focus.
I mean, sure, Mario Kart is always going to be more fun with my friends on the couch with me. But for the most part, when I'm hanging out with people in real life, we're doing something other than playing video games, so it'd be really nice to have some good streamlined online features.
Someone please explain to me how nintendo thinks they can get away with what was an outdated system 10 years ago? What the fuck is the thought process. How did a group of presumably intelligent people come together and say "Ok so we all agree this is just perfect right good. No outside opinions. lets ship it." How did this terrible system happen.
It's not even a japanese pride thing because Sony figured it out. Some one needs to go into every major executive meeting and have a sound board with one button that just says "it is [current year] think about that." this man's job is to push the button every time some one talks about an idea better suited to over 10 years ago.
No HDCP.
Another parasitical hollywood Macrovision type scam bullshit requirement making things worse for consumers and adding unnecessary cost to device manufacture. The technology was cracked almost a decade ago, and you can trivially buy inexpensive chinese HDMI "splitters" with multiple outputs, one of which will have a HDCP-free signal.
Voice Chat tied to a Mobile App.
Friend Codes.
Online will support only 20 NES games.
2 years of no cloud saves and countless data lost (including my own BOTW save data).
Third party support is glorified game ports from years past and games people have moved on from a year prior.
Amiibos being dropped almost entirely outside of now being just statues. You can literally just buy one and it has the same function as any other same named Amiibo.
Nintendo has made plenty of mistakes and has plenty of flaws.
Nintendo consistently fails in the networking department. It's like clockwork.
Started with Gamecube being internet-compatible but never delivering (except for Phantasy Star Online). Then we got wonky networking systems and lag on the Wii, the WiiU, and now the Switch.
They will go to painstaking lengths to make a quality game, but they don't take anywhere near that same approach to making online features work, and it's really saddening.
What’s crazy is that the WiiU and 3DS actually had more capable online features. The wiiu did away with friend codes and we could still use our names. It had video calling, video services, miiverse, which was great except for all the children on there, and actual virtual console although it wasn’t the greatest. The 3ds had drawing apps where you could somewhat send messages to friends, and miiverse.
THE WII HAD BETTER ONLINE FEATURES. It had video services, messaging using the wii bulletin board thing, and random online channels like weather. In fact Japan had a bunch of channels that expanded its use in a pre smartphone world like a delivery channel.
The problem is that one of Nintendo’s tenets is that consumers don’t know what they want. If they decide on doing something they almost always stick with it because any backlash is just people not understanding their vision. So this results in awesome innovation, unique games, and a mysterious cult-like company that makes a lot of dumbfounding and seemingly stupid decisions. The problem is just that those stupid decisions are actually very well founded from their point of view, and they don’t even feel the need to explain themselves to anybody.
Nintendo invest millions in market research and product development. The 10% out of the 1% of Switch users that, being generous here, make up this sub, do not influence how that turns out at all. As much as I agree voice chat shouldn't be relegated to an external device, I realise that they don't cater to me or anyone else here.
My best guess is that the majority of users aren't particularly interested in online, and as a result simply don't care how voice chat is handled. This is what Nintendo sees, and this is what they act on.
Because why spend time on a feature when their target demographic doesn’t care and it doesn’t affect their bottom line? They’ve done the math and theyre not interested. Why would they when the console sells this well? Why not release overpriced ports when people buy them to the point that they sell dramatically better than the originals? Frankly the consumer is partially at fault for the fact that Nintendo has been able to get away with its stubborn ways.
Majora's Mask
MM is my LEAST favourite 3D Zelda, and much rather play the remake.
Zora swimming is the same speed with magic. Also they made it so you could change how the swimming handled. That's not a downgrade. You can still dash even without magic.
Also I feel the bosses that were changed have more challenge now, rather than just shoot or slash to win.
In terms on Twinmold, the last half can be annoying if you don't know the tricks. Attack it on the first phase normally. Then use the 2 giant boulders, 1 each phase afterwards. It takes him down immediately. Also if you grab the tail and spin the stick, you can take it down in 3 phases instead of 4, meaning you only have to knock it down normally once as there's 2 boulders.
They also broke some stuff when they made those changes.
Like those lily pads as a Deku scrub for example.
I mean, with the OoT 3D remake they didn't fix/change almost anything. And with the few changes they did, was actually warranted.
Like making the iron boots an item you can use with the buttons to streamline things so you don't have to constantly pause the game in order to equip/unequip the iron boots.
But with the MM 3D remake they changed stuff that no one was even complaining about.
Like the Zora swimming mechanic. I'm pretty sure most people loved how fast and fluid it was.
The developers knew that many people struggled with the original though, so I guess that was their focus with the remake.
If that was their intent, why couldn't they make two options or difficulty settings for old and new fans alike? That way both parties would be satisfied.
It's not impossible because I've played many remakes that had those options.
Zora swimming is the same speed with magic. Also they made it so you could change how the swimming handled. That's not a downgrade. You can still dash even without magic.
Also I feel the bosses that were changed have more challenge now, rather than just shoot or slash to win.
In terms on Twinmold, the last half can be annoying if you don't know the tricks. Attack it on the first phase normally. Then use the 2 giant boulders, 1 each phase afterwards. It takes him down immediately. Also if you grab the tail and spin the stick, you can take it down in 3 phases instead of 4, meaning you only have to knock it down normally once as there's 2 boulders.
They also broke some stuff when they made those changes.
Like those lily pads as a Deku scrub for example.
I mean, with the OoT 3D remake they didn't fix/change almost anything. And with the few changes they did, was actually warranted.
Like making the iron boots an item you can use with the buttons to streamline things so you don't have to constantly pause the game in order to equip/unequip the iron boots.
But with the MM 3D remake they changed stuff that no one was even complaining about.
Like the Zora swimming mechanic. I'm pretty sure most people loved how fast and fluid it was.
The developers knew that many people struggled with the original though, so I guess that was their focus with the remake.
If that was their intent, why couldn't they make two options or difficulty settings for old and new fans alike? That way both parties would be satisfied.
It's not impossible because I've played many remakes that had those options.
Pokémon Stadium 2 N64 / Pokemon Let's Go animation comparison
In this video I am going to post first it compares Pokémon Stadium 2 Mega Kick and Pokémon Let’s Go Double kick:
From what I can see the Pokémon in Pokémon Stadium 2 has more movement when using a move and each Pokémon using the same move has different animation like Kabutops and Snorlax.
in this video Blastoise uses Hydro Pump from his cannons in Pokémon Stadium 2.
The video has glitches keep that in mind.
Here is a perfect video with no glitches
At 1:08 he uses Hydro Pump from his cannons in Pokémon Stadium 2.
In Pokémon Let’s Go Blastoise doesn’t shoot Hydro Pump from his cannons
At 1:00 he uses Hydro Pump.
N64 is inferior than the Switch in every aspect keep that in mind. It's very lazy.
For the 3DS games they kind of had the excuse of the 3DS hardware power and the sheer amount of Pokémon included. For Let's Go they could have improved on that.
But remember how Gen5 was a massive upgrade over Gen4 (yes, I like the moving sprites). So they could still improve for Gen8. And I hope they do.
and the sad thing is they only have 151 models to animate not anymore then that...so its losing even to pokemon stadium 1 somehow and its oldschool animations which had 1 animation for physical and one for special...
having them hop up and down for double kick compared to the animation in the old game which has the exact same pokemon no gen2 onwards well idk how they can mess that up unless they are rushing development...
edit: i guess you can count mega and alolan as seperate but still thats not many more animations they have to do...
Gamefreak is similar to EA, only without the money grubbing scams. What I mean is that they're a mediocre gaming company who happened to make a big hit, and they'll eat forever off of that. EA has Fifa and Gamefreak has Pokemon. I actually remember the one time that Gamefreak became delusional tried to insert their independence from Nintendo, by making and releasing Tembo the Badass Elephant on every platform except Nintendo's. It ended up flopping. lol. It's like, yeah Gamefreak, go back home to Nintendo. I hate to sound like a jerk, but that was a huge wake up call to them; if it isn't Pokemon, don't touch it.
True some game company takes long to release games due to them taking longer to make, GameFreak should do the same also.
Instead of dividing resource between 2018 and 2019 Pokémon, all that resource should have gone to the 2019.
Look at Super Smash Bros it is normally good since they take years to make the game and release it.
Exactly. I wouldn't mind waiting as far as 2020 for a really well made game that actually has care and attention to detail instead of the same lazy animations. Hell, doesn't need to be expensive animation just something that makes some sense like damn Blastoise using his damn canons to shoot water attacks for god sake and not his forehead.
the 3DS more powerful than the N64 in these areas:
- CPU
- GPU
- Ram
- Memory storage
- Resolution
You don’t have to be rude in your reply.
From what I can see the Pokémon in Pokémon Stadium 2 has more movement when using a move and each Pokémon using the same move has different animation like Kabutops and Snorlax.
in this video Blastoise uses Hydro Pump from his cannons in Pokémon Stadium 2.
The video has glitches keep that in mind.
Here is a perfect video with no glitches
At 1:08 he uses Hydro Pump from his cannons in Pokémon Stadium 2.
In Pokémon Let’s Go Blastoise doesn’t shoot Hydro Pump from his cannons
At 1:00 he uses Hydro Pump.
N64 is inferior than the Switch in every aspect keep that in mind. It's very lazy.
For the 3DS games they kind of had the excuse of the 3DS hardware power and the sheer amount of Pokémon included. For Let's Go they could have improved on that.
But remember how Gen5 was a massive upgrade over Gen4 (yes, I like the moving sprites). So they could still improve for Gen8. And I hope they do.
and the sad thing is they only have 151 models to animate not anymore then that...so its losing even to pokemon stadium 1 somehow and its oldschool animations which had 1 animation for physical and one for special...
having them hop up and down for double kick compared to the animation in the old game which has the exact same pokemon no gen2 onwards well idk how they can mess that up unless they are rushing development...
edit: i guess you can count mega and alolan as seperate but still thats not many more animations they have to do...
Gamefreak is similar to EA, only without the money grubbing scams. What I mean is that they're a mediocre gaming company who happened to make a big hit, and they'll eat forever off of that. EA has Fifa and Gamefreak has Pokemon. I actually remember the one time that Gamefreak became delusional tried to insert their independence from Nintendo, by making and releasing Tembo the Badass Elephant on every platform except Nintendo's. It ended up flopping. lol. It's like, yeah Gamefreak, go back home to Nintendo. I hate to sound like a jerk, but that was a huge wake up call to them; if it isn't Pokemon, don't touch it.
True some game company takes long to release games due to them taking longer to make, GameFreak should do the same also.
Instead of dividing resource between 2018 and 2019 Pokémon, all that resource should have gone to the 2019.
Look at Super Smash Bros it is normally good since they take years to make the game and release it.
Exactly. I wouldn't mind waiting as far as 2020 for a really well made game that actually has care and attention to detail instead of the same lazy animations. Hell, doesn't need to be expensive animation just something that makes some sense like damn Blastoise using his damn canons to shoot water attacks for god sake and not his forehead.
the 3DS more powerful than the N64 in these areas:
- CPU
- GPU
- Ram
- Memory storage
- Resolution
You don’t have to be rude in your reply.
