@Abes3, The point of the Evercade (at least until now) was mostly to appeal to collectors and people wanting good, legal emulation available on physical media (for preservation and stuff).
Having an online store on the Evercade would be like having a Wifi connection with Spotify on a Turntable. It doesn't make a lot of sense, given what the thing is all about.
I'm a bit torn on the Evercade EXP. At first, I was excited, but now with this announcement, having those games not being on cartridge kind of defeats the purpose. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to play these on the EXP, but these games being tied to the console's internal memory, on a console that is all about physical cartridges, feels like a company not knowing what their customers want. They probably felt like this would drive sales of the EXP, or make owners of the original handheld buy into the upgrade, or owners of the VS console get it as a portable player for their current library.... Or... maybe it was the only way for them to get Capcom to grant them a licence. Who knows?
I wouldn't be against a retro-oriented console platform having an online store dedicated to old games (I'd actually buy into it!), but that's not what the Evercade was supposed to be, and that's not why buyers invested in its ecosystem in the first palce.
@shoeses, The problem with having an online storefront, is that at some point, they get shut down if they don't bring in much revenue. Which gets us back to dealing with this whole problem in the first place.
The only way I see this working would be for said store to work in a manner that legally lets people copy the roms they bought to other devices they own or back them up on whatever media format they want. Start treating game roms like DRM-free music files or video files. You bought the content? You should be able to play it on the device you prefer, through the emulator you prefer.
But this would NEVER happen because it would prevent companies (like Nintendo) to sell you the same game over and over again on each new console generation... or move them behind a subscription fee. And the bigger problem is that most gamers out there seem to accept this as "normal", and pay again, and again, and again....
I'm all for a solution that would make people pay once, and "own" the game in a way they can play it however they want.
I'm a bit sick of seeing people thinking that somehow, exchange rates makes it equal somewhat. It doesn't. Because exchange rate doesn't only affect retail prices. People don't get their salaries adjusted because of it. Our dollar going down doesn't mean employers are paying us more. They don't.
That's often a side of the equation most people don't consider.
So you can put it any way you want, if you mean the games or systems are priced "similarly" because of exchange rate, then you can't sidestep the issue of everyone now earning less because of the same exchange rate.
Any way you put it, we pay a bigger chunk of our money for games and consoles. Either they cost more, or either we earn less, in the end it doesn't make a difference, we pay more.
Not so long ago, we were almost on par with U.S. dollar. Now we're not. No one is getting paid more because of this.
I think no one will deny that the PS5 version looks better, but aside from the better framerate, everything else is in the smaller details that aren't detracting from the game in any way. Game still look pretty decent on the Switch, although running at a lower framerate and showing a bit less stuff on screen.
I'm impressed. Although I'm not sure I'll get the game. Not at full price at least. Maybe when on sale, some day.
It's EA. They'll release it at full new release price or almost. Like they did for Burnout Paradise. Because it's the Switch, you know, and people gladly pay a premium for Switch versions. #sickofthistrend.
I hate when they change names. I mean, why? I know it depends on the language, and in some languages, some names may sometimes be harder to pronounce. But still...
I'm french speaking, and most of the "play on words" they think they're doing is completely lost on me. No one I know ever thought that "Marie" is actually a play on "Mairie". Everyone just don't know why the name is different in French and English. Because usually, most english names don't magically change when you speak French (Except when you live in France - I don't - as they like to change things for absolutely no freaking reason, but hey, that's another debate).
I have a friend who's called Scott. He's english-speaking. And you know what? Every french-speaking person still calls him Scott. They don't change his name to a random "François" for some stupid reason no one care.
We should instead name this "sale" as the event when some Switch games are actually sold at the regular price (the regular price they're sold everywhere else).
I'm talking mainly about Doom and Skyrim.
The "oldies" are priced ok.
Watching the video... reminds me of Moto Racer 4 on the Switch. Like a racing game that often goes into single-digit framerate. A RACING GAME!!! It baffles me when games come out like that. Like, everyone in the development team think this is fine? No one voiced any concern? Or were those concerned voiced but ignored by the publisher? I don't know where in the chain all of these games go off-rail, but isn't a debate between 30 and 60fps. We're talking about games dropping regularly into single-digit fps. This is ridiculous.
@JayJ I always was suspicious towards the Monster Supercross one, and I know it's stupid, but it was down to its super long and silly name. I usually try to stay away from "sponsored" racing games because they're usually not very good. And this dates back to those "Ford Racing" days on the PS1 lol!
But I might look into this one if you say it's worth it when on sale. With Moto Racer 4 on Switch being as unplayable as it is (with framerate sometimes dropping in the single digit, no joke!) it would be nice to have an offroad racer that plays well on the platform.
I never played that series before I bought a copy of Mx vs ATV Supercross Encore for XB1 for a ridiculous $0.99 brand new... and... I played less than hour with it. And I consider this an hour of my life I won't get back. The controls were beyond horrible. I usually love offroad racing and the likes, but this was unplayable to me. So maybe this new one is better? The one I played made me very wary of that series (nothing like a bad first impression).
I find Motoracer 4 for the Switch to be better, and that title is quite the trainwreck.
Anwyays... I know this would be impossible, but can Codemaster or someone else create a followup to that old FUEL game? THAT was truly an open-world racer (with an INSANELY LARGE world map), and aside from the cheating AI, is a title I can still enjoy today on my XB1 (through backward compatibility) and on my PC. At least this one had tight controls IMO, and graphics that still look damn fine to me these days.
@Mountain_Man Crazy when you think about it, right? But hey, I'd say in a sense, this is kind of in line with our times. Most people don't seem to realize that paying $10 once, is a much better deal than paying $2.99 every now and then a couple of times each month for in-game consumables. Personally, I despise mobile gaming for exactly that reason.
I'd say in general, the masses are weird, when you think about it. The most popular movies are rarely great movies. The most popular music is rarely great too, IMO. Most reality TV that becomes insanely popular, I find completely insipid. Sure, there are exceptions sometimes. But I feel that what defines something as great or being worth your money in the eyes of the masses often kind of eludes me.
So in my eye, supporting bad movies, music and TV, and supporting bad commercial schemes falls in the same bucket. lol!
I never had a problem with paying a decent, one-time price, for a piece of software I like. I'm probably in the minority who bought XCOM and Civilization Revolution on mobile because 1-these work well as mobile titles (especially on tablets) and 2- you pay once and you have access to ALL the game, with no artificial limitations like crystals, cards, or stupid secondary in-game currency or having game mechanics tweaked to make you pay (your character is exhausted, come back in a while or PAY).
Anyway, I think mobile gaming could've been GREAT. But alas, we still need dedicated portable consoles to experience TRUE gaming on the go. I'm not complaining though, as the Switch is great for that.
I only have one minor issue with the controls, and it's that switching from one weapon to the next feels sluggish. Like, you hit the button to switch to the next weapon, and it takes a good whole second (maybe slightly more) before actually doing the switch. Like, there's a good delay in carrying over your action. Doesn't hamper my enjoyment of this awesome game, but I hope they'll issue a patch at some point to fix this.
I also was completely stuck at some point where I had all the required key cards, and despite that, some doors didn't open. It was odd as it was a level I knew and completed many times in the past.
Another very, very minor thing is that they don't list when a save game was actually saved. Only the level is listed, which sometimes make it hard to remember which one you used (unless you always overwrite in the same slot). I also haven't found an auto-save option (so remember to save before quitting).
Other than that, I'm having a blast replaying this. I'll surely enjoy the added levels as well.
Well, £26 is still much more reasonable than what EA charges for the Burnout Paradise remaster, which is a 12 year old game, for $65 over here, which would be almost £40. THAT is insane.
But are we really surprised? I'm not. Plenty of games get released on Switch with a higher price than everywhere else for absolutely no reason other than people buying anyway...
I don't think £26 is SO bad. I personally would prefer a bit less, but it's not the worse. If it runs well, it could be almost worth it IMO. But that's me.
After EA released the Burnout Paradise Remaster for $65 (a 12-year old game that's been ported to almost every console under the sun since then - I bought it for $5 on XB1 last year!), I just don't care anymore about this delusional company.
They'll probably announce something like the Mass Effect trilogy or The Sims 4 for $80 or something. Or smaller indie releases. So really, why should I care....
@HobbesPrime I'll second that. Rock Band Unplugged was awesome. And there was a lot of good DLC songs for it too (although not nearly as much as for regular RB). I regret having sold my old PSP and my copy of the game back then. But hey, different times, and needed the money for something else I can't remember.
Even if it was an updated version with a new soundtrack (because it might be difficult to licence everything again exactly as it was) this is one of those rare titles I'd be willing to pay full price for on release day.
Make that not only a remaster but a downright remake, with a lot more variety in items & instruments to make your band look truly unique, more cities to travel to (and more venues), but keep the gameplay intact. And obviously, running in 1080p/720p on the Switch (docked/undocked).
Man, I really miss Rock Band... Not exactly all the plastic instruments, but the whole "create a band" aspect and play through a mostly rock-oriented soundtrack.
