Richnj

I've gone mostly digital for convenience and to save space. Also less likelihood of my two very young boys destroying the whole lot. Being able to scan and boot up any game on a whim has been a big plus this last decade.

This has actually been a big factor in me getting a 1TB for my Switch rather than get excited for the next xbox or PS. They fail to have the instant access and large library bonuses of digital games, while also fail to have the pluses of physical media. The Switch actually does both of these better.

KOTOR and Republic Commando are the only SW games I'd continue to rebuy.

I still believe this is just the lazy way to achieve this. We've seen plenty of impossible ports on the system. It just takes more money from the publisher and talent from the developer. Things Capcom clearly haven't fully committed to the Switch yet.

And honestly, if I'm going to put down £35-£50 on a game on Switch, I'd rather it be a low res, low frame port, than a hit or miss and one-day-removed-from-servers streamable game.

@AJDarkstar I'm not sure about games not having 'verted', since invertes has always been my normal.

I came from using a flight stick on flight sims on PC, and N64 shooters like Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, and Duke 64 didn't bother me too much because they had heavy auto aim and aim assist built in to the games.

It wasn't until Halo CE on xbox in 2001 that it became a problem. I spent the first level looking at the floor. Wasn't until I inverted the aim that it clicked and I could actually look about. Turned out my brain was still wired so that pulling back on a stick makes your nose go up. Used inverted ever since.

Still drives me crazy when I have to help my Fiancee, son, or nephews though. And they always pull a face when trying to play one of my games.

I play inverted, and have done for at least 20 years, and I can't remember the last game I couldn't change this option in.

This is just another bit of proof that Nintnedo put zero care or time in to this collection. The fans and the games deserved better.

@Donkey-Kong-Fan 1) It's probably because he loves the company and the games, but hates the strategy surrounding this particular release. I mean, the Wii U ports are questionable too, but they don't draw half the criticisms and backlash because they aren't nearly as disgraceful.

2) It's not defamation if it's true.

"Oh, we'll delete it from the servers on 31st March 2021, if you like. There. Happy now?!"

10/10 game of the year!.

Also, I like how this would make the game a "meta royale" TM. With the lack of new players coming in, it would become a survival game on a whole other level. To see who the last person playing the game is.

"get off, get off"

Turns out, his real love was his best friend all along. Also, his best friend is in to JOI.

@TheFrenchiestFry @FullMetalWesker Doesn't matter is it was an anniversary thing or not. Selling it at full price for such a low effort launch, with a FOMO inducing time limit, (and during a global pandemic with resulting recession of all things) is scummy.

The other Mario stuff is OK because it's not £50. The limited time creates FOMO, that can directly be turned in to hype, which in turn can be monetised. And that sort of exploitation of behaviours is scummy.

Had they released this at something more reasonable, like £15. Something more in line with the effort put in, that would have been fine.

At best, this is an extremely tone-deaf and irresponsible launch that despite being as agregious as it is, has been successful and may give companies like EA, Acti, and 2k (who still continue to push what is acceptable) bad ideas.

I'll be waiting for the Switch version first.

@AJDarkstar You can't scale down an open world RPG.

He says right there in your article that bugs are inherent to these types of games and that extra time is how you mitigate them.

I'm not implying they don't make buggy games. I'm saying that using New Vegas as the prime example is not fully honest because of the context around its development. Short of turning it to a very short very linear style game, any company would have launched New Vegas a buggy mess.

@AJDarkstar I think that's a gross simplification of the relationship between independent developer, needing project funding to stay in business and a large publisher like Bethesda, who have a very public history of undermining its own 3rd party partners in order to purchase them for pennies.

@AJDarkstar Bethesda put an incredibly tight deadline on new vegas. I've heard it was only 18 months. When Bethesda themselves take years to their main line titles.

It's no surprise that New Vegas was buggy.

@SwitchForce Even Sony has been declining in Japan. It's a weird market. They prefer smaller and more mobile devices. Things like xboxes and playstations are just dying out there.

Xbox has been a failure there, but it's hardly an easy market as your implying.

"we haven't seen Steve with any pickles"

If you pay close attention in Minecraft, you will eventually sea pickles.

I say we should leave it in.

It's also what she said.

@TG16_IS_BAE I'm fast approaching 500gb.

So I just bought the 1tb card. I'm planning on getting a good 5 more years out of my Switch, if not more, so I'm going to need the space.

Just do a spiritual sequel and cut the toxic konami ties.

@Valhalla91 I mean, you were pretty selective in that data. The Wii was surrounded by 3 underperforming home consoles.

Those failures is what an iterative release model tries to avoid.

It could, it should, and I think they aren't the only ones. Sony will attempt to retain the old model as it has been good for them. But MS are looking to break that cycle too.

The Xbox Series itself already seems to be modelled after phones and even MS' own Surface hardware, and its cross system support with Xbox One. Hence the 'series' naming. With X being high end and S being budget, I fully expect to see an xbox series 2 in 4-5 years. If not sooner.

You won't be required to upgrade with every hardware release, but there'll be power benefits from doing so. You can upgrade when you feel you want and need to. It's a much better ecosystem and is more beneficial to both companies and customers.

