Ashunera84

The sheer volume of "waahhhh" here is astounding.

You do not need this feature, just like you did not need the amiibo armor in Breath of the Wild. If you want to buy it, buy it. If not, don't. It's really that simple.

One thing I've learned from listening to game developers is never listen to game developers.

Any further FE content should just be re-skins of existing characters like Bowser Jr. or Olimar's costumes.

Tier lists are very, very overrated.

You will ALWAYS do better with what you enjoy and are comfortable with in a game like this.

@GrandScribe you are making that "baseball" kind of argument right now. How much would it cost (where cost is a representation of time, effort, and resources) for every company to get to your desired level of accessibility? Are you a developer yourself who is able to answer this question with authority? Is it even possible to get there for everyone? How many laws have to be written, how many court cases would it add, how many resources go into enforcing these laws? How many businesses are negatively impacted by regulations that don't really apply to what they do? Does my small business, which uses software designed specifically for us need to ensure accessibility for disabled persons? Which disabilities are reasonable to account for? What would that cost us and our customers? If we're exempt, where do you draw the line? Who decides where the line is drawn? Do you have a background in business or law that makes you able to answer these questions with any authority? These are questions that need to be answered.

You are assuming the cost, effort, and resources required is low. This is your mistake. Accessibility is very difficult and very costly WITHOUT accounting for disabilities. Do you believe that businesses don't already want to expand their market to the 10 million or so disabled Americans? What you're asking for hasn't been done because it cannot be done.

How many Accessibility improvements have been made throughout society over the past 100 years for the disabled? How many are being made today? Are things not getting better over time? Are you taking improvements for granted? To what degree should society realign to fit the needs of tiny minorities, and what are the long term effects? Should every developer of any technology be aware of and accounting for specific disabilities that are 100 times less common than your specific needs? The cost of a solution (if you have one) needs to be weighed against the overall benefit of the solution, otherwise you're being irresponsible.

Is this ableism? No, this is life. All of us have our own problems, our own illnesses, our own circumstances and our own goals, and history has proven that taking agency for SELF improvement away from people can have severely negative effects on society. There are many disadvantages people can have, be they racism, sexism, poverty, disability, or various stigmata. Progress on many issues is never going to happen at the rate we wish it to, but progress is still happening. The adaptive controller, which provides a luxury to disabled persons, is proof of it.

Like I said, promoting the parties who are working on solutions really is your best and most efficient option. Grants and investments for those working on solutions are effective. If that means campaigning to increase these grants, I'm all for it. I'm fine with my tax money going there. Still some red tape, but it's far more efficient. Law that enforces business adhere to more very costly regulations absolutely is not the answer.

@GrandScribe this is incredibly naive and idealistic. It relies on the assumption that making everything accessible to everyone is easy. It's not even remotely easy, even without accounting for disabilities. How well do you think my able grandmother can use Facebook? This falls under the accessibility umbrella, something all tech companies, Nintendo included, spends a great deal of time, effort and money on already.

Inclusion within reason is expected (ie. ramps) but where costs are high and few benefit, it does not make sense to enforce. Someone pays for every regulation. Those costs add up. When profit disappears, new businesses can't open and old businesses close. When that happens, 100% of people, disabled or otherwise, suffer. A low barrier to entry or the masses is VITAL for innovation. Innovation is VITAL to improving the lives of the disabled. If you, as an individual, can't have something right now, does that mean everyone should go without?

Despite the human approximation of "nature" through markets/capitalism having many faults that do need fixing (specifically providing opportunity to the disadvantaged, a wealth distribution problem) it's just a simple, sad reality that an individual being legislated something will cost someone else something.

Should playing baseball be made accessible to the totally blind by baseball leagues? No. This is why you promote third parties who find solutions for specialized cases. (In the case of baseball, restoring or improving vision through health sciences is obviously the only route, baseball leagues can't do that.) Promoting third parties is most effective way to solve these problems without hindering society in other ways. No bureaucracy, no debate, no restrictions, no inefficiency, no unintended side-effects, just your money going directly toward finding solutions.

@GrandScribe building a ramp is a fairly small concession to make. The cost of doing so is very low and the benefit of doing so is very high, so in this specific case, it's probably worth it to legislate. That said, it's still a cost associated with opening/maintaining a business that makes it more difficult to do, and barriers to entry for a startup slows innovation, which can prevent innovations that help the disabled from happening.

