I said the other day that it was looking like a game that won't be fondly remembered a year from now let alone ten...and it appears I'm bang on the money.
It seems that its not a bad game - heck, not even an average one - but when your heritage includes some of the best video games ever made and even the lesser games in the games in the series being very good with very few genuine missteps across its 5 decade history...just being good or good but flawed simply doesn't cut it.
I was really hoping this would be the game that finally convinced me to buy a Switch 2 but after the last round of previews, I decided to jump ship and buy a Steam Deck instead. Thankfully the reviews have confirmed I made the right choice.
Now I'm not saying this is going to a fustercluck that seems to take the worst choices in regards to numerous important aspects of the game in a vain attempt to bring in a new audience instead of focusing on what has made the franchise so beloved and acclaimed for nearly 40 years and letting homegrown hype and strong reviews draw new players in organically...
...but given the information available on the game and the fact Nintendo are actively marketing the very things alienating the audience who made Metroid a viable IP for them in the first place, I'd say its unlikely to be a game remembered fondly by anyone a year from now, let alone ten.
30fps is fine. 60 is preferable but 30 does the job just fine.
The whole obsession over framerates and resolution stems from the PC master race types who used these numbers to lord it over console owners who were too busy having fun to care their games weren't as sharp or smooth as their PC-owning superiors. Those kinds of people were obnoxious dullards then and they're obnoxious dullards now.
The reason so many games are at 30fps is because it's an acceptable compromise between developer ambitions and technical/time/skill limitations. Development scope is always greater than technology can produce so compromises need to be made and frame rates will always be the first to go.
It's also often greater than time or their expertise will allow resulting in the same thing.
I honestly don't understand why people can't wrap their heads around this when they moan about games running at a perfectly acceptable 30fps.
So is anyone going to talk about the game or are you all going to keep going round in circles about game key cards like your incessant whining is going to make them go away?
I haven't played the game yet (I'm waiting for reasonable, level-headed opinions on it to rise to the surface instead of the extremes that have been aired since its launch.)
From what I've seen and heard, however, it does seem as though the game does have genuine difficulty problems, though. Its all well and good providing players with an open world to tackle as they please (I'm always a fan of giving players opportunity to break games if they have the skills or resiillience to overcome the challenges needed to do so.)
The issue here, however seems to be that players who attempt this or just those who wander into areas outside their skill level are unfairly punished, increasing the difficulty in other areas of the game whilst not providing sufficient rewards for those who decide to power through.
The most compelling aspect of Metroidvanias and Soulslikes is the gradual sense of empowerment the player feels as they progress. Not one of the FROMSoft titles leaves you feeling weak or underpowered as you progress, even as the difficulty ramps up and challenges become harder.
Likewise with any good Metroidvania: You are constantly moving onwards and upwards.
Silksong, however, seems to take the survival horrow approach: constantly leaving you at a disadvantage and screwing you over at ever opportunity it can.
And that would be fine if it were a surival horror game...but it's not and that makes it a problem.
@Dr_Awkward I'm going to try being polite here but believe me, it's a struggle... I hate to break this to you but the player is not a bug and this is not Dungeons and Dragons where you're pretending to be a one.
You are not Hornet. You do not exist in this world. You are a human being looking upon a 2 dimensional abstract representation of that world experiencing it with limited omnipresence and interacting with it through a 2 dimensional avatar.
The characters within the world may be bugs but the game itself is designed to experienced and interacted with by human beings and therefore every aspect of its designs and systems are designed around how humans work, not how the characters within the world itself do.
Now if you'll excuse me I've got a brick wall I feel the urge to smash my head into repeatedly.
@Dr_Awkward No, in this instance its a matter of poor game design. There is no argument to be had about it. If I rigged up a car bomb and left a note with instructions on how to disarm it attached to the wall behind the car, I would be still be held to blame when they fail to see the note and it kills them because a reasonable person does not expect their vehicle to be booby trapped, therefore would not be looking for warnings and even if they saw them may not pay them heed.
That exact same mentality is at play here. You can't blame players for missing the warning signs when they have no reason to be looking.
And no, the bench being in the midst of a trap infested region is not an excuse. The bench has been established as a symbol of safety. It is a well established rule that safe places in games are places the player can relax and be safe from harm - especially in the middle of treacherous environments.
If developers want to break that rule then they have to do one of two things: give the player ample warning that this is not actually a safe place or make sure the punishment for failure is not overly harsh.