I bet they'll announce something like the Mass Effect trilogy for $80. After they said the Burnout Paradise port was going to be available for a freaking $65 (a 12-year old game that's been ported on almost all consoles since then), I lost all hope in EA taking the Switch seriously.
Indeed, that is a complete joke. Here, it's going to be sold for an incredible $65. Which is only a bit lower than brand new AAA title release price. That's not even a joke. That's a freaking insult.
I mean, I bought that remaster last year on Xbox One for about $5. And I've been playing it on Steam as well since forever, and even on a GPD Win device, so playing on the crapper/bus anywhere isn't a new feature for me.
I was interested in buying it again for the Switch, not having my GPD Win anymore, and because I still love that game, but I was expecting something more along the lines of $30. Maybe a bit lower, as this is a port of a game that's been made available on almost every platform under the sun since its release.
At $65, this is horrible in terms of value, UNLESS you've never played the game and still see this as a completely new title. But even so, I think you could do FAR BETTER with your money than buying this at that price. Borderlands, Bioshock and Xcom 2 collections are all priced lower than this over here, and offer a LOT more value for less money (provided these games are your cup of tea). Burnout Paradise was sold for about the same price when it was released 12 YEARS AGO. Asking the same price today is insulting.
Great game, just horrible pricing. But then, that's EA. What were you expecting?
Yeah... Scott Pilgrim was awesome. It's sad that stupid licensing issues are preventing some games to be redistributed again, or ported to newer consoles. I'd replay that one for sure if it was made available on the XB1...
That being said, paying $20 for this Jay and Silent Bob game seems much overpriced for what it is. I get the gameplay trying to mimick classics like River City Ransom and Double Dragon 2 (that artwork, lol!) but then again, just that doesn't make it worth my $20 in itself. Maybe when on sale at some point, at LEAST %50 off.
Well, as long as people will continue to pay a stupidly high premium to play old games on Switch, aberrations like this will continue to happen. I mean, $65 (CDN) for a game I bought for $5 on my Xbox One... over a year ago.... Also, regular price, when not on sale, on every other system is like $25. WTF EA?
I was overjoyed when I heard this was coming to the Switch. But at this price, it's not just ridiculously overpriced, it is a downright insult.
So, so, so sick of this crazy trend to overcharge throught the roof for Switch games for absolutely no reason. I mean, charging a bit more for a new port of a game that was released on almost every system under the sun already is ok. But this is not "charging a bit more". This charging $10 for a single roll of toilet paper.
But then... this is the Switch... and this is EA. Silly of me to have expected a decent price.
While I'm happy to see 2K giving support to the Switch, not putting all of XCOM 2 on a 32GB cart is a real heart-breaker here. I mean, why would I waste so much space on my SD card for a game I bought physical? If I buy it physical, part of it is because I don't want to use all that space on my micro SD!
Having played the game on PC, this is one of the rare game I'd gladly double-dip for to be able to play on the go. I bought the first one on X360, on PC, on iPad and and Android. Yes, really. I love this series. But I'm really sick of all those games coming on small carts requiring huge downloads. This is stupid and Nintendo should put a stop to that and not allow this anymore. I mean, if you think of doing that, then just go digital-only. Physical releases should be for games entirely playable from the cart.
Anyway... looks like I'll have to upgrade my 200gb micro SD... which only have about 40gb left on it now...
Playing this way, while enjoyable, is still a pain, as the island is kind of small. Maybe for two people, that would be ok, but for a family of four, it kinds of put limits on the game you wouldn't have otherwise.
I said I would be passing on this game for that reason, and I bit the bullet because hey, COVID-19 and all that staying at home thing, and I thought that would be something cool all the family could enjoy... well, while it's fun, it's not "great".
You have to spend half the time cutting down the trees the kids are planting every-freaking-where, you have to constantly tell others to NOT pick up all the fruits on the island... First player who plays on a day gets all the fossils and the shop limited items...
While there are fun moments to be had for sure, you have to "police" everyone to play fair all the time and leave stuff for others. And this is not "fun" work.
For such a family-oriented game, it sure is hell for families.... and no way I'm going to spend near a grand on getting three other switches and copies of the games.... I mean, WTF....
It's a really super nice adaptation of an already super fun board game. Although, as usual, wait for a steep discount, as the Nintendo tax is pretty HEAVY on this one. It's $25 here on the Switch store, while it's $8 on Steam and $5 on Android for the exact same game.
I don't think it's worth paying an extra $20 just for controller support. But get it elsewhere if it seems interesting to you. Because it's fun. Just not worth the Nintendo Tax.
@KIRO Given that Switches are $400 around here (around $300 for lites), games $80 each, and that I have a wife and two kids who would all want to get their own island... Well... it's a big sad NOPE for me here, as I'm looking at shelling out anything between $1400 and $1700 when factoring in sales taxes, if everyone has it their way. For a SINGLE game.
I truly miss the GC days when all you needed was your own memory card to store your own village. With the one island per console limit, Nintendo made it hard for families of gamers to buy into this without buying a system for everyone. Unless said families are ready to have "rules" regarding in-game stuff, and I don't think a lot of people want to start policing others in a freaking videogame, however cool said game is. Recipe for family conflicts in many cases.
I really want to play this game, but buying it only for myself will draw the fires from others in the family... lol!
I'll always have trouble with re-releases of 8 and 16-bits classics that ends up being much too pricey for what they are. I mean, over $50 for this compilation (in my corner of the world), is almost on the verge of being insulting. Like, not quite there, but almost.
I'll wait for a sale. There are a lot more games I'd buy for $50 before this, even if it looks fun.
@holygeez03 I get that. I'm the same towards different things in life too. Most notably all those "TruMotion" or whatever they call it in TVs. It only makes anything look like it was "shot for TV" and it looks too weird to me. And I too, love true 24fps for movies, and yes, I've been caring about that for decades too.
But I think there is some "buffer" between what someone can stand and what they can't. Like, there is a point where the difference a thing make is not that much impacful, even if it does indeed make things better. Like, I would totally understand someone saying going from 30fps to 60fps has a major impact. Now going from 26 to 30? Not really. I can get why someone would say gaming at 4K on a PC monitor has an impact. Gaming at 4K on a 43" TV you're sitting 10 ft away from? Not really. Maybe unless you have a 25/20 vision....
It's always relative.
Even I, while not labelling myself an audiophile, am able to notice things in music like audio clipping and fine details that many others would not. BUT, I know this isn't something as important as the music in itself, so while I appreciate a good music recording (there are pretty rare nowadays), I don't let the crappy mastering get in the way of my enjoyment of songs themselves.
Thing is, to me, having acess to a version of an album that is better mastered does make the experience better, but it's still all about the songs in themselves. Songs were good before. They're not "better" now, they are the same songs. They're just reproduced in a better manner. The technical aspect is a different thing to me, than the artistry and talent conveyed through it.
So... I get that everyone's different. But I still don't get why subtle differences can tip the point from "not worth to buy" to "I need this now". Unless people are relatively more obsessed with the technicalities than the content itself. And that's ok I guess. To each their own.
I love what the new patch for the Witcher is doing, but to me, the game was already spectacular before it, so... I just don't understand this "now it's worth it" mindset.... But that's me.
While I welcome any patch that improve things even slightly (and kudos to the developpers for supporting their game like this!), I can't help not getting why people thought it wasn't playable before, but this new post-patch version is now worth their time.
I personnaly never had a problem with the bluriness of anything in the game, but I admit that's me. It never prevented me from enjoying what is a great game. In fact, having photography as another hobby of mine, depth of field is a pretty natural phenomenom and this sometimes adds a more cinematic look IMO. Having everything set to infinite focus, to me, looks unnatural. I know many likes it this way though (infinite focus) so I can't speak for anyone but myself.
I also find it funny in the video when they talk about 5fps being something like a major improvement. Sure, it makes things smoother in some places, and that's indeed welcome, but to me, that's no "major" improvement. It's, of course, a welcome one (any performance improvement is welcome - again, kudos to the developpers), but I still don't get why this is now worth it vs. before not being worth the purchase.
I get why the cloud sync for saves might lure in new buyers though. But most everything else, while making the game better indeed, aren't things affecting gameplay in any meaningful way.
Not trying to insult anyone, but I'm legitimately curious about the reasons why it wasn't worth a purchase before, but now it is. Are people attracted to a game because of its gameplay or because of its graphics? I'm not talking about the difference between a cheap-looking game and an AAA release. What we're seeing here is a marginal improvement that, yes, makes things better, but it's still marginal. It's not "night and day".
We usually see this graphic criticism (or graphic elitism?) on the side of those PC Master Race fanboys. It's just weird seeing that on the console side these days....
I haven't tried the new patch yet, but from the screenshots, while it improves things, I wouldn't call this "night and day". Yes, I can see the difference if we compare to, say, the PC version or even other consoles versions, but that doesn't matter to me.
Graphics, past a certain point, don't make or break a game in my book. This is the same game as on other platforms, although with some graphic compromises that didn't affect the game much. And it was already looking great on Switch. If this makes it look better, great! But it makes me laugh when I read some people's reaction about this now making the game worth their time.
