Because the number of coins you could earn from matches in a month was capped (and capped really low), I think it a might be a bit early to say this is meant to make it "harder" to unlock Pokémon. No matter how much you played you could only earn coins to unlock a Pokémon every 4 months or so (not counting events), and you were encouraged to buy "cheap" Pokémon. That led to the game being extremely stale. I've been a Master ranked trainer for a bit over a year and there are literally Pokémon I have NEVER encountered in a match. No one is ever going to experiment with a Pokémon that is not already a common part of the meta when doing so involves a month long investment.
This change is also the result of a resent in game survey, and the number one issue that survey found for people quitting the game was that it was too hard to unlock new Pokémon. I mean, sure, we seen tone deafness to exceptional degrees from FTP games in the past, but I just don't see them reacting to that feedback by making it harder to unlock them.
Not sure why, Microsoft is so far ahead in the software game right now it's not even close. Game Pass has them investing billions in indie games, not the mention the fact that ID@Xbox was already insanely popular, so it's really not shocking that devs would try to win some favor by offering timed or full exclusivity. It's to the point where blind dropping a game on Game Pass is a valid launch strategy, because Microsoft is paying more for the license then you were hoping to make from total sales. 3 games did it LAST WEEK.
Slayer-X is the best example. From interviews, we know the game was budgeted around having $500,000 in sales total over it's lifetime, but Microsoft offered them $1m to drop it as a timed exclusive on Game Pass. Why would NOT say yes?
Remember the "console wars" is made up by 12 year old's. Devs only care about dollars. Right now, Game Pass ... JUST Game Pass, no other aspect of Xbox or Microsoft Games Studios, is making more profit then all of Play Station (including hardware, software, merch, movies, and all other verticals), as well as all of Nintendo as a company.
Like I totally get that some people don't like Game Pass and even violently oppose the fact that gaming is heading in that direction. Totally valid. But you can't just ignore the reality that it's transformed gaming and is the single most profitable gaming product ever.
I mean, I absolutely love this game, the world building and the characters, but ... might be time to move on. I thought 3 Halo 3s was bad, but we have 5 Persona 5s!
Makes sense. It was much more common in consoles that required proprietary engines, never intended to be hardware independent. You already know exactly how fast the hardware is going to run, so you can just line everything in the code. Only breaks down when you turn to emulators.
A billion years ago game logic took longer to run then graphics, and when that was the case you would often code you game to simply draw the graphics whenever it could, as fast as it could, because you knew that was never going to be the bottleneck. This would "tie" framerate to graphics, increasing the framerate if you increased the processing speed.
Nowadays, game logic is basically nothing in almost every case, your whole overhead is graphics. You're still going to find a few games that do it the old way (Dyson Sphere Program is a likely example), but even in cases like that you simply use a frame limiter to make sure it never gets out of hand. In the overwhelming majority of games or any game that uses a 3rd party engine, your frame rate is completely decupled from game logic. Fighting games and MOBA's in pretectal run the logic at a set "refresh rate" regardless of what your framerate is, which is why you're at a huge disadvantage on older hardware. You're only "seeing" 30 frames a second, but the game is being played at 60 or even 120 frames.
I mean, for a out of the blue update to a old game, what more could you ask for? I think it shows a great deal of care, creativity, and passion from the people who were working on the update, knowing they were likely working under extreme budget and time constraints.
Large changes to code (and the deployment and testing cycle that would come with that) were likely off the table, as were any huge additions of assets ... outside of ones you could justify as advertisements for a paid product like an amiibo. So they instead gave us some pretty buffy quality of life upgrades, while allowing us to do more with the game assists that already existed.
In the end, I'm sure it will give a lot of people a reason to go back to a game they have already paid for and already gotten more then their money's worth out of at this point. I, personally, can't see any reason to complain or find fault in that.
While there is no perfect system, I think people really overstate how bad "mirror matches", or the general idea of being on the most popular team, is.
Mirror matches earn more Conchs, which in addition to being a great personal incentive, also means the most popular team has an advantage when it comes to winning "sneak peak", which is 90 points.
The most popular team also has an advantage in Tri Color clout (the team with 4 players wins more often then either team with 2), which earns 180 points.
So they have an advantage for 270 points, and earn 70 points for votes.
More importantly, they are at no disadvantage in pro or open clout, which make up the other 240 points. Sure, mirror matches don't count, but the number of non-mirror matches being played by the most popular team isn't less then the other two teams. All 3 teams have the same number of matches that count, the most popular team just has more matches that do not count.
The TEAM has the same opportunity to earn clout, even though the individuals on the team do not. That fact that there are more individuals means it more or less evens out.
It was worst before 7.0, but if you look at the results, the most popular team has won 41% of the time, which is more then what we should expect statistically at 33% (but still well within a margin that falls within expected random variance).
Mirror matches also count the exact same as any other match for your personal progression. They increase your event clout, they increase your xp, and you earn gold at the same rate.
So while I can understand thinking "Boo, this match doesn't count", the reality is you're on the team most likely to win and you're earning personal achievements at the same rate, so I would encourage anyone to try and get over that mental block and just enjoy the event!
You might be right. As someone who has been playing since day one of the first game, with tons of event and amiibo gear, I might be undervaluing snails. Either way, I do agree it would be ideal if there was a way to get them outside of Splatfest.
Splatoon's support officially ended forever ago. Splatfests are not slowing down, they are done. The last one was July 19, 2024.
Because the game is still popular, they made the decision to re-run seasonal events. What happened this week was a repeat of the last Splatoween, and in December we should get a repeat of the last Frosty Fest. But nothing new, and no "themed" Splatfests.
Support ending also means it's highly unlikely you'll see content patches to change things like Sea Snails. While I agree that might not be ideal, the reality is that you don't actually need a ton of them. Two seasonable events (if you get Master rank) should be more then enough to max out all the gear you'll need.
It's also important to note that you don't really NEED Sea Snails to gain a competitive advantage. I mean, it's NICE to have 3 of the same stat on the same item, and that item to also be one you find cosmetically pleasing ... but it's just as effective to get the upgrades you want over 3 pieces of mixed gear, something you can do pretty easily without Sea Snails. So given the advantage is basically only cosmetic, I'm not that upset about it.
I hope everyone had a great Splatfest! I'm so happy we are still getting these! I'm looking really forward to Frosty Fest, and I hope to see you all there.
Gratz to team Zombie, but always remember ... we're all winners today.
The start time is set in Japan, and Japan has daylight saving time. So in other time zones it will go up or down an hour based on if their clocks are set back an hour relative to yours or not.
Oh great, another discussion of Game Key cards that adds absolutely nothing new to the discourse!
With one of the first comments on almost every video game announcements on your site already being "GAME CARD??", do we really need to be giving more of a platform to this issue? I would understand if this was a complex, multisided issue with ongoing developments, but it just isn't. People don't like them. We get it.
The quality of the comment section on this site has fallen off a cliff to the point where you have an real problem. Conversations about actual games are highjacked by the same vocal minority to cut and paste the same remedial arguments over and over. Do you really need to be encouraging it?
I have nothing against people who want physical games or dislike Game Key Cards. I don't like Game Key Cards. I also get that the site makes money from engagement, and negative topics get more engagement. But you're encouraging the type of engagement that is leading to completely homogenous and uninteresting discourse, and I'm sure I'm not the only person who is coming to the site and commenting less because of it.
There are people who hate the bourgeoisie, sure. At different points in history that hate has boiled over into the odd beheading or social revaluation. But that's the exception, not the rule. I think it's fantastic if you are part of the minority that sees things for how they are, but we shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking we are a majority.
My point is when people worship titans of industry or the wealthy elite, a thing most people absolutely do, they do so without considering that if they witnessed the same behaviors in someone who wasn't insanely wealthy already, they would condemn them.
At the peak of Musk's cult of personality, when 100s of millions of people world wide would defend his every action, I would argue that if any of them read an article about some everyday Joe who inherited a emerald mine from their Nazi father and was in the process of working locals to death to profit from it, they would condemn that person, despite the hypocrisy.
When a rich dude buys up all the land and starts selling it back to people for 10 times what it's worth, that person is basically a hero. We worship them, idolize them, and lower their taxes.
When some guy who's likely struggling just to get by buys up all the Pokémon cards and sells them at profit, that person is the scum of the earth and deserves to die.