In this instance it seems ample warnings are not in place as they are easily missed or misunderstood leading to player deaths.
This is not a matter of "git gud scrub" but a fundamental misunderstanding of how the majority of human beings work as well as a major breach of the unwritten covenant between players and desigers.
Game design rules tell us that certain places are safe regardless of where they are. You trust these places and you trust the developers to play by the rules.
Now while its acceptible to subvert those rules, it has to be done carefully otherwise you're more likely to make people angry than have them laugh at the funny trick you played on them.
In this instance, it's not been done well. Benches are not only established safe spaces but places where players are likely to be low on health making it akin to being stabbed in the back by a trusted friend and them laughing "April Fools!" as you bleed out.
Sure its April Fools Day and they left you a messages saying "I'm gunna stab you lol" a few minutes beforehand but you're not paying attention and even if you were, you don't take it seriously.
This is considerably different to Mimics. Treasure chests are not typically safe spaces (except in games like Zelda which takes player control away to play an animation.) They are fair game to be trapped. Not only that, but although you may be caught off guard, you are still facing the mimic, can literally see it coming and your mind and body are not in a state of repose.
This is more like someone you've just met but who seems friendly inviting you in for a hug then pulling a knife on you as you approach.
Both are unexpected and with potentially devastating results but one of them provides you with opportunity to react in a situation you should probably have your wits about you anyway, the other is just cheap and unfair even though it is signalled in advance as its a betrayal of trust when you are at your most vulnerable.
Glad to see Nintendo won this. They deserve that new ivory back scratcher they've had to put off buying because a small minority of their customers haven't been paying them for games.
Now if only they could put an end to the second-hand market and the reselling of games so they can afford a new gold plated litter tray I'd be ecstatic for them.
I remember seeing this when it came out and it piqued my interest enough that I remember it all these years later. Unfortunately, I didn't have a PC at the time (I was still creaking by with 520STe at the time.) so I'm really interested in checking this one out to see if I missed out on much.
And speaking on old games I missed out at the time, why haven't NightDive bought Blood over to consoles yet?
Thanks for your response. I can certainly agree now that their extermination would not be genocide.
As to whether its right? This is a far more difficult question.
Firstly, I would argue that calling the Metroids a synthetic life-form is inaccurate (although I'm only going by what's written on the Metroid wiki for this.) My understanding is that the Metroid species are genetically modified species, rather than created from scratch by the Chozo.
In this regard, they are no different whatsoever to Samus, who is also a genetically modified weapon that could pose a threat to the Galactic Federation. If Samus is allowed to live then surely the metroids have the same right?
As to whether the metroids existence takes precedence over a planet's native populace, the question really is, "who are we to decide?"
As we've already agreed, animals do not have the same rights as people so unless the Galactic Federation had a vested interest in SR388 and its ecology (were they perhaps considering exploiting its resources (animal, mineral and vegetable) for their own ends?) then what happens to it is of no concern to them.
As for whether the metroids are a sustainable species? They very much would not be...but neither are humans (I know we have lofty ideals we're better than that but man's primal nature always take precedence over reasoned intentions.) and yet if I were to posit that mankind be wiped out of existence to prevent it spreading through the cosmos and draining planets of their natural resources, I would be considered a monster.
So why should humanity get a free pass to spread through the galaxy unimpeded whilst the metroids suffer the indignity of being wiped out of existence for taking over a single uninhabted planet and having the unfortunate problem of being a superior species?
Ultimately, the answer comes down the adage 'might equals right'. The Galactic Federation are the dominant force in the galaxy who get to dictate who lives and who dies and any threat to that dominance — real or potential — is to be eradicated with extreme prejudice.
Truth be told, my Metroid knowledge was lacking when I made my initial response.
I will say, however, that the X are not deemed unworthy of existence based on an arbitrary moral judgement but the facts of reality. They are unrepentant aggressors that posed a direct threat to the Chozo.
There was no means of living peacefully and between the options of letting your race be exterminated or committing genocide yourself, then committing genocide is the only sane option.
This, did not apply to the Metroids, however. They may well have been an invasive species but they were not a direct threat and I don't believe were spreading beyond SR388. Saying that in the wrong hands, that might change ignores the fact that they themselves are not a threat.
The Galactic Federation should be dealing with actual threats rather than eradicating a species based entirely on nebulous fears that they might be a threat in the future if another species takes control of them.
