Forums

Topic: Xbox One/Xbox 360 Thread

Posts 4,901 to 4,920 of 7,987

SuperGhirahim64

@Grumblevolcano That's not good to hear outside of those big 3. So far Nintendo have done great with Switch, but online has been their first real backward step. They need to revamp it quickly.

Why choose from a range of great characters like Wario, Waluigi or Baby Luigi, when you have all green jelly Luigi and Toadette. Why have regular Toad and Toadette or another character when you can have a blue or yellow dressed Toad? 😵

BlueOcean

@NEStalgia I got Crash Bandicoot when it was a Deal with Gold, time flies, I thought it was last week! I haven't played it yet though. I've only played the GameCube games that honestly I didn't like but those were made by a different developer. I hope that the trilogy is much better than Wrath of Cortex, Nitro Kart,Tag Team Racing. The last two are not platformers but anyway these are the three I have played and are mediocre at best.

BlueOcean

BlueOcean

@Banjos_Backpack I still play some Wii U games online too, I am playing Wii U more often lately and also trying to finally beat Xenoblade Chronicles.

Apparently, only Mario Kart 8, Splatoon 2 and Mario Tennis Aces survived on Switch so people will be paying for those and Super Smash Bros. 5, and the NES games. The thing about Nintendo is that online gaming is usually a more casual thing for a few games, and being free on Wii U suits that.

BlueOcean

NEStalgia

BTW, PSA for all: I discovered that Groups (folders) are for some unknown reason not stored at the account level but only locally. I have over 150 games organized in groups, logged in on another console.....and no groups...I had to wade through the alphabetical list! So keep in mind, if you're as big into using groups as I am, that it does NOT carry to other consoles, it's just local save data on the hardware. Which makes zero sense at all, but that's how it is. Woe is me if it's ever lost.

@BlueOcean Wrath of Cortex was interesting...it was a weird 2d/3d sidescroller with a little of crash in it. It was kinda neat, but weird. I played it a little on PS2 when it was well past its prime and it was kinda meh. It was made by Tt...the company that makes the Lego games.

The original trilogy was, of course Naughty Dog. And ironically the big complaint I have for the game is: The Naughty Dog Camera(TM) that everyone says all ND games have. It's obviously not the trademark "over the shoulder at a specific angle" camera everyone mocks. But it does show ND had an obsession with weird camera angles that get in the way from day 1.

It's an experiment. A platformer that has you running into or away from the screen. Neat in theory. In practice it leads to incredibly cheap deaths very very often. Falling into a pit just on the other side of a ridge that you can't see until you're over it which then demands trial and error gameplay of failing over and over, to memorize where the pits are in the course, to then be able to predict ahead of the events. In some ways like a racing game.

Technically the game design isn't very good. One can argue it's in fact very, very bad. However, especially with the fresh coat of paint (and some fixes to the physics), there's a weird Souls-ian addiction to "ok one more time, this time I've got it!) no matter how cheap and stupid it is My brain knows I'm playing a game that's terrible from concept to implementation. Yet somehow I grin while playing it. The Switch build and it's so so graphics dont' inspire the same joy, which goes a long way to say "the game-play actually sucks but looking at it is so fun" The gameplay would actually be more suited to quick burst handheld play, but without the shine I'm less inspired to want to play it.

What saves it is it's a unique experiment in gaming that's never really been tried again, so even though ti's flawed, and it's flaws are the reason it's never been tried again, it's really the only experience like it, so it's worth enjoying despite its flaws (until you snap your controller in half.)

NEStalgia

SuperGhirahim64

@BlueOcean Yeah if anything those on Wii U online are probably more hardcore fans like ourselves too which adds to it. But I find online is a bit of a strange experience. I used to play a good bit of FIFA and CoD online. But it was just repetition for hours on end. I was going to bed thinking, what was the highlight of that? There's no real story, no real achievement, nothing of value compared to something like Breath of the Wild or Mario Odyssey were I am going to bed amazed, looking forward to the next session.

What is Xenoblade Chronicles like? I was thinking of getting the 3DS game.

Totally agree regarding online. They just need to offer more. I like the NES online thing. Give us a range of back catalogue consoles to do that with. Something interesting rather than a poundshop stop of Xbox Live or PS plus.