Online Nintendo: Switch Online
However who in their right mind is going to get it day one?
Mario Kart? Splatoon? Smash? Pokken?
These games exist on Wii U to a degree if they want to play online for free the option is available
The one exception is Arms there is no other option regarding Arms
Those interested in NES titles won't get it day one either there simply won't be enough and they'll wait for a robust library.
I'll get it eventually but I see zero reason to get it at launch unless your really into Arms which will start a snowball effect. Principles and lack of reason will create a barren environment and Nintendo is completely aware of it hence why the seven day trail exists. The free months we've had are the trail yet they add another. The only reason to add a free trail is so that those free players will beef things up making it seem like things are booming. A week of people saying its a success at how many people are online trying to get people to sub because things look good. After that trail week the rug will be pulled back and Nintendo can see how much fish they've reeled in and if its enough. Whether online lives or dies is completely determined on how well the trial keeps the current list of online games active during the first few days.
Your bad assumption is thinking we won't be able to voice chat or message without the phone app. I mean sure you "could" be right but no one knows. We barely know anything about the service apart from what is written on the website and I'm sure there is more to it. Why don't we wait and see what happens?
So let me get this straight.... it's a BAD assumption to take into account everything we already know and the fact that there is literally ZERO HARDWARE built in to the Switch to allow voice chat? I think my assumption of us not having voice chat on the Switch itself is a pretty damned good assumption.
Secondly, the mentality of "why don't we wait and see what happens" should've been applied to this topic before it was created. Rather than make outlandish claims regarding how many people will purchase the online service, maybe you should've taken your own advice and "waited to see what happens."
Is the precedent that is being set here. What is going to happen tomorrow? Apple will charge so that we can use their products online? Steam will charge so we can play on Steam Platform? Windows store? Android devices? We are already paying for an internet connection. I am not against Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo releasing an online service that it is OPTIONAL an gives you free games, cloud saves, etc. I am against them not letting you play online if you do not pay. They are not providing me with internet. It pisses me even more that Nintendo barely releases new games to justify online payment. My Nintendo Switch this year has been pretty much collecting dust. The only games I have played on Switch this year were Mario+Rabbids DLC and got 200 stars left on Odyssey (I collected the previous 600-700 last year). That is it. The rest of my games were on PS4 an a couple on PC. I was not happy with my Switch because I was not using it a lot, but still had the option to play every now and then. Now this ability to play every now and then online has actually been handicapped because I have to pay.
Apple, Valve, and Microsoft especially don't need to wait for Nintendo. Nintendo isn't setting any precedent because this has already been a (very successful and lucrative) thing for years. Nintendo is just playing catch up.
Really? You think Microsoft, the ones who started this trend on consoles, is sitting around and saying "XboxLive has been successful for years, but lets wait to see how it works out for Nintendo until we try this on Windows."?
£20 a year is 5.5 pence a day.
I can't justify NOT spending that for the online... I could never use it again and id get it just so i know its there to use.
The people saying they won't get it just enjoy building negative news around the Switch and most likely dont own it.
5.5 pence per day is too little to matter
Edit: i do feel sorry for all these peasant gamers who can drop £100 a month on Fifa loot boxes but can't foot 5.5 pence a day for Nintendo Online.
It's your own fault for failing to comprehend Nintendo's statements prior to launch that the Switch would have a subscription online service, with the online functions being free until the service launched. It was pretty clear and straightforward, so other than not being happy with the idea of having to pay, it wasn't just sprung on us with Nintendo cackling "The free ride is over, now you pay!"
In the end, though, the online service is optional as you can play any of the games without online and, for games which require an internet connection, it looks like they will not be locked behind the online service, as any mention of requiring a subscription is absent from their product listings.
Mario Kart? Splatoon? Smash? Pokken?
These games exist on Wii U to a degree if they want to play online for free the option is available
The one exception is Arms there is no other option regarding Arms
Those interested in NES titles won't get it day one either there simply won't be enough and they'll wait for a robust library.
I'll get it eventually but I see zero reason to get it at launch unless your really into Arms which will start a snowball effect. Principles and lack of reason will create a barren environment and Nintendo is completely aware of it hence why the seven day trail exists. The free months we've had are the trail yet they add another. The only reason to add a free trail is so that those free players will beef things up making it seem like things are booming. A week of people saying its a success at how many people are online trying to get people to sub because things look good. After that trail week the rug will be pulled back and Nintendo can see how much fish they've reeled in and if its enough. Whether online lives or dies is completely determined on how well the trial keeps the current list of online games active during the first few days.
Your bad assumption is thinking we won't be able to voice chat or message without the phone app. I mean sure you "could" be right but no one knows. We barely know anything about the service apart from what is written on the website and I'm sure there is more to it. Why don't we wait and see what happens?
So let me get this straight.... it's a BAD assumption to take into account everything we already know and the fact that there is literally ZERO HARDWARE built in to the Switch to allow voice chat? I think my assumption of us not having voice chat on the Switch itself is a pretty damned good assumption.
Secondly, the mentality of "why don't we wait and see what happens" should've been applied to this topic before it was created. Rather than make outlandish claims regarding how many people will purchase the online service, maybe you should've taken your own advice and "waited to see what happens."
Is the precedent that is being set here. What is going to happen tomorrow? Apple will charge so that we can use their products online? Steam will charge so we can play on Steam Platform? Windows store? Android devices? We are already paying for an internet connection. I am not against Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo releasing an online service that it is OPTIONAL an gives you free games, cloud saves, etc. I am against them not letting you play online if you do not pay. They are not providing me with internet. It pisses me even more that Nintendo barely releases new games to justify online payment. My Nintendo Switch this year has been pretty much collecting dust. The only games I have played on Switch this year were Mario+Rabbids DLC and got 200 stars left on Odyssey (I collected the previous 600-700 last year). That is it. The rest of my games were on PS4 an a couple on PC. I was not happy with my Switch because I was not using it a lot, but still had the option to play every now and then. Now this ability to play every now and then online has actually been handicapped because I have to pay.
Apple, Valve, and Microsoft especially don't need to wait for Nintendo. Nintendo isn't setting any precedent because this has already been a (very successful and lucrative) thing for years. Nintendo is just playing catch up.
Really? You think Microsoft, the ones who started this trend on consoles, is sitting around and saying "XboxLive has been successful for years, but lets wait to see how it works out for Nintendo until we try this on Windows."?
£20 a year is 5.5 pence a day.
I can't justify NOT spending that for the online... I could never use it again and id get it just so i know its there to use.
The people saying they won't get it just enjoy building negative news around the Switch and most likely dont own it.
5.5 pence per day is too little to matter
Edit: i do feel sorry for all these peasant gamers who can drop £100 a month on Fifa loot boxes but can't foot 5.5 pence a day for Nintendo Online.
It's your own fault for failing to comprehend Nintendo's statements prior to launch that the Switch would have a subscription online service, with the online functions being free until the service launched. It was pretty clear and straightforward, so other than not being happy with the idea of having to pay, it wasn't just sprung on us with Nintendo cackling "The free ride is over, now you pay!"
In the end, though, the online service is optional as you can play any of the games without online and, for games which require an internet connection, it looks like they will not be locked behind the online service, as any mention of requiring a subscription is absent from their product listings.
Nintendo And Sony
When people say they want Nintendo to go third party, they imagine a realistic open world Zelda game on the HD twins and PC. They imagine 4k Mario Kart and 2D/3D Mario with super crisp level design. They imagine Pokemon finally coming on their superior systems. They imagine Metroid Prime in splendid HD goodness on their platform, and they imagine Nintendo turning F-Zero into a super realistic racing sim.
What they don't know is that if Nintendo went 3rd party, they would most likely develop exclusively for mobile games. Less money to spend on the budget and advertising, and more profits. It's like a match made in Heaven for Nintendo. So when people clamor for Nintendo to go 3rd party, I'm like, "you really don't want that. Trust me, you really don't."
Sony fans are the ones that invented the “handheld consoles aren’t consoles” argument so that they can pretend Nintendo hasn’t “won” anything since the SNES (which also involves the “gimmicks don’t count” argument to get rid of the Wii), all because they want to pretend the Vita isn’t allowed to be brought up.
And I’d like to think I’m consistent, at least. I love the Switch for the same reason I loved the PSP and Vita. PSP was actually my handheld of choice over the DS that gen because of its “console gaming on the go” style library. If you don’t think portable Star Wars The Force Unleashed was the coolest shit are you even a fan of handhelds? Vita was damn good but eventually through longevity the 3DS just took over, it was going to happen when Sony dropped support for theirs but Nintendo didn’t. For real, Sony actually has done two really good handhelds. One succeeded and the other I feel was held back by the price of the memory cards.
This is why Sony fanboys confuse me more than any other type of fanboys, they claim to hate weaker systems like the Switch and yet they buy the 2nd weakest one available. If power matters so much then they should be PC gamers, but bringing this up to them usually results in a bunch of replies like "shut up, it's the games that matter!", which is the exact argument they hear from Nintendo fans after their claims of hating weaker systems.
It was barely announced that its development started last year. Games like Metroid Prime 1 ~ 3 that have that much scanning/lore, collectibles, level design, etc... those games won't be completed very quickly. Especially if they wish to hold up to the high bar that the previous games set. For example, if it's not a first person shooter like the others, people will rage.
I'm personally not getting my hopes up for any new mainline titles to be announced any time soon. Better that than be let down every time, y'know?
I don't even think I would buy it if this were true, which...I very much doubt it is. Any rumors immediately get dismissed as fake in my eyes, unless the rumors are from an official source.
It's true that I never played City Folk despite seeing it on sale for like, $10 several times, but eh. I didn't get as much enjoyment as I hoped out of New Leaf...although according to the Activity Log, I put in 204 hours before quitting forever...which I guess isn't too bad? I guess it's because I simply lack the creativity/don't feel the need to go out of my way to decorate the entire town with custom textures and whatnot. If I enjoyed that portion of the game more, I might still be playing it today, but alas, I did not.
But getting slightly back on topic, I feel like having two Animal Crossing games in a single card would be problematic, more so the "having two Animal Crossing games at the same time part" than anything else. If I recall, Animal Crossing games more or less require your full attention if you want to keep up with everything, which means...playing every day. That would be difficult to do with two Animal Crossings at the same time, plus switching back and forth between an older and newer Animal Crossing would be unusual as well (though I suppose at least this could be remedied by majorly updating City Folk with new mechanics.)
Hm. The only way I could see something like this working is if they combined the two games into one game, adding distinctive things from each game into one new(ish?) game. I haven't played City Folk, but I guess they could add the "city" portion as the main hub for most of the shops and whatever else was there, and have two towns that linked together, either separated by the city portion or through some other means? They might have to shrink down the towns a bit to make it more manageable though.
What they don't know is that if Nintendo went 3rd party, they would most likely develop exclusively for mobile games. Less money to spend on the budget and advertising, and more profits. It's like a match made in Heaven for Nintendo. So when people clamor for Nintendo to go 3rd party, I'm like, "you really don't want that. Trust me, you really don't."