Surely they should be dealing with the Space Pirates and other potential threats – through peaceful means if possible and by force should they fail – rather than charging in to slaughter the Metroids who, it seems just wanted a home of their own.
Killing the Metroids just seems like the Galactic Federation picking an easy target (perhaps they had voters they needed to impress by showing they're doing 'something' to protect them?) rather than dealing with the bigger and more complex issue of the Space Pirate threat.
@Kingy Whilst true, the X Parasites were a deadly threat that could not be dealt with peacefully. It's one thing to eliminate a direct threat, another to hunt down every last member of a species just because they might be a threat (the Space Pirates were the direct threat and their eventual (apparent) extinction was bought about by their own hubris.)
The Metroids themselves were merely caught in the middle of a conflict and found themselves made into villains because they lacked the ability to speak up for themselves.
Using the legal definition of the term to argue whether exterminating an alien race isn't genocide is missing the point: Any current definition of genocide only talks in terms of humans because humans haven't haven't enountered alien life (sentient or otherwise.)
A little common sense would assume that should mankind encounter non-human sentient life, that definition might expand.
Ergo, when speaking about the mass extermination of a fictional race, genocide is still the appropriate word.
Besides, this a purely semantic debate that doesn't change the fact that whatever you call it, deliberately seeking to wipe out an entire race or species is a dick move and not something a supposedly a supposedly superiior race such as mankind should be engaging in.
@PtM Typical human arrogance assuming anything that isn't like you is a lesser being for which different terms apply . The Metroids are an alien RACE making the term genocide perfectly applicable ('geno' meaning race or tribe.)
Obviously, we're talking about a fictional setting here so its all hypothetical but try to remember that those who commit genocide don't see those they're slaughtering as people either so whether they're alien or just believe in a different god to you, the moment you decide another group of sentient beings don't deserve to exist and start wiping them out en masse, it is an act of genocide.
@Suketoudara I agree that they're responsible for the audiophile-like obsession amongst gamers over the most utterly inconsequential little things.
They served a purpose when they first started as games could vary wildly between platforms but over the last 15 years, that gap has closed to the point you need forensic tools to tell them apart.
Even still, their retro videos are interesting and they can be useful on those rare occasions where there are significant differences between platforms and cross-gen releases.
Aesthetics matter for nothing if it fails at its primary function.
That is to say, if I wanted a fancy toy to put on display, I'm sure I could find one for far less than this and if I want a camera then I can get a functional one for cheaper than this.
It is a poor product being sold for a massively inflated price (which nullifies any bonus points it gets for its novelty value.) and shouldn't be rated anywhere near a 7/10.
But then, fools and their money are easily parted and gamers are some of the biggest billys out there and will snap this up regardless of reviews or functionality so it really doesn't matter if its rated 3/10 or 10/10.
@Old-Red Nobody's upset. It's just tiring seeing the same kind of comments every time. We get it, you don't like the idea of having to download a game you've bought physically, repeating your objections at every conceivable opportunity isn't going to make them go away. Games companies aren't your parents, they don't care what you think, they aren't going to capitulate to your whims if you kick up enough fuss and they're not even going to notice that you're not buying their games because their are thousands of people who are and they're not complaining.
I understand that you want people to see key carts as a con but that's not up to you. Value is in the eye of the beholder, after all. If you think they're a con and refuse to buy them then that's your prerogative but if others are happy with their purchases then who are you to tell them they're wrong?
At the end of the day, the market will dictate their success or not and given the same idea has been in use on other systems for over a decade, it doesn't take a genius to realise the're not going away any time soon.
Learn to pick your battles, learn when its best to speak up and when to bide your time and, most importantly, learn when to accept defeat and you'll find that people are more receptive to what you have to say and are more likely to change minds.
@eldersnake Nobody is saying you have to blindly accept things but there comes a time when you're just wasting energy and alienating people and its best to admit defeat.
As for the number of people who aren't happy about these cards? Remember that you and them belong to a vocal minority of hardcore gamers and that you are vastly outnumbered by people who don't care or don't care enough to veto them.
Personally, I don't see the big deal besides game preservation but its clear the big publishers don't care about game preservation (they are, like all corporate media publishers, in it to make money not preserve art.) and its equally clear that 99% of consumers don't care about game preservation either, so what's the point in getting worked up and fighting a battle that was lost before you even began it?