We, as a society, put real time, effort and money into trying to stop people from buying up all the Pokémon cards, because hey, me not being able to get a Pokémon card is just an unacceptable world state. We do nothing about the whole land barons and monopoly problems because record homelessness and wealth inequality is fine, as long as I get that shinny Pikachu.
To be clear, I'm not suggesting we hate the scalper LESS. But maybe a great way to react when you realize that on a microscale the cornerstone of our entire society and economic model is actually pretty awful is to ask yourself why you accept it on the macroscale. We spend so much time hating each other, we don't have any hate left for the people who deserve it.
This is why I see most of the arguments here as disingenuous at best. The Venn diagram of people who are going to freak out at evil, irredeemable Nintendo for not allowing a charity event to use their IPs unconditionally and people who are going to freak out at evil, irredeemable Nintendo if their IPs show up at an LGBT+ charity event is basically a circle.
I do not have anyone on ignore. Why would I? I post here for discourse, not to speak to myself. In the future if you want to talk about me, you should @ me.
You are speaking to your opinion of the moral and ethical realities of copyright law. I want to be clear that you have every right to that opinion. At the same time, while I consider myself rather adept at communication, I can not with words adequately express how much that conversation disinterests me.
Instead, I speak to the legal reality and the factual information relevant to issues. Here, that comes down to 3 points:
This is a completely normal and blasé application of copyright law.
This is covered by international copyright and not Japanese law
Nintendo changed their enforcement policy after over 125 tournament organizers, staff, and participants were accused of the sexual abuse of over 1500 minors at events that used Nintendo's ips in 2020, which lead to a flood of additional accusations and calls to hold Nintendo liable for the abuse. They now ask that organizers prove they have adequate safety systems in place to prevent abuse before allowing the use of Nintendo's IP.
That last part is relevant to combat the misinformation that Nintendo asks for royalties or other monitory compensation, or the idea that Nintendo "doesn't allow" the use of there IPs. Anyone willing to follow their guidelines for preventing sexual abuses' will be given permission. Therefor, if you can't use Nintendo's IPs at your event, it is because you refuse to put safeguards in place.
I personally view comments like yours like this:
Me - The Sky is blue
Response - The sky SHOULDN'T BE BLUE. The sky should be red. You are morally and ethically compromised because you do not wish for the sky to be red. You are morally and ethically compromised because you accept that the sky is blue.
My only reply is simply
1) I do not care to discus what color people, including myself, WISH the sky was.
2) The sky is, in fact, blue.
One key bit of information and a misconception I want to clear up is what a "non-profit" is. It is not a entity that can not MAKE profit. It is an entity that can not DISTRIBUTE profit to outside parties, for example, shareholders, investors or a group of owners. They must also have a stated goal of operating for social benefit, but this obviously is extremely open to interpretation and has almost no oversight in most countries.
This is important because non-profits are allowed to PAY STAFF. As such, many non-profits prioritize huge salaries for management over anything else. They often give management raises based on "performance" which means that as the organization becomes more profitable (as in the differential between the operating costs and the net revenue increases) it's not the amount of money they direct to their "cause" that increases, it's simply given to the top earners.
I don't mean to darken everyone's day by pointing out one more horrible reality, but it's really important we don't have the mindset that a "non-profit" organization automatically means it's altruistic and universally "good". Some are! But some, if not most, are simply elaborate ways of moving as much money as possible into the pockets of a few key people. Just like an other business.
As luck would have it, I very much understand copyright law AND often live in Japan!
Copyright law is largely international, with the Berne Convention covering how over 200 counties, including Japan, litigate the issue. The "World Intellectual Property Organization" handles additional right for IP holders under international treaties. I'm going to use copyright and IP law interchangeably without giving a full definition as to when one or the other applies because the end result is the same.
Japan's own laws are irrelevant. Not only have they been historically extremely lax, allowing for "fair use" in almost any situation, but they don't matter. This, like every other copyright or IP issue involving a multinational, is covered by The WIPO Copyright Treaty and WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty. Domestic law must meet these standards.
Domestic law can supplement this treaties, like the DMCA or directives 91/250/EC, D96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC of the European Union, which go above and beyond to grant additional rights to rights holders. Japan has no such amendments. America's DMCA makes that country likely the most favorable to rights holders, defining several violations that would not be enforceable in Japan. To be clear, the core argument that Japan has "crazy" copyright or IP laws that are stricter then US is not only false, but the opposite is true in a very real and dramatic way.
What is happening in the case, a rights holder demanding a company ask permission before using it's IPs in any capacity, including but not limited to streaming, is a right that could be asserted in basically every country in the world. It has been illegal to reproduce another author's creation, for any purpose, in the US sense essentially 1790. The law has been updated numinous times to include additional media as required and push back the amount of time before it entered the public domain, but the basic idea that no one, for any reason, has the right to "copy" the registered work of another author hasn't changed. "Fair use" is a relatively new concept, and doesn't apply here. Streaming has been recognized as a live performance, and therefor streaming another's work has been a violation of copyright since around 2005. Twitch exists because some IP holders choose to not enforce their rights, not because Twitch has the right to operate as it does.
With respect, given you freely admit you have no idea how Japanize or international copyright works, perhaps a more constrictive way you could have added to this conversation would be to ask questions rather then to post based on baseless assumptions.
In addition, while you have the right to your opinion that is apparently in the contrary, if I have to choose between a world where anyone can use Nintendo's IP for free, but this leads to the documented, very real, not made up, not hypothetical, sexual abuse of 10s of 1000s of children by organizations that used Nintendo's IP to lure young gamers, or a world where you have to ask Nintendo for permission, a permission they will always grant as long as you ensure you are protecting said children ... yeah, I would obviously choose to live in that second one.
This is simply misrepresentation. Nintendo, 100% will let RTA (or anyone else) use Nintendo games, they just have to ask in advance and ensure Nintendo that they are meeting standards to prevent the sexual abuse of minors at the events. This includes letting a Nintendo representative audit security practices and vent the staff. This is not a secret, and event organizer have no excuse to not be aware of this requirement. Many choose to ignore it hoping Nintendo simply will not notice, and then try to spin what happens as Nintendo's overreach rather then their own negligence or unwillingness to take the required precautions..
This is not random. The child focused nature of Nintendo's products had lead to numerous events where Nintendo's IPs were used to lure children or young teens who where then sexual abused by the event organizers and/or staff. In other cases, most notably in the FGC, events did very little to prevent sexual abuse of younger players by older participants in the event. Nintendo took a ton of bad press, were blamed for the abuse even though they had nothing to do with organizing or running the events, and so where forced to take action and change their policies.
It says a lot of really not good things about the gaming community that a company's completely valid attempts at reducing real, documented, chronic and ongoing sexual abuse of minors is not just seen as unreasonable, but spawns irrational and downright insane levels of hate.
I'm not the "wont someone please think of the children!" type, but I think a better way to report on these issues would be to report on Nintendo's policy and run headlines more inline with "Gaming event refuses to meet minimal standards to protect Children" or "Unbelievably negligent tournament organizers forget copyright is a thing, do not secure permission to use Nintendo games in advance."
That's right, it's $5 million in revenue, but like I said the in previous post, we know that operating costs are just over 1 billion. So $4 billion in profit, versus the $2.5 billion(ish) in profit PlayStation makes.
As for the service itself, I totally get that it's not for everyone. I think there is a big generational shift in how we look at subscriptions, with younger people being much more inclined to attempt them.
I have a friend that is adamantly against subscriptions, and we were talking a few months ago about what games he was looking to pick up. Of the 5 he mentioned, 4 were on PC Game Pass. At that point, I think you really have to start considering paying $15 a month vs. $280 upfront for 4 games. Even if one of the games turned out to be an absolute gem you wanted to own forever, Game Pass gives you 10% off buying games on the service, so you're still saving money having Game Pass for a few months to try out all of them and then buying the ones you really like. That's what he ended up doing.
Personally that's how I look at subscriptions. I don't see them as life time commitments. I perfectly fine with picking up Game Pass, PSN+, or even EA's or Ubisoft's subscriptions for a single month to play a game rather then paying full price to buy it. 90% of the time, that month is all I need to be "done" with the game, and in the rare case I want to experience more of it, I wish list it on steam and buy it on discount. Again, I get this level of micromanagement isn't for everyone, but I think more people do this then you might think.
I could totally get behind what you're saying if the main point here was that Nintendo mislead people. But they just didn't.
Here is every official Nintendo commercial for the Switch 2. There are 4 games IN TOTAL featured in them, and the only unreleased game is Mario Kart World.