Sony fans are the ones that invented the “handheld consoles aren’t consoles” argument so that they can pretend Nintendo hasn’t “won” anything since the SNES (which also involves the “gimmicks don’t count” argument to get rid of the Wii), all because they want to pretend the Vita isn’t allowed to be brought up.
And I’d like to think I’m consistent, at least. I love the Switch for the same reason I loved the PSP and Vita. PSP was actually my handheld of choice over the DS that gen because of its “console gaming on the go” style library. If you don’t think portable Star Wars The Force Unleashed was the coolest shit are you even a fan of handhelds? Vita was damn good but eventually through longevity the 3DS just took over, it was going to happen when Sony dropped support for theirs but Nintendo didn’t. For real, Sony actually has done two really good handhelds. One succeeded and the other I feel was held back by the price of the memory cards.
This is why Sony fanboys confuse me more than any other type of fanboys, they claim to hate weaker systems like the Switch and yet they buy the 2nd weakest one available. If power matters so much then they should be PC gamers, but bringing this up to them usually results in a bunch of replies like "shut up, it's the games that matter!", which is the exact argument they hear from Nintendo fans after their claims of hating weaker systems.
It was barely announced that its development started last year. Games like Metroid Prime 1 ~ 3 that have that much scanning/lore, collectibles, level design, etc... those games won't be completed very quickly. Especially if they wish to hold up to the high bar that the previous games set. For example, if it's not a first person shooter like the others, people will rage.
I'm personally not getting my hopes up for any new mainline titles to be announced any time soon. Better that than be let down every time, y'know?
I don't even think I would buy it if this were true, which...I very much doubt it is. Any rumors immediately get dismissed as fake in my eyes, unless the rumors are from an official source.
It's true that I never played City Folk despite seeing it on sale for like, $10 several times, but eh. I didn't get as much enjoyment as I hoped out of New Leaf...although according to the Activity Log, I put in 204 hours before quitting forever...which I guess isn't too bad? I guess it's because I simply lack the creativity/don't feel the need to go out of my way to decorate the entire town with custom textures and whatnot. If I enjoyed that portion of the game more, I might still be playing it today, but alas, I did not.
But getting slightly back on topic, I feel like having two Animal Crossing games in a single card would be problematic, more so the "having two Animal Crossing games at the same time part" than anything else. If I recall, Animal Crossing games more or less require your full attention if you want to keep up with everything, which means...playing every day. That would be difficult to do with two Animal Crossings at the same time, plus switching back and forth between an older and newer Animal Crossing would be unusual as well (though I suppose at least this could be remedied by majorly updating City Folk with new mechanics.)
Hm. The only way I could see something like this working is if they combined the two games into one game, adding distinctive things from each game into one new(ish?) game. I haven't played City Folk, but I guess they could add the "city" portion as the main hub for most of the shops and whatever else was there, and have two towns that linked together, either separated by the city portion or through some other means? They might have to shrink down the towns a bit to make it more manageable though.
Nintendo Switch Criticisms 001
The switch goes a few things right. Examples include the bittering agent on the cartridges and the swappable joycons. Of course, it also has flaws. The battery not being replaceable by users, requiring a separate premium membership to play the games you bought online in the near future, and no local save file back up option a few of things. I get that there are people here that like Nintendo, but the criticism of this stuff is in hopes that these problems will be fixed at a future date so Nintendo can make it a better system.
It's possible some people just don't see it when it's right in front of them. Nintendo has a system with potential for greatness, but it needs more polish. Ditch the premium membership for online (don't have to get rid of the entire plan, but that part should be ditched),
Make the smart phone app an optional addon for online (not everyone has a smart phone or at least would rather not use it to play online),
Implement a proper Virtual console with games up to the Gamecube if possible (not sure if DS is possible because of the two screen thing, but it should be worth trying to do what can be done in terms of VC),
Make the battery replaceable by users (thus giving these systems a longer life),
Create N64 and Gamecube Joycons for it (some games play better with the Gamecube controller than they do with newer ones because the mapping doesn't translate as well. The driving levels in Sonic Adventure 2 are like this. In addition, because of the button layout on an N64 controller, it would be great for Sega Genesis games should there be more of them.)
You could also say the same for the blind feverishly loyal fans of Nintendo. I love the system. I love Nintendo. That doesn't mean they aren't worthy of criticism, which is what you've implied throughout the months here. If I dare suggest that something they do is wrong, it's met with accusations of being a Sony shill, a troll, or just "not a true Nintendo fan." That's stupid and you know it. You can like something but also criticize it. If you don't have that open of a mind than you're just blindly following. Look where that got (insert notable group from history class here) in the past.
We’ve already seen them in one gen go from “Power is all that matters” when PS4 was the strongest to “power isn’t everything, exclusives are all that matter” once the One X came out, which is doubly hilarious because they come here and it’s all about power again. And I’m calling it now, if Sony releases a handheld less powerful than the PS4 and XB1 suddenly power won’t matter anymore, suddenly console ports to a handheld will be okay again, suddenly portability won’t be a gimmick anymore, suddenly everyone cares about portability, and suddenly it will be okay for a new system to not have a library the size of the PS4’s. Everything they bash the Switch for it will be okay for Sony to do. It’s always how they roll.
Also reminds me of the 3DS vs Vita scenario after Vita's reveal. They swarmed the 3DS board with their superiority complex for a while until Vita released and didn't do so well. The 3DS board gave the Vita board a taste of their own medicine insomuch that the Vita folks retreated and the 3DS folks swarmed that board. Got to the point where the Vita folks cried to the mods because of the Media Create threads, so the mods banned the posting of them there. All because of the Vita board's attitude of feeling superior. But of course we know what followed. When Wii U didn't do so well, guess who showed up and continued hanging around, even moving to the Switch board? Folks who hold a grudge through a fault of their own.
It's possible some people just don't see it when it's right in front of them. Nintendo has a system with potential for greatness, but it needs more polish. Ditch the premium membership for online (don't have to get rid of the entire plan, but that part should be ditched),
Make the smart phone app an optional addon for online (not everyone has a smart phone or at least would rather not use it to play online),
Implement a proper Virtual console with games up to the Gamecube if possible (not sure if DS is possible because of the two screen thing, but it should be worth trying to do what can be done in terms of VC),
Make the battery replaceable by users (thus giving these systems a longer life),
Create N64 and Gamecube Joycons for it (some games play better with the Gamecube controller than they do with newer ones because the mapping doesn't translate as well. The driving levels in Sonic Adventure 2 are like this. In addition, because of the button layout on an N64 controller, it would be great for Sega Genesis games should there be more of them.)
It's possible some people just don't see it when it's right in front of them. Nintendo has a system with potential for greatness, but it needs more polish. Ditch the premium membership for online (don't have to get rid of the entire plan, but that part should be ditched),
Make the smart phone app an optional addon for online (not everyone has a smart phone or at least would rather not use it to play online),
Implement a proper Virtual console with games up to the Gamecube if possible (not sure if DS is possible because of the two screen thing, but it should be worth trying to do what can be done in terms of VC),
Make the battery replaceable by users (thus giving these systems a longer life),
Create N64 and Gamecube Joycons for it (some games play better with the Gamecube controller than they do with newer ones because the mapping doesn't translate as well. The driving levels in Sonic Adventure 2 are like this. In addition, because of the button layout on an N64 controller, it would be great for Sega Genesis games should there be more of them.)
You could also say the same for the blind feverishly loyal fans of Nintendo. I love the system. I love Nintendo. That doesn't mean they aren't worthy of criticism, which is what you've implied throughout the months here. If I dare suggest that something they do is wrong, it's met with accusations of being a Sony shill, a troll, or just "not a true Nintendo fan." That's stupid and you know it. You can like something but also criticize it. If you don't have that open of a mind than you're just blindly following. Look where that got (insert notable group from history class here) in the past.
We’ve already seen them in one gen go from “Power is all that matters” when PS4 was the strongest to “power isn’t everything, exclusives are all that matter” once the One X came out, which is doubly hilarious because they come here and it’s all about power again. And I’m calling it now, if Sony releases a handheld less powerful than the PS4 and XB1 suddenly power won’t matter anymore, suddenly console ports to a handheld will be okay again, suddenly portability won’t be a gimmick anymore, suddenly everyone cares about portability, and suddenly it will be okay for a new system to not have a library the size of the PS4’s. Everything they bash the Switch for it will be okay for Sony to do. It’s always how they roll.
Also reminds me of the 3DS vs Vita scenario after Vita's reveal. They swarmed the 3DS board with their superiority complex for a while until Vita released and didn't do so well. The 3DS board gave the Vita board a taste of their own medicine insomuch that the Vita folks retreated and the 3DS folks swarmed that board. Got to the point where the Vita folks cried to the mods because of the Media Create threads, so the mods banned the posting of them there. All because of the Vita board's attitude of feeling superior. But of course we know what followed. When Wii U didn't do so well, guess who showed up and continued hanging around, even moving to the Switch board? Folks who hold a grudge through a fault of their own.
It's possible some people just don't see it when it's right in front of them. Nintendo has a system with potential for greatness, but it needs more polish. Ditch the premium membership for online (don't have to get rid of the entire plan, but that part should be ditched),
Make the smart phone app an optional addon for online (not everyone has a smart phone or at least would rather not use it to play online),
Implement a proper Virtual console with games up to the Gamecube if possible (not sure if DS is possible because of the two screen thing, but it should be worth trying to do what can be done in terms of VC),
Make the battery replaceable by users (thus giving these systems a longer life),
Create N64 and Gamecube Joycons for it (some games play better with the Gamecube controller than they do with newer ones because the mapping doesn't translate as well. The driving levels in Sonic Adventure 2 are like this. In addition, because of the button layout on an N64 controller, it would be great for Sega Genesis games should there be more of them.)
Wednesday, September 12, 2018
Systems Boycott
I see no reason to boycott any console... they're made by companies who want our money, sure, I do believe that people who create games do so often for their love of gaming and wanting to produce a work of art or a masterful story. But at the end of the day, the consoles exist to make money. They have to earn my loyalty by providing good products at a reasonable price, I'm not going to side with a company because I own their plastic box, therefore, it must be the best.
I own both the X and the Pro and quite honestly, I'd much rather just own one console and have everything all in one place.I have no real care or preference between MS/Sony, I bought the Xbox One first this generation for 2 reasons, Halo and because that's where nearly all my friends play and (albeit not recently) most of my time is spent playing multiplayer games with them.
I can quite easily list the reasons why I bought a PS4 (March this year) in addition to my Xbox:
- God of War
- Bloodborne
- Nioh
- Horizon Zero Dawn
- The Last of Us (I never had a PS3... so wanted to see what the fuss was all about)
(I have also bought Shadow of the Colossus and was given Detroit: Become Human by someone who didn't like it)
Beyond the above few games (which are all enjoyable, can't take that away from Sony), it literally offers me nothing over what I already had, maybe it's not the best use of money to be honest, but I'm fortunate enough that I can afford to do this. As I say, I would rather just have one system which has everything, but I understand that companies need to offer an incentive to purchase their hardware over another.