The cost of making games playable by disabled people can be very high, depending on what needs to be done. Again, if a game is developed to be playable by 100% of the population, what were the additional costs? Does the price per content jump 50%? 100%? The cost increases are pushed to the consumer. Does everyone then have to pay $120 for the game, or are all of the costs paid by just the people who need those features? That might push the cost of a copy into the thousands. If it increases everyone's cost, does it price me out of buying it? Why am I paying for $60 worth of features I'll never use? How many units won't be sold because of cost relatively speaking? Is this a sustainable business model?

Is this "fair" to the disabled? Maybe not. But are you entitled to my money? I'm not a rich CEO, just an average Joe. When businesses close because of legislated regulations, we all lose.

Tech companies in general spend a lot of time and effort on accessibility that aren't immediately apparent. It can simply be very hard to find solutions in a lot of cases. This is why promoting, donating to or investing in third parties who specialize in providing solutions for the disabled is preferable to forcing everyone to make products that way by default.

It's certainly a big positive when innovations make products accessible to more people with disabilities, but I'm not sure it's reasonable for all game developers to develop all games and hardware with all disabled people in mind. The Wii was criticized, as mentioned in the article, for not having accessible options to replace motion controls. But that was kind of the point of the Wii. If an option existed to not use motion controls, nobody would get off their butts, eliminating the novelty of the games often directly to the detriment of the people playing the games. Getting people out of their comfort zone and it being an activity more than just a video game is what sold Wii systems.

With some tiny fraction (one percent?) of people unable to play Wii games at all and a much smaller number of people unable to use a traditional controller, there probably isn't much incentive for Nintendo specifically to focus on this degree of accessibility. Third parties who are dedicated to accessibility for the disabled are generally better equipped to understand problems and create solutions.

It may be sad, but it's also unavoidable - finances matter. If Nintendo (or any other company) doesn't see an avenue for meaningful profit, there isn't really any reason for them to do it, especially if they are already fairly specialized. Microsoft, on the other hand, develops software and hardware for a much larger range of activities and may find it worth the resources to expand in that direction.

Governments can legislate certain degrees of accessibility, but that does increase costs. Is, as an example, forcing game developers to ensure all games are accessible to 100% of the population instead of 95% at double the price worth it? Legislation can also increase the barrier to enter a market for startups, which can have depressing economic effects and actually stunt the very things it attempts to promote.

The best way to find solutions to this problem is to actually donate and promote third parties who specialize in this type of accessibility. Don't complain about companies who don't (or in many cases, can't) focus on it. Uplift the ones who do.

Activision Blizzard also recorded record profits, and Bobby Kotick pays employees less than 1/3 of 1% of his own compensation.

@Mr-Fuggles777 If this wasn't a 10-year-old game with mountains of reviews, I'd agree. It's very easy to become informed about it, though.

This is definitely the waaaaahhhh of the day.

Highly recommend Ys VIII

Kingdoms of Amalur was excellent, but I've already completed it 3 times.

Already ordered the MH Rise special edition Switch console. Balan Wonderworld is a dark horse for a purchase eventually. Not going to get any of the others.

So much for good games from Codemasters.

Just give me Grey Birdo

I like voice chat options, but the value of the Switch App is that people don't expect you to use it. I sometimes don't want to join strangers in random online games, and the Switch setup gives everyone a perfect excuse to not participate. It works just fine when you actually want to use it.

I like games that have keyboard support for communication (MHGU)

The skill cap increase and overall feel of moves offered by the wirebug is amazing. It's an amazing mechanic when you get used to it.

Starcraft Ghost

He does have a point.

Many promotional materials, ads, and interviews tend to talk about the "ground breaking" technical aspects of a game and lose focus of what that means for a customer. Cyberpunk is possibly the best example of this. While I can understand there were some significant technical challenges to overcome, and they were trying to do a lot of things that had never been done before, what does that mean for the player of the game? If I play Cyberpunk, what experience am I going to have that is brand new and worthy of that kind of hype? Is there anything at all that I have not seen in other games?

Lots of people in here seem to think the vocal minority on internet forums represent the whole of the fan base.

Having personally dealt with this phenomenon for nearly 2 decades, I assure you, it does not.

My first taste of MH was the demo for 3U on 3DS. I didn't "get it" and never bought the full game.

4U comes around, friends talk to me about it, I really WANT to like it, so I download the demo and force myself to do a hunt as every weapon, and it was enough to get me to appreciate the depth and nuance to combat. I now place MH in the very highest tier of gaming franchises.

It is the best cooperative series in existence. I can't think of anything close.

Citadel needs to be sued into oblivion

@Clyde_Radcliffe that and the "secret of" stages from Sunshine were the 3D Land template. I could go for more of that. But honestly, I've never been disappointed by any Mario game.