Why choose from a range of great characters like Wario, Waluigi or Baby Luigi, when you have all green jelly Luigi and Toadette. Why have regular Toad and Toadette or another character when you can have a blue or yellow dressed Toad? 😵

NEStalgia

@Banjos_Backpack I'm with you on online. I got into online back in the 90's PC world when it was all new. It was cool. It was a cool group of people. But that kind of "spend all day and all night on one game with no set goals other than "win the match" really burns itself out fast. The first time since Quake 2 I actually got back into it was Splatoon for some reason. And ARMS. The only thing I use XBLG/PS+ online services for is internet coop for games that don't support LAN. Gears and Halo now support lan so that leaves Destiny as pretty much the only other one. That's a little different because there's actually a campaign that takes place online, like an MMO.... but otherwise I'm not enthused about online play at all (the Dark Souls hints are helpful though.)

Off-Topic, but New to XC? The N3DS port is decent, but the Wii or WiiU version will look a lot better if you have the U. I played on 3DS though so it's perfectly doable. Still waiting for the inevitable Switch port. It's a JRPG but with a weird semi real-time battle system. IMO everything monolith is a rough flawed diamond. The whole series has some inexplicable problems (hint: Don't use Sharla more than you must, she sucks horribly, few mechanics are explained well ever, and yes, the beginning sucks, just stick with it. Also side quests in XC1 are MMO fetch quests and mostly skippable, but the game is still huge.) But the world and story are unforgettable and combat becomes fun if you take the time to figure it out (XC2 and XCX have much deeper combat though) and easily a top slot winner if you can stick through the flaws.

NEStalgia

BlueOcean

@Banjos_Backpack

Xenoblade Chronicles

I am hating Xenoblade Chronicles (Wii) so much, which explains why I stopped playing it back in the day. It's incredible frustrating, the camera is awful, the difficult spikes are crazy. Sometimes you are about to beat a difficult enemy and it push you to a ravine and you have to start again finding your way back. It has the most boring side quests (I am not exaggerating) that I have played in my whole life and you are almost forced to do them. I really can't believe how this one was critically acclaimed so much. As a hardcore JRPG you spend most of the time fighting but in this game you also have to walk endlessly for one or another reason. The battle system is well designed but when put in practice is a mess, literally, when fighting more than one enemy at the same time which is most of the time because the enemies move, the camera is awful and manual and you have to move your character as well and also find other characters and touch them for boosts, help and reviving. On top of that the frame rate suffers in battles which makes more challenging to get the boosts right because they are rhythm micro-games. It's a broken game somehow.

However, it has a genuinely interesting story, it's visually appealing, Bionis' Leg looks very elaborated considering it's a Wii game, it looks even better than Breath of the Wild, resolution aside. The cut-scenes are great, the characters fit in the story, although they seem to be inspired a bit too much by the protagonists of Final Fantasy X, and the voice acting is pretty good, which is really surprising in Nintendo-published games. The soundtrack is hit or miss. I just want to beat it and say goodbye to it forever after all these years, but at the same time the story and characters will not be forgotten.

Online gaming - Wii, Wii U and Xbox One
The only games I have spent a significant amount of time playing online would be Monster Hunter Tri (Wii) and now Sea of Thieves and Fortnite. The reasons are different, Monster Hunter Tri was like sharing real adventures with new friends I communicated with, even as far as using videocalls on Skype.

On Wii U it's basically Mario Kart 8 every now and then, because the game against the CPU is easy and boring on 150cc and 200cc is messy, but I got Splatoon so I'll try that too.

Now on Xbox One I found that online gaming is so well designed with invitations, game chat, party chat, solid servers, etc. Sea of Thieves is a bit like Monster Hunter, it's about sharing adventures basically, meeting people... For me, I mean, I am friendly -in spite of what some people think about me on here, ha, ha-. Sea of Thieves can be relaxing or you can go to hard challenges like battling an skeleton ship, it's up to you. Monster Hunter focus on hunting so it's more action-oriented.

Fortnite is a different thing, it feels a bit more impure because you just want to feel the adrenalin when you kill somebody that could have killed you, but at the same time it feels great when you are able to help somebody or are being helped by a friend or a stranger. It's like heaven in hell. The real challenge is building while fighting.