Now, if this patch makes the game runs smoother and improves fps in some cases, then that is what I consider a real improvement. But everything else is cosmetics. It's sugar coating poured on top of an already sugary enough cake.
@NESlover85
I'm thinking the same too. And I don't want to make it sound like I'm against it, I'm not, even if I don't get it and don't care about it. If people like it and enjoy it, that's cool. I just think the word "esport" is weird because I don't see the "sport" in it. While I can see a legitimate competition in this, I don't see any "sport".
And on the matter of Nintendo sponsoring these events... Well, Nintendo probably don't see anything they can get in return from this, aside from trouble. I mean, do these people have the arrogance of thinking THEY are the ones who made this franchise popular?
And like someone else said previously, to start supporting them is a one-way ticket that you'll never get out of easily. Imagine if they start funding these tournements, and then back off two or three years later. You'll see some backlash against Nintendo like you wouldn't believe. Also, as someone else said, new Street Fighter iterations seems irrelevant to buy now because they feel like almost entirely pointless if you don't plan on doing rounds of competition publicly. Almost like Capcom steered the series from an enjoyable fighting game to something mostly geared for organized competitions. Which is ok if that's your thing. But I prefer going back to play old SF games these days.
For once, I think Nintendo is doing the smart thing. They want their games to be seen as something everyone can enjoy. Not a game made especially for these competitions. If people want to continue using this game in their events, fine, but it's THEIR decision. Why would Nintendo owe anything to them?
XCOM 2 on the Switch. I've been wishing for this ever since the Switch got released. Now I'll finally be able to say goodbye to full nights of sleep! YES YES YES!!!!
Holy macaroni, Batman. Some people have way too much free time on their hands when they start complaining about the news on a website they themselve chose to visit. Just go away if you can't bear the "old" news and leave it for those who don't mind. Problem solved.
Anyways, back on point, I never found the Resident Evil movies to be particuliary enjoyable. They always seemed to me like B-movie grade fare only with more budget, and with only a remote link to the franchise they're supposed to be part of.
Now, I don't have any issue with a RE series moving ahead in time. Could be interesting if done right. And I'm not meaning "right" as in "respecting any tidbit of fact that came from the games before". I'll leave those details to the rabbid fanboys to debate irrationnaly on the web over the following days/week/months. No, I simply mean respectful to the source material to some degree (can take some liberties here and there I don't mind) and looking like part of the storyline (not a completely different alternate story of some kind like the movies). Seeing what happenned to some old characters from the game series might be interesting. Same thing with Umbrella Corp. It's set many years after, so I guess this will mean some stories to tell. Some incidents and stories will obviously be referenced in there (to give some backstory).
Colour me genuinely curious, but being handled by Netflix doesn't mean anything quality-wise. I thought the Witcher was great, but that's me. And from what I watched from the Castlevania series, it seems decent too. My main issue would be that if it ends up being decent, Netflix could "cancel" the series on a whim, like they do with so many other series, and leave viewers without "closure".
@DiscoDriver44 Thanks for the reply. But problem is, I rarely play my PS4 anymore because it's bound to the basement TV. Most of my game time is done away from the TV, mostly in the train rides to/from work everyday. So I don't care about online play. I just like racing games in general.
Tempted to buy Crash Team Racing, but I've heard the introduction of microtransaction kind of ruined it for some people. Someone care to elaborate why they think so? Also, are the load times still as atrocious as when it launched or things improved in subsequent patches?
@Xiovanni I truly feel for ya. I'm a father of two, and I seriously don't know if my kids will ever have the means to actually buy a house. which is sad. Unless they move pretty far from the city where the prices are still manageable. We barely managed to buy one many years ago, when the market was starting to go up over here, so I consider ourselves lucky.
This is completely different type of problem, I know. But this also makes me somewhat mad when you see all these eco-warriors out there saying that suburbs are evil and contributing to climate change by way of forcing people to travel more and the like... Because people buy houses where they can afford them. It's quite legitimate for any human being to actually want to own the place they live in. Saying we should all live in the big cities is saying we should be a nation of renters and this will simply widen the gap between classes even more.
But... I have small hopes. The populations are getting older (at least in some societies) which means at some point, there will probably be a lot more homes to sell than there are buyers who can afford them, which will may drive prices down.
I'm a bit in the same mindset. In fact, there is TONS of games available (and in my backlog too) that I haven't played yet. The problem with consoles is that most of them not being backward compatible means you can't really play all the game you want to play during a single generation (if you actually have a life and do other things in life, I mean). And when you buy the new one, this often means that all the games you haven't played on the previous generation, will stay unplayed forever, for the most part.
Well, to me, this means there are TONS of games I haven't played yet. I have a backlog so huge on PC alone, that it could last me MANY YEARS to go through it.
I don't even anticipate buying any of the new consoles when they get out, or maybe even during their relevant years. Sure, nicer graphics and faster load times are nice, but if it's only to play the new Super Call of Batlefield in Brown Space Turbo edition: The ultimate collector's edition, I'll pass... thank you. Not saying games like these aren't fun anymore, but... you know... I feel like aside from what you can sometimes find in the indie game circle, most of the gameing landscape has stalled a bit for some time already... Sure, things are prettier this generation than the last, but that's it. It's the same old, only prettier. For some people, that's all it takes. But I'm a bit tired.
I think when the cloud takes over, I'll start hunting for old NES and other systems carts, buy some hardware to dump the games myself (doing so is legal in many countries, but check local laws folks!) and have a blast playing my games on various devices.
I don't trust the cloud. There's nothing for me in there.
@Kidfunkadelic83 The problem with this future, is that it's driven from the interests of businesses to make more money, NOT from the interests of the consumers, as streaming-everything mostly means that content will be limited and eventually completely lost, or under the control of companies that have total power over what you are and aren't allowed to watch, listen, read and play.
When everything will be transitionned to a "service", it will be the apex of savage capitalism. Because instead of making people pay for goods and products (that they own and can use again and again), you now make them pay and they own nothing.
This is like the difference between paying the rent for an appartment, and paying a house's mortgage. Basically, the industry is saying that everyone's future is to stop buying houses and rent appartments forever. Oh, and the landlord can kick you out for any reason he sees fit. And has complete control over your furniture, and what you can and can't put in your appartment.
From their perspective... it smells like a ton of money. No wonder they're all investing in this. Total control + forcing people to pay forever if they want to play whatever.
I just find it sad that the younger generations mostly aren't seeing it this way. We're raising generations of future techno slaves that won't have any money anymore, or own anything, because everything will be a freaking "service" they'll have to pay every month.
I'm sure they'll include something later, by way of a patch or something. If not, more power to them, but I wouldn't hold this for a promise that can't be broken. Many companies tell something and then don't respect what they said. Sometimes, the change is done after release, by way of a game update.
To me, the guy sounds actually somewhat sane, in a way that he still view the advent of media convergence as something definitely identifiable to this era, and questions its purpose (I do too). Guy's kind of remind me of my late grandfather, especially now when I realise that many of the things he said back then ("in my days...") were, in some way, actually better.
And now, having kids of my own, I can somewhat relate. I still prefer to play old retro games than many modern games. I don't get why my kids (and apparently, millions of people) are so bent on watching Youtubers yelling all the time about anything. I don't get why "selfies" matter to so many people. I don't see the importance of Twitter and the likes. So yep, I'm a dinosaur. And you know what? I'm fine with that. Seems like Sapkowski's in a similar boat, although he's older, so his references are too.
The guy's doing what he wanted to do (write books), and he got success out of that, to the point where its big enough for games, TV series, animated movies, and so on. He might not care about those, but as this brings money in (through new sales of books, and licences), he's surely happy about this. He just feels like what he thinks about that should'nt be relevant for the masses. And the masses, used to this era of social media, seem to have trouble understanding that someone may want to keep his thoughts to himself sometimes.
Anyway. I enjoyed the series, and I'm enjoying the games. Will start the books soon.
Personnaly, I'm really tired of endless runners. I mean, since they're litterally dime a dozen on most platforms since years already, one really need to have something extra super duper special for me to want to play it. And I mean beyond art style or variation on the same old gameplay.
I know some people will definetely like this, and that's cool. I wish all developpers out there can get some success with their games. Creating games is often a labour of love, so it's great when people recognize this and buy your game.
But.... it's another endless runner..... So probably not for me. Unless someone tells me there is a definite thing or feature in there that makes it completely different than most other endless runners out there....
@Danrenfroe2016 I'm with you too on this. And by the video, this look like one of those "endless runner" type of games with a colour-coded gimmick similar to some others in the genre I've seen plenty of times already.
Not saying this game isn't good at what it tries to do, it's just that in a world where these games are available by the dozens on most mobile platforms, it needs something truly, and exceptionaly special for me to take notice. The endless runner genre was a fun concept quite some years ago already, and about two gazillion of them exists out there now. Even if this one is top quality and fun, it still feels to me like a cheap mobile game, which is NOT the type of thing I bought my Switch for.
Some "mobile" games on Switch are fine. For instance, Asphalt 9 feels like a console game somewhat, with physical controls and all. Sure, it has that freemium aspect to it... but it "feels" ok. I also have Gris, without knowing that it was for mobile too (still feels like a regular console game, although an artsy one). But this runner game seems to me like tons of other similar games on mobile, which doesn't convince me to try it out, even at that price.