The Switch 2 direct features about 13 games, with only 5 of them being unreleased. It makes no claims that tons of other games are coming soon or are even in the works. More time is devoted to the features of the system then to showing off games. So if your expectation is that there were going to be a ton of games out really soon ... where did you get that from? Who said that? Certainly not Nintendo.
So I don't think Nintendo is in any way responsible for expectations that people just made up on their own with no evidence. I'm not sure why that is contraveral. I also think that people are accountable for researching large purchases to ensure it's the right product for them. Again, can't see why that's contraveral. You speak to expectations set by "the media", but again, if you choose to listen to outside sources rather then trusting the information that's contained in official advertising from Nintendo, that's on you. Nintendo isn't accountable to the expectations set by people they have no control over, only to the expectations they set for themselves.
If someone needs a car for them and their 5 children and buys a FAIT 500, I don't think it's "victim blaming" to say you probably should have researched that a bit more. You bought the wrong car, and it's not FAIT's fault. It would be different if FAIT was advertising the 500 as a prefect car for large families ... but they are not. Just like Nintendo isn't advertising the Switch 2 as having a ton of games and new releases.
You can WANT anything you like. The problem isn't with wanting a bunch of new games, it's with expecting a bunch of new games, when every bit of information we got from Nintendo, Nintendo's partners, and 3rd party game developers said otherwise.
Nintendo's been VERY clear about the fact that they didn't take any teams off Switch games to work on Switch 2 games, how only a handful of partners were given dev kits, and how no dev kits where given to any 3rd parties. They flat out told people the first year would focus on ports, and even they would come slowly.
You can argue that maybe that's not the best way to handle a new system, sure. But if you bought a system KNOWING FULL WELL that was Nintendo's plan ... you have no leg to stand on when it comes to be upset about them doing exactly what they told you they were going to do.
Not to motion the fact that this lineup is unprecedently large. The Switch only had 10 games at launch, and had only confirmed 11 more after 4 months. So a 21 game showcase after 55 days, adding to the 22-25 launch titles isn't bad, and I don't think anyone should have been expecting more then twice the number of games the Switch had.
So, no, not blaming anyone for wanting a first party, new release focused console. I wanted that too. But the Switch 2 never claimed to be that.
I mean, I get it. People are upset that a product they want, or in some cases may even be required for how they enjoy video games, is going away. There is nothing unreasonable about that.
I'm old. There used to be this thing called "TV" and it would play "shows" that you didn't have any control over. You couldn't pause or rewind and the only way you could watch them was be being at the TV at a given time. Insane, right? Anyways, it was pretty common when one of these "shows" would get cancelled that people would complain about it for months. The arguments were basically the same; it was just greedy corporations looking for more profitable shows even though a lot of people still wanted to watch the old ones.
So I can understand where people are at right now. But believe me, if people are going to get this upset every time a product they love gets discontinued, by the time they are my age they are going to be VERY bitter. I'm just doing what I can to spread future happiness!
If companies only care about money, and selling games on carts is in demand and will make them money, why don't they do it?
Look man, I totally get that you want physical games. Power to you. I respect your right to that opinion and that desire.
I just really wish you would accept that most companies don't want to sell you physical games, respect their right to THAT opinion, and stop trying to make every conversation about how you don't.
Your own argument is completely negated by you first statement.
3rd parties are only concerned with their bottom line. Therefore, if physical games where profitable, they would sell them. If demand for full games on cart justified the associated costs, they would offer them to make money, the thing that you said was their only motivation.
The lack of investment in physical media, again, by your own argument, is proof physical media is not sustainable or profitable enough. You can't expect any company to sell a product they do not make profit from, nor can you fault a company for responding to a decline in demand by no longer selling a product.
That's why it's so hard to get a good 8 track player at Walmart. That's not a conspiracy and no one is to "blame" ... it's just how markets work. And while that sucks for the few people who still want 8 track players, it's time for them to accept that they have become a marginalized minority and that expecting companies to cater to them is completely unrealistic. At some point you need to ask yourself if responding to every new CD release with "WHAT, NO 8 TRACK RELEASE?" is really the hill you want to die on. And I don't think you can blame people for being tired of hearing it.
It's really hard to have solid gameplay footage or roadmaps in July when you got your dev kit in June. I think that fact seriously doesn't get enough attention and is overlooked. Nintendo didn't give out dev kits to most developers until after release. Some studios still don't have one.
That's why we are really only seeing small, uncomplicated, minimalistic games built on a largely platform independent engine like Unreal where the developer is confident the port wont be resource intensive, or games from the few developers that got dev kits ahead of time. For everyone else, it's simply too soon to commit to a port.
And if your plan was to launch on Switch 2 as your lead console, your game is AT BEST 55 days into development. You likely don't have much to show.
They are also extremely counter productive. The response to push back over game keys isn't going to be a shift toward full games on cartridge, it's going to be a shift away from any physical release at all.
I get that it sucks and no one is happy, but people should see game keys for what they are ... a game that WAS NOT going to get a physical release, period, getting a game key as a compromise.
I think it's starting to dawn on some people that they bought the Switch 2 based on hype, without really understanding the usage cases that made it a good fit. Don't get me wrong, there are a ton of people for whom the Switch 2 is a great choice, but it's not a console for everyone ... at least not yet.
If you already have a decent PC or a current Gen console, this year the Switch 2 is going to offer mostly games you already own with lower performance at higher prices, or the worst performance option for multiplatform games. I think that's why a lot of people felt let down by this direct ... but honestly, I don't see how this caught anyone off guard. This is exactly what we should have been expecting, based on the marketing we've seen to date.
And if you're the Switch 2's actual core market, people who owned a Switch and nothing else, this was fine. More of the games you've wanted to play for years now coming to a system you actually own, and fewer and fewer multiplatform games you don't have access to.
So it just comes down to why you bought a Switch 2. If, despite every bit of evidence to the contrary, you thought Nintendo would deliver tons of exclusives and exciting partner content, yeah, this was very disappointing. But that's kinda on you ...
If you bought it to finally have accuses to games you were locked out of because you didn't own a console, this was ... fine. Not amazing, but fine.
"market conditions" are tariffs. Up until now, most companies have been burning though stock that was already shipped to the US, hoping things would change. Stock is running out, and things are not changing.
As for what they justify, If you're in the US, you can look forward to a 15 to 35% increase in just about all consumer goods over the next few months, even ones made in the US. That's because the random, haphazard nature of the tariffs have increased prices on raw materials used in US manufacturing.
In their earning calls today, MS disclosed Game Pass earnings at 5 billion, without any major increase to operating cost. So as of right now, Game Pass is more profitable then the PlayStation brand. All of it.
"The other platforms have officially gone gold and now the team is focusing all its efforts on the finishing touches."
So ... the master copy of the game you will be releasing has been finalized and sent to the publisher, but it's not finished. Modern game development, ladies and gentlemen.
Not really sure where that rumor about ToTK comes from. If you read her journal it clearly states that she kicked Link out of that house. They don't share a bed, she STOLE his bed. There are also several NPCs in that town who interact with you (as Link) by saying they thought you moved out, and that they haven't seen you around since Zelda moved in.
Zelda also flat out says they are not in a relationship when asked about it. Maybe you might do that in the will they wont they stage of a relationship, but not if you're living together. Not to mention that Link was engaged to Mipha and lost her only a few years ago, based on his perception of time.
Shigeru Miyamoto has said, time and time again, that he see the Mario characters as actors, and each individual game is a completely new story. So it's impossible to assign a relationship based on "evidence" from the games. And if they are both actors working in the same theater group ... yeah, who wants the drama of a relationship on top of that? Keep your workplace professional!
Link, as in "The Hero of Time", is a reincarnated spirt who pops up in a lot of games. Link, as in, the most common male name in Hyrule, but other then that no one special, is the protagonist in some other Zelda games, generally the ones where he uses the Picori Blade (or the Four Sword).
So it's not just one character or one time line. Link and Tetra likely hooked up after Phantom Hourglass, given they repopulate a Kingdom together and it is hinted that they have direct ancestors in Spirit Tracks. But in BOTW, link in engaged to Mipha. Link and Zelda's relationship in Skyward Sword is also very will they won't they.
People already explained Silver Surfer, but as for Beta Ray Bill ... He's better Thor.