I think online gaming can be repetitive but also can be very rewarding because of what can bring to your brain and heart. But I don't play much anyway, there are many people that play over 40 hours a week which is more than a full-time job. I wouldn't do that whether it's offline or online, because then I'd think that I'd have a problem.

Edited on by BlueOcean

BlueOcean

Grumblevolcano

@BlueOcean A main way Nintendo could've improved the quantity of 1st party online titles is to add online to games that have multiplayer. For example Kirby Star Allies has 4 player local co-op, have 4 player online co-op and that game becomes more exciting for those who play online. Same with Super Mario Party, let River Survival and the classic Mario Party board gameplay have 4 player online multiplayer rather than just a special minigame mode.

Subspace Emissary in Brawl could be played with others in local co-op but imagine how cool it would be if Smash Ultimate had a story mode and you could play it, Classic Mode, All Star Mode, etc. online. Will it be like that? I doubt it, online functionality for Smash Ultimate will likely the same as Smash Wii U and if you're lucky there'll be a better netcode.

That was one of the cool things about Xbox 360 era Xbox, online multiplayer and co-op were present while keeping local multiplayer and co-op intact. You want to play Halo 3 campaign with friends? Doesn't matter whether those friends are with you person or far away, you can still do it. Halo Reach even had campaign co-op matchmaking.

Grumblevolcano

Switch Friend Code: SW-2595-6790-2897 | 3DS Friend Code: 3926-6300-7087 | Nintendo Network ID: GrumbleVolcano

BlueOcean

@Grumblevolcano

I agree, my friend. Those games could be patched and have online modes and will give Nintendo Online more sense. A co-operative story mode in Super Smash Bros. 5 sounds good too, but I don't know, it's like Nintendo is rushing games too much for that. I really don't know what they are doing with all the time and all the people working for them. I don't mean just on Switch, if I am honest it was an issue on Wii U and 3DS too: Mario Kart 7, Super Mario 3D Land, Metroid Prime Federation Force, Yoshi's New Island, Mario Party 10, Star Fox Zero, Mario Tennis Ultra Smash, Animal Crossing Amiibo Festival, even Paper Mario Colour Splash and Sticker Star... All those felt rushed or lower-quality.

It looks like Smash Bros. 5 will have a lot of characters and stages but I'm not sure if it will have something like The Subspace Emissary. I think that the fact that they delayed Yoshi means that they still care about the final quality of their games, I suppose, so who knows. Luigi's Mansion 2 and Yoshi's Woolly World were great. Nintendo used to care about quality a lot in the past but in recent years you never know if a Nintendo-published game will be great or disappointing.

In short, I agree with your ideas.

I didn't have a 360 so I don't know much outside of the ton of backwards compatible games that now I own. At least The Master Chief Collection has split-screen modes but it's true, local multiplayer is rare today outside of Nintendo consoles. I don't think that there are many games for Xbox One or PS4 with split-screen modes, let alone a whole campaign like on Xbox 360.

BlueOcean

Grumblevolcano

@BlueOcean The only thing that makes me think Smash Ultimate will have a story mode is that the starting roster is only the N64 lineup. Having like 60 characters unlockable is going to be a massive grind without a story mode, like unlocking Mewtwo in Melee levels of grinding.

Grumblevolcano

Switch Friend Code: SW-2595-6790-2897 | 3DS Friend Code: 3926-6300-7087 | Nintendo Network ID: GrumbleVolcano

DarthNocturnal

Ha. I remember that.

“20 hours of VS?! But I don't play that enough....... hmm, 700 matches you say?“

>sets stock to 1
>Jigglypuff's SD rating skyrockets mysteriously

"Sometimes, I just don't understand human behavior" - C-3P0

ThanosReXXX

@BlueOcean Thanks, and my pleasure, and I'll wrap the whole text wall swapping up right here, so rest assured that we will stay more on topic from here on out. (although: we didn't really go off topic in the first place, seeing as it was an Xbox-related discussion) I do have to confess that things have become much clearer now, with @NEStalgia's latest and quite elaborate explanation, so we are now actually able to agree, as you will see, on most of what has been said...