I fully accept that Microsoft encompasses Xbox and Windows 10... it baffles me that people see this as a reason to bash on Xbox. It's quite clear that MS have purposefully taken this path, I'm cool with it. I'm cool with Windows Exclusive or whatever term you want to put against it. As someone who has no interest in gaming on a PC (I used to play WoW for years), I sit at a desk all day as a job... I just want to sit on a sofa with a machine that just works, does the job (very well for both the X and Pro) and use it as my escape after a busy day.
Whilst I wanted both and I'm enjoying both... quite frankly now I have both I was just as content when I only owned one. There's too many games for me to get through anyway and now I've almost got through the PS4 games I wanted... I'm spending most my time back on the Xbox One X anyway. I probably should have bought the new trailer for my MX bike that I need instead of a PS4 Pro...
Ever since the Sega Genesis & SNES released, I have been determined to own every major console each gen. The only console I’ve ever “boycotted” was the NeoGeo because it was so unbelievably expensive at the time. It was almost $700 for the console and the games were like $200-300 each when they were released. I still have never seen it in person, only in magazines and online. I’ve always dreamed of owning one. My holy grail when it comes to consoles. I almost bought one brand new with 7 or 8 unopened games about 10 years ago on eBay for $2000. After thinking on it for a few days, I went to buy it and it was already sold.
I own both the X and the Pro and quite honestly, I'd much rather just own one console and have everything all in one place.I have no real care or preference between MS/Sony, I bought the Xbox One first this generation for 2 reasons, Halo and because that's where nearly all my friends play and (albeit not recently) most of my time is spent playing multiplayer games with them.
I can quite easily list the reasons why I bought a PS4 (March this year) in addition to my Xbox:
- God of War
- Bloodborne
- Nioh
- Horizon Zero Dawn
- The Last of Us (I never had a PS3... so wanted to see what the fuss was all about)
(I have also bought Shadow of the Colossus and was given Detroit: Become Human by someone who didn't like it)
Beyond the above few games (which are all enjoyable, can't take that away from Sony), it literally offers me nothing over what I already had, maybe it's not the best use of money to be honest, but I'm fortunate enough that I can afford to do this. As I say, I would rather just have one system which has everything, but I understand that companies need to offer an incentive to purchase their hardware over another.
I fully accept that Microsoft encompasses Xbox and Windows 10... it baffles me that people see this as a reason to bash on Xbox. It's quite clear that MS have purposefully taken this path, I'm cool with it. I'm cool with Windows Exclusive or whatever term you want to put against it. As someone who has no interest in gaming on a PC (I used to play WoW for years), I sit at a desk all day as a job... I just want to sit on a sofa with a machine that just works, does the job (very well for both the X and Pro) and use it as my escape after a busy day.
Whilst I wanted both and I'm enjoying both... quite frankly now I have both I was just as content when I only owned one. There's too many games for me to get through anyway and now I've almost got through the PS4 games I wanted... I'm spending most my time back on the Xbox One X anyway. I probably should have bought the new trailer for my MX bike that I need instead of a PS4 Pro...
Ever since the Sega Genesis & SNES released, I have been determined to own every major console each gen. The only console I’ve ever “boycotted” was the NeoGeo because it was so unbelievably expensive at the time. It was almost $700 for the console and the games were like $200-300 each when they were released. I still have never seen it in person, only in magazines and online. I’ve always dreamed of owning one. My holy grail when it comes to consoles. I almost bought one brand new with 7 or 8 unopened games about 10 years ago on eBay for $2000. After thinking on it for a few days, I went to buy it and it was already sold.
Systems Theory: Nintendo Holiday Season 001
Also, the answer depends a lot on exactly what the question is.
"Will Nintendo exceed the accumulated lifetime sales of he PS4?" Not during the PS4's active life, obviously. . . but since the PS4 had a four year head start, this is trivial and meaningless. Will it exceed the PS4 eventually? At the rate the Switch is selling, it could entirely happen; just not until after the PS4 retires, most likely.
"Will Nintendo take first place on a by-week or by-month console sales chart?" Certainly, and it almost certainly will happen in the near future. The PS4 and XBone are heading towards the ends of their lives, while the Switch is new. The expected sales curve will be very favorable towards the Switch, and only maybe switch over again once the XBone 2 and PS5 come out. . . and probably not immediately, even then.
"Will Nintendo take first place on a generation total sales chart?" Tough to say, since we don't really have any information on the Switch's actual generational rivals. Until the XBone and PS5 come out, we can't really say whether they will outsell the Switch overall or not. The 9th Generation could follow the same pattern as the 8th, or it could be a tight competition, or it could be a complete upset, its impossible to tell yet.
Obviously he's talking aboit monthly sales but you already knew that and pretended not to to suit your agenda.
Obviously it'll not overtake anytime soon a successful console with a 4 or 5 years head start. When it's all said and done? Maybe.
And people always seem to forget this: for console warriors this seems to matter too much, for the Sony and Nintendo what matters are profits. If you put together a the money nintendo made with their gaming division vs Sony's, Nintendo is wipping the floor with Sony. Sony has a much more aggressive price strategy than Nintendo. They need to sell more consoles than Nintendo to stay relevant so you see huge price drops on their hardware and software throughout its lifetime, Nintendo on the other hand does not do it often and rarely sells consoles at a loss (wiiu at launch was the only exception?).
You're not missing much, @Ryan_Si
I have all three. The only reason I even keep my PS4 Pro plugged in is to readjust my PSVR Rev2 screen size sometimes (which I use to play Splatoon 2 and many other Switch games), otherwise the wait for Death Stranding and other truly amazing exclusives has been a struggle. Not saying it doesn't have some good games, but the best games it has are also on PC (or are timed exclusives and eventually on PC).
I was hoping Persona5 would change my mind on this, but after only being able to play for around 15min of the first 3 hours of cutscenes, I ejected the fucking disc. This is the problem with a lot of PS4 exclusives -- If I wanted to watch a movie, I'd watch a fucking movie. Where's the fucking gameplay?!
I still buy games for it to give it some love, but the draw isn't there like it is for Switch if you have a great gaming PC, all because of almost all games being multiplats after PS4/XB1 brought x86 to consoles (and death to themselves due to developers porting everything to all 3 now).
Bloodborne is great and my favorite PS4 exclusive by far... but no Pro patch really makes it look more dated than it should, and most people can live with DS3 if you're not into those games. GoW and HZD are alright to show people HDR, but their gameplay is mediocre due to the fact that they offer nothing new, instead giving players a mix of other games' gameplay and throwing a pretty package on top as if that's supposed to make up for the core gameplay feeling like a poor imitation of MGSV + SoulsBorne with some Zelda mixed in. I'm expecting the same from Spiderman - great for when I'm in the mood for a pretty girl with nothing going on upstairs, but that only lasts so long.
I feel like that's really an overbroad definition of the term "gimmick". At least IMO, any feature that later becomes common, if not standard, is definitionally not a "gimmick". A 'gimmick' is only properly an extraneous feature that *doesn't* actually contribute to the core function of _____. If it does contribute, its not a gimmick, and if others routinely embrace it, that's a pretty clear sign it does actually contribute.
I would also argue that one needs to distinguish between consoles that succeeded because of their gimmick, versus consoles that succeeded aside from ( or in spite of ) their gimmick. One also should distinguish between gimmicks that are core to a console's design and function, versus gimmicks that are more secondary. For example, the 3D in the 3DS is something I'd accept as a gimmick, but there certainly is no evidence to suggest it was the reason for the console's success. . . particularly since it was so extraneous, they made a "3DS" model without the 3D.
I don’t even think Nintendo needs a price drop to perform well on holiday season. Sony and Microsoft have to make massive price drops to even compete with Nintendo. Nintendo is going to be strong with excellent system sellers in Pokémon and Smash thst will drive the most sales in the season that attributed to most of the console sales
Plus we are getting increasing amounts of third party support like civilization, Megaman 11 and more. Excellent. Excellently excellent. Nintendo’s domination is beneficial to all console gamers because:
1. Sony will drop their PS4 price so it’s dirt cheap to try to even compete with Nintendo, making it a cheap system similar to the 2DS
2. Sony will have to focus more of their efforts on their home console next gen
Competition is excellent. I am excited to see what happens next.
Switch will most likely outsell Ps4 in December. But too soon to say who will end up 2018 best seller.
But you're underestimating RDR2. It will have massive hardware sales boost for PS4(and xbox but xbox can only compete in US). GLobally PS4 and Switch have been neck and neck all year. Switch outsold it for the first few months then Ps4 came back with God of War.
Neither console will dominate. But Don't underestimate what RDR2 will do to Ps4 Hardware sales. Especially in Europe. Europe is the one continent That is stopping Nintendo from dominating anything. Sony is absolutely crushing it over there. PS4 sells more a month in Europe than it does in Japan and American combined. Switch is killing it in Japan but Japan is much smaller market compared to Europe and America.
No doubt Smash will have a huge effect but that game comes out way too late.
I'm sure pokemon will effect sales but if i'm being honest..that game looks like Trash.
I can't find the link, sadly, but I did run across one article with a claim by someone from Sony that they expected it to sell 20M. I will certainly be glad for this to be disproven as telephone gone awry.
( Also, seriously, its quite irksome to see Sony fans bandy around sales figures for games, and quietly forget to mention that these are *multiplatform sales totals*. How many copies of a game that Rockstar manages to sell *across multiple platforms*, is not indicative of some degree of extraordinary success upon the part of *Sony*. They deserve credit for the amount sold on Sony platforms, no more. But then, they also seem to love to claim every multiplatform title as if it were a Sony exclusive. . . )
"Will Nintendo exceed the accumulated lifetime sales of he PS4?" Not during the PS4's active life, obviously. . . but since the PS4 had a four year head start, this is trivial and meaningless. Will it exceed the PS4 eventually? At the rate the Switch is selling, it could entirely happen; just not until after the PS4 retires, most likely.
"Will Nintendo take first place on a by-week or by-month console sales chart?" Certainly, and it almost certainly will happen in the near future. The PS4 and XBone are heading towards the ends of their lives, while the Switch is new. The expected sales curve will be very favorable towards the Switch, and only maybe switch over again once the XBone 2 and PS5 come out. . . and probably not immediately, even then.
"Will Nintendo take first place on a generation total sales chart?" Tough to say, since we don't really have any information on the Switch's actual generational rivals. Until the XBone and PS5 come out, we can't really say whether they will outsell the Switch overall or not. The 9th Generation could follow the same pattern as the 8th, or it could be a tight competition, or it could be a complete upset, its impossible to tell yet.
Obviously he's talking aboit monthly sales but you already knew that and pretended not to to suit your agenda.
Obviously it'll not overtake anytime soon a successful console with a 4 or 5 years head start. When it's all said and done? Maybe.
And people always seem to forget this: for console warriors this seems to matter too much, for the Sony and Nintendo what matters are profits. If you put together a the money nintendo made with their gaming division vs Sony's, Nintendo is wipping the floor with Sony. Sony has a much more aggressive price strategy than Nintendo. They need to sell more consoles than Nintendo to stay relevant so you see huge price drops on their hardware and software throughout its lifetime, Nintendo on the other hand does not do it often and rarely sells consoles at a loss (wiiu at launch was the only exception?).