I love really bad movies. I really enjoyed the first Resident Evil film. But I just can't support something like this.

Firstly, it just isn't in the spirit of the source material. Like, I can be in to films that stray. LOTR and the MCU might not be 1-1 translations of their source, but they are good film series to watch and retain the spirit of the source. But the Anderson/Jovovich approach is just godawful interpretations that don't care about that spirit.

Secondly, it's like the Sharknado of video game movies. The Sonic and Detective Pikachu movies show a level of quality throughout their production, written and acting and that should be rewarded. If you're going to reward bad, it can't be a level of bad that tried to excuse its flaws by claiming it's intentional. Which seems to be how Anderson escaped critique with the later RE movies.

The Knights of Pen and Paper collections are great.

I don't speak a word of Japanese, I have stage fright, and I'm honest. So no.

The Switch is more than capable of running these games, and while it's understandable that impressive ports of contemporary games take longer to get working on the system, there's zero excuse for a remaster of a decade old trilogy, that's had more than enough time in development, to not appear on the Switch at the same time as the other consoles.

Also, after revisiting some old classics like Mass Effect, Fallout etc, I'm currently playing the Dead Space trilogy and enjoying that far more than ME2 and beyond. Dead Space needs the remaster more I think.

@Ghostchip @JeanPaul Heaven forbid you find out what what people have done with the Disney princesses.

@Marios-love-child No, I didn't say you bought it to deprive others. It's technically Nintendo who is doing the depriving. The disturbing part is where you assigned more importance to your object because others couldn't get it.

We can disagree, and agree to disagree, but personal insults don't normally come under that category.

@JamesR "By the way, regarding time limits, I'm still angry that I can no longer get hold of a new, official AC/DC T-shirt from their 1978 Powerage world tour.

I appreciate that this was before I was born, but still."

Google it. You'll be able to get a digital copy, 42 years later, and for free. Beats out £50 for six months by a long shot.

@Morph "If you haven't bought it by the time its pulled, you either didn't want it that badly or you had other priorities."

Good thing we're not experiencing a recession or mass unemployment due to a pandemic, where normally financially stable people may find themselves in financially tough times, and may have to priortise other things over video games, especially over the next six months.

@Marios-love-child By disturbing things, yeah. Your games, your things, are meant to derive their 'special-ness' through your own personal experiences with them.

You deriving extra special-ness through an artificially depriving of others of the chance to have the same as you, is disturbing.

@johnvboy I'd be OK with lazy rom drops that left the original graphics untouched and unspoiled, if they were priced appropriately. £50 is remake territory.

If this collection did one thing wrong, it probably wouldn't have had the amount of backlash it had. Problem is it did three things wrong. It's a low effort job, charging full price, and with a nonsensical limited release window.

@Marios-love-child "it makes my copy feel more special"

That's disturbing on many levels.

@janpampoen and anyone buying a Switch after the limited window, or just not able to get the game will not have chance to play the games at all. Maybe you shouldn't have missed the "limited" availability of these games 20 years ago.

@TG16_IS_BAE I'd settle for either roms at a reasonable price, or higher quality efforts at £50.

This is neither.

@zool Yeah, over 50% of Switch owners do play in handheld. It's something like 80%, with the remaining 20% being exclusively docked. But only 30% play exclusively in handheld mode. Bottom line is that 70% of the base Switch audience use the console as a home console to some degree.

And I think I see where I misunderstood you. You don't like including Switch Lite in to switch sales, but why?. Sony and MS have both released slim and pro versions of their consoles, and included them in to life time sales. If there was a PS5/XBS Lite/Hybrid, and it played all the same games, on the same ecosystem, with the same players, then why shouldn't it be included?. It's part of the same family of consoles, and it counts.

The biggest difference between the pro and lite approaches is that the lite actually does less than the base model, while the pros do everything the base models do but better. If we're worried about double dipping, then the pro consoles are a bigger concern when reporting unit sales, no?

(God I wish there were PS5 and Xbox Series hybrids).

@Apportal in fairness, the 8 of us only pay £32 a year. So it's more like £4 a year per sub. If anyone is paying the £18, they are getting ripped off.

@zool To play along with your logic, I think it was around 30% who play exclusively in handheld. So 50/50 isn't a true indicator. You'd have to take 70% of those figures to find the number of gamers who use the Dock.

That said, it's a stupid argument. Even if 50% of players were exclusively handheld, those gamers still buy and play games, and that demand for games is causing a constant supply of games to the system.

The console is selling, the games are selling, and the support is still coming. Having handheld players be a part of that cycle doesn't diminsh the strength of the experience. You, as a docked only gamer, can buy the console, and buy a series of games on the system, let's say Doom. You can buy all five games on the system, with a sixth coming out, and those games exist on the system because of every gamer that supported those games on the system. Doesn't matter if they were docked or handheld gamers. You as a docked player benefitted from their engagement with the system and its library.

And it doesn't matter if the Switch made it to 200m units sold because it's benefitting from two markets, it's still just one console.