@NEStalgia Holy crap! I guess it wouldn't be too far from the truth, to say that you've hit a new high in text-wall size, unless I missed some of your other efforts, perhaps in forum and/or article threads where I wasn't involved...

I more or less promised to our discussion partner to not keep this dragging on, so I'll just stick to the two most relevant points:

First off, unless I missed that (in which case my apologies), I haven't really seen you explicitly say something about the X and/or even the S becoming streaming boxes, in relation to Xbox Scarlett, so that is probably also where a large part of our misunderstanding came from, both from me and @BlueOcean, so good that we finally have that in the clear now, and I could actually see that happening, so we do indeed agree on that part.

BUT.... current gen Xboxes being able to stream next gen Xbox games does in no way equate to what I was disagreeing about with you, and that is that your comments came across as if the X was going to be the S of the Scarlett, while statements of Phil Spencer himself strongly seem to point to a completely new machine, or even two, if the streaming box + local console rumor is to be believed.

That can be backwards compatible, obviously, and what I've said before about business sense, would be to not completely alienate current gen Xbox owners, by indeed making the X2 completely backwards compatible with the ENTIRE catalog of games that can now be played on the One, including previous gen titles.

Still doesn't make the X an X2 Lite, or whatever they're going to call it, though. And it possibly being able to stream X2 games also doesn't indicate much toward that being an option. Heck, the Switch is now able to stream Assassin's Creed Odyssey in certain regions, so if that isn't an indication of that point, then I don't know what is...

But my whole point with the "makes no marketing and business sense", was that they will of course want to move people to the newer device, and that is also why I expect it to be so fully compatible with everything we've seen and received so far, so that trading in your "old" X for the Scarlett won't hurt that much, seeing as you would still be able to play and/or download your entire existing game catalog.

Keeping the older consoles tagging along, even just as streaming boxes, could potentially mean people not choosing to move, which could also mean a negative impact on X2 sales, so one way or the other, they'll have to get rid of current gen platforms, and persuade people to get that brand new X2...

Second and last point: although the Xbox and PlayStation may have become more like PC's in a box than ever before, the software and architecture is still very much tailor-made (otherwise we would simply be able to install PC games on them), and in the case of the Xbox One, there are three hardware layers/components, that each take care of a single aspect of the device, so one for the OS, one for games, and one for media. That means that unlike with a PC, the entirety of the hardware isn't constantly taxed with running both the OS and a game (at the same time on all hardware components), because those tasks are divided between the three layers/components, to optimize performance.

That also means that the device still works quite differently, AND as previously mentioned, can be programmed in ways different than ordinary PC hardware, and also in a more efficient way, because it is tailor-made to do so, unlike PC's, which as you know, come in an almost "all colors of the rainbow" number of varieties. Software adapting to all that automatically could potentially still hold the hardware back, unless game sizes go through the roof.

I would hope that Microsoft is also going to improve upon that, either by means of compression or otherwise, because it's already clear that 4K addons for games are ever growing in size, so imagine if the premium version of the Scarlett is going to tackle 8K: it wouldn't even matter then if it is a streaming box or a local console, because the internet speed requirements to handle such amounts of data would probably be too much for quite a few regions, and not just in the US, but worldwide...

Unless of course, they're simply going to stick to 4K and focus on upping and locking that frame rate, in which case, my point is irrelevant...

As for Scream Ride: how come you've only now discovered that? It's been out for ages, relatively speaking.
I've already had installed on the Xbox 360, and it is indeed quite the entertaining game.

And I don't think Kameo looks ugly at all, or perhaps that is because I'm not sat with my face only an arm's length away from the screen...

My TV is almost exactly 10 feet away from my couch, 42 inch plasma panel, full HD.

But yes, that too is a good game. Then again: what do I know? As you know I recently downloaded and renewed my love for OG Xbox game Black, so apparently, I'm really not that much of an expert on what looks good on Xbox One or not...

@BlueOcean Okay, I'm done now...
How about that Banjo-threeie rumor, aye?

'The console wars are like boobs. Sony and Microsoft fight over which ones look the nicest and Nintendo's are the most fun to play with.'