Consistent frame rates are more important than high frame rates. I will take a consistent 30 over an inconsistent 60 any day.

MH Rise is consistent, more consistent than World was (which was consistent compared to a lot of games itself).

Regarding the game itself, MH is the deepest combat you'll find in gaming. There is a long learning curve. The best quote I've heard is "Everyone likes Monster Hunter, many just quit before they find the weapon that suits them".

AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH MONSTER HUNTER

@SeantheDon29 profiting off someone else's IP is not "free publicity". There are many ways it could reduce the IP holder's revenue. If you want to give corporations more power, removing or reducing fictional IP protections would be a great way of doing that.

Got both evolution items without even trying to at all, it's not THAT rare.

Four Swords Adventures online.

The games are NOTHING alike.

@Kidfunkadelic83 they certainly have an idea of what sells. One Animal Crossing game has outsold the entire Metroid franchise combined. That's even with the Prime trilogy on a highly successful platform.

Don't get me wrong, I consider F-Zero GX among the very best racing games ever made, and better than any Mario Kart. The appeal isn't that wide, though. That said, Nintendo has been slowly opening up to handing some IPs to partner developers, and F-Zero might be the best candidate for that.

@Kidfunkadelic83 they make what sells.

It's rare for a game to have such wide appeal as Animal Crossing, and that should count for something. Hades is a true gem and will get my vote, but ACNH is pretty special and I can't imagine it doesn't win when it's exactly what the world needed exactly when it needed it.

Would be a day one purchase.

Not perfect, but a surprisingly eye-opening look at privilege, history, and Japanese myth. After playing a few in-game years, you'll walk away with a fresh perspective on the luxuries you have in life.

@link_hatchet hackers didn't "prove" a damn thing.

@Yosher that video did not confirm half the things you said, and did a number of times claim differences were not actually differences, which implies bias and an attempt to gain clicks and followers. He also only checked like 10 out of around 900 models.

I don't think using different specs would make any sense except where improvements needed to be made. Why redesign the pokemon? They were rebuilt to be the same with revisions on many of them.

3D All Stars is emulated. Cannot be compared at all, really.

@Yosher this is an understandable viewpoint because it certainly seems simple from the outside, but it is a false one.

You can't just port 3DS stuff over. GF was honest when they said they remade all the models, they just remade them to be the same shape and animations. Light maps/textures are radically different.

Essentially, Switch and 3DS use different tools. Porting things over directly is like trying to drive a nail with a screwdriver. This is why backwards compatibility is difficult and not a given on new platforms.

Most AAA games will max out at 80-90 character models, usually with a lot of shared animations. The Pokemon franchise has around 1100 if including forms and gender differences, not including NPCs and player characters, and nearly all of them have unique animations.

If it were easy, you'd see mods with full pokedexes. But there really aren't any. You may have a case for gen 1 pokemon that were in LGE/LGP, but that's it. And even then, the light/texture maps look significantly different and would require a lot of work to hit the SwSh standard.

People should look up Brooks' Law as well as the effects of hiring on productivity to learn why even a large, rich company can't just add more people to get this stuff done.

Not gonna say I didn't notice framerate drops, but I am going to say they aren't really a big deal.

Would be a day one purchase.

@ArcticFox "it just used that game's assets. They made new environments and whatnot, so this was an original work."

By definition, using something else's assets makes it not an original work. A original work would not use the Zelda IP or assets.

@kemosabii high likelihood of a mii costume I'd imagine.

Sitting at about 45% win rate after 88 games.

Why didn't he get the star?

@VR32X play some special battles. You'll get some variety and possibly unlock some new stages.

You cannot rip off your own IP. Period.

@SirAileron there may be truth to this in the climate at the time of those studies for that specific company, but the nature of data and economies does not necessarily mean it will remain true if businesses like Nintendo always lose these cases. If intellectual property laws become weak or unenforceable, it's a very real possibility with plenty of precedent that many businesses of all sizes (not just big corporations) can suffer severe losses to pirates or more likely just bigger businesses who will steal your ideas and push you out of your own market.

Patent laws can be overly restrictive in many cases, but when it comes to non-essential goods, it's best to keep piracy at a minimum.

@TG16_IS_BAE plagiarism is theft of someone's completed work.

Just being clear here, you think this is a good thing?

@TG16_IS_BAE let me ask this another way.

You think plagiarism is good?

Played 6 games, won twice and never finished below 6th.

Patience is key right now, no need to rush.

@TG16_IS_BAE no, just have a basic understanding of property laws and the reasons behind them.

Do you think it would be a good idea to let anyone use any IP for anything they want?