When he was introduced he beats up Thor and just flat out steals Mjolnir, which totally sees him as worthy. He gets all the powers of Thor and is mistaken as him for a while. Then after he beats up Thor again in a contest to see who should be the TRUE Thor, Odin makes Stormbreaker (The axe from Endgame!) for him and he just becomes his own hero.
Proving what a great dad he is, there are SEVERAL points, in several different runs, where Odin tells his son that Beta Ray Bill is just flat out a better warrior, and a better Thor. No wonder Thor is emo all the time.
Especially in the Pokémon world. Getting crushed in a car just means you can't have your soul sucked out by a murder balloon, trapped in eternal torment by a demon candle, or have your lifeforce sucked out by a ghost dog. It's a blessing, really.
I mean, nitpicking here, but I would argue the problem isn't that we care too much. I care a lot about some voice work. I cried real tears when Megumi Hayashibara retired, and if they tried to replace Rina Itou or Alice Peralta I might have a legitimate breakdown.
But I don't think a reasonable way to express these opinions is to tell another human being to die in a fire. The problem is that as a natural result of how the dehumanization of groups of people for personal or political gain has become common place and completely acceptable, a lot of people stop seeing anyone outside there immediate circle as human beings. When role models are telling people to treat there neighbors like sub-human animals, what the heck chance does an anonymous person on the internet have?
There is no generic disposition towards one type of gaming genre. People play the games that they are exposed to, and the ones that they are encouraged to play by their social circles as well as society as a whole. This becomes pretty clear if you look at distributions like this across multiple cultures. You'll see a much more dramatic male/female split in cultures that teach, encourage, and enforce strict gender roles, and less variation in cultures that learn towards fluidity in gender roles. This happens in entertainment media as a whole, not just video games.
Japan has the added cavoite that there is an extremely prevalent negative stereotype towards some types of games, and it impacts males disproportionately. Play games like Animal Crossing, The Sims, or other cozy life sims that encourage daily play? Now you're a filthy haijin and a social pariah. It's a double standard in the same way a woman who is open about sex is a wh*ore or a sl*t while the same negatives are not applied to men. It's cute when woman play games like that, pathetic when men do. On the flip side, woman who play competitive games are cast in a very negative light, while it's fine for men to play them.
It's really as simple as that. If your friends and family are going to give you a hard time and force you to explain why you're playing Hello Kitty Island as a man or why you're playing competitive online games as a woman, a lot of people just wont bother. Not to mention you're less likely to be exposed to those games in the first place. You have limited play time and you're likely going to prioritize the games you can share with your immediate social group. So if you live in a culture where social groups are highly segregated by gender, it compounds the effect. If you don't, it mitigates it.
Because when they have let people know in advance, that person received life altering amounts of death threats and other threats of violence, public shaming, cyber and sometimes physical stalking, and just about any other horrible thing you can think of from a community that's normalized that as part of fandom. A shockingly high number of people see that as a completely acceptable way to express your dissatisfaction at a change like this, or to show support for the pervious voice actor. Jennifer Hale is still getting death treats to this day, for example.
By waiting until discussion of the game starts to leave the public discourse after launch, you minimize this. You don't eliminate it, because we live in a dystopia and everything is awful, but you do reduce it by quite a bit.
They further mitigate this by limiting when and how the pervious voice actor is allowed to say they've left the role. This again is born from experience. Using the same example, Hellena Taylor spent a lot of time implying (or, basically flat out saying) that Jennifer Hale had stolen the role from her by offering to work for less money. That obviously made things much, much worse.
Thanks for checking my work! I kinda forget the critical "with a even distribution" cavate. Basically the point I'm making is that in a large data set, if a 64 year old is playing, the data set has to skew towards more younger players. You can test that by adding up the sequence where you have one person playing of every age. If the top age is 64, that sequence has an average of 32.5, so you would need an extra person under 32 to pull the average down to 32. So the idea that this is an indication that 50% of players are over 32 isn't something we can assume is true from the average alone, and in fact, it's very likely to be untrue.
Average on it's own is a really bad statistic to use to get a meaningful idea of how old the general player base is. Mode and Mean are much more telling, and we don't get that here.
The reason is that age is a non-symmetrical offset. There is a hard limit on how much a young player can offset the average, but a much softer limit in the other direction. A single 80 year old can influence the number more then a single 6 year old can, basically. As such, average age is always going to skew towards a number that is older then what you would get from a more complex analysis that looked at, for example, the number of players at every given age.
If 50% of the people playing Pokémon were over 32, then no one playing Pokémon can be older then 63. If someone 64 was playing, it would be impossible (with a even distribution) for 50% of the values to be over 32 because a single young player, even at 1 year old can't bring DOWN the average as much as the 64 year old brings it UP.
I bet if we did see the actual number it would be like a TON of people at 8 to 12 and a TON of people in the 38-45 range, with much lower numbers outside those peaks.
That is absolutely and categorically false. If PlayStation did it, the boards would be ALIGHT with activity. You would have PlayStation fans coming out of the woodwork posting about it in the millions.
And they would all be explaining how it's the best thing to ever happen to gaming, how great Sony is for doing it, and how stupid and worthless Microsoft is because they don't do it.
Could you imagine if Microsoft banned a single user, ever, even if by mistake, for something like this? There would be literal death threats. But Nintendo make it official policy and the general consensus is ... Mah.
Comments 2,060
Re: Hello Kitty Island Adventure - Switch 2 Edition Now Available, Includes Paid Upgrade For Switch
Just wanted to check in and say this is the greatest video game ever made (next to the Splatoon series)
That is all
Thank you for your time.
Re: Pokémon Unite Is Discontinuing Aeos Coins In Its December Game Update
@lumothesinner @Dom_31
Because the number of coins you could earn from matches in a month was capped (and capped really low), I think it a might be a bit early to say this is meant to make it "harder" to unlock Pokémon. No matter how much you played you could only earn coins to unlock a Pokémon every 4 months or so (not counting events), and you were encouraged to buy "cheap" Pokémon. That led to the game being extremely stale. I've been a Master ranked trainer for a bit over a year and there are literally Pokémon I have NEVER encountered in a match. No one is ever going to experiment with a Pokémon that is not already a common part of the meta when doing so involves a month long investment.
This change is also the result of a resent in game survey, and the number one issue that survey found for people quitting the game was that it was too hard to unlock new Pokémon. I mean, sure, we seen tone deafness to exceptional degrees from FTP games in the past, but I just don't see them reacting to that feedback by making it harder to unlock them.
Re: Timed Xbox Exclusive Little Rocket Lab Appears To Be Releasing On Switch Soon
@JayJ
Not sure why, Microsoft is so far ahead in the software game right now it's not even close. Game Pass has them investing billions in indie games, not the mention the fact that ID@Xbox was already insanely popular, so it's really not shocking that devs would try to win some favor by offering timed or full exclusivity. It's to the point where blind dropping a game on Game Pass is a valid launch strategy, because Microsoft is paying more for the license then you were hoping to make from total sales. 3 games did it LAST WEEK.
Slayer-X is the best example. From interviews, we know the game was budgeted around having $500,000 in sales total over it's lifetime, but Microsoft offered them $1m to drop it as a timed exclusive on Game Pass. Why would NOT say yes?
Remember the "console wars" is made up by 12 year old's. Devs only care about dollars. Right now, Game Pass ... JUST Game Pass, no other aspect of Xbox or Microsoft Games Studios, is making more profit then all of Play Station (including hardware, software, merch, movies, and all other verticals), as well as all of Nintendo as a company.
Like I totally get that some people don't like Game Pass and even violently oppose the fact that gaming is heading in that direction. Totally valid. But you can't just ignore the reality that it's transformed gaming and is the single most profitable gaming product ever.
Devs sure aren't ignoring that.
Re: Reminder: Sonic Racing: CrossWorlds Gets Another Free Guest Character Today
I mean technically Ichiban is not a member of the Yakuza. He's a billionaire Confectionist and resort owner.
Re: Persona 5 Series Sales Just Won't Slow Down As Games Soar Past 13 Million
I mean, I absolutely love this game, the world building and the characters, but ... might be time to move on. I thought 3 Halo 3s was bad, but we have 5 Persona 5s!
Re: Opinion: Animal Crossing On Switch 2 Has Me Equal Parts Buzzing And Baffled
@SpaceboyScreams
Makes sense. It was much more common in consoles that required proprietary engines, never intended to be hardware independent. You already know exactly how fast the hardware is going to run, so you can just line everything in the code. Only breaks down when you turn to emulators.