Nintendo Network ID: ThanosReXX

BlueOcean

@ThanosReXXX I didn't read @NEStalgia last wall about the "generations" and Scarlett vs. PS5 because I didn't want to go crazy in the loop... So I don't know if I agree with his last comment or not. Now I feel bad and will have to read it... and explain again why he is wrong? Oh no...

BlueOcean

ThanosReXXX

@BlueOcean No, it's safe to read, except I still don't agree completely, but that's fine with me.
Most important for me, is compromise, meet in the middle and all that. If both parties in a discussion just dig their heels in the sand, then the discussion is going nowhere but down the drain.

He has a good point, we had some good points, and combined, we had several good points, and we're probably on to something in relation to digest all these rumors, and at times not all too clear official statements. I say: job done.

Edited on by ThanosReXXX

'The console wars are like boobs. Sony and Microsoft fight over which ones look the nicest and Nintendo's are the most fun to play with.'

Nintendo Network ID: ThanosReXX

NEStalgia

@BlueOcean XC1 Yeah I agree with the frustrations. But the side quests are totally skippable. I did very very few of them. They were horrible. Difficulty spikes usually involved "grind more" and "send Sharla packing. Also "know when to use Melia" was a big deal. But yea, I have a love hate relationship with XC. IT's very flawed. And yet so amazing.

@ThanosReXXX I think Ralek still beats my text walls regularly.

Rather than add too much more text walling, I'll just comment on a few specific points:

-X2 being a whole new box still doesn't preclude anything software wise on prior hardware unless it's an architecture change, and that's not happening.

-The hardware customness in the current gen doesn't really mean much for a game. There's just not much that has to be put into it versus PC for it to run on the new consoles, and especially XBoxen. I think you're overvaluing the old methodologies and ignoring the great standardization of the modern era games.

-Business wise, I do disagree that "MS wants to move people to the new box." If they are firmly doing the generation thing, then yes, they do. But what do they gain by pushing the new hardware? In the past it was the ability to sell new games. But if games were inherently multi-generational like with PCs? They don't need to sell a specific box. Hardware nets them little profits. They just need to sell any XBoxen to get people to lock into their subscriptions and game store. Including smartphone apps that stream XBox games. There's no money in the hardware, the money's in the MS Store, GP, and Gold. If X can't run the games, then yeah, they want you to buy new hardware so you will buy new games. If X can run the new games, people not moving on isn't a problem: They're still buying games! And it gives game makers a much larger install base in the early years of a console, alleviating one of the biggest problems early gen for publishers. There's a lot of benefit to that strategy for MS, for 3rd parties, and for customers. (Again, if that were to be their plan.) (again, though the CPU is the question mark as to how possible that will or won't be) but business-wise, if it is possible, everybody benefits, and nobody loses from that. Imagine how much better that looks for EA or Ubisoft moving into a new gen with already millions of installs and growing rather than starting new every gen? They all want their PC model on consoles and widest possible access to customers, and that really accomplishes that better than generational shifts. Yeah last gen they wanted to cut the prior gen loose but that's because they wanted to get away from PPC and get far away from CELL. Now that it's x86 they don't have the incentive to escape this gen's hardware so completely. And that would give them exactly that.

Again, for clarity, not saying if it's going to happen or not, given the CPU, but there's incentive, business wise, across the board for that kind of ecosystem of forward-compatibility. MS wins (more software sales through their stores, increased vendor lock to consumers), publishers win (big install base, PC-like sales model), consumers win (play new games just less pretty/performant as they could be on faster hardware....like PCs....) Hardware operates so close to margin now nobody really loses if you don't buy the new hardware as long as you buy the software and subs. (if it's possible.)