But I feel sorry for mobile developpers who thought that the Switch would be a golden opportunity for them. It's like they didn't understand that a console (even a portable one) isn't exactly aimed at the same market mobile devices are catering to...
I don't think a boost in resolution would be a realistic expectation. But a slightly better framerate would. Like, ensuring a constant 30fps everywhere, including in cinematics. The game sometimes drop some frames when a lot is going on.
I haven't got a lot of crashes (maybe one or two in over dozens and dozens of hours played), but one other thing that could be improved is load times. When in smaller areas of the map, load times are manageable, but whenever you travel to Novigrad or Velen regions, load times are quite bad. If they can improve that, it would be very welcome.
Oh, and can they add more variety for NPC designs through a patch? I know some models were removed for this version to cut on size, the result being that it happenned sometimes in my game where two completely different characters (in optional missions) shared the exact same model, which ended up being a bit too weird.
Oh, and some pop-in, pop-out graphics I've seen flickering in the background a couple of times. Like the asset is moving in and out of the limit at which it clips. An easier transition between those rendering zones might look better. Although this a pretty minor detail that doesn't affect gameplay at al.
Oh, they already all have their profiles. But this won't do anything as Nintendo said there will be only one island PER SWITCH. Not per account or user. Per system. So all users will have to live on the same island and share the same resources.
So you can imagine the conflicts this will generate with my kids. Or if my son decides to wreck havoc on the trees planted by my daughter... or if she decides to dig holes all around his house.... you get the idea.... Or if someone decides to pick all the fruits, leaving nothing for others, and so on....
As a parent, I really don't want to have to deal with stuff like this. I mean, I could deal with it, and enforce some rules between them, but... I just don't want to play the AC police with my kids. And I don't want to buy a game they love and say to them they can't play it.
So I'll probably won't buy it. Even if I'm a fan since the first one on the GC. (Our wedding cake topping had AC characters - so yeah, we're big fans).
It's sad that I'll probably have to miss out on this one because of the limitation of having only one Island PER SYSTEM. I mean, come on Nintendo... do you expect, since all my family members (wife + two kids) love the AC games, to buy three additionnal Switches so that everyone can have their own island?
Game looks awesome otherwise. Just sad that families in which everyone is a gamer weren't considered when making it. Strange, coming from a company as family-oriented as Nintendo. Oh well.
@MuhBael Yeah, I know. I already have it with all its DLC and it's almost 100% completed. It's quite a good game, indeed along the same lines as Xcom.
But still, I would double-dip and buy it a second time if Xcom 2 would hit the Switch. Even at full price. It's one of those rare games I don't mind paying that much for.
While these games weren't part of a personnal wish list I want to see happenning on the Switch (#1 would be Xcom 2), this is definitely something I'd be interested in, even if I already have the games on PC. Playing them on the Switch would be pretty cool. Provided, of course, that the price would be right (which I doubt, this is the Switch after all, but let's see...)
Reading the headline, I was anticipating the end of it to be "in Canada".
While I always feel sad for employees losing their job, I have a hard time understanding how these stores are still in business. I remember going there all the time like 20 years ago, and at that time those stores weren't so bad. Prices were not always the best, but their were ok and staff was generally cool, and they actually often had the things I wanted.
Fast-forward these days, and we have stores that never have what I want in stock, prices that are always equal or higher than everywhere else, used game prices that are an insult (and are affecting the videogame industry badly), plus harrassing and unfriendly staff. Oh, and fraudulent advertising too, when stores refuse to honour their own advertised specials from their flyers.
I kid you not, one of their clerks even insulted me once because I wasn't interested in the game he was sugesting to me, as if I was completely stupid for not liking his suggestion.
This, and their horrible trend of trying to sell unwrapped and loose discs/carts as "new". --- "I can guarantee you it was never played". Yeah, right. Look pal, it's openned, there's no way for me to know it's new. They sometime REFUSED to sell me an unwrapped copy (even if they had some in stock).
I rarely go there anymore now. And I encourage my kids (and friends) to not shop there either.
Stores like these will often say that online retailers make things hard for them, but it's not really true. They dug their own grave by simply not giving a damn about the customer's experience. And any intelligent customer will do the math. Why shop there? If I'm not getting any good service or a good in-store experience, what's the reason? Between not getting service in-store, or not getting service online BUT at least get a better price, I'd say stores like these are simply pushing people towards the online competition. So, in a sense, it's their own fault.
The thing about Windows 10 for a portable gaming OS, is that it's feckin terrible at managing a stanby mode when... you know... gaming.
I had a GPD Win some time ago, and while I still think it was worth every penny for the sheer volume of games I was able to play on this thing, what ruined it as a viable "portable" gaming solution was that there was no easy "sleep" ot "standby mode" that didn't wrecked system stability.
I mean, you're on the train, and then you realize that you've arrived at your destination station, so you need to quickly move, right? Well, you can't just put this to sleep. If you do, get ready for a big surprise when you'll wake the system up. Usually in the form of a black screen, corrupted graphics, unresponsive controls, and often without a mean to get back in the game without CTRL-ALT-DELETEing your way into a reboot. And even sometimes this doesn't work, and you have to do a cold reset.
BUT, aside from that, I had tons of fun with the device. I just had to properly exit any game I was playing before properly shutting down the system.
So...
Did Alienware found a fix to make Windows 10 more stable when using sleep or standby mode while gaming?
Otherwise, I don't really care for it as a portable replacement or competitor to the Switch. Still, looks fun though. Just not something I'd bring with me all the time to game on (like my Switch).
Never had any crashes with the game yet (and with many dozens of play hours). Wonder if this has anything to do with the game being played from a cart... maybe SD card performance (or reliability) has something to do with this? Dunno.
Personally, I don't have any issue with the blurriness, or anti-aliasing, as I'm playing mostly in portable mode and I'm not noticing anything that bug me.
Sure, there is some popup happening in some random places, and some lower quality textures, but the only thing I've seen (from my end) that would improve things a bit (it is a minor update after all), could be the framerate that strangely drops in some cinematics, and maybe improve the framerate a bit in graphically more complex areas (like Novigrad for instance).
Also, load times in some regions of the world are quite long. If these can be improved, that would be great too.
Comments 466
Re: Evercade EXP Handheld Will Come Bundled With 18 Classic Capcom Titles
@Abes3,
The point of the Evercade (at least until now) was mostly to appeal to collectors and people wanting good, legal emulation available on physical media (for preservation and stuff).
Having an online store on the Evercade would be like having a Wifi connection with Spotify on a Turntable. It doesn't make a lot of sense, given what the thing is all about.
I'm a bit torn on the Evercade EXP. At first, I was excited, but now with this announcement, having those games not being on cartridge kind of defeats the purpose. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to play these on the EXP, but these games being tied to the console's internal memory, on a console that is all about physical cartridges, feels like a company not knowing what their customers want. They probably felt like this would drive sales of the EXP, or make owners of the original handheld buy into the upgrade, or owners of the VS console get it as a portable player for their current library.... Or... maybe it was the only way for them to get Capcom to grant them a licence. Who knows?
I wouldn't be against a retro-oriented console platform having an online store dedicated to old games (I'd actually buy into it!), but that's not what the Evercade was supposed to be, and that's not why buyers invested in its ecosystem in the first palce.
Re: Talking Point: WATA And The Grey Areas Of Game Preservation - Is There Any Better Way?
@shoeses,
The problem with having an online storefront, is that at some point, they get shut down if they don't bring in much revenue. Which gets us back to dealing with this whole problem in the first place.
The only way I see this working would be for said store to work in a manner that legally lets people copy the roms they bought to other devices they own or back them up on whatever media format they want. Start treating game roms like DRM-free music files or video files. You bought the content? You should be able to play it on the device you prefer, through the emulator you prefer.
But this would NEVER happen because it would prevent companies (like Nintendo) to sell you the same game over and over again on each new console generation... or move them behind a subscription fee. And the bigger problem is that most gamers out there seem to accept this as "normal", and pay again, and again, and again....
I'm all for a solution that would make people pay once, and "own" the game in a way they can play it however they want.
But like I said.... it's never going to happen.
Re: No, This Nintendo Ad Didn't Raise The Price Of The Switch - It's Just Canadian
I'm a bit sick of seeing people thinking that somehow, exchange rates makes it equal somewhat. It doesn't. Because exchange rate doesn't only affect retail prices. People don't get their salaries adjusted because of it. Our dollar going down doesn't mean employers are paying us more. They don't.
That's often a side of the equation most people don't consider.
So you can put it any way you want, if you mean the games or systems are priced "similarly" because of exchange rate, then you can't sidestep the issue of everyone now earning less because of the same exchange rate.
Any way you put it, we pay a bigger chunk of our money for games and consoles. Either they cost more, or either we earn less, in the end it doesn't make a difference, we pay more.
Not so long ago, we were almost on par with U.S. dollar. Now we're not. No one is getting paid more because of this.