Re: Opinion: Animal Crossing On Switch 2 Has Me Equal Parts Buzzing And Baffled
@OmnitronVariant @GetontheStiix
Just to add to that:
A billion years ago game logic took longer to run then graphics, and when that was the case you would often code you game to simply draw the graphics whenever it could, as fast as it could, because you knew that was never going to be the bottleneck. This would "tie" framerate to graphics, increasing the framerate if you increased the processing speed.
Nowadays, game logic is basically nothing in almost every case, your whole overhead is graphics. You're still going to find a few games that do it the old way (Dyson Sphere Program is a likely example), but even in cases like that you simply use a frame limiter to make sure it never gets out of hand. In the overwhelming majority of games or any game that uses a 3rd party engine, your frame rate is completely decupled from game logic. Fighting games and MOBA's in pretectal run the logic at a set "refresh rate" regardless of what your framerate is, which is why you're at a huge disadvantage on older hardware. You're only "seeing" 30 frames a second, but the game is being played at 60 or even 120 frames.
Re: Opinion: Animal Crossing On Switch 2 Has Me Equal Parts Buzzing And Baffled
I mean, for a out of the blue update to a old game, what more could you ask for? I think it shows a great deal of care, creativity, and passion from the people who were working on the update, knowing they were likely working under extreme budget and time constraints.
Large changes to code (and the deployment and testing cycle that would come with that) were likely off the table, as were any huge additions of assets ... outside of ones you could justify as advertisements for a paid product like an amiibo. So they instead gave us some pretty buffy quality of life upgrades, while allowing us to do more with the game assists that already existed.
In the end, I'm sure it will give a lot of people a reason to go back to a game they have already paid for and already gotten more then their money's worth out of at this point. I, personally, can't see any reason to complain or find fault in that.
Re: Team Zombie Gobbles Up A Win In Splatoon 3's Splatoween Splatfest
@AussieMcBucket @AstroTheGamosian
While there is no perfect system, I think people really overstate how bad "mirror matches", or the general idea of being on the most popular team, is.
Mirror matches earn more Conchs, which in addition to being a great personal incentive, also means the most popular team has an advantage when it comes to winning "sneak peak", which is 90 points.
The most popular team also has an advantage in Tri Color clout (the team with 4 players wins more often then either team with 2), which earns 180 points.
So they have an advantage for 270 points, and earn 70 points for votes.
More importantly, they are at no disadvantage in pro or open clout, which make up the other 240 points. Sure, mirror matches don't count, but the number of non-mirror matches being played by the most popular team isn't less then the other two teams. All 3 teams have the same number of matches that count, the most popular team just has more matches that do not count.
The TEAM has the same opportunity to earn clout, even though the individuals on the team do not. That fact that there are more individuals means it more or less evens out.
It was worst before 7.0, but if you look at the results, the most popular team has won 41% of the time, which is more then what we should expect statistically at 33% (but still well within a margin that falls within expected random variance).
Mirror matches also count the exact same as any other match for your personal progression. They increase your event clout, they increase your xp, and you earn gold at the same rate.
So while I can understand thinking "Boo, this match doesn't count", the reality is you're on the team most likely to win and you're earning personal achievements at the same rate, so I would encourage anyone to try and get over that mental block and just enjoy the event!
Re: Team Zombie Gobbles Up A Win In Splatoon 3's Splatoween Splatfest
@AccessibleDaydream
You might be right. As someone who has been playing since day one of the first game, with tons of event and amiibo gear, I might be undervaluing snails. Either way, I do agree it would be ideal if there was a way to get them outside of Splatfest.
Re: Team Zombie Gobbles Up A Win In Splatoon 3's Splatoween Splatfest
@Porky
Splatoon's support officially ended forever ago. Splatfests are not slowing down, they are done. The last one was July 19, 2024.
Because the game is still popular, they made the decision to re-run seasonal events. What happened this week was a repeat of the last Splatoween, and in December we should get a repeat of the last Frosty Fest. But nothing new, and no "themed" Splatfests.
Support ending also means it's highly unlikely you'll see content patches to change things like Sea Snails. While I agree that might not be ideal, the reality is that you don't actually need a ton of them. Two seasonable events (if you get Master rank) should be more then enough to max out all the gear you'll need.
It's also important to note that you don't really NEED Sea Snails to gain a competitive advantage. I mean, it's NICE to have 3 of the same stat on the same item, and that item to also be one you find cosmetically pleasing ... but it's just as effective to get the upgrades you want over 3 pieces of mixed gear, something you can do pretty easily without Sea Snails. So given the advantage is basically only cosmetic, I'm not that upset about it.
Re: Team Zombie Gobbles Up A Win In Splatoon 3's Splatoween Splatfest
I hope everyone had a great Splatfest! I'm so happy we are still getting these! I'm looking really forward to Frosty Fest, and I hope to see you all there.
Gratz to team Zombie, but always remember ... we're all winners today.
Re: Team Zombie Gobbles Up A Win In Splatoon 3's Splatoween Splatfest
@AccessibleDaydream
The start time is set in Japan, and Japan has daylight saving time. So in other time zones it will go up or down an hour based on if their clocks are set back an hour relative to yours or not.
Re: Mailbox: Game-Key Cards, Slacker Sakurai, Shapes & Beats - Nintendo Life Letters
Oh great, another discussion of Game Key cards that adds absolutely nothing new to the discourse!
With one of the first comments on almost every video game announcements on your site already being "GAME CARD??", do we really need to be giving more of a platform to this issue? I would understand if this was a complex, multisided issue with ongoing developments, but it just isn't. People don't like them. We get it.
The quality of the comment section on this site has fallen off a cliff to the point where you have an real problem. Conversations about actual games are highjacked by the same vocal minority to cut and paste the same remedial arguments over and over. Do you really need to be encouraging it?
I have nothing against people who want physical games or dislike Game Key Cards. I don't like Game Key Cards. I also get that the site makes money from engagement, and negative topics get more engagement. But you're encouraging the type of engagement that is leading to completely homogenous and uninteresting discourse, and I'm sure I'm not the only person who is coming to the site and commenting less because of it.
Re: McDonald's Japan Pulls Happy Meal Pokémon Cards Early, And Fans Blame Scalpers
Removed
Re: McDonald's Japan Pulls Happy Meal Pokémon Cards Early, And Fans Blame Scalpers
@Zeebor15 @AllBLK
There are people who hate the bourgeoisie, sure. At different points in history that hate has boiled over into the odd beheading or social revaluation. But that's the exception, not the rule. I think it's fantastic if you are part of the minority that sees things for how they are, but we shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking we are a majority.
My point is when people worship titans of industry or the wealthy elite, a thing most people absolutely do, they do so without considering that if they witnessed the same behaviors in someone who wasn't insanely wealthy already, they would condemn them.
At the peak of Musk's cult of personality, when 100s of millions of people world wide would defend his every action, I would argue that if any of them read an article about some everyday Joe who inherited a emerald mine from their Nazi father and was in the process of working locals to death to profit from it, they would condemn that person, despite the hypocrisy.
I don't think that's an overly hot take.
Re: McDonald's Japan Pulls Happy Meal Pokémon Cards Early, And Fans Blame Scalpers
When a rich dude buys up all the land and starts selling it back to people for 10 times what it's worth, that person is basically a hero. We worship them, idolize them, and lower their taxes.
When some guy who's likely struggling just to get by buys up all the Pokémon cards and sells them at profit, that person is the scum of the earth and deserves to die.
We, as a society, put real time, effort and money into trying to stop people from buying up all the Pokémon cards, because hey, me not being able to get a Pokémon card is just an unacceptable world state. We do nothing about the whole land barons and monopoly problems because record homelessness and wealth inequality is fine, as long as I get that shinny Pikachu.
To be clear, I'm not suggesting we hate the scalper LESS. But maybe a great way to react when you realize that on a microscale the cornerstone of our entire society and economic model is actually pretty awful is to ask yourself why you accept it on the macroscale. We spend so much time hating each other, we don't have any hate left for the people who deserve it.
Re: Nintendo Won't Let Charity Speedrunning Event Use Its Games Without Permission, Because Of Course
@zenspath
This is why I see most of the arguments here as disingenuous at best. The Venn diagram of people who are going to freak out at evil, irredeemable Nintendo for not allowing a charity event to use their IPs unconditionally and people who are going to freak out at evil, irredeemable Nintendo if their IPs show up at an LGBT+ charity event is basically a circle.