But yeah, at absolute minimum, I'd be stunned of the X (and maybe S, and probably Windows boxen) can't participate in the streaming service. That would bridge that gap for the 5 people in the US that have internet that can handle it It would be a cheap way out, but less cheap than if none of the new boxes were streamers. Though I might like it....I have a Surface Pro (not One, not X, not 4, not Scarlett, just "Surface Pro" ) Streaming onto it like a giant Switch would be kind of awesome. I do that sometimes already but then my local XBox needs to be on. If streaming actually worked well (it won't, but if it did ) it could be cool to just buy Surfaces instead of XBoxes going forward It's the more expensive route, but a lot more versatile! (seriously, best laptop ever....current form factor is incredible. I spent all day transferring three 128GB SD cards from Switches to 256GB ones the other day, outdoors, and still had 30% battery left, and my lap didn't get second degree burns )

There is one key issue with backward compatibility, plus forward compatibility: Will Scarlett even have a disc drive? Debatable these days, and if it's so much more powerful than X, the game sizes will not fit on discs in any case. How they address that will be interesting and it may end up as a fully digital console, even if it does have a disc drive. Unless it sticks with "disc size textures + enhanced textures downloaded" like X. In which case below-X quality games will actually be the Scarlett default! "All games have a required 40GB download to simply function" doesn't sound like a good way to sell a console even in 2020. Streaming is starting to sound ideal The hype train is forgetting that there may either be no physical media, that BC may or may not mean "digital purchases only", or that new game physical media may just be a "download booster" if it's not moving to "Cartridges", thumbdrives, etc.) Worrisome times!

Scream Ride LOL yeah, I never heard of it. It's the exclusive that slipped through the cracks. It's very simplistic in a lot of ways but it's really crazy fun!

NEStalgia

ThanosReXXX

@NEStalgia And he replies with yet another wall of text... crap-ff-ing-tastic...

The business part of getting people interested in X2 is what I firmly disagree upon. To me, as a sales professional, it makes less than zero sense. Sure, the possible "X2 streaming" capabilities of the One X could be a sort of a transitional thing, to kind of ease people into the new generation of devices, but even though it's true that the most profit doesn't come from the hardware, I simply cannot (and will not, because I'm stubborn like that, lol) rhyme that with Scarlett setting a new standard in console hardware/gaming, nor do I see that being a beneficial business strategy moving forward into the Scarlett-only generation, which is bound to happen at some point.

Early adopters are key with any service or product, so like I said in the previous comment, holding that back from happening, by allowing the previous gen systems to tag along, compatible to some point or not, is not beneficial at all, in the long run. That is only true for the introductory period, or at most for the first leg of the generation to come. At some point, it has to differentiate itself, and offer that much of an added value, that people will actually WANT to buy that X2, without having to feel any remorse for having to leave their Xbox One (X) behind, because Scarlett will (must) be able to do all what that console can do, but also so much more.

And I don't believe that all of that can be incorporated in a streaming-only service either. But that was never the issue anyway, because Phil Spencer has already said that there will be dedicated hardware, so that part is more than likely already covered.

It could be argued that a streaming-only box is also a way of setting new standards in console gaming, but even if I would like to do so, I can't see a company famous for delivering power-house consoles, going into such a downgrade mode that they would revert their entire Xbox department into a streaming set-top box service. And making up such a service, with the excellent online infrastructure that they already have, could already be implemented directly. It doesn't take another two years to make hardware for that, and they've been at it for more than a year already...

As for the "not being able to put Scarlett games on a disc" part: you are apparently unfamiliar with 4- or 5-layer Blurays...

Top grade multi-layer Blurays can already hold as much as up to 125GB of uncompressed data, so using compression techniques for the install files, could probably up that to a total amount of anywhere between 150 - 200GB per disc, so I see no issues there. And there will still be the option to have additional files for download, but an entire game, whether 4K or 8K, can most definitely be put on a single disc.

Important question that arises from that, though: who is going to pay for that? The customer or Microsoft? If they do, then they will probably have to take a moderate (albeit calculated) hit on their profit margin, seeing as the manufacturing/pressing of these more expensive Blurays will need to be factored in, or they might simply add 5 to 10 bucks to the price of a retail game, which might just be acceptable for the target audience, if these new generation games do indeed go above and beyond in offering more bang for your buck...

Dang, another text wall. Perhaps you could try and be more compact in your next reply. Otherwise, I probably can't help but replying to a text wall with yet another text wall...

'The console wars are like boobs. Sony and Microsoft fight over which ones look the nicest and Nintendo's are the most fun to play with.'