You're not missing much, @Ryan_Si
I have all three. The only reason I even keep my PS4 Pro plugged in is to readjust my PSVR Rev2 screen size sometimes (which I use to play Splatoon 2 and many other Switch games), otherwise the wait for Death Stranding and other truly amazing exclusives has been a struggle. Not saying it doesn't have some good games, but the best games it has are also on PC (or are timed exclusives and eventually on PC).
I was hoping Persona5 would change my mind on this, but after only being able to play for around 15min of the first 3 hours of cutscenes, I ejected the fucking disc. This is the problem with a lot of PS4 exclusives -- If I wanted to watch a movie, I'd watch a fucking movie. Where's the fucking gameplay?!
I still buy games for it to give it some love, but the draw isn't there like it is for Switch if you have a great gaming PC, all because of almost all games being multiplats after PS4/XB1 brought x86 to consoles (and death to themselves due to developers porting everything to all 3 now).
Bloodborne is great and my favorite PS4 exclusive by far... but no Pro patch really makes it look more dated than it should, and most people can live with DS3 if you're not into those games. GoW and HZD are alright to show people HDR, but their gameplay is mediocre due to the fact that they offer nothing new, instead giving players a mix of other games' gameplay and throwing a pretty package on top as if that's supposed to make up for the core gameplay feeling like a poor imitation of MGSV + SoulsBorne with some Zelda mixed in. I'm expecting the same from Spiderman - great for when I'm in the mood for a pretty girl with nothing going on upstairs, but that only lasts so long.
Hate to tell you but the DS & 3DS had the touchscreen & 3D gimmicks....
Nes, Snes, GB/C/Advance & I think the Gamecube are the consoles that didn't really sell on a gimmick.
That's not entirely true. The NES, SNES and Game Boy introduced features that were not in other consoles at the time, such as the D-Pad, shoulder buttons, link cable, etc. They're part of the standard now. One can argue motion controls are part of the standard as well.
The only console that truly had no gimmick at all was the GameCube, and that failed tremendously.
I feel like that's really an overbroad definition of the term "gimmick". At least IMO, any feature that later becomes common, if not standard, is definitionally not a "gimmick". A 'gimmick' is only properly an extraneous feature that *doesn't* actually contribute to the core function of _____. If it does contribute, its not a gimmick, and if others routinely embrace it, that's a pretty clear sign it does actually contribute.
I would also argue that one needs to distinguish between consoles that succeeded because of their gimmick, versus consoles that succeeded aside from ( or in spite of ) their gimmick. One also should distinguish between gimmicks that are core to a console's design and function, versus gimmicks that are more secondary. For example, the 3D in the 3DS is something I'd accept as a gimmick, but there certainly is no evidence to suggest it was the reason for the console's success. . . particularly since it was so extraneous, they made a "3DS" model without the 3D.
I don’t even think Nintendo needs a price drop to perform well on holiday season. Sony and Microsoft have to make massive price drops to even compete with Nintendo. Nintendo is going to be strong with excellent system sellers in Pokémon and Smash thst will drive the most sales in the season that attributed to most of the console sales
Plus we are getting increasing amounts of third party support like civilization, Megaman 11 and more. Excellent. Excellently excellent. Nintendo’s domination is beneficial to all console gamers because:
1. Sony will drop their PS4 price so it’s dirt cheap to try to even compete with Nintendo, making it a cheap system similar to the 2DS
2. Sony will have to focus more of their efforts on their home console next gen
Competition is excellent. I am excited to see what happens next.
Switch will most likely outsell Ps4 in December. But too soon to say who will end up 2018 best seller.
But you're underestimating RDR2. It will have massive hardware sales boost for PS4(and xbox but xbox can only compete in US). GLobally PS4 and Switch have been neck and neck all year. Switch outsold it for the first few months then Ps4 came back with God of War.
Neither console will dominate. But Don't underestimate what RDR2 will do to Ps4 Hardware sales. Especially in Europe. Europe is the one continent That is stopping Nintendo from dominating anything. Sony is absolutely crushing it over there. PS4 sells more a month in Europe than it does in Japan and American combined. Switch is killing it in Japan but Japan is much smaller market compared to Europe and America.
No doubt Smash will have a huge effect but that game comes out way too late.
I'm sure pokemon will effect sales but if i'm being honest..that game looks like Trash.
I can't find the link, sadly, but I did run across one article with a claim by someone from Sony that they expected it to sell 20M. I will certainly be glad for this to be disproven as telephone gone awry.
( Also, seriously, its quite irksome to see Sony fans bandy around sales figures for games, and quietly forget to mention that these are *multiplatform sales totals*. How many copies of a game that Rockstar manages to sell *across multiple platforms*, is not indicative of some degree of extraordinary success upon the part of *Sony*. They deserve credit for the amount sold on Sony platforms, no more. But then, they also seem to love to claim every multiplatform title as if it were a Sony exclusive. . . )
How did XBAND work?
Basically all it did was receive player 2's button inputs over the internet rather than the controller port. You had to plug a cart into the xband and a phone line into the xband, it was dial up then. Once you connected you had an account and had email, messaging, leader boards, news, and then you could hit play multiplayer or whatever. When you were matched up one player would dial the phone number of the other(automatic in the xband system) and make the connection then it would switch out of the xband interface and go into the game like normal. After the match it would go back to the xband interface and it would show who you were playing and you could message them. It was a neat little system.
In terms of the features today though, just going off this. Would you really want to play most of these online? Even going with hypotheticals. Nes Tennis over mario tennis aces? SMK over MK8D? SMB is pass the controller and you wouldn't even have voice chat so what's the point? Watch a lets play. Street Fighter 2 over the HD remake they just did? Lets even go crazy and say they add n64 and goldeneye or perfect dark. Do you really want to play a single stick n64 fps over pretty much anything else? So what switch owners are now going to get into competitive balloon fight?
Online features might have been a tad bit more interesting on the nes classic where at least you didn't have better versions of pretty much everything right there on the system.
In terms of the features today though, just going off this. Would you really want to play most of these online? Even going with hypotheticals. Nes Tennis over mario tennis aces? SMK over MK8D? SMB is pass the controller and you wouldn't even have voice chat so what's the point? Watch a lets play. Street Fighter 2 over the HD remake they just did? Lets even go crazy and say they add n64 and goldeneye or perfect dark. Do you really want to play a single stick n64 fps over pretty much anything else? So what switch owners are now going to get into competitive balloon fight?
Online features might have been a tad bit more interesting on the nes classic where at least you didn't have better versions of pretty much everything right there on the system.
Naruto Pasta
This whole weekend I was playing Naruto Storm Trilogy and it's been a long time since I teared up so much in a game, especially in Storm 3 with a certain scene, it was like I was gradually become sadder and sadder until I had to pause the game and take a breather. Hell, my head still hurts after trying to hold back so much until I couldn't take it. It's very weird for me to get emotional like this and I just think how pathetic I must look being alone in my room sobbing with my controller in my hands but goddamit these scenes was sad as hell.
Both in Naruto Storm 2 and 3, these games are relentless with the feels. To be honest, I stopped watching the anime back when I was in like 9th grade (I'm 23 now) since I hate filler, and the repetitiveness of the fights (Good guy comes, fights bad guy, flashback, enemy gets the upper hand, all hope is lost, flashback, ROCK MUSIC + good guy gets the upper hand, OH? but the bad guy has a trump card, and so on...). However, I love the material of the anime and these games adapts it so well, except for Ninja Storm 1 which was great gameplay wise with the cinematic ultimate jutsus, but non existent story.
I highly recommend this package for anyone interested in some fun, very tightly paced story modes, and some epic looking scenes. If you want to experience some potentially emotional storytelling, these games (Storm 2 and 3) are very great additions. Storm 1 is still worth buying since for some reason, Storm 2 and 3 abandoned the cinematic Ultimate Jutsus in favor of shorter snappier but less impactful Ultimates. Still combat is simple but enjoyable enough.
I tried to split my time between Uncharted 4 multiplayer and this, but I was so hooked on the trilogy..
Both in Naruto Storm 2 and 3, these games are relentless with the feels. To be honest, I stopped watching the anime back when I was in like 9th grade (I'm 23 now) since I hate filler, and the repetitiveness of the fights (Good guy comes, fights bad guy, flashback, enemy gets the upper hand, all hope is lost, flashback, ROCK MUSIC + good guy gets the upper hand, OH? but the bad guy has a trump card, and so on...). However, I love the material of the anime and these games adapts it so well, except for Ninja Storm 1 which was great gameplay wise with the cinematic ultimate jutsus, but non existent story.
I highly recommend this package for anyone interested in some fun, very tightly paced story modes, and some epic looking scenes. If you want to experience some potentially emotional storytelling, these games (Storm 2 and 3) are very great additions. Storm 1 is still worth buying since for some reason, Storm 2 and 3 abandoned the cinematic Ultimate Jutsus in favor of shorter snappier but less impactful Ultimates. Still combat is simple but enjoyable enough.
I tried to split my time between Uncharted 4 multiplayer and this, but I was so hooked on the trilogy..
Systems Theory: Nintendo Dialogues 001
Mario Odyssey first and foremost. But you already knew that!
For platformers, DK Tropical Freeze, Captain Toad, and Rayman Legends are must plays.
For strategy, Mario Rabbids (though it's not an essential title imo)
For multiplayer, Splatoon 2 has both addicting online and a really charming campaign. Just keep in mind, 20 bucks a year for online starting next week. Also keep in mind, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe has some decent extra content.
For RPGs, Skyrim is actually a must. Even for the veterans. Just playing it on the go is surreal.
For JRPGs, it's really between Octopath Traveler and Xenoblade 2, though I've played neither
For Indies, the essentials are Hollow Knight, Celeste, Dead Cells, and Stardew Valley
1 - "You were told about it in advance, so shut up."
- Saying in advance you're going to do a shitty thing does not make it okay to do that shitty thing.
2 - "Microsoft and Sony are doing it too!"
- That doesn't justify any of them doing it. Just because something is often done does not make it okay to do. Lootboxes are often done, but they're getting into hot shit in Belgium.
3 - "You're not entitled to online play, so shut up."
- "You're not entitled to it so you can't complain about it." is a terrible line of thinking. You are entitled to exist and breathe, and that's about it. If you do not pay for food, you will have a hard time staying fed. If do not pay for your water and/or power, they will be turned off. If you do not pay for your home, you will be thrown onto the street. These are some critical things that you are not entitled to, and I'm sure you would complain if you felt you were being denied them unfairly. Just because online components of video games are not as important as these things does not mean one cannot complain about them. Speaking of...
4 - "There are more important things to worry about than paywalled online, so shut up."
- That's not the battle being fought here. Simple as that. There is a time and place for each conflict, and this is not the time or place to talk about the greater problems of the world.
4 - "It's just twenty bucks, so shut up."
"What are you, poor?" is not a defense.
5 - "Servers cost money."
- Sure! But no console manufacturer foots the bill for third party servers, and peer to peer connections are common amongst consoles rather than use a dedicated servers. Not only that, but using this as a defense for paywalled online is deliberate ignorance to the fact that companies make money through other means. If video games were not profitable, Nintendo would have gotten out of the business years ago, and the Switch sells like hotcakes and, notably, is not sold at a loss. The only way for paywalled online to be necessary to a company's survival would be for them to otherwise always be teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, which no strong company does. Period.