Re: Nintendo Won't Let Charity Speedrunning Event Use Its Games Without Permission, Because Of Course
@tsukipon
Thanks a ton for the shout out. I do my best!
Re: Nintendo Won't Let Charity Speedrunning Event Use Its Games Without Permission, Because Of Course
@CANOEberry
I do not have anyone on ignore. Why would I? I post here for discourse, not to speak to myself. In the future if you want to talk about me, you should @ me.
You are speaking to your opinion of the moral and ethical realities of copyright law. I want to be clear that you have every right to that opinion. At the same time, while I consider myself rather adept at communication, I can not with words adequately express how much that conversation disinterests me.
Instead, I speak to the legal reality and the factual information relevant to issues. Here, that comes down to 3 points:
This is a completely normal and blasé application of copyright law.
This is covered by international copyright and not Japanese law
Nintendo changed their enforcement policy after over 125 tournament organizers, staff, and participants were accused of the sexual abuse of over 1500 minors at events that used Nintendo's ips in 2020, which lead to a flood of additional accusations and calls to hold Nintendo liable for the abuse. They now ask that organizers prove they have adequate safety systems in place to prevent abuse before allowing the use of Nintendo's IP.
That last part is relevant to combat the misinformation that Nintendo asks for royalties or other monitory compensation, or the idea that Nintendo "doesn't allow" the use of there IPs. Anyone willing to follow their guidelines for preventing sexual abuses' will be given permission. Therefor, if you can't use Nintendo's IPs at your event, it is because you refuse to put safeguards in place.
I personally view comments like yours like this:
Me - The Sky is blue
Response - The sky SHOULDN'T BE BLUE. The sky should be red. You are morally and ethically compromised because you do not wish for the sky to be red. You are morally and ethically compromised because you accept that the sky is blue.
My only reply is simply
1) I do not care to discus what color people, including myself, WISH the sky was.
2) The sky is, in fact, blue.
Re: Nintendo Won't Let Charity Speedrunning Event Use Its Games Without Permission, Because Of Course
One key bit of information and a misconception I want to clear up is what a "non-profit" is. It is not a entity that can not MAKE profit. It is an entity that can not DISTRIBUTE profit to outside parties, for example, shareholders, investors or a group of owners. They must also have a stated goal of operating for social benefit, but this obviously is extremely open to interpretation and has almost no oversight in most countries.
This is important because non-profits are allowed to PAY STAFF. As such, many non-profits prioritize huge salaries for management over anything else. They often give management raises based on "performance" which means that as the organization becomes more profitable (as in the differential between the operating costs and the net revenue increases) it's not the amount of money they direct to their "cause" that increases, it's simply given to the top earners.
I don't mean to darken everyone's day by pointing out one more horrible reality, but it's really important we don't have the mindset that a "non-profit" organization automatically means it's altruistic and universally "good". Some are! But some, if not most, are simply elaborate ways of moving as much money as possible into the pockets of a few key people. Just like an other business.
Re: Nintendo Won't Let Charity Speedrunning Event Use Its Games Without Permission, Because Of Course
@KingMike
As luck would have it, I very much understand copyright law AND often live in Japan!
Copyright law is largely international, with the Berne Convention covering how over 200 counties, including Japan, litigate the issue. The "World Intellectual Property Organization" handles additional right for IP holders under international treaties. I'm going to use copyright and IP law interchangeably without giving a full definition as to when one or the other applies because the end result is the same.
Japan's own laws are irrelevant. Not only have they been historically extremely lax, allowing for "fair use" in almost any situation, but they don't matter. This, like every other copyright or IP issue involving a multinational, is covered by The WIPO Copyright Treaty and WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty. Domestic law must meet these standards.
Domestic law can supplement this treaties, like the DMCA or directives 91/250/EC, D96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC of the European Union, which go above and beyond to grant additional rights to rights holders. Japan has no such amendments. America's DMCA makes that country likely the most favorable to rights holders, defining several violations that would not be enforceable in Japan. To be clear, the core argument that Japan has "crazy" copyright or IP laws that are stricter then US is not only false, but the opposite is true in a very real and dramatic way.
What is happening in the case, a rights holder demanding a company ask permission before using it's IPs in any capacity, including but not limited to streaming, is a right that could be asserted in basically every country in the world. It has been illegal to reproduce another author's creation, for any purpose, in the US sense essentially 1790. The law has been updated numinous times to include additional media as required and push back the amount of time before it entered the public domain, but the basic idea that no one, for any reason, has the right to "copy" the registered work of another author hasn't changed. "Fair use" is a relatively new concept, and doesn't apply here. Streaming has been recognized as a live performance, and therefor streaming another's work has been a violation of copyright since around 2005. Twitch exists because some IP holders choose to not enforce their rights, not because Twitch has the right to operate as it does.
With respect, given you freely admit you have no idea how Japanize or international copyright works, perhaps a more constrictive way you could have added to this conversation would be to ask questions rather then to post based on baseless assumptions.
In addition, while you have the right to your opinion that is apparently in the contrary, if I have to choose between a world where anyone can use Nintendo's IP for free, but this leads to the documented, very real, not made up, not hypothetical, sexual abuse of 10s of 1000s of children by organizations that used Nintendo's IP to lure young gamers, or a world where you have to ask Nintendo for permission, a permission they will always grant as long as you ensure you are protecting said children ... yeah, I would obviously choose to live in that second one.
Re: Nintendo Won't Let Charity Speedrunning Event Use Its Games Without Permission, Because Of Course
@Gatorclops
I mean, I haven't done freelance work in years, but if Nintendolife wants to reach out to me ...
Re: Nintendo Won't Let Charity Speedrunning Event Use Its Games Without Permission, Because Of Course
This is simply misrepresentation. Nintendo, 100% will let RTA (or anyone else) use Nintendo games, they just have to ask in advance and ensure Nintendo that they are meeting standards to prevent the sexual abuse of minors at the events. This includes letting a Nintendo representative audit security practices and vent the staff. This is not a secret, and event organizer have no excuse to not be aware of this requirement. Many choose to ignore it hoping Nintendo simply will not notice, and then try to spin what happens as Nintendo's overreach rather then their own negligence or unwillingness to take the required precautions..
This is not random. The child focused nature of Nintendo's products had lead to numerous events where Nintendo's IPs were used to lure children or young teens who where then sexual abused by the event organizers and/or staff. In other cases, most notably in the FGC, events did very little to prevent sexual abuse of younger players by older participants in the event. Nintendo took a ton of bad press, were blamed for the abuse even though they had nothing to do with organizing or running the events, and so where forced to take action and change their policies.
It says a lot of really not good things about the gaming community that a company's completely valid attempts at reducing real, documented, chronic and ongoing sexual abuse of minors is not just seen as unreasonable, but spawns irrational and downright insane levels of hate.
I'm not the "wont someone please think of the children!" type, but I think a better way to report on these issues would be to report on Nintendo's policy and run headlines more inline with "Gaming event refuses to meet minimal standards to protect Children" or "Unbelievably negligent tournament organizers forget copyright is a thing, do not secure permission to use Nintendo games in advance."
Re: Romero Games "Is Not Closed" Following Xbox Layoffs
@Pod
That's right, it's $5 million in revenue, but like I said the in previous post, we know that operating costs are just over 1 billion. So $4 billion in profit, versus the $2.5 billion(ish) in profit PlayStation makes.
As for the service itself, I totally get that it's not for everyone. I think there is a big generational shift in how we look at subscriptions, with younger people being much more inclined to attempt them.
I have a friend that is adamantly against subscriptions, and we were talking a few months ago about what games he was looking to pick up. Of the 5 he mentioned, 4 were on PC Game Pass. At that point, I think you really have to start considering paying $15 a month vs. $280 upfront for 4 games. Even if one of the games turned out to be an absolute gem you wanted to own forever, Game Pass gives you 10% off buying games on the service, so you're still saving money having Game Pass for a few months to try out all of them and then buying the ones you really like. That's what he ended up doing.
Personally that's how I look at subscriptions. I don't see them as life time commitments. I perfectly fine with picking up Game Pass, PSN+, or even EA's or Ubisoft's subscriptions for a single month to play a game rather then paying full price to buy it. 90% of the time, that month is all I need to be "done" with the game, and in the rare case I want to experience more of it, I wish list it on steam and buy it on discount. Again, I get this level of micromanagement isn't for everyone, but I think more people do this then you might think.