Companies like CDPR are still run by people passionate about games and understand the importance of game preservation so will avoid using these key carts whether you speak up or not, the big corporate publishers (even those we view favourably like Nintendo and Capcom.) have a very different, more predatory, ethos that instigate changes only if not doing so will SIGNIFICANTLY affect their reputation and/or bottom line.
And even if you have a few thousand hardcore gamers who refuse to buy their games and make a stink every chance you get, you're never going to manage to achieve that dent over an issue the overwhelming majority of their customers don't care about and can't be persuaded to care about because they don't view video games the same way that you and I do.
@Old-Red You're fighting a battle you had no hope of winning here.
Very few people care whether the thing they slap in their console has all the 1s and 0s needed to run the game or not.
Consoles have had downloadable patches and HDD installs for about 20 years now and with people's Internet connections as fast as they are now, it really doesn't matter to your average consumer if the whole thing is in their hands or not.
So whilst I get that this shift sucks from an archival perspective, it is but one of many many things about the modern world that has changed for the worse over time (and one of the least important in the grand scheme of things at that!) and isn't going back no matter how much you go on about it.
The best thing you can do is accept this and move on. You don't have to be happy about it but it's almost as tiresome as hearing people moaning about games only being 30fps.
Comments 20
Re: Round Up: The Reviews Are In For Metroid Prime 4: Beyond
I said the other day that it was looking like a game that won't be fondly remembered a year from now let alone ten...and it appears I'm bang on the money.
It seems that its not a bad game - heck, not even an average one - but when your heritage includes some of the best video games ever made and even the lesser games in the games in the series being very good with very few genuine missteps across its 5 decade history...just being good or good but flawed simply doesn't cut it.
I was really hoping this would be the game that finally convinced me to buy a Switch 2 but after the last round of previews, I decided to jump ship and buy a Steam Deck instead. Thankfully the reviews have confirmed I made the right choice.
Re: Metroid Prime 4: Beyond - Meet The Team
Now I'm not saying this is going to a fustercluck that seems to take the worst choices in regards to numerous important aspects of the game in a vain attempt to bring in a new audience instead of focusing on what has made the franchise so beloved and acclaimed for nearly 40 years and letting homegrown hype and strong reviews draw new players in organically...
...but given the information available on the game and the fact Nintendo are actively marketing the very things alienating the audience who made Metroid a viable IP for them in the first place, I'd say its unlikely to be a game remembered fondly by anyone a year from now, let alone ten.
Re: Site News: Nintendo Life Turns 20 Today!
So how long until Hookshot is absorbed into the behemoth that is IGN?
Re: Dynasty Warriors: Origins Will Run At A "Fixed" 30fps On Switch 2
30fps is fine. 60 is preferable but 30 does the job just fine.
The whole obsession over framerates and resolution stems from the PC master race types who used these numbers to lord it over console owners who were too busy having fun to care their games weren't as sharp or smooth as their PC-owning superiors. Those kinds of people were obnoxious dullards then and they're obnoxious dullards now.
The reason so many games are at 30fps is because it's an acceptable compromise between developer ambitions and technical/time/skill limitations. Development scope is always greater than technology can produce so compromises need to be made and frame rates will always be the first to go.
It's also often greater than time or their expertise will allow resulting in the same thing.
I honestly don't understand why people can't wrap their heads around this when they moan about games running at a perfectly acceptable 30fps.
Re: Video: SEGA Shares "First Look" At Yakuza Kiwami 3's Combat Gameplay
So is anyone going to talk about the game or are you all going to keep going round in circles about game key cards like your incessant whining is going to make them go away?
Re: Team Cherry Explains Hollow Knight: Silksong's "Steep Difficulty"
I haven't played the game yet (I'm waiting for reasonable, level-headed opinions on it to rise to the surface instead of the extremes that have been aired since its launch.)
From what I've seen and heard, however, it does seem as though the game does have genuine difficulty problems, though. Its all well and good providing players with an open world to tackle as they please (I'm always a fan of giving players opportunity to break games if they have the skills or resiillience to overcome the challenges needed to do so.)
The issue here, however seems to be that players who attempt this or just those who wander into areas outside their skill level are unfairly punished, increasing the difficulty in other areas of the game whilst not providing sufficient rewards for those who decide to power through.
The most compelling aspect of Metroidvanias and Soulslikes is the gradual sense of empowerment the player feels as they progress. Not one of the FROMSoft titles leaves you feeling weak or underpowered as you progress, even as the difficulty ramps up and challenges become harder.