6 - "Companies exist to make money."
- That is not carte blanche for corporations to do whatever they want as long as it makes them a buck. See again, lootboxes in Belgium. Companies exist to make money, and lootboxes are made to make money, yet they have gotten on the bad end of a legal dispute. If "companies exist to make money." were a Get Out Of Jail Free Card, then this would not have happened. Simple as that.
Did I miss anything?
Here's the thing. I don't like paying for online, but it's pretty much the way things are now. Microsoft started it, Sony followed. It was literally a matter of time before Nintendo did. However, how they are doing it is like a slap in the face. No messaging. No voice chat natively. Peer to peer. These things are standard these days. The fact that we are paying for a substandard service is the issue. I'll still pay for it, mainly for the cloud saves, but this is all ass backwards. And for whatever reason, so many people on this board are drunk off the damn coolaid. I just want actual features that are standard with online services. And there is literally nothing wrong with stating that.
This topic again? I guess I'll add you to my ignore list after posting one thing for the knowledge of other people, as you obviously don't care about knowledge.
Nintendo has approximately 200 Network Engineers.
https://nintendoeverything.com/updated-list-of-employee-counts-for-nintendo-companies/
The remaining amount after math is about 286. iQue and ND Cube are smaller parts of Nintendo, so that would leave approximately 200 employees for Network Service DB employees
Average pay of a Network Engineer = $111,000
https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/network-engineer-salary-SRCH_KO0,16.htm
Network Labor Costs = $22,200,000
NBA2k18 takes up 5 Gb per save
https://www.destructoid.com/the-file-size-for-nba-2k18-on-switch-is-a-technical-foul-461427.phtml
At 390,000 software sales, assuming just 2 saves a person, that game alone would require almost 4 PETABYTES of cloud storage.
http://www.vgchartz.com/db/game.php?id=174556
Skyrim saves can get to the 100s of MB, and that game sold 1,000,000 copies as well.
http://www.vgchartz.com/db/game.php?id=161518
Thats another 100 TB from that game with only 1 save file. Skyrim will tend to have MUCH more than 1 save file PER playthrough, and thats not even taking into account multiple characters.
These hard drives are having millions of writes a day, so they will be under heavy use, which means they will need to be replaced.
All of these are costs for the Nintendo Online.
You can say "*but but steam!" but steam had that as part of its profit margin built into the store from conception. This was an added cost for all of the big three. Any time you add a service, there's an added cost. And even though throwing money at something won't automatically make it better, letting something hemmorage money is a guaranteed way to make sure it stays bad.
Oh no! Ignored! Whatever will I do?
I mean, nevermind that Point 5 already destroys that because it's literally "Servers cost money!" with a little extra fluff.
Oh, I knew I was forgetting something! This is what it is!
7 - "But they're giving services that cost money."
- Two pointers here. One, services like cloud saves that do not intrinsically have anything to do with online play. The cloud saves could still be behind the premium subscription without the online play being with it. This has never been an argument against having a premium subscription at all, only one against gutting content that was advertised with the game for the sake of making a buck. Two, these corporations must not be coddled for the consequences of their decisions. It was Nintendo's decision to implement cloud saves (not even for all games) to the exclusion of local backups. Indeed, it was their decision to break into online games as well. They knew the costs that would imply, and they chose to do it anyway. If they were so grossly incompetent at business that starting a heavy lean toward online play would bankrupt them without paywalling it (spoiler: they're not), then they would have dug their own grave, an action for which the end user cannot be held liable for. We are not Nintendo's guardians or defenders. Hold them accountable for their decisions, especially those that turn out poorly for you.
#27
There's nothing to say. He blows off Steam saying "but steam had that as part of its profit margin built into the store from conception", which is simply not an argument, and there are three huge reasons why.
1 - With all the massive piles of crap alongside the worthwhile games that Steam hosts, as well as their open, blanket supplying of cloud saves to every one of their users, their server costs will easily exceed Nintendo's by a massive margin. Not only that, but he specifically namedrops NBA 2K18 and Skyrim, which are both games that, go figure, Steam also sells. He is, on some level, trying to imply that between the two only Nintendo will have to host their data which is bordering on being a bald faced lie.
2 - He says "built into the store fromconception", but it is a critical skill of a business to be able to change course and adjust your planning as it's needed. If Nintendo were to barrel into cloud saves without considering the costs that would entail, they'd be a gaggle of pure idiots, to put it simply. He speaks as though the console manufacturers were completely blindsided by the notion of cloud saves, and that also is simply not true. They each had as much time as they wanted to crunch the numbers and gauge whether it'd be worth it to bother with them. Not only that, but the closest you could say Nintendo is being forced to do this is through their own will, having decided to not allow for local backups. Again, companies must not be coddled for their decisions. Nintendo knows what the costs will be for this, and if they somehow managed to grossly underestimate those costs, then that is their failure, and not a failure the consequences of which should be passed onto their customers.
3 - The margin between the console manufacturers and Steam is not as wide as it is made out to be. The Switch in particular, as I have said many a time, is not sold at a loss, so for Nintendo it cannot be said "But they need it to help recoup the cost of making the consoles" since the consoles already pay for themselves. True, Valve has not done much consistent work in game production, but just as much as that is their decision, it is Nintendo's decision to upkeep a strong first party lineup, which again I say must be working for them because if their first party games were not profitable, they would have bailed out years ago, and to say that first party games is a detriment to their finances is even more laughable when you remember that Breath of the Wild double dipped with a season pass and Splatoon 2 has its own premium DLC.
The arguments of "servers and network engineers cost money" are moot because that's not a problem exclusive to Nintendo, and attempting to write off the main point of evidence that those costs can be supported without a subscription at all (though, again, a subscription is only a problem when aspects of games already paid for are gutted) because that company doesn't manufacture consoles is just trying to drape the elephant in the room with a blanket. It won't work.
And finally, to speak coarsely for a minute, his head's clearly up his ass with him announcing "I SHALL IGNORE THEE, IGNORANT PEON!". He's not, and potentially was never interested in actually addressing anything I have to say. His response to continued pressure that contradicts his viewpoint was effectively to take his ball and go home, which I find perfectly fair to interpret as a forfeiture.
Haven't hit ignore yet, so I'll do one more response.
Sailor_Razor posted...
but it is a critical skill of a business to be able to change course and adjust your planning as it's needed.
Yes, and that's why they are having a cost for it.
Sailor_Razor posted...
But they're giving services that cost money."
- Two pointers here. One, services like cloud saves that do not intrinsically have anything to do with online play. The cloud saves could still be behind the premium subscription without the online play being with it.
But the online still costs money and is still a constant service. Bandwidth for being able to connect millions of devices to millions of other devices, and needing servers in all parts of the world costs money. I don't have numbers for those, as I don't know where to even begin outside of the cost of network engineers which I already covered. And oh man, could you imagine the rage of it was just cloud saves that cost $20 a year?
Sailor_Razor posted...
The arguments of "servers and network engineers cost money" are moot because that's not a problem exclusive to Nintendo, and attempting to write off the main point of evidence that those costs can be supported without a subscription at all
Your right, it's not exclusive to Nintendo, and neither are premium subscriptions. That's what you are ignoring.
Sailor_Razor posted...
There's nothing to say. He blows off Steam saying "but steam had that as part of its profit margin built into the store from conception", which is simply not an argument, and there are three huge reasons why.
None of these are arguments that aren't already addressed (which is why you are being put on ignore, you don't address points, you try to mock them as if that makes you right).
You see, I have listed a ton of sources in my post, you have listed none and are just posting conjecture. The gap isn't as wide? Lies! I say stands profit margin is 1 BILLION TIMES LARGER!!! (OK, that was mocking , I admit that).
Here is the thing, Nintendo tried doing bare minimum, just as Sony tried doing bare minimum for online. Nintendo held it a little longer, as they had other things they were trying out to avoid online betting the focus of their consoles. Bars minimum will only get you so far, and if you want a premium service out will cost you a premium cost. Nintendo knows this, and instead of screwing customers by adding it on to a console that it was never advertised for, they waited for their next generation. That way any consumers would have the choice of getting it with that knowledge.
Sailor_Razor posted...
Nintendo knows what the costs will be for this, and if they somehow managed to grossly underestimate those costs, then that is their failure, and not a failure the consequences of which should be passed onto their customers.
Actualy, the cost of a service is exactly what is passed onto customers.
Sailor_Razor posted...
And finally, to speak coarsely for a minute, his head's clearly up his ass with him announcing "I SHALL IGNORE THEE, IGNORANT PEON!". He's not, and potentially was never interested in actually addressing anything I have to say. His response to continued pressure that contradicts his viewpoint was effectively to take his ball and go home, which I find perfectly fair to interpret as a forfeiture.
Actualy I announced it so that when there's no responses, it would be evident as to why. I feel no pressure from you because, as I've noted in this post, you don't actually address anything. You act like you do, but you don't. I ignore people who can't do this simple thing.
#34
That just stinks of being an attention whore. Let's crack it down one by one.
1 - Citation - Being a business that exists to make money is not carte blance to do whatever they want. They can be criticized for their decisions.
2 - If it were just the cloud saves, that would be on them for that decision. They make the willful choice to not go the route of having a subscription that lets you play anything of their old library, and also letting you pick and choose if you'd rather. That it's a constant service doesn't matter. Nintendo is not going to stop making and releasing games and just hope the subscription covers their costs. That too is a constant service, which already has a significant price tag to it.
3 - I'm not ignoring anything. It is also shitty for Microsoft and Sony to paywall online play. If they did not, their premium subscriptions would be fine. There is an exact line being crossed here.
4 - They can not do the bare minimum while also doing something. That's what PS3 PSN+ was. If it was inadequate, they should have improved it, not said "Oh now you have to pay or we're taking away shit you already paid for!" Also, your interpretation is too kind.
5 - Citation - "Video games are not so unprofitable that they cannot support secondary services, or Nintendo would've bailed out years ago.
6 - Continuing on with that holier-than-thou "BE IGNORED, IGNORANT PEON!" nonsense. Begone with ye.
#38
There's enough time in the day to do more than one thing.
#39
"This isn't a frivolous "we want more money by doing nothing" kind of thing though.". From my perspective, it literally is. Their competitor, Valve, has proven that paywalled online is not necessary for a sustainable model. By trying to exclude people who don't want to pay them a subscription, that is the definition of a cheap cash grab.
#43
That they're so opaque about it, that's what I fully expect. I just want it to go so badly that they get covered in bad PR, and have no choice but to backpedal permanently.
$45 and #46
Ad hominem attack.
#49
I can't see it that way.
#51
Or it's the first way they thought of to make themselves look like a better option.
If/when they raise the price to $60, I will just laugh, for I have predicted it, as Sony did the same thing.
For platformers, DK Tropical Freeze, Captain Toad, and Rayman Legends are must plays.
For strategy, Mario Rabbids (though it's not an essential title imo)
For multiplayer, Splatoon 2 has both addicting online and a really charming campaign. Just keep in mind, 20 bucks a year for online starting next week. Also keep in mind, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe has some decent extra content.