Nintendo Network ID: ThanosReXX

DarthNocturnal

I think I've seen a few comparable tsunamis of text. Including one (not on this thread) from a user who wanted to use as many words as possible, just to get his single point across to me. The point in question could've been condensed into two words: “You're stupid“. Or at least, that's the vibe I was getting from it...

"Sometimes, I just don't understand human behavior" - C-3P0

SuperGhirahim64

@NEStalgia doesn't it? It doesn't do anything for me anymore. I'm not into friend parties on Xbox live etc mainly because the talking ends up distracting from the actual game, and I hate if one becomes dictatory and basically tries to tell you how to play...

I think that's the best use of online actually, the co-op that doesn't have LAN. Friend leaderboards is another one. I dont mind online the odd time just for competition in smash or Mario kart, but for hours on end and to pay for it? Nah. I played A Link to the Past and Super Mario Galaxy 2 today, I'd much rather that experience than a forgettable online repeat fest.

Going on that, I might actually go for the 3DS version if I can get a good deal! It sounds like the sort of thing I would prefer on the go. A bit like Pokémon I guess.

Having read your comment @BlueOcean, im not sure now. If the gameplay and camera is fundamentally sucky, it probably isn't for me. I went back, like I said and played Mario Galaxy 2 today. It felt so awkward compared to Odyssey. I am really not keen on the control set up on Wii or Wii U for most games. I must look up reviews and comparisons on the 3DS versions before making a decision.

Online wise,
Monster Hunter sounds interesting although not sure I would ever get into it unfortunately. Sea of Thieves sounds good, Fortnite I hate the heart and soul of lol. Interesting to hear your experience though! I guess basically Nintendo don't offer those range of experiences that different players look for online.

I agree with Mario Kart 8 although I love 200cc. I just wish it had more records or online features with friends. Maybe like cups and grand prixs or something rather than just a ranking system.

Xbox Ones online system is definitely really well built. The highest standard available by some margin I would argue atm? Even if you're nicer online than here 😋

I think online, especially for Nintendo, needs to be reinvented. Most games are so pointless online like we discussed but it can be made rewarding. I liked the FIFA online seasons mode for example. But to spend the money on it each of them command isn't worth it for me at the moment, personally.

Edited on by SuperGhirahim64

Why choose from a range of great characters like Wario, Waluigi or Baby Luigi, when you have all green jelly Luigi and Toadette. Why have regular Toad and Toadette or another character when you can have a blue or yellow dressed Toad? 😵

NEStalgia

@ThanosReXXX lol I'll get to another text wall reply (i try to scale it back, i really do! ) another time but before that, for the remainder of the conversation, let's agree to agree that forward compatibility as i described as possible. The debate will be much smoother for the remaining points if we start it with the common assumption that technologically it's entirely feasible to have years of forward compatibility (we've already hashed the fact that it may it may not be possible cpu depending but let's agree for the remainder of the debate to assume it's entirely possible)

NEStalgia

ThanosReXXX

@NEStalgia Oh, no worries. We don't have to agree to agree, because I already agreed with you on the current gen Xboxen being possible streaming solutions for next gen, albeit that I don't see it as a long-running solution, as I already detailed more than elaborate enough in the previous comment. The S and X aren't going to ride the coattails of the (two?) Xbox Scarlett console(s) for the entire length of its generation.

That is just not feasible, isn't business sensible in the long run, and therefor isn't long-term profitable either. And as an X owner, would you want to downgrade to an S? More than likely not, so why would anyone want to play Scarlett games on an X, if they can get the full-blown experience by actually playing these games on a Scarlett? Seems like a relative no-brainer to me...

The overlay-period could be good for Xbox One S/X owners not really feeling the need to upgrade (yet), or for people on the fence, OR for people not interested in Scarlett games at all, for whatever reason. Could even be the same reason as to why some people currently aren't interested in an X, so if 4K isn't going to sway them now, then it might possibly still not sway them in two years either...

So, in closing: if you want me to completely agree with you, then all I would be willing and able to admit to, is that it's "entirely" possible on paper, but not in real life, and not in the long run.

Edited on by ThanosReXXX

'The console wars are like boobs. Sony and Microsoft fight over which ones look the nicest and Nintendo's are the most fun to play with.'

Nintendo Network ID: ThanosReXX

Top

Please login or sign up to reply to this topic