Re: Video: Immortals Fenyx Rising - Switch VS PlayStation 5 Graphical Comparison
I think no one will deny that the PS5 version looks better, but aside from the better framerate, everything else is in the smaller details that aren't detracting from the game in any way. Game still look pretty decent on the Switch, although running at a lower framerate and showing a bit less stuff on screen.
I'm impressed. Although I'm not sure I'll get the game. Not at full price at least. Maybe when on sale, some day.
Re: EA's Need For Speed: Hot Pursuit Remaster Expected To Be Announced Next Week
It's EA. They'll release it at full new release price or almost. Like they did for Burnout Paradise. Because it's the Switch, you know, and people gladly pay a premium for Switch versions. #sickofthistrend.
Re: Feature: Animal Crossing Character Names Around The World - A Few Of Our Favourite Variants
I hate when they change names. I mean, why? I know it depends on the language, and in some languages, some names may sometimes be harder to pronounce. But still...
I'm french speaking, and most of the "play on words" they think they're doing is completely lost on me. No one I know ever thought that "Marie" is actually a play on "Mairie". Everyone just don't know why the name is different in French and English. Because usually, most english names don't magically change when you speak French (Except when you live in France - I don't - as they like to change things for absolutely no freaking reason, but hey, that's another debate).
I have a friend who's called Scott. He's english-speaking. And you know what? Every french-speaking person still calls him Scott. They don't change his name to a random "François" for some stupid reason no one care.
Changing names just confuses everyone...
Re: Lots Of DOOM Games, Skyrim And Wolfenstein Are All 50% Off On Nintendo Switch
We should instead name this "sale" as the event when some Switch games are actually sold at the regular price (the regular price they're sold everywhere else).
I'm talking mainly about Doom and Skyrim.
The "oldies" are priced ok.
Re: There Are Reportedly "No Plans" To Fix Deadly Premonition 2's Awful Frame Rate
Watching the video... reminds me of Moto Racer 4 on the Switch. Like a racing game that often goes into single-digit framerate. A RACING GAME!!! It baffles me when games come out like that. Like, everyone in the development team think this is fine? No one voiced any concern? Or were those concerned voiced but ignored by the publisher? I don't know where in the chain all of these games go off-rail, but isn't a debate between 30 and 60fps. We're talking about games dropping regularly into single-digit fps. This is ridiculous.
Not buying this crap.
Re: MX vs ATV All Out Races Onto Switch This September
@JayJ
I always was suspicious towards the Monster Supercross one, and I know it's stupid, but it was down to its super long and silly name. I usually try to stay away from "sponsored" racing games because they're usually not very good. And this dates back to those "Ford Racing" days on the PS1 lol!
But I might look into this one if you say it's worth it when on sale. With Moto Racer 4 on Switch being as unplayable as it is (with framerate sometimes dropping in the single digit, no joke!) it would be nice to have an offroad racer that plays well on the platform.
Re: MX vs ATV All Out Races Onto Switch This September
I never played that series before I bought a copy of Mx vs ATV Supercross Encore for XB1 for a ridiculous $0.99 brand new... and... I played less than hour with it. And I consider this an hour of my life I won't get back. The controls were beyond horrible. I usually love offroad racing and the likes, but this was unplayable to me. So maybe this new one is better? The one I played made me very wary of that series (nothing like a bad first impression).
I find Motoracer 4 for the Switch to be better, and that title is quite the trainwreck.
Anwyays... I know this would be impossible, but can Codemaster or someone else create a followup to that old FUEL game? THAT was truly an open-world racer (with an INSANELY LARGE world map), and aside from the cheating AI, is a title I can still enjoy today on my XB1 (through backward compatibility) and on my PC. At least this one had tight controls IMO, and graphics that still look damn fine to me these days.
Re: Nintendo's Mobile Business Is Here To Stay
@Mountain_Man
Crazy when you think about it, right? But hey, I'd say in a sense, this is kind of in line with our times. Most people don't seem to realize that paying $10 once, is a much better deal than paying $2.99 every now and then a couple of times each month for in-game consumables. Personally, I despise mobile gaming for exactly that reason.
I'd say in general, the masses are weird, when you think about it. The most popular movies are rarely great movies. The most popular music is rarely great too, IMO. Most reality TV that becomes insanely popular, I find completely insipid. Sure, there are exceptions sometimes. But I feel that what defines something as great or being worth your money in the eyes of the masses often kind of eludes me.
So in my eye, supporting bad movies, music and TV, and supporting bad commercial schemes falls in the same bucket. lol!
I never had a problem with paying a decent, one-time price, for a piece of software I like. I'm probably in the minority who bought XCOM and Civilization Revolution on mobile because 1-these work well as mobile titles (especially on tablets) and 2- you pay once and you have access to ALL the game, with no artificial limitations like crystals, cards, or stupid secondary in-game currency or having game mechanics tweaked to make you pay (your character is exhausted, come back in a while or PAY).
Anyway, I think mobile gaming could've been GREAT. But alas, we still need dedicated portable consoles to experience TRUE gaming on the go. I'm not complaining though, as the Switch is great for that.
Re: Duke Nukem 3D: 20th Anniversary World Tour
@TheLUNATICgamer
It plays very well, 60fps and all.
I only have one minor issue with the controls, and it's that switching from one weapon to the next feels sluggish. Like, you hit the button to switch to the next weapon, and it takes a good whole second (maybe slightly more) before actually doing the switch. Like, there's a good delay in carrying over your action. Doesn't hamper my enjoyment of this awesome game, but I hope they'll issue a patch at some point to fix this.
I also was completely stuck at some point where I had all the required key cards, and despite that, some doors didn't open. It was odd as it was a level I knew and completed many times in the past.
Another very, very minor thing is that they don't list when a save game was actually saved. Only the level is listed, which sometimes make it hard to remember which one you used (unless you always overwrite in the same slot). I also haven't found an auto-save option (so remember to save before quitting).
Other than that, I'm having a blast replaying this. I'll surely enjoy the added levels as well.
Re: Here's Your First Look At Crysis Remastered Running On Nintendo Switch
@pip_muzz,
Well, £26 is still much more reasonable than what EA charges for the Burnout Paradise remaster, which is a 12 year old game, for $65 over here, which would be almost £40. THAT is insane.
But are we really surprised? I'm not. Plenty of games get released on Switch with a higher price than everywhere else for absolutely no reason other than people buying anyway...
I don't think £26 is SO bad. I personally would prefer a bit less, but it's not the worse. If it runs well, it could be almost worth it IMO. But that's me.
Re: Nintendo Download: 18th June (Europe)
Burnout Paradise. $65.
I LOVE that game... but...
x100 Nope.
Re: EA Is Bringing Seven Games To Nintendo Switch Over The Next 12 Months
After EA released the Burnout Paradise Remaster for $65 (a 12-year old game that's been ported to almost every console under the sun since then - I bought it for $5 on XB1 last year!), I just don't care anymore about this delusional company.
They'll probably announce something like the Mass Effect trilogy or The Sims 4 for $80 or something. Or smaller indie releases. So really, why should I care....
Re: 15 More Songs Revealed For Fuser, Harmonix's Upcoming Rhythm Action Game
@HobbesPrime
I'll second that. Rock Band Unplugged was awesome. And there was a lot of good DLC songs for it too (although not nearly as much as for regular RB). I regret having sold my old PSP and my copy of the game back then. But hey, different times, and needed the money for something else I can't remember.
Even if it was an updated version with a new soundtrack (because it might be difficult to licence everything again exactly as it was) this is one of those rare titles I'd be willing to pay full price for on release day.
Make that not only a remaster but a downright remake, with a lot more variety in items & instruments to make your band look truly unique, more cities to travel to (and more venues), but keep the gameplay intact. And obviously, running in 1080p/720p on the Switch (docked/undocked).
Man, I really miss Rock Band... Not exactly all the plastic instruments, but the whole "create a band" aspect and play through a mostly rock-oriented soundtrack.
Re: EA Play Live Goes Digital This June - Expect World Premieres, News And Much More
I bet they'll announce something like the Mass Effect trilogy for $80. After they said the Burnout Paradise port was going to be available for a freaking $65 (a 12-year old game that's been ported on almost all consoles since then), I lost all hope in EA taking the Switch seriously.
Re: All Resident Evil Games Discounted On Nintendo Switch, Get Up To 60% Off
It's still frustrating though, that some of these games, even at 50% off, are now at the regular price they're sold elsewhere.
Re: Guide: Upcoming Nintendo Switch Games And Accessories For June And July 2020
@JH64
Indeed, that is a complete joke. Here, it's going to be sold for an incredible $65. Which is only a bit lower than brand new AAA title release price. That's not even a joke. That's a freaking insult.
I mean, I bought that remaster last year on Xbox One for about $5. And I've been playing it on Steam as well since forever, and even on a GPD Win device, so playing on the crapper/bus anywhere isn't a new feature for me.
I was interested in buying it again for the Switch, not having my GPD Win anymore, and because I still love that game, but I was expecting something more along the lines of $30. Maybe a bit lower, as this is a port of a game that's been made available on almost every platform under the sun since its release.