Re: Nintendo Showcases Every Partner Direct Switch 2 Game In New Infographic
@StratThe
I could totally get behind what you're saying if the main point here was that Nintendo mislead people. But they just didn't.
Here is every official Nintendo commercial for the Switch 2. There are 4 games IN TOTAL featured in them, and the only unreleased game is Mario Kart World.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-m4g53BhDI&list=PLztuFPRnw-7BW_A2i0xPCLFjjSAfZ2qmF&index=1
The Switch 2 direct features about 13 games, with only 5 of them being unreleased. It makes no claims that tons of other games are coming soon or are even in the works. More time is devoted to the features of the system then to showing off games. So if your expectation is that there were going to be a ton of games out really soon ... where did you get that from? Who said that? Certainly not Nintendo.
So I don't think Nintendo is in any way responsible for expectations that people just made up on their own with no evidence. I'm not sure why that is contraveral. I also think that people are accountable for researching large purchases to ensure it's the right product for them. Again, can't see why that's contraveral. You speak to expectations set by "the media", but again, if you choose to listen to outside sources rather then trusting the information that's contained in official advertising from Nintendo, that's on you. Nintendo isn't accountable to the expectations set by people they have no control over, only to the expectations they set for themselves.
If someone needs a car for them and their 5 children and buys a FAIT 500, I don't think it's "victim blaming" to say you probably should have researched that a bit more. You bought the wrong car, and it's not FAIT's fault. It would be different if FAIT was advertising the 500 as a prefect car for large families ... but they are not. Just like Nintendo isn't advertising the Switch 2 as having a ton of games and new releases.
Re: Nintendo Showcases Every Partner Direct Switch 2 Game In New Infographic
@StratThe
You can WANT anything you like. The problem isn't with wanting a bunch of new games, it's with expecting a bunch of new games, when every bit of information we got from Nintendo, Nintendo's partners, and 3rd party game developers said otherwise.
Nintendo's been VERY clear about the fact that they didn't take any teams off Switch games to work on Switch 2 games, how only a handful of partners were given dev kits, and how no dev kits where given to any 3rd parties. They flat out told people the first year would focus on ports, and even they would come slowly.
You can argue that maybe that's not the best way to handle a new system, sure. But if you bought a system KNOWING FULL WELL that was Nintendo's plan ... you have no leg to stand on when it comes to be upset about them doing exactly what they told you they were going to do.
Not to motion the fact that this lineup is unprecedently large. The Switch only had 10 games at launch, and had only confirmed 11 more after 4 months. So a 21 game showcase after 55 days, adding to the 22-25 launch titles isn't bad, and I don't think anyone should have been expecting more then twice the number of games the Switch had.
So, no, not blaming anyone for wanting a first party, new release focused console. I wanted that too. But the Switch 2 never claimed to be that.
Re: Nintendo Showcases Every Partner Direct Switch 2 Game In New Infographic
@BBBBBBBBBBB
I mean, I get it. People are upset that a product they want, or in some cases may even be required for how they enjoy video games, is going away. There is nothing unreasonable about that.
I'm old. There used to be this thing called "TV" and it would play "shows" that you didn't have any control over. You couldn't pause or rewind and the only way you could watch them was be being at the TV at a given time. Insane, right? Anyways, it was pretty common when one of these "shows" would get cancelled that people would complain about it for months. The arguments were basically the same; it was just greedy corporations looking for more profitable shows even though a lot of people still wanted to watch the old ones.
So I can understand where people are at right now. But believe me, if people are going to get this upset every time a product they love gets discontinued, by the time they are my age they are going to be VERY bitter. I'm just doing what I can to spread future happiness!
Re: Nintendo Showcases Every Partner Direct Switch 2 Game In New Infographic
@SillyG
If companies only care about money, and selling games on carts is in demand and will make them money, why don't they do it?
Look man, I totally get that you want physical games. Power to you. I respect your right to that opinion and that desire.
I just really wish you would accept that most companies don't want to sell you physical games, respect their right to THAT opinion, and stop trying to make every conversation about how you don't.
Re: Nintendo Showcases Every Partner Direct Switch 2 Game In New Infographic
@SillyG
Your own argument is completely negated by you first statement.
3rd parties are only concerned with their bottom line. Therefore, if physical games where profitable, they would sell them. If demand for full games on cart justified the associated costs, they would offer them to make money, the thing that you said was their only motivation.
The lack of investment in physical media, again, by your own argument, is proof physical media is not sustainable or profitable enough. You can't expect any company to sell a product they do not make profit from, nor can you fault a company for responding to a decline in demand by no longer selling a product.
That's why it's so hard to get a good 8 track player at Walmart. That's not a conspiracy and no one is to "blame" ... it's just how markets work. And while that sucks for the few people who still want 8 track players, it's time for them to accept that they have become a marginalized minority and that expecting companies to cater to them is completely unrealistic. At some point you need to ask yourself if responding to every new CD release with "WHAT, NO 8 TRACK RELEASE?" is really the hill you want to die on. And I don't think you can blame people for being tired of hearing it.
Re: Nintendo Showcases Every Partner Direct Switch 2 Game In New Infographic
@TheExile285
It's really hard to have solid gameplay footage or roadmaps in July when you got your dev kit in June. I think that fact seriously doesn't get enough attention and is overlooked. Nintendo didn't give out dev kits to most developers until after release. Some studios still don't have one.
That's why we are really only seeing small, uncomplicated, minimalistic games built on a largely platform independent engine like Unreal where the developer is confident the port wont be resource intensive, or games from the few developers that got dev kits ahead of time. For everyone else, it's simply too soon to commit to a port.
And if your plan was to launch on Switch 2 as your lead console, your game is AT BEST 55 days into development. You likely don't have much to show.
Re: Nintendo Showcases Every Partner Direct Switch 2 Game In New Infographic
@Max_the_German
They are also extremely counter productive. The response to push back over game keys isn't going to be a shift toward full games on cartridge, it's going to be a shift away from any physical release at all.
I get that it sucks and no one is happy, but people should see game keys for what they are ... a game that WAS NOT going to get a physical release, period, getting a game key as a compromise.
Re: Nintendo Showcases Every Partner Direct Switch 2 Game In New Infographic
I think it's starting to dawn on some people that they bought the Switch 2 based on hype, without really understanding the usage cases that made it a good fit. Don't get me wrong, there are a ton of people for whom the Switch 2 is a great choice, but it's not a console for everyone ... at least not yet.
If you already have a decent PC or a current Gen console, this year the Switch 2 is going to offer mostly games you already own with lower performance at higher prices, or the worst performance option for multiplatform games. I think that's why a lot of people felt let down by this direct ... but honestly, I don't see how this caught anyone off guard. This is exactly what we should have been expecting, based on the marketing we've seen to date.
And if you're the Switch 2's actual core market, people who owned a Switch and nothing else, this was fine. More of the games you've wanted to play for years now coming to a system you actually own, and fewer and fewer multiplatform games you don't have access to.
So it just comes down to why you bought a Switch 2. If, despite every bit of evidence to the contrary, you thought Nintendo would deliver tons of exclusives and exciting partner content, yeah, this was very disappointing. But that's kinda on you ...
If you bought it to finally have accuses to games you were locked out of because you didn't own a console, this was ... fine. Not amazing, but fine.
Re: Nintendo Switch Console & Accessory Prices Are Going Up In The US
@swoose
"market conditions" are tariffs. Up until now, most companies have been burning though stock that was already shipped to the US, hoping things would change. Stock is running out, and things are not changing.
As for what they justify, If you're in the US, you can look forward to a 15 to 35% increase in just about all consumer goods over the next few months, even ones made in the US. That's because the random, haphazard nature of the tariffs have increased prices on raw materials used in US manufacturing.
Re: Romero Games "Is Not Closed" Following Xbox Layoffs
@Pod
Just an update in the off chance you care!
In their earning calls today, MS disclosed Game Pass earnings at 5 billion, without any major increase to operating cost. So as of right now, Game Pass is more profitable then the PlayStation brand. All of it.
Re: 'The Knightling' Has Gone Gold, But The Switch Version Has Been Axed
"The other platforms have officially gone gold and now the team is focusing all its efforts on the finishing touches."
So ... the master copy of the game you will be releasing has been finalized and sent to the publisher, but it's not finished. Modern game development, ladies and gentlemen.