For RPGs, Skyrim is actually a must. Even for the veterans. Just playing it on the go is surreal.
For JRPGs, it's really between Octopath Traveler and Xenoblade 2, though I've played neither
For Indies, the essentials are Hollow Knight, Celeste, Dead Cells, and Stardew Valley
1 - "You were told about it in advance, so shut up."
- Saying in advance you're going to do a shitty thing does not make it okay to do that shitty thing.
2 - "Microsoft and Sony are doing it too!"
- That doesn't justify any of them doing it. Just because something is often done does not make it okay to do. Lootboxes are often done, but they're getting into hot shit in Belgium.
3 - "You're not entitled to online play, so shut up."
- "You're not entitled to it so you can't complain about it." is a terrible line of thinking. You are entitled to exist and breathe, and that's about it. If you do not pay for food, you will have a hard time staying fed. If do not pay for your water and/or power, they will be turned off. If you do not pay for your home, you will be thrown onto the street. These are some critical things that you are not entitled to, and I'm sure you would complain if you felt you were being denied them unfairly. Just because online components of video games are not as important as these things does not mean one cannot complain about them. Speaking of...
4 - "There are more important things to worry about than paywalled online, so shut up."
- That's not the battle being fought here. Simple as that. There is a time and place for each conflict, and this is not the time or place to talk about the greater problems of the world.
4 - "It's just twenty bucks, so shut up."
"What are you, poor?" is not a defense.
5 - "Servers cost money."
- Sure! But no console manufacturer foots the bill for third party servers, and peer to peer connections are common amongst consoles rather than use a dedicated servers. Not only that, but using this as a defense for paywalled online is deliberate ignorance to the fact that companies make money through other means. If video games were not profitable, Nintendo would have gotten out of the business years ago, and the Switch sells like hotcakes and, notably, is not sold at a loss. The only way for paywalled online to be necessary to a company's survival would be for them to otherwise always be teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, which no strong company does. Period.
6 - "Companies exist to make money."
- That is not carte blanche for corporations to do whatever they want as long as it makes them a buck. See again, lootboxes in Belgium. Companies exist to make money, and lootboxes are made to make money, yet they have gotten on the bad end of a legal dispute. If "companies exist to make money." were a Get Out Of Jail Free Card, then this would not have happened. Simple as that.
Did I miss anything?
Here's the thing. I don't like paying for online, but it's pretty much the way things are now. Microsoft started it, Sony followed. It was literally a matter of time before Nintendo did. However, how they are doing it is like a slap in the face. No messaging. No voice chat natively. Peer to peer. These things are standard these days. The fact that we are paying for a substandard service is the issue. I'll still pay for it, mainly for the cloud saves, but this is all ass backwards. And for whatever reason, so many people on this board are drunk off the damn coolaid. I just want actual features that are standard with online services. And there is literally nothing wrong with stating that.
This topic again? I guess I'll add you to my ignore list after posting one thing for the knowledge of other people, as you obviously don't care about knowledge.
Nintendo has approximately 200 Network Engineers.
https://nintendoeverything.com/updated-list-of-employee-counts-for-nintendo-companies/
The remaining amount after math is about 286. iQue and ND Cube are smaller parts of Nintendo, so that would leave approximately 200 employees for Network Service DB employees
Average pay of a Network Engineer = $111,000
https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/network-engineer-salary-SRCH_KO0,16.htm
Network Labor Costs = $22,200,000
NBA2k18 takes up 5 Gb per save
https://www.destructoid.com/the-file-size-for-nba-2k18-on-switch-is-a-technical-foul-461427.phtml
At 390,000 software sales, assuming just 2 saves a person, that game alone would require almost 4 PETABYTES of cloud storage.
http://www.vgchartz.com/db/game.php?id=174556
Skyrim saves can get to the 100s of MB, and that game sold 1,000,000 copies as well.
http://www.vgchartz.com/db/game.php?id=161518
Thats another 100 TB from that game with only 1 save file. Skyrim will tend to have MUCH more than 1 save file PER playthrough, and thats not even taking into account multiple characters.
These hard drives are having millions of writes a day, so they will be under heavy use, which means they will need to be replaced.
All of these are costs for the Nintendo Online.
You can say "*but but steam!" but steam had that as part of its profit margin built into the store from conception. This was an added cost for all of the big three. Any time you add a service, there's an added cost. And even though throwing money at something won't automatically make it better, letting something hemmorage money is a guaranteed way to make sure it stays bad.
Oh no! Ignored! Whatever will I do?
I mean, nevermind that Point 5 already destroys that because it's literally "Servers cost money!" with a little extra fluff.
Oh, I knew I was forgetting something! This is what it is!
7 - "But they're giving services that cost money."
- Two pointers here. One, services like cloud saves that do not intrinsically have anything to do with online play. The cloud saves could still be behind the premium subscription without the online play being with it. This has never been an argument against having a premium subscription at all, only one against gutting content that was advertised with the game for the sake of making a buck. Two, these corporations must not be coddled for the consequences of their decisions. It was Nintendo's decision to implement cloud saves (not even for all games) to the exclusion of local backups. Indeed, it was their decision to break into online games as well. They knew the costs that would imply, and they chose to do it anyway. If they were so grossly incompetent at business that starting a heavy lean toward online play would bankrupt them without paywalling it (spoiler: they're not), then they would have dug their own grave, an action for which the end user cannot be held liable for. We are not Nintendo's guardians or defenders. Hold them accountable for their decisions, especially those that turn out poorly for you.
#27
There's nothing to say. He blows off Steam saying "but steam had that as part of its profit margin built into the store from conception", which is simply not an argument, and there are three huge reasons why.
1 - With all the massive piles of crap alongside the worthwhile games that Steam hosts, as well as their open, blanket supplying of cloud saves to every one of their users, their server costs will easily exceed Nintendo's by a massive margin. Not only that, but he specifically namedrops NBA 2K18 and Skyrim, which are both games that, go figure, Steam also sells. He is, on some level, trying to imply that between the two only Nintendo will have to host their data which is bordering on being a bald faced lie.
2 - He says "built into the store fromconception", but it is a critical skill of a business to be able to change course and adjust your planning as it's needed. If Nintendo were to barrel into cloud saves without considering the costs that would entail, they'd be a gaggle of pure idiots, to put it simply. He speaks as though the console manufacturers were completely blindsided by the notion of cloud saves, and that also is simply not true. They each had as much time as they wanted to crunch the numbers and gauge whether it'd be worth it to bother with them. Not only that, but the closest you could say Nintendo is being forced to do this is through their own will, having decided to not allow for local backups. Again, companies must not be coddled for their decisions. Nintendo knows what the costs will be for this, and if they somehow managed to grossly underestimate those costs, then that is their failure, and not a failure the consequences of which should be passed onto their customers.
3 - The margin between the console manufacturers and Steam is not as wide as it is made out to be. The Switch in particular, as I have said many a time, is not sold at a loss, so for Nintendo it cannot be said "But they need it to help recoup the cost of making the consoles" since the consoles already pay for themselves. True, Valve has not done much consistent work in game production, but just as much as that is their decision, it is Nintendo's decision to upkeep a strong first party lineup, which again I say must be working for them because if their first party games were not profitable, they would have bailed out years ago, and to say that first party games is a detriment to their finances is even more laughable when you remember that Breath of the Wild double dipped with a season pass and Splatoon 2 has its own premium DLC.
The arguments of "servers and network engineers cost money" are moot because that's not a problem exclusive to Nintendo, and attempting to write off the main point of evidence that those costs can be supported without a subscription at all (though, again, a subscription is only a problem when aspects of games already paid for are gutted) because that company doesn't manufacture consoles is just trying to drape the elephant in the room with a blanket. It won't work.
And finally, to speak coarsely for a minute, his head's clearly up his ass with him announcing "I SHALL IGNORE THEE, IGNORANT PEON!". He's not, and potentially was never interested in actually addressing anything I have to say. His response to continued pressure that contradicts his viewpoint was effectively to take his ball and go home, which I find perfectly fair to interpret as a forfeiture.
Haven't hit ignore yet, so I'll do one more response.
Sailor_Razor posted...
but it is a critical skill of a business to be able to change course and adjust your planning as it's needed.
Yes, and that's why they are having a cost for it.
Sailor_Razor posted...
But they're giving services that cost money."
- Two pointers here. One, services like cloud saves that do not intrinsically have anything to do with online play. The cloud saves could still be behind the premium subscription without the online play being with it.
But the online still costs money and is still a constant service. Bandwidth for being able to connect millions of devices to millions of other devices, and needing servers in all parts of the world costs money. I don't have numbers for those, as I don't know where to even begin outside of the cost of network engineers which I already covered. And oh man, could you imagine the rage of it was just cloud saves that cost $20 a year?
Sailor_Razor posted...
The arguments of "servers and network engineers cost money" are moot because that's not a problem exclusive to Nintendo, and attempting to write off the main point of evidence that those costs can be supported without a subscription at all
Your right, it's not exclusive to Nintendo, and neither are premium subscriptions. That's what you are ignoring.
Sailor_Razor posted...
There's nothing to say. He blows off Steam saying "but steam had that as part of its profit margin built into the store from conception", which is simply not an argument, and there are three huge reasons why.
None of these are arguments that aren't already addressed (which is why you are being put on ignore, you don't address points, you try to mock them as if that makes you right).
You see, I have listed a ton of sources in my post, you have listed none and are just posting conjecture. The gap isn't as wide? Lies! I say stands profit margin is 1 BILLION TIMES LARGER!!! (OK, that was mocking , I admit that).
Here is the thing, Nintendo tried doing bare minimum, just as Sony tried doing bare minimum for online. Nintendo held it a little longer, as they had other things they were trying out to avoid online betting the focus of their consoles. Bars minimum will only get you so far, and if you want a premium service out will cost you a premium cost. Nintendo knows this, and instead of screwing customers by adding it on to a console that it was never advertised for, they waited for their next generation. That way any consumers would have the choice of getting it with that knowledge.
Sailor_Razor posted...
Nintendo knows what the costs will be for this, and if they somehow managed to grossly underestimate those costs, then that is their failure, and not a failure the consequences of which should be passed onto their customers.
Actualy, the cost of a service is exactly what is passed onto customers.
Sailor_Razor posted...
And finally, to speak coarsely for a minute, his head's clearly up his ass with him announcing "I SHALL IGNORE THEE, IGNORANT PEON!". He's not, and potentially was never interested in actually addressing anything I have to say. His response to continued pressure that contradicts his viewpoint was effectively to take his ball and go home, which I find perfectly fair to interpret as a forfeiture.
Actualy I announced it so that when there's no responses, it would be evident as to why. I feel no pressure from you because, as I've noted in this post, you don't actually address anything. You act like you do, but you don't. I ignore people who can't do this simple thing.
#34
That just stinks of being an attention whore. Let's crack it down one by one.
1 - Citation - Being a business that exists to make money is not carte blance to do whatever they want. They can be criticized for their decisions.