At $65, this is horrible in terms of value, UNLESS you've never played the game and still see this as a completely new title. But even so, I think you could do FAR BETTER with your money than buying this at that price. Borderlands, Bioshock and Xcom 2 collections are all priced lower than this over here, and offer a LOT more value for less money (provided these games are your cup of tea). Burnout Paradise was sold for about the same price when it was released 12 YEARS AGO. Asking the same price today is insulting.
Great game, just horrible pricing. But then, that's EA. What were you expecting?
Re: 8-Bit Brawler Jay And Silent Bob: Mall Brawl Gets Its Own Switch eShop Release Next Week
@Supahfly
Yeah... Scott Pilgrim was awesome. It's sad that stupid licensing issues are preventing some games to be redistributed again, or ported to newer consoles. I'd replay that one for sure if it was made available on the XB1...
That being said, paying $20 for this Jay and Silent Bob game seems much overpriced for what it is. I get the gameplay trying to mimick classics like River City Ransom and Double Dragon 2 (that artwork, lol!) but then again, just that doesn't make it worth my $20 in itself. Maybe when on sale at some point, at LEAST %50 off.
Re: Burnout Paradise Remastered Launches On June 19th, According To US eShop Listing
Well, as long as people will continue to pay a stupidly high premium to play old games on Switch, aberrations like this will continue to happen. I mean, $65 (CDN) for a game I bought for $5 on my Xbox One... over a year ago.... Also, regular price, when not on sale, on every other system is like $25. WTF EA?
I was overjoyed when I heard this was coming to the Switch. But at this price, it's not just ridiculously overpriced, it is a downright insult.
So, so, so sick of this crazy trend to overcharge throught the roof for Switch games for absolutely no reason. I mean, charging a bit more for a new port of a game that was released on almost every system under the sun already is ok. But this is not "charging a bit more". This charging $10 for a single roll of toilet paper.
But then... this is the Switch... and this is EA. Silly of me to have expected a decent price.
Re: EB Canada Reminds Us To Set Aside 24 GB For The XCOM 2: Collection On Switch
While I'm happy to see 2K giving support to the Switch, not putting all of XCOM 2 on a 32GB cart is a real heart-breaker here. I mean, why would I waste so much space on my SD card for a game I bought physical? If I buy it physical, part of it is because I don't want to use all that space on my micro SD!
Having played the game on PC, this is one of the rare game I'd gladly double-dip for to be able to play on the go. I bought the first one on X360, on PC, on iPad and and Android. Yes, really. I love this series. But I'm really sick of all those games coming on small carts requiring huge downloads. This is stupid and Nintendo should put a stop to that and not allow this anymore. I mean, if you think of doing that, then just go digital-only. Physical releases should be for games entirely playable from the cart.
Anyway... looks like I'll have to upgrade my 200gb micro SD... which only have about 40gb left on it now...
Re: Poll: Has Your Family Bought A Second Switch To Play Animal Crossing: New Horizons 'Properly'?
Playing this way, while enjoyable, is still a pain, as the island is kind of small. Maybe for two people, that would be ok, but for a family of four, it kinds of put limits on the game you wouldn't have otherwise.
I said I would be passing on this game for that reason, and I bit the bullet because hey, COVID-19 and all that staying at home thing, and I thought that would be something cool all the family could enjoy... well, while it's fun, it's not "great".
You have to spend half the time cutting down the trees the kids are planting every-freaking-where, you have to constantly tell others to NOT pick up all the fruits on the island... First player who plays on a day gets all the fossils and the shop limited items...
While there are fun moments to be had for sure, you have to "police" everyone to play fair all the time and leave stuff for others. And this is not "fun" work.
For such a family-oriented game, it sure is hell for families.... and no way I'm going to spend near a grand on getting three other switches and copies of the games.... I mean, WTF....
Re: Mini Review: Talisman: Digital Edition - A Superb Adaptation Of A Board Game Classic
It's a really super nice adaptation of an already super fun board game. Although, as usual, wait for a steep discount, as the Nintendo tax is pretty HEAVY on this one. It's $25 here on the Switch store, while it's $8 on Steam and $5 on Android for the exact same game.
I don't think it's worth paying an extra $20 just for controller support. But get it elsewhere if it seems interesting to you. Because it's fun. Just not worth the Nintendo Tax.
Re: The First Animal Crossing: New Horizons Review Is In, And It Might Surprise You
@KIRO
Given that Switches are $400 around here (around $300 for lites), games $80 each, and that I have a wife and two kids who would all want to get their own island... Well... it's a big sad NOPE for me here, as I'm looking at shelling out anything between $1400 and $1700 when factoring in sales taxes, if everyone has it their way. For a SINGLE game.
I truly miss the GC days when all you needed was your own memory card to store your own village. With the one island per console limit, Nintendo made it hard for families of gamers to buy into this without buying a system for everyone. Unless said families are ready to have "rules" regarding in-game stuff, and I don't think a lot of people want to start policing others in a freaking videogame, however cool said game is. Recipe for family conflicts in many cases.
I really want to play this game, but buying it only for myself will draw the fires from others in the family... lol!
Re: Review: Double Dragon & Kunio-Kun Retro Brawler Bundle - A Stunning Retro Collection
I'll always have trouble with re-releases of 8 and 16-bits classics that ends up being much too pricey for what they are. I mean, over $50 for this compilation (in my corner of the world), is almost on the verge of being insulting. Like, not quite there, but almost.
I'll wait for a sale. There are a lot more games I'd buy for $50 before this, even if it looks fun.
Re: All DOOM Games Heavily Reduced On Switch, Some Now As Low As £1.20
@Dman10
Why is Doom 2016 still so expensive even when on sale?
I mean, even on sale at 50%, it's priced higher than the REGULAR price EVERYWHERE ELSE. This is a total joke.
Although I bought Doom 3. Already have Doom1993, and Doom3 for about 4 bucks is a no brainer.
But Doom 2016... 50% off and STILL pricier than regular price everywhere else... LOL!!!! It's so insulting that it's laughable.
Re: Video: Digital Foundry Delivers Its Verdict On Witcher 3's Impressive Patch 3.6
@holygeez03
I get that. I'm the same towards different things in life too. Most notably all those "TruMotion" or whatever they call it in TVs. It only makes anything look like it was "shot for TV" and it looks too weird to me. And I too, love true 24fps for movies, and yes, I've been caring about that for decades too.
But I think there is some "buffer" between what someone can stand and what they can't. Like, there is a point where the difference a thing make is not that much impacful, even if it does indeed make things better. Like, I would totally understand someone saying going from 30fps to 60fps has a major impact. Now going from 26 to 30? Not really. I can get why someone would say gaming at 4K on a PC monitor has an impact. Gaming at 4K on a 43" TV you're sitting 10 ft away from? Not really. Maybe unless you have a 25/20 vision....
It's always relative.
Even I, while not labelling myself an audiophile, am able to notice things in music like audio clipping and fine details that many others would not. BUT, I know this isn't something as important as the music in itself, so while I appreciate a good music recording (there are pretty rare nowadays), I don't let the crappy mastering get in the way of my enjoyment of songs themselves.
Thing is, to me, having acess to a version of an album that is better mastered does make the experience better, but it's still all about the songs in themselves. Songs were good before. They're not "better" now, they are the same songs. They're just reproduced in a better manner. The technical aspect is a different thing to me, than the artistry and talent conveyed through it.
So... I get that everyone's different. But I still don't get why subtle differences can tip the point from "not worth to buy" to "I need this now". Unless people are relatively more obsessed with the technicalities than the content itself. And that's ok I guess. To each their own.
I love what the new patch for the Witcher is doing, but to me, the game was already spectacular before it, so... I just don't understand this "now it's worth it" mindset.... But that's me.
Re: Video: Digital Foundry Delivers Its Verdict On Witcher 3's Impressive Patch 3.6
While I welcome any patch that improve things even slightly (and kudos to the developpers for supporting their game like this!), I can't help not getting why people thought it wasn't playable before, but this new post-patch version is now worth their time.
I personnaly never had a problem with the bluriness of anything in the game, but I admit that's me. It never prevented me from enjoying what is a great game. In fact, having photography as another hobby of mine, depth of field is a pretty natural phenomenom and this sometimes adds a more cinematic look IMO. Having everything set to infinite focus, to me, looks unnatural. I know many likes it this way though (infinite focus) so I can't speak for anyone but myself.
I also find it funny in the video when they talk about 5fps being something like a major improvement. Sure, it makes things smoother in some places, and that's indeed welcome, but to me, that's no "major" improvement. It's, of course, a welcome one (any performance improvement is welcome - again, kudos to the developpers), but I still don't get why this is now worth it vs. before not being worth the purchase.
I get why the cloud sync for saves might lure in new buyers though. But most everything else, while making the game better indeed, aren't things affecting gameplay in any meaningful way.
Not trying to insult anyone, but I'm legitimately curious about the reasons why it wasn't worth a purchase before, but now it is. Are people attracted to a game because of its gameplay or because of its graphics? I'm not talking about the difference between a cheap-looking game and an AAA release. What we're seeing here is a marginal improvement that, yes, makes things better, but it's still marginal. It's not "night and day".