Re: Random: Don't Worry Folks, Nintendo Says Mario And Peach Are Just "Good Friends"
@TruestoryYep
Not really sure where that rumor about ToTK comes from. If you read her journal it clearly states that she kicked Link out of that house. They don't share a bed, she STOLE his bed. There are also several NPCs in that town who interact with you (as Link) by saying they thought you moved out, and that they haven't seen you around since Zelda moved in.
Zelda also flat out says they are not in a relationship when asked about it. Maybe you might do that in the will they wont they stage of a relationship, but not if you're living together. Not to mention that Link was engaged to Mipha and lost her only a few years ago, based on his perception of time.
Re: Random: Don't Worry Folks, Nintendo Says Mario And Peach Are Just "Good Friends"
@Anti-Matter
I guess you never finished that game? At the end she tells Mario she's had enough of his advances and leaves him to rot on a moon.
Re: Random: Don't Worry Folks, Nintendo Says Mario And Peach Are Just "Good Friends"
Shigeru Miyamoto has said, time and time again, that he see the Mario characters as actors, and each individual game is a completely new story. So it's impossible to assign a relationship based on "evidence" from the games. And if they are both actors working in the same theater group ... yeah, who wants the drama of a relationship on top of that? Keep your workplace professional!
Re: Random: Don't Worry Folks, Nintendo Says Mario And Peach Are Just "Good Friends"
@OctolingKing13
Link, as in "The Hero of Time", is a reincarnated spirt who pops up in a lot of games. Link, as in, the most common male name in Hyrule, but other then that no one special, is the protagonist in some other Zelda games, generally the ones where he uses the Picori Blade (or the Four Sword).
So it's not just one character or one time line. Link and Tetra likely hooked up after Phantom Hourglass, given they repopulate a Kingdom together and it is hinted that they have direct ancestors in Spirit Tracks. But in BOTW, link in engaged to Mipha. Link and Zelda's relationship in Skyward Sword is also very will they won't they.
Re: Marvel's New Beat 'Em Up 'Cosmic Invasion' Reveals Two More Playable Characters
@ShieldHero
People already explained Silver Surfer, but as for Beta Ray Bill ... He's better Thor.
When he was introduced he beats up Thor and just flat out steals Mjolnir, which totally sees him as worthy. He gets all the powers of Thor and is mistaken as him for a while. Then after he beats up Thor again in a contest to see who should be the TRUE Thor, Odin makes Stormbreaker (The axe from Endgame!) for him and he just becomes his own hero.
Proving what a great dad he is, there are SEVERAL points, in several different runs, where Odin tells his son that Beta Ray Bill is just flat out a better warrior, and a better Thor. No wonder Thor is emo all the time.
Re: Surprise! A Brand New Pokémon Puzzle Game Is Available Now On Mobile And Switch
@Tyranexx
Especially in the Pokémon world. Getting crushed in a car just means you can't have your soul sucked out by a murder balloon, trapped in eternal torment by a demon candle, or have your lifeforce sucked out by a ghost dog. It's a blessing, really.
Re: Surprise! A Brand New Pokémon Puzzle Game Is Available Now On Mobile And Switch
Oh wow, this seemed like a really tame, child focused ad then out of nowhere a kid gets crushed to death in the back seat of a car!
Re: Princess Peach's New Voice Actor Has Been Confirmed
@Roibeard64
I mean, nitpicking here, but I would argue the problem isn't that we care too much. I care a lot about some voice work. I cried real tears when Megumi Hayashibara retired, and if they tried to replace Rina Itou or Alice Peralta I might have a legitimate breakdown.
But I don't think a reasonable way to express these opinions is to tell another human being to die in a fire. The problem is that as a natural result of how the dehumanization of groups of people for personal or political gain has become common place and completely acceptable, a lot of people stop seeing anyone outside there immediate circle as human beings. When role models are telling people to treat there neighbors like sub-human animals, what the heck chance does an anonymous person on the internet have?
Re: Gender Split & Average Ages Of Japanese Nintendo Players Revealed Via New Survey
@Ryu_Niiyama @AlonditeFE
There is no generic disposition towards one type of gaming genre. People play the games that they are exposed to, and the ones that they are encouraged to play by their social circles as well as society as a whole. This becomes pretty clear if you look at distributions like this across multiple cultures. You'll see a much more dramatic male/female split in cultures that teach, encourage, and enforce strict gender roles, and less variation in cultures that learn towards fluidity in gender roles. This happens in entertainment media as a whole, not just video games.
Japan has the added cavoite that there is an extremely prevalent negative stereotype towards some types of games, and it impacts males disproportionately. Play games like Animal Crossing, The Sims, or other cozy life sims that encourage daily play? Now you're a filthy haijin and a social pariah. It's a double standard in the same way a woman who is open about sex is a wh*ore or a sl*t while the same negatives are not applied to men. It's cute when woman play games like that, pathetic when men do. On the flip side, woman who play competitive games are cast in a very negative light, while it's fine for men to play them.
It's really as simple as that. If your friends and family are going to give you a hard time and force you to explain why you're playing Hello Kitty Island as a man or why you're playing competitive online games as a woman, a lot of people just wont bother. Not to mention you're less likely to be exposed to those games in the first place. You have limited play time and you're likely going to prioritize the games you can share with your immediate social group. So if you live in a culture where social groups are highly segregated by gender, it compounds the effect. If you don't, it mitigates it.
Re: Princess Peach's New Voice Actor Has Been Confirmed
@N00BiSH @Dee123
Because when they have let people know in advance, that person received life altering amounts of death threats and other threats of violence, public shaming, cyber and sometimes physical stalking, and just about any other horrible thing you can think of from a community that's normalized that as part of fandom. A shockingly high number of people see that as a completely acceptable way to express your dissatisfaction at a change like this, or to show support for the pervious voice actor. Jennifer Hale is still getting death treats to this day, for example.
By waiting until discussion of the game starts to leave the public discourse after launch, you minimize this. You don't eliminate it, because we live in a dystopia and everything is awful, but you do reduce it by quite a bit.
They further mitigate this by limiting when and how the pervious voice actor is allowed to say they've left the role. This again is born from experience. Using the same example, Hellena Taylor spent a lot of time implying (or, basically flat out saying) that Jennifer Hale had stolen the role from her by offering to work for less money. That obviously made things much, much worse.
Re: Gender Split & Average Ages Of Japanese Nintendo Players Revealed Via New Survey
@Kiz3000
Thanks for checking my work! I kinda forget the critical "with a even distribution" cavate. Basically the point I'm making is that in a large data set, if a 64 year old is playing, the data set has to skew towards more younger players. You can test that by adding up the sequence where you have one person playing of every age. If the top age is 64, that sequence has an average of 32.5, so you would need an extra person under 32 to pull the average down to 32. So the idea that this is an indication that 50% of players are over 32 isn't something we can assume is true from the average alone, and in fact, it's very likely to be untrue.
Re: Gender Split & Average Ages Of Japanese Nintendo Players Revealed Via New Survey
@SillyG
Average on it's own is a really bad statistic to use to get a meaningful idea of how old the general player base is. Mode and Mean are much more telling, and we don't get that here.
The reason is that age is a non-symmetrical offset. There is a hard limit on how much a young player can offset the average, but a much softer limit in the other direction. A single 80 year old can influence the number more then a single 6 year old can, basically. As such, average age is always going to skew towards a number that is older then what you would get from a more complex analysis that looked at, for example, the number of players at every given age.
If 50% of the people playing Pokémon were over 32, then no one playing Pokémon can be older then 63. If someone 64 was playing, it would be impossible (with a even distribution) for 50% of the values to be over 32 because a single young player, even at 1 year old can't bring DOWN the average as much as the 64 year old brings it UP.
I bet if we did see the actual number it would be like a TON of people at 8 to 12 and a TON of people in the 38-45 range, with much lower numbers outside those peaks.
Re: PSA: You Might Want To Be Careful Buying Pre-Owned Switch 1 Games For Your Switch 2
@pikachupikachup
That is absolutely and categorically false. If PlayStation did it, the boards would be ALIGHT with activity. You would have PlayStation fans coming out of the woodwork posting about it in the millions.
And they would all be explaining how it's the best thing to ever happen to gaming, how great Sony is for doing it, and how stupid and worthless Microsoft is because they don't do it.
Re: PSA: You Might Want To Be Careful Buying Pre-Owned Switch 1 Games For Your Switch 2
Could you imagine if Microsoft banned a single user, ever, even if by mistake, for something like this? There would be literal death threats. But Nintendo make it official policy and the general consensus is ... Mah.
Man, I do NOT get brand loyalty.