@HobbitGamer @Zuljaras One of my first PC gaming experiences was flight sims, obviously with a flight stick.

I played PC shooters like Half Life and Duke Nukem. I played single stick console shooters like Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. When the xbox and Halo CE first came out I went round a friend's to play split screen. It was my first twin stick FPS experience, and I spent the first 15 mins looking at the floor. I just couldn't wrap my head around the right stick. On a whim I inverted the Y axis, and bam. It clicked. My brain could process how to control my camera.

I've played inverted ever since. Much to the annoyance of my friends, my nephews, my Fiancée, and now even my son whenever they attempt to play on my accounts.

This is starting to feel like when PS tried to defend games as a service to try to hype up the Avengers game.

If you're having to write article after article, and feel like you need to defend your stance in the comment section, maybe it would be easier to just acknowledge the issues, rather than trying to paint them in a good light.

@scully1888 Well now you're just lying to me, because you just said the score was "decided by a single criteria".

@scully1888 Actually makes it worse.

If your only criteria is how much fun you personally had, then your reviews aren't worth much. I accept there's always some personal enjoyment aspect to reviews, but if you aren't taking in to account value, technical standards, user accessibility options, and effort put in to the product, then what's the point of attaching a score to a review.

Removing points for failings is part of the point.

@EMI Yeah, but they're expensive to watch them live, and in person, first time round, not on DVD 20 years after they're first played.

@ilh Depends on whether it was MS or Nintendo that got to set the price. I wouldn't pay £50 for a Switch version.

And Nintendo could have released Mario 64, Sunshine, and Galaxy at discounted prices through a VC, but here we are.

Let me do my best defender impression.

YoU dOn'T hAvE tO bUy It.

If I was any company with a "monster" IP, after reading this, I'd be all up for suing Monster Energy.

Monster Hunter, Monsters Inc... You get the idea.

Side note: the word 'monster' doesn't look right now. I'm not even sure I'm spelling it correctly anymore.

I'd actually really like BL3 on Switch. The other three games are better as far as I'm concerned, but I'd like the full series on the system.

This is one of those franchises, like Bioshock and Elder Scrolls, where I actually enjoy playing through them again every few years, and playing on different hardware is a good way to mix it up a little.

With recent announcements about continued support for the game, and potentially cross play, if Gearbox go full out and add crossplay across all titles, then I'd be a happy man.

I am shocked.

It's not like Nintendo has a history of manufactured scarcity, nor has anyone been pointing this out during the 3D all stars limited availablity conversation.

Nostradamus couldn't have seen this coming.

@status-204 My favourite kind of news articles are the ones that include five tweets from complete randos giving their opinion of some major incident.

A limited release of a collection of highly beloved, highly requested games after months of financial pressures, job losses, and a resulting recession for £50, is a bit different from an unexpected, small jump rope exercise game released during the beginning of a pandemic lockdown for £0.

The context is important, and the context is why the 3D All Stars release is so bad.

Since the Series S is discless I've lost interest in buying a next gen console. So a Switch Pro/Home would be the most enticing console for me for the foreseeable future.

@BlackenedHalo I wouldn't mind the low effort if the price and availability wasn't the way it is.

Just think, if we had the VC, you could buy these games for much less and whenever you were ready to buy them. Christ, if Nintendo announced right now that a new VC was coming to Switch with NES - Wii support, I wouldn't be angry about the way they are handling this collection.

It's almost as if manufactured scarcity is just a perfect tactic for abuse and artificially increasing value of a product.

These scalers are just disgusting. Also the people buying out a product to sell on at above the original sale price aren't saints either.

Yeah, this is the sort of content I want.

@Ashunera84 You implied it. Saying that they play the long game whole western devs play the quarterly game.

And it doesn't change the fact that these game are being removed when there's no reason to remove them. You're arguing that they don't release loads of re-releases to not oversaturate the market, during a gen they have re-released almost their entire last gen catalogue. While they had other titles releasing and staying up for sale. While in previous gens they had the virtual console to keep their back catalogue available.

The very fact that there's three games in this collection for £50 means that each game has "devalued" from being a full price each. Games naturally devalue. You can't stop it. Once enough of a game has been available, anyone who values the content of the game already owns it. The thing about value is it's subjective, not objective. Not every game has a £50 price point for eternity. People won't buy the same product they have already played, years later for full price. The game has lost value. People who didn't buy the game for price full at launch are unlikely to pay full price years after launch. To them, the value of the game isn't £50. In order to continue to sell content long in to the future, you have to lower the price. It's not that games unnaturally devalue, but Nintendo are unnaturally manufactoring rarity and value. This is demonstrated by the limited supply of hardware they produce. The limited supply of games they produce. And now the limited availability of a digital game. How about we be honest about what Nintendo are doing, rather than trying to excuse it.

The availability doesn't have to end just because another event is coming up. That's GAAS levels of manipulation. The availability of a digital Mario game wouldn't negatively affect another event. If the release of one title affected a future release, we'd see more titles get pulled just before another title released. Trying to claim that the limited availability was chosen to end on that date because of another event, and not a fiscal connection is either naive, or disingenuous.