Likewise with any good Metroidvania: You are constantly moving onwards and upwards.
Silksong, however, seems to take the survival horrow approach: constantly leaving you at a disadvantage and screwing you over at ever opportunity it can.
And that would be fine if it were a surival horror game...but it's not and that makes it a problem.
Re: "I Have No Words" - Silksong Fans Are Losing Their Minds Over One Bench
@Dr_Awkward I'm going to try being polite here but believe me, it's a struggle... I hate to break this to you but the player is not a bug and this is not Dungeons and Dragons where you're pretending to be a one.
You are not Hornet. You do not exist in this world. You are a human being looking upon a 2 dimensional abstract representation of that world experiencing it with limited omnipresence and interacting with it through a 2 dimensional avatar.
The characters within the world may be bugs but the game itself is designed to experienced and interacted with by human beings and therefore every aspect of its designs and systems are designed around how humans work, not how the characters within the world itself do.
Now if you'll excuse me I've got a brick wall I feel the urge to smash my head into repeatedly.
Re: "I Have No Words" - Silksong Fans Are Losing Their Minds Over One Bench
@Dr_Awkward No, in this instance its a matter of poor game design. There is no argument to be had about it. If I rigged up a car bomb and left a note with instructions on how to disarm it attached to the wall behind the car, I would be still be held to blame when they fail to see the note and it kills them because a reasonable person does not expect their vehicle to be booby trapped, therefore would not be looking for warnings and even if they saw them may not pay them heed.
That exact same mentality is at play here. You can't blame players for missing the warning signs when they have no reason to be looking.
And no, the bench being in the midst of a trap infested region is not an excuse. The bench has been established as a symbol of safety. It is a well established rule that safe places in games are places the player can relax and be safe from harm - especially in the middle of treacherous environments.
If developers want to break that rule then they have to do one of two things: give the player ample warning that this is not actually a safe place or make sure the punishment for failure is not overly harsh.
In this instance it seems ample warnings are not in place as they are easily missed or misunderstood leading to player deaths.
This is not a matter of "git gud scrub" but a fundamental misunderstanding of how the majority of human beings work as well as a major breach of the unwritten covenant between players and desigers.
Re: "I Have No Words" - Silksong Fans Are Losing Their Minds Over One Bench
Game design rules tell us that certain places are safe regardless of where they are. You trust these places and you trust the developers to play by the rules.
Now while its acceptible to subvert those rules, it has to be done carefully otherwise you're more likely to make people angry than have them laugh at the funny trick you played on them.
In this instance, it's not been done well. Benches are not only established safe spaces but places where players are likely to be low on health making it akin to being stabbed in the back by a trusted friend and them laughing "April Fools!" as you bleed out.
Sure its April Fools Day and they left you a messages saying "I'm gunna stab you lol" a few minutes beforehand but you're not paying attention and even if you were, you don't take it seriously.
This is considerably different to Mimics. Treasure chests are not typically safe spaces (except in games like Zelda which takes player control away to play an animation.) They are fair game to be trapped. Not only that, but although you may be caught off guard, you are still facing the mimic, can literally see it coming and your mind and body are not in a state of repose.
This is more like someone you've just met but who seems friendly inviting you in for a hug then pulling a knife on you as you approach.
Both are unexpected and with potentially devastating results but one of them provides you with opportunity to react in a situation you should probably have your wits about you anyway, the other is just cheap and unfair even though it is signalled in advance as its a betrayal of trust when you are at your most vulnerable.
Re: Nintendo Wins $2 Million Lawsuit Against 'MiG Switch' Distributor
Glad to see Nintendo won this. They deserve that new ivory back scratcher they've had to put off buying because a small minority of their customers haven't been paying them for games.
Now if only they could put an end to the second-hand market and the reselling of games so they can afford a new gold plated litter tray I'd be ecstatic for them.
Re: Nightdive's Latest Remaster Is A Rip-Roaring Wild West Cult Classic
I remember seeing this when it came out and it piqued my interest enough that I remember it all these years later. Unfortunately, I didn't have a PC at the time (I was still creaking by with 520STe at the time.) so I'm really interested in checking this one out to see if I missed out on much.
And speaking on old games I missed out at the time, why haven't NightDive bought Blood over to consoles yet?
Re: Opinion: Metroid II Doesn't Care If Samus Lives Or Dies
Thanks for your response. I can certainly agree now that their extermination would not be genocide.