2 - If it were just the cloud saves, that would be on them for that decision. They make the willful choice to not go the route of having a subscription that lets you play anything of their old library, and also letting you pick and choose if you'd rather. That it's a constant service doesn't matter. Nintendo is not going to stop making and releasing games and just hope the subscription covers their costs. That too is a constant service, which already has a significant price tag to it.
3 - I'm not ignoring anything. It is also shitty for Microsoft and Sony to paywall online play. If they did not, their premium subscriptions would be fine. There is an exact line being crossed here.
4 - They can not do the bare minimum while also doing something. That's what PS3 PSN+ was. If it was inadequate, they should have improved it, not said "Oh now you have to pay or we're taking away shit you already paid for!" Also, your interpretation is too kind.
5 - Citation - "Video games are not so unprofitable that they cannot support secondary services, or Nintendo would've bailed out years ago.
6 - Continuing on with that holier-than-thou "BE IGNORED, IGNORANT PEON!" nonsense. Begone with ye.
#38
There's enough time in the day to do more than one thing.
#39
"This isn't a frivolous "we want more money by doing nothing" kind of thing though.". From my perspective, it literally is. Their competitor, Valve, has proven that paywalled online is not necessary for a sustainable model. By trying to exclude people who don't want to pay them a subscription, that is the definition of a cheap cash grab.
#43
That they're so opaque about it, that's what I fully expect. I just want it to go so badly that they get covered in bad PR, and have no choice but to backpedal permanently.
$45 and #46
Ad hominem attack.
#49
I can't see it that way.
#51
Or it's the first way they thought of to make themselves look like a better option.
If/when they raise the price to $60, I will just laugh, for I have predicted it, as Sony did the same thing.
Friday, September 7, 2018
Controller insurance
- Boards
- PlayStation 4
- Controller insurance
|
I went to buy my ps4 slim today, and the guy that helped me was really trying to push me to get insurance on my controller of all things.
He said that he had managed to wear out 5 controllers in 1 year. Is the dualshock 4 really that fragile, or was he just bs'ing me? I didn't get the insurance because it sounded way to crazy to be true.
Crash Bandicoot will return to us June 30 2017.
That is going to be a special day. |
|
Chairstood posted...
he just bs'ing me |
|
Lmfao.
It's like that disc insurance GAME sells in the UK. Utter fucking bollocks.
Everything that lives is designed to end...
|
|
Controller insurance is the undercoating of gaming
I am Mogar, God of Irony and The Devourer of Topics.
http://i.imgtc.com/tHc3mIo.png http://i.imgtc.com/PYxw8Lm.png |
|
One of my controllers broke (the R1 was endlessly held down even after I took the button out). I managed to sell it on eBay while being very clear that it was not working and what was wrong. Regardless of the condition it still sold for $30. Considering DualShock 4's occasionally go on sale for $40 that is a pretty good investment return.
Fc:4768-7618-5314
Or 2638-3926-9055 |
|
Wow what a sleazy fuck. No TC, dualshock 4's are not that fragile, and unless you are going balls to the wall in fighting games or racing games your controller will do just fine for at least a couple years. I've had my original DS4 for about 2 years now and the rubber on the left thumb stick is wearing down a bit but still barely noticeable.
What store was this anyway? |
|
ragekit posted...
Wow what a sleazy fuck. No TC, dualshock 4's are not that fragile, and unless you are going balls to the wall in fighting games or racing games your controller will do just fine for at least a couple years. I've had my original DS4 for about 2 years now and the rubber on the left thumb stick is wearing down a bit but still barely noticeable. Elgiganten (danish for Electronic Giant)
Crash Bandicoot will return to us June 30 2017.
That is going to be a special day. |
|
All controllers wear down after awhile, my DS4 has a squeaky R2....but controller insurance is just stupid.
Ne-Rai.
|
|
Chairstood posted...
ragekit posted...Wow what a sleazy fuck. No TC, dualshock 4's are not that fragile, and unless you are going balls to the wall in fighting games or racing games your controller will do just fine for at least a couple years. I've had my original DS4 for about 2 years now and the rubber on the left thumb stick is wearing down a bit but still barely noticeable. Not familiar with it but all you need to know is that DS4s are well made and will not break easily. The only way this guy went through five controllers in a year is if he's throwing them around every time he loses lol Or if he's lying to get you to cough up more cash. |
|
Gotta laugh at that shady up-selling. Hearing that story reminded me of this:
"Let me tap dance on him, won't ya?"
|
|
Toobie posted...
Lmfao. I get sick of them doing that at Walmarts here in America. I mean $5 for insurance on a game disc really? |
|
I got my PS4 in January '14, and have had 2 controllers. I need a new one, though. You would think I jizzed all over the damn thing - touchpad, options button, face buttons and R2 all stick.
I wanna put on my Reeboks, and get on top of his esophagus,
and watch the apocalypse drop him in necropolis ^S^ |
|
I've had 2 controllers and I got my PS4 at launch. The first one the left stick started being less responsive after a few years. I also dropped it(after the stick issue) from maybe 3 feet onto a carpeted floor and it basically fell apart(the triggers popped out and the touch pad stopped working)
I was able to take it apart and put everything back together and it works fine now except for the stick still so take of that what you like. The second one has been fine though going on two years.
PSN ID: akrim_drak
Steam ID: rentisb |
|
ragekit posted...
Wow what a sleazy fuck. No TC, dualshock 4's are not that fragile, and unless you are going balls to the wall in fighting games or racing games your controller will do just fine for at least a couple years. I've had my original DS4 for about 2 years now and the rubber on the left thumb stick is wearing down a bit but still barely noticeable. I don't believe the guy was sleazy as fuck lol but i do believe it could be unnecessary as i do believe that going "balls to the wall" in fighting games or other strenuous combat games mat and will cause some type of wear down the road (seen or unseen damage) more than other games. My brother had had his controllers for about a year and half and only really started noticing SOME dpad issues after passing street fighter so much. It's really not noticeable (or wasn't at first to him) but i noticed it almost immediately because ink a jut more adept and sensitive to inputs and reaction on screen. My ds4 is fine because i don't use it for fighting games, i have another pad for that. I don't think insurance for hardware is bad if it actually covers wear and tear pass the manufacture warranty.
Life imitates art
PSN: EsperKazumi CFN: Esperstarr |
|
Honestly, the controller insurance isn't a bad thing. I have been good with my ps4 controllers, and none of them have broken down. However, my brother is an angry drunk and when he plays cod he throws controllers. He has busted his fair share of controllers, and keeps taking them back. 8 bucks isn't a bad price here in Canada for a new controller. Even if it doesn't break, near the end of the year, just take it back and swap it with a brand new controller. Though the disc insurance is just stupid. I don't even know how someone would scratch a blu ray disc unless they were intentially trying.
FC 4485 2219 8958, PSN SARGEh32149606
HOLD YOUR FIRE! I'm a human! |
|
I had a PS4 for 4 months and had to replace my DS4 twice. Both times the controller just stopped working ingame (but worked fine in menus? go figure). EB games was nice enough to replace it both times by giving me a refurb.
XBL: chex81 || NNID: phasma81
|
|
I think he was just trying to make a sale, I just replaced my launch controller, it was not fragile at all for me
To the edge of the universe and back, endure and survive
|
|
Nobody wears out 5 controllers in a year that's almost one every two months. The Value of the insurance is impossible to determine with out knowing how much it cost. Five bucks a year isn't bad. $50 a year would be silly. You could be a whole new controller for that.
BabaBooey to ya all!
|
|
I take very good care of all my things, and I've had 2 DS4s break on me already. With the 3rd one having the thumbgrips slowly come off now as well. They're not that fragile, but they're not as sturdy as past gens.
Go, then.....there are other worlds than these.
|
|
It would have cost me 600kr (about 85$) to insurance the controller. Just as much as a new controller anyway.
Yeah, everything is quite expensive in Denmark. The PS4 Slim costs 2400kr (about 350$) A game costs 500kr (about 75$)
Crash Bandicoot will return to us June 30 2017.
That is going to be a special day. |
|
The newer ones are better, but still not great. The launch controllers were garbage though.
I collect spores, molds, and fungus.
|
|
Chairstood posted...
It would have cost me 600kr (about 85$) to insurance the controller. Just as much as a new controller anyway. What the actual? That's way too much money. Here in Canada, the controller insurance was 8 or 10 bucks, can't remember at the moment. A new controller is a little over 70 bucks after taxes. That's why the plan is worth it here. If the insurance cost as much as the controller, there is literally no reason to buy it.
FC 4485 2219 8958, PSN SARGEh32149606
HOLD YOUR FIRE! I'm a human! |
|
I usually endup dropping mine on the floor almost everyday for one reason or another. Ive had my ps4 over a year. Controller still works as if it was new
Xbox goes from 360 to One and no one bats an eye. Windows goes from 8 to 10 and everyone loses there minds!
|
|
The original PS4 controllers had rubber that broke down pretty easily, but the newer ones shouldn't have any issues. My launch PS4 controller started running off right from the get go but took 2 years to rip to the plastic, but the controller I bought after has been 100% fine.
So no don't worry about it. Besides new rubber caps are like 3 bucks on Amazon
PSN/XBL/NN - NettoSaito | 3DS - [1203-9218-7780]
Netto's Game Room - Reviews and what not - http://www.nettosgameroom.com |
|
I'm still using my launch contoller, and I use it on PC as well. I've used it for over 350 hours on PC alone.
Favorite game to date - Xenogears \/-/-/-/\
If you believe used games are the industries problem, then you sir or ma'am are a fool. |
|
ragekit posted...
Chairstood posted...ragekit posted...show hidden quote(s) Get the hell out. The latest model is decent, but the launch and one right after were pretty bad when it came to battery and the rubber grips on the analog sticks.
You guys hate SJWs? Blame your favorite developers for pandering to white men for the past 30 years.
|
|
kind of like them pushing insurance plans for games...do I really need insurance for something that costs less than a hundred dollars? $60 isn't cheap, but replacing a game is hardly financially devastaing, especially since by the time you might need to, that game will have probably dropped in price significantly.
Granted controllers don't get cheaper over time, but still, they aren't all that pricey, and 5 in a year? is he storing them in a jar of peanut butter...then throwing the jar out of a moving car into a river...which then flows over a waterfall...into a volcano? Christ, take even a modicum of care and they should last a couple years each, more if you are tolerant of a drifting analog stick or a weak trigger spring.
Just shut the hell up and talk about games, im so tired of the politics of gaming...
|
|
pnut027 posted...
ragekit posted...Chairstood posted...show hidden quote(s) sure, but this dude was talking about 5 in the last year, not 5 3 years ago. Not a fan of the ds4, but crappy first wave (my launch controller's r2 spring snapped, the sticks peeled, and the 2 halves of the controller literally started coming apart after a few months...the launch controllers sucked hard) aside from those, the build quality is fine on the newer ones.
Just shut the hell up and talk about games, im so tired of the politics of gaming...
|
|
5 controllers in one year? Dude has some rage issues. I play every day or nearly so and I've yet to wear out any controller other than the launch controller and it;s shitty thumb pads.
The trouble is not that I am single and likely to stay single, but that I am lonely and likely to stay lonely.
~ Charlotte Bronte |
- Boards
- PlayStation 4
- Controller insurance
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)