We usually see this graphic criticism (or graphic elitism?) on the side of those PC Master Race fanboys. It's just weird seeing that on the console side these days....
Anyway... I'll go grab some coffee...
Re: Gallery: The Witcher 3 Looks Stunning On Switch Thanks To Its Latest Update
I haven't tried the new patch yet, but from the screenshots, while it improves things, I wouldn't call this "night and day". Yes, I can see the difference if we compare to, say, the PC version or even other consoles versions, but that doesn't matter to me.
Graphics, past a certain point, don't make or break a game in my book. This is the same game as on other platforms, although with some graphic compromises that didn't affect the game much. And it was already looking great on Switch. If this makes it look better, great! But it makes me laugh when I read some people's reaction about this now making the game worth their time.
Now, if this patch makes the game runs smoother and improves fps in some cases, then that is what I consider a real improvement. But everything else is cosmetics. It's sugar coating poured on top of an already sugary enough cake.
Re: Leading Smash Bros. Player Calls Out Nintendo For "Not Putting Resources Into The Scene"
@NESlover85
I'm thinking the same too. And I don't want to make it sound like I'm against it, I'm not, even if I don't get it and don't care about it. If people like it and enjoy it, that's cool. I just think the word "esport" is weird because I don't see the "sport" in it. While I can see a legitimate competition in this, I don't see any "sport".
And on the matter of Nintendo sponsoring these events... Well, Nintendo probably don't see anything they can get in return from this, aside from trouble. I mean, do these people have the arrogance of thinking THEY are the ones who made this franchise popular?
And like someone else said previously, to start supporting them is a one-way ticket that you'll never get out of easily. Imagine if they start funding these tournements, and then back off two or three years later. You'll see some backlash against Nintendo like you wouldn't believe. Also, as someone else said, new Street Fighter iterations seems irrelevant to buy now because they feel like almost entirely pointless if you don't plan on doing rounds of competition publicly. Almost like Capcom steered the series from an enjoyable fighting game to something mostly geared for organized competitions. Which is ok if that's your thing. But I prefer going back to play old SF games these days.
For once, I think Nintendo is doing the smart thing. They want their games to be seen as something everyone can enjoy. Not a game made especially for these competitions. If people want to continue using this game in their events, fine, but it's THEIR decision. Why would Nintendo owe anything to them?
Re: Catherine: Full Body And XCOM 2 Collection Rated For The Nintendo Switch In South Korea
XCOM 2 on the Switch. I've been wishing for this ever since the Switch got released. Now I'll finally be able to say goodbye to full nights of sleep! YES YES YES!!!!
Re: Looks Like Netflix's Resident Evil Series Won't Be Set In Raccoon City
Holy macaroni, Batman. Some people have way too much free time on their hands when they start complaining about the news on a website they themselve chose to visit. Just go away if you can't bear the "old" news and leave it for those who don't mind. Problem solved.
Anyways, back on point, I never found the Resident Evil movies to be particuliary enjoyable. They always seemed to me like B-movie grade fare only with more budget, and with only a remote link to the franchise they're supposed to be part of.
Now, I don't have any issue with a RE series moving ahead in time. Could be interesting if done right. And I'm not meaning "right" as in "respecting any tidbit of fact that came from the games before". I'll leave those details to the rabbid fanboys to debate irrationnaly on the web over the following days/week/months. No, I simply mean respectful to the source material to some degree (can take some liberties here and there I don't mind) and looking like part of the storyline (not a completely different alternate story of some kind like the movies). Seeing what happenned to some old characters from the game series might be interesting. Same thing with Umbrella Corp. It's set many years after, so I guess this will mean some stories to tell. Some incidents and stories will obviously be referenced in there (to give some backstory).
Colour me genuinely curious, but being handled by Netflix doesn't mean anything quality-wise. I thought the Witcher was great, but that's me. And from what I watched from the Castlevania series, it seems decent too. My main issue would be that if it ends up being decent, Netflix could "cancel" the series on a whim, like they do with so many other series, and leave viewers without "closure".
Re: Spyro And Crash Bandicoot Games Discounted On Switch For A Limited Time (Europe)
@DiscoDriver44
Thanks for the reply. But problem is, I rarely play my PS4 anymore because it's bound to the basement TV. Most of my game time is done away from the TV, mostly in the train rides to/from work everyday. So I don't care about online play. I just like racing games in general.
Re: Spyro And Crash Bandicoot Games Discounted On Switch For A Limited Time (Europe)
Tempted to buy Crash Team Racing, but I've heard the introduction of microtransaction kind of ruined it for some people. Someone care to elaborate why they think so? Also, are the load times still as atrocious as when it launched or things improved in subsequent patches?
Re: Xbox Boss Doesn't See Nintendo As A "Main Competitor" In The Next-Gen War
@Xiovanni
I truly feel for ya. I'm a father of two, and I seriously don't know if my kids will ever have the means to actually buy a house. which is sad. Unless they move pretty far from the city where the prices are still manageable. We barely managed to buy one many years ago, when the market was starting to go up over here, so I consider ourselves lucky.
This is completely different type of problem, I know. But this also makes me somewhat mad when you see all these eco-warriors out there saying that suburbs are evil and contributing to climate change by way of forcing people to travel more and the like... Because people buy houses where they can afford them. It's quite legitimate for any human being to actually want to own the place they live in. Saying we should all live in the big cities is saying we should be a nation of renters and this will simply widen the gap between classes even more.
But... I have small hopes. The populations are getting older (at least in some societies) which means at some point, there will probably be a lot more homes to sell than there are buyers who can afford them, which will may drive prices down.
I hope that will be the case. For my kids.
Re: Xbox Boss Doesn't See Nintendo As A "Main Competitor" In The Next-Gen War
@Kidfunkadelic83
I'm a bit in the same mindset. In fact, there is TONS of games available (and in my backlog too) that I haven't played yet. The problem with consoles is that most of them not being backward compatible means you can't really play all the game you want to play during a single generation (if you actually have a life and do other things in life, I mean). And when you buy the new one, this often means that all the games you haven't played on the previous generation, will stay unplayed forever, for the most part.
Well, to me, this means there are TONS of games I haven't played yet. I have a backlog so huge on PC alone, that it could last me MANY YEARS to go through it.
I don't even anticipate buying any of the new consoles when they get out, or maybe even during their relevant years. Sure, nicer graphics and faster load times are nice, but if it's only to play the new Super Call of Batlefield in Brown Space Turbo edition: The ultimate collector's edition, I'll pass... thank you. Not saying games like these aren't fun anymore, but... you know... I feel like aside from what you can sometimes find in the indie game circle, most of the gameing landscape has stalled a bit for some time already... Sure, things are prettier this generation than the last, but that's it. It's the same old, only prettier. For some people, that's all it takes. But I'm a bit tired.
I think when the cloud takes over, I'll start hunting for old NES and other systems carts, buy some hardware to dump the games myself (doing so is legal in many countries, but check local laws folks!) and have a blast playing my games on various devices.
I don't trust the cloud. There's nothing for me in there.
Re: Xbox Boss Doesn't See Nintendo As A "Main Competitor" In The Next-Gen War
@Kidfunkadelic83
The problem with this future, is that it's driven from the interests of businesses to make more money, NOT from the interests of the consumers, as streaming-everything mostly means that content will be limited and eventually completely lost, or under the control of companies that have total power over what you are and aren't allowed to watch, listen, read and play.
When everything will be transitionned to a "service", it will be the apex of savage capitalism. Because instead of making people pay for goods and products (that they own and can use again and again), you now make them pay and they own nothing.
This is like the difference between paying the rent for an appartment, and paying a house's mortgage. Basically, the industry is saying that everyone's future is to stop buying houses and rent appartments forever. Oh, and the landlord can kick you out for any reason he sees fit. And has complete control over your furniture, and what you can and can't put in your appartment.
From their perspective... it smells like a ton of money. No wonder they're all investing in this. Total control + forcing people to pay forever if they want to play whatever.
I just find it sad that the younger generations mostly aren't seeing it this way. We're raising generations of future techno slaves that won't have any money anymore, or own anything, because everything will be a freaking "service" they'll have to pay every month.
Re: There's "No Store" Or Microtransactions In DOOM Eternal
... at launch.
I'm sure they'll include something later, by way of a patch or something. If not, more power to them, but I wouldn't hold this for a promise that can't be broken. Many companies tell something and then don't respect what they said. Sometimes, the change is done after release, by way of a game update.
So I never take anything for granted these days.
Re: Comparing The Witcher Games To The Books Is Like Comparing "Spaghetti Carbonara With A Bicycle", Says Creator
To me, the guy sounds actually somewhat sane, in a way that he still view the advent of media convergence as something definitely identifiable to this era, and questions its purpose (I do too). Guy's kind of remind me of my late grandfather, especially now when I realise that many of the things he said back then ("in my days...") were, in some way, actually better.
And now, having kids of my own, I can somewhat relate. I still prefer to play old retro games than many modern games. I don't get why my kids (and apparently, millions of people) are so bent on watching Youtubers yelling all the time about anything. I don't get why "selfies" matter to so many people. I don't see the importance of Twitter and the likes. So yep, I'm a dinosaur. And you know what? I'm fine with that. Seems like Sapkowski's in a similar boat, although he's older, so his references are too.