As to whether its right? This is a far more difficult question.
Firstly, I would argue that calling the Metroids a synthetic life-form is inaccurate (although I'm only going by what's written on the Metroid wiki for this.) My understanding is that the Metroid species are genetically modified species, rather than created from scratch by the Chozo.
In this regard, they are no different whatsoever to Samus, who is also a genetically modified weapon that could pose a threat to the Galactic Federation. If Samus is allowed to live then surely the metroids have the same right?
As to whether the metroids existence takes precedence over a planet's native populace, the question really is, "who are we to decide?"
As we've already agreed, animals do not have the same rights as people so unless the Galactic Federation had a vested interest in SR388 and its ecology (were they perhaps considering exploiting its resources (animal, mineral and vegetable) for their own ends?) then what happens to it is of no concern to them.
As for whether the metroids are a sustainable species? They very much would not be...but neither are humans (I know we have lofty ideals we're better than that but man's primal nature always take precedence over reasoned intentions.) and yet if I were to posit that mankind be wiped out of existence to prevent it spreading through the cosmos and draining planets of their natural resources, I would be considered a monster.
So why should humanity get a free pass to spread through the galaxy unimpeded whilst the metroids suffer the indignity of being wiped out of existence for taking over a single uninhabted planet and having the unfortunate problem of being a superior species?
Ultimately, the answer comes down the adage 'might equals right'. The Galactic Federation are the dominant force in the galaxy who get to dictate who lives and who dies and any threat to that dominance — real or potential — is to be eradicated with extreme prejudice.
Re: Opinion: Metroid II Doesn't Care If Samus Lives Or Dies
@Kingy You make many good points.
Truth be told, my Metroid knowledge was lacking when I made my initial response.
I will say, however, that the X are not deemed unworthy of existence based on an arbitrary moral judgement but the facts of reality. They are unrepentant aggressors that posed a direct threat to the Chozo.
There was no means of living peacefully and between the options of letting your race be exterminated or committing genocide yourself, then committing genocide is the only sane option.
This, did not apply to the Metroids, however. They may well have been an invasive species but they were not a direct threat and I don't believe were spreading beyond SR388. Saying that in the wrong hands, that might change ignores the fact that they themselves are not a threat.
The Galactic Federation should be dealing with actual threats rather than eradicating a species based entirely on nebulous fears that they might be a threat in the future if another species takes control of them.
Surely they should be dealing with the Space Pirates and other potential threats – through peaceful means if possible and by force should they fail – rather than charging in to slaughter the Metroids who, it seems just wanted a home of their own.
Killing the Metroids just seems like the Galactic Federation picking an easy target (perhaps they had voters they needed to impress by showing they're doing 'something' to protect them?) rather than dealing with the bigger and more complex issue of the Space Pirate threat.
Re: Opinion: Metroid II Doesn't Care If Samus Lives Or Dies
@Kingy Whilst true, the X Parasites were a deadly threat that could not be dealt with peacefully. It's one thing to eliminate a direct threat, another to hunt down every last member of a species just because they might be a threat (the Space Pirates were the direct threat and their eventual (apparent) extinction was bought about by their own hubris.)
The Metroids themselves were merely caught in the middle of a conflict and found themselves made into villains because they lacked the ability to speak up for themselves.
Re: Opinion: Metroid II Doesn't Care If Samus Lives Or Dies
@PtM Your point being? I got my information from the UN ( https://www.un.org/en/genocide-prevention/definition )
Using the legal definition of the term to argue whether exterminating an alien race isn't genocide is missing the point: Any current definition of genocide only talks in terms of humans because humans haven't haven't enountered alien life (sentient or otherwise.)
A little common sense would assume that should mankind encounter non-human sentient life, that definition might expand.
Ergo, when speaking about the mass extermination of a fictional race, genocide is still the appropriate word.
Besides, this a purely semantic debate that doesn't change the fact that whatever you call it, deliberately seeking to wipe out an entire race or species is a dick move and not something a supposedly a supposedly superiior race such as mankind should be engaging in.
Re: Opinion: Metroid II Doesn't Care If Samus Lives Or Dies
@PtM Typical human arrogance assuming anything that isn't like you is a lesser being for which different terms apply . The Metroids are an alien RACE making the term genocide perfectly applicable ('geno' meaning race or tribe.)
Obviously, we're talking about a fictional setting here so its all hypothetical but try to remember that those who commit genocide don't see those they're slaughtering as people either so whether they're alien or just believe in a different god to you, the moment you decide another group of sentient beings don't deserve to exist and start wiping them out en masse, it is an act of genocide.
Re: "We Answer To Nobody But You, The Audience" - Digital Foundry Is Now Fully Independent
@Suketoudara I agree that they're responsible for the audiophile-like obsession amongst gamers over the most utterly inconsequential little things.
They served a purpose when they first started as games could vary wildly between platforms but over the last 15 years, that gap has closed to the point you need forensic tools to tell them apart.
Even still, their retro videos are interesting and they can be useful on those rare occasions where there are significant differences between platforms and cross-gen releases.
Re: Review: Nintendo Switch 2 Piranha Plant Camera - Shocking Image Quality, But Its Cuteness Will Snare You
Aesthetics matter for nothing if it fails at its primary function.
That is to say, if I wanted a fancy toy to put on display, I'm sure I could find one for far less than this and if I want a camera then I can get a functional one for cheaper than this.
It is a poor product being sold for a massively inflated price (which nullifies any bonus points it gets for its novelty value.) and shouldn't be rated anywhere near a 7/10.
But then, fools and their money are easily parted and gamers are some of the biggest billys out there and will snap this up regardless of reviews or functionality so it really doesn't matter if its rated 3/10 or 10/10.
Re: Review: Street Fighter 6: Years 1-2 Fighters Edition (Switch 2) - Just One Caveat Holds Back Capcom's Finest
@Old-Red Nobody's upset. It's just tiring seeing the same kind of comments every time. We get it, you don't like the idea of having to download a game you've bought physically, repeating your objections at every conceivable opportunity isn't going to make them go away. Games companies aren't your parents, they don't care what you think, they aren't going to capitulate to your whims if you kick up enough fuss and they're not even going to notice that you're not buying their games because their are thousands of people who are and they're not complaining.
I understand that you want people to see key carts as a con but that's not up to you. Value is in the eye of the beholder, after all. If you think they're a con and refuse to buy them then that's your prerogative but if others are happy with their purchases then who are you to tell them they're wrong?
At the end of the day, the market will dictate their success or not and given the same idea has been in use on other systems for over a decade, it doesn't take a genius to realise the're not going away any time soon.
Learn to pick your battles, learn when its best to speak up and when to bide your time and, most importantly, learn when to accept defeat and you'll find that people are more receptive to what you have to say and are more likely to change minds.
@eldersnake Nobody is saying you have to blindly accept things but there comes a time when you're just wasting energy and alienating people and its best to admit defeat.
As for the number of people who aren't happy about these cards? Remember that you and them belong to a vocal minority of hardcore gamers and that you are vastly outnumbered by people who don't care or don't care enough to veto them.
Personally, I don't see the big deal besides game preservation but its clear the big publishers don't care about game preservation (they are, like all corporate media publishers, in it to make money not preserve art.) and its equally clear that 99% of consumers don't care about game preservation either, so what's the point in getting worked up and fighting a battle that was lost before you even began it?
Companies like CDPR are still run by people passionate about games and understand the importance of game preservation so will avoid using these key carts whether you speak up or not, the big corporate publishers (even those we view favourably like Nintendo and Capcom.) have a very different, more predatory, ethos that instigate changes only if not doing so will SIGNIFICANTLY affect their reputation and/or bottom line.
And even if you have a few thousand hardcore gamers who refuse to buy their games and make a stink every chance you get, you're never going to manage to achieve that dent over an issue the overwhelming majority of their customers don't care about and can't be persuaded to care about because they don't view video games the same way that you and I do.
Re: Review: Street Fighter 6: Years 1-2 Fighters Edition (Switch 2) - Just One Caveat Holds Back Capcom's Finest
@Old-Red You're fighting a battle you had no hope of winning here.
Very few people care whether the thing they slap in their console has all the 1s and 0s needed to run the game or not.
Consoles have had downloadable patches and HDD installs for about 20 years now and with people's Internet connections as fast as they are now, it really doesn't matter to your average consumer if the whole thing is in their hands or not.
So whilst I get that this shift sucks from an archival perspective, it is but one of many many things about the modern world that has changed for the worse over time (and one of the least important in the grand scheme of things at that!) and isn't going back no matter how much you go on about it.
The best thing you can do is accept this and move on. You don't have to be happy about it but it's almost as tiresome as hearing people moaning about games only being 30fps.