The guy's doing what he wanted to do (write books), and he got success out of that, to the point where its big enough for games, TV series, animated movies, and so on. He might not care about those, but as this brings money in (through new sales of books, and licences), he's surely happy about this. He just feels like what he thinks about that should'nt be relevant for the masses. And the masses, used to this era of social media, seem to have trouble understanding that someone may want to keep his thoughts to himself sometimes.
Anyway. I enjoyed the series, and I'm enjoying the games. Will start the books soon.
Re: '80s-Inspired Endless Runner Top Run Speeds Onto Nintendo Switch Next Month
Personnaly, I'm really tired of endless runners. I mean, since they're litterally dime a dozen on most platforms since years already, one really need to have something extra super duper special for me to want to play it. And I mean beyond art style or variation on the same old gameplay.
I know some people will definetely like this, and that's cool. I wish all developpers out there can get some success with their games. Creating games is often a labour of love, so it's great when people recognize this and buy your game.
But.... it's another endless runner..... So probably not for me. Unless someone tells me there is a definite thing or feature in there that makes it completely different than most other endless runners out there....
Re: FutureGrind Dev Slashes Switch eShop Price After Disappointing Sales
@Danrenfroe2016
I'm with you too on this. And by the video, this look like one of those "endless runner" type of games with a colour-coded gimmick similar to some others in the genre I've seen plenty of times already.
Not saying this game isn't good at what it tries to do, it's just that in a world where these games are available by the dozens on most mobile platforms, it needs something truly, and exceptionaly special for me to take notice. The endless runner genre was a fun concept quite some years ago already, and about two gazillion of them exists out there now. Even if this one is top quality and fun, it still feels to me like a cheap mobile game, which is NOT the type of thing I bought my Switch for.
Some "mobile" games on Switch are fine. For instance, Asphalt 9 feels like a console game somewhat, with physical controls and all. Sure, it has that freemium aspect to it... but it "feels" ok. I also have Gris, without knowing that it was for mobile too (still feels like a regular console game, although an artsy one). But this runner game seems to me like tons of other similar games on mobile, which doesn't convince me to try it out, even at that price.
But I feel sorry for mobile developpers who thought that the Switch would be a golden opportunity for them. It's like they didn't understand that a console (even a portable one) isn't exactly aimed at the same market mobile devices are catering to...
Re: Saber Interactive Says The Witcher 3 Update For Switch Will Be "Worth The Wait"
I don't think a boost in resolution would be a realistic expectation. But a slightly better framerate would. Like, ensuring a constant 30fps everywhere, including in cinematics. The game sometimes drop some frames when a lot is going on.
I haven't got a lot of crashes (maybe one or two in over dozens and dozens of hours played), but one other thing that could be improved is load times. When in smaller areas of the map, load times are manageable, but whenever you travel to Novigrad or Velen regions, load times are quite bad. If they can improve that, it would be very welcome.
Oh, and can they add more variety for NPC designs through a patch? I know some models were removed for this version to cut on size, the result being that it happenned sometimes in my game where two completely different characters (in optional missions) shared the exact same model, which ended up being a bit too weird.
Oh, and some pop-in, pop-out graphics I've seen flickering in the background a couple of times. Like the asset is moving in and out of the limit at which it clips. An easier transition between those rendering zones might look better. Although this a pretty minor detail that doesn't affect gameplay at al.
Re: Gallery: A New Batch Of Lovely Animal Crossing: New Horizons Screens For Your Viewing Pleasure
@Welshland
Oh, they already all have their profiles. But this won't do anything as Nintendo said there will be only one island PER SWITCH. Not per account or user. Per system. So all users will have to live on the same island and share the same resources.
So you can imagine the conflicts this will generate with my kids. Or if my son decides to wreck havoc on the trees planted by my daughter... or if she decides to dig holes all around his house.... you get the idea.... Or if someone decides to pick all the fruits, leaving nothing for others, and so on....
As a parent, I really don't want to have to deal with stuff like this. I mean, I could deal with it, and enforce some rules between them, but... I just don't want to play the AC police with my kids. And I don't want to buy a game they love and say to them they can't play it.
So I'll probably won't buy it. Even if I'm a fan since the first one on the GC. (Our wedding cake topping had AC characters - so yeah, we're big fans).
Re: Gallery: A New Batch Of Lovely Animal Crossing: New Horizons Screens For Your Viewing Pleasure
It's sad that I'll probably have to miss out on this one because of the limitation of having only one Island PER SYSTEM. I mean, come on Nintendo... do you expect, since all my family members (wife + two kids) love the AC games, to buy three additionnal Switches so that everyone can have their own island?
Game looks awesome otherwise. Just sad that families in which everyone is a gamer weren't considered when making it. Strange, coming from a company as family-oriented as Nintendo. Oh well.
Re: BioShock: The Collection Could Be Coming To Switch According To New Rating
@MuhBael
Yeah, I know. I already have it with all its DLC and it's almost 100% completed. It's quite a good game, indeed along the same lines as Xcom.
But still, I would double-dip and buy it a second time if Xcom 2 would hit the Switch. Even at full price. It's one of those rare games I don't mind paying that much for.
Re: BioShock: The Collection Could Be Coming To Switch According To New Rating
While these games weren't part of a personnal wish list I want to see happenning on the Switch (#1 would be Xcom 2), this is definitely something I'd be interested in, even if I already have the games on PC. Playing them on the Switch would be pretty cool. Provided, of course, that the price would be right (which I doubt, this is the Switch after all, but let's see...)
Re: GameStop Subsidiary EB Games Closing 19 "Unprofitable" Stores Across Australia
Reading the headline, I was anticipating the end of it to be "in Canada".
While I always feel sad for employees losing their job, I have a hard time understanding how these stores are still in business. I remember going there all the time like 20 years ago, and at that time those stores weren't so bad. Prices were not always the best, but their were ok and staff was generally cool, and they actually often had the things I wanted.
Fast-forward these days, and we have stores that never have what I want in stock, prices that are always equal or higher than everywhere else, used game prices that are an insult (and are affecting the videogame industry badly), plus harrassing and unfriendly staff. Oh, and fraudulent advertising too, when stores refuse to honour their own advertised specials from their flyers.
I kid you not, one of their clerks even insulted me once because I wasn't interested in the game he was sugesting to me, as if I was completely stupid for not liking his suggestion.
This, and their horrible trend of trying to sell unwrapped and loose discs/carts as "new". --- "I can guarantee you it was never played". Yeah, right. Look pal, it's openned, there's no way for me to know it's new. They sometime REFUSED to sell me an unwrapped copy (even if they had some in stock).
I rarely go there anymore now. And I encourage my kids (and friends) to not shop there either.
Stores like these will often say that online retailers make things hard for them, but it's not really true. They dug their own grave by simply not giving a damn about the customer's experience. And any intelligent customer will do the math. Why shop there? If I'm not getting any good service or a good in-store experience, what's the reason? Between not getting service in-store, or not getting service online BUT at least get a better price, I'd say stores like these are simply pushing people towards the online competition. So, in a sense, it's their own fault.
Re: Alienware Reveals Switch-Like Device Capable Of Playing PC Games
The thing about Windows 10 for a portable gaming OS, is that it's feckin terrible at managing a stanby mode when... you know... gaming.
I had a GPD Win some time ago, and while I still think it was worth every penny for the sheer volume of games I was able to play on this thing, what ruined it as a viable "portable" gaming solution was that there was no easy "sleep" ot "standby mode" that didn't wrecked system stability.
I mean, you're on the train, and then you realize that you've arrived at your destination station, so you need to quickly move, right? Well, you can't just put this to sleep. If you do, get ready for a big surprise when you'll wake the system up. Usually in the form of a black screen, corrupted graphics, unresponsive controls, and often without a mean to get back in the game without CTRL-ALT-DELETEing your way into a reboot. And even sometimes this doesn't work, and you have to do a cold reset.
BUT, aside from that, I had tons of fun with the device. I just had to properly exit any game I was playing before properly shutting down the system.
So...
Did Alienware found a fix to make Windows 10 more stable when using sleep or standby mode while gaming?
Otherwise, I don't really care for it as a portable replacement or competitor to the Switch. Still, looks fun though. Just not something I'd bring with me all the time to game on (like my Switch).
Re: Saber Interactive "Working Hard" On An Update For The Witcher 3 On Switch
Never had any crashes with the game yet (and with many dozens of play hours). Wonder if this has anything to do with the game being played from a cart... maybe SD card performance (or reliability) has something to do with this? Dunno.
Personally, I don't have any issue with the blurriness, or anti-aliasing, as I'm playing mostly in portable mode and I'm not noticing anything that bug me.
Sure, there is some popup happening in some random places, and some lower quality textures, but the only thing I've seen (from my end) that would improve things a bit (it is a minor update after all), could be the framerate that strangely drops in some cinematics, and maybe improve the framerate a bit in graphically more complex areas (like Novigrad for instance).
Also, load times in some regions of the world are quite long. If these can be improved, that would be great too.