Yasaal

Yasaal

User

Comments 1,328

Re: Nintendo's E3 2018 Site Is Now Open For Business

Yasaal

@ValhallaOutcast Haven't seen those reports so can't comment on that. Anyway I doubt an (enhanced) port could also be allowed a non-string copyright. That's how the law works, at least in the States. Don't know about UK tho. I mean, I saw the US trailer with the copyright thing, not the UK edition, which is why me and most US outlets are confident it's a sequel in terms of copyright.

Re: Nintendo's E3 2018 Site Is Now Open For Business

Yasaal

@Ledgendt Ports can't be rating pending, at least direct ports can't. Remasters might have PRs. Ports also have a string of copyright. Bayo 2 on Switch for example had a copyright "2014-2018" while Mario Kart 8 Deluxe had a copyright of "2014-2017". Smash Switch so far has an official copyright of "2018" and nothing else. This shows it's a new game because you can't just change the copyright so easily without a whoooooole lot of paperwork.

These were the official reasons. As for unofficial reasons, new logo, logo doesn't line up with the Smash 4 logo. New game must be there since Smash is a bestseller and it can push more units to Switch and other unofficial, unproved and mostly "wishlist"-like reasons. If you're looking for Smash being a port or sequel, read the previous paragraph for Rock solid proof.

Re: White House Meeting With Industry Execs Focuses On Violence In Video Games

Yasaal

@GraveLordXD Well it's a start I guess. Can't expect people to immediately be positive at hearing the voice of survivors especial children. We're still a long way off the right track.

I agree. It's been wonderful engaging in a conversation with you. Very rarely does an internet debate or discussion end in peace instead of f bombs XD.

To those two points you laid out in the end. I whole heartedly agree. All we can do is hope that the government doesn't screw this up (Spoiler alert: They will screw this up) and hope that such horrific incidents never happen again.

Re: White House Meeting With Industry Execs Focuses On Violence In Video Games

Yasaal

@GraveLordXD True. Children should be taught that the government isn't everything. If there's one thing I liked about the survivors of the shooting, it is that they're trying to make themselves heard. That's something I liked. It gave me hope for the future generations. That they know that the government isn't perfect and that they will eventually have to take matters into their own hands.

For now, I'm trying to stay sane for the next 2 or 6 years (God knows how long he'll stay) by watching Colbert and Oliver and so far it's going good. Really hope we don't get another "storm" brewing...

Re: White House Meeting With Industry Execs Focuses On Violence In Video Games

Yasaal

@GraveLordXD Well you yourself said that a gun won't do anything but sit in it's place while people will do propaganda. Maybe that's why the govt wants to control people and not guns, once again, you're implying that I don't want guns allowed and I don't want the proper gun users to keep their guns. Gun control is important. If it's not implemented then careless people will start picking guns and kill innocent people, therefore badly affecting the proper gun users because the government will use their usual "all for one one for all" law and strike everyone.

I'm on your side surprisingly. I want guns allowed, but the difference between your and my side is that you don't want gun control while I do. The funny part about that? Both ways protect existing responsible gun owners. I'm not a fan of the government, but if done right, I'm sure gun control will not only prevent future shootings (irresponsible minors don't get guns), but it'll not further destroy the hard earned reputation of responsible gun owners (since the aforementioned parties won't get the gun and so such horrific incidents won't happen which ultimately means people won't immediately point fingers at the proper gun owners).

I want guns allowed. But I want gun control implemented (properly). Why should responsible gun owners be held responsible for what an irresponsible minor does with a hunting gun? Why not make gun laws that prevent such minors from getting their hands on a firearm without affecting the gun ownership of existing owners? People make it hard but it's not hard to solve at all. "Are you 21+ and don't have a history of mental problems?, Good! Here's your gun!". That's how it should be but this government loves making things impossible and a pain to solve. "So much winning" Mr President said. So much winning indeed.

Re: White House Meeting With Industry Execs Focuses On Violence In Video Games

Yasaal

@GraveLordXD Well for the first point, I'll give an example, when you cut vegetables, you use a knife, not a samurai sword. Why? Because the knife itself can do the job well. Plain and simple. Now to relate with guns, you don't need a rifle to protect yourself because a pistol can do the job well too. Not a matter of deaths, but a matter of "doing the job well". Why do people need a rifle instead of a pistol is something I'll never understand. But anyway, let people cut vegetables with a samurai sword, it's a free world anyway right?

Now for your second point. It's commendable to know that the NRA had a bright past. But their aim has changed drastically. It's gone from "disarm the population" to "arm the population with whichever gun needed". Quite the shift, and quite surprising honestly.

Thing is, I still stand by my point, "I'm not saying no to guns, I'm saying yes to gun control". I believe that people have the right to protect themselves, just that the government should apply laws to prevent minors and people with a history of mental problems getting their hands on them. Why? It sullies the reputation of other gun owners as you said. If you disagree with this, you're contradicting yourself. Don't you think gun control should be implemented? To protect the people? To protect the 2nd amendment as well? (Explanation of second question in case a misunderstand happens: The aforementioned parties wouldn't get their hands on a gun and gun violence would be drastically reduced, thus resulting in the people accepting guns in society because these shootings affect everyone). I don't know why you omitted looking at these other points I put up before, and therefore I will remind you of what my original message was.

Re: White House Meeting With Industry Execs Focuses On Violence In Video Games

Yasaal

@GraveLordXD Ah here we go again. Didn't want a deep talk of politics in a Nintendo site but I started it. People don't need hunting guns to protect themselves. A pistol or something similar is enough of a weapon to protect yourself and your loved ones from.

Second. I'm not saying no to guns. I'm saying yes to Gun control. Big difference. For example if you're a sane person above the age of 21 and want a gun. Do a test, and if you pass you'll have it. Nothing more. Nothing less. If in case you have mental problems like the mass shooter and are below the age of 21 like the mass shooter, you don't get the gun. No more. No less.

Next, it's the fault of the shooter, the government, the gun provider and the sheriffs who were supposed to rush in and stop the killer. Now I already explained in the above paragraph why the law abiding citizens should not be affected by the laws and how. I'll explain breifly again, law abiding citizens above the age of 21 and with no mental problems can keep their guns, (preferably not Hunting weapons bc that's totally not what's needed but that's a different debate).

Now for the NRA. Why am I and the media blaming them? It's related to the government. Since the NRA funds the Reps, they're pressured to give in to what the NRA wants (as goes with every political sponsor), now the problem here is that the NRA doesn't want any gun control laws since it'll hurt gun sales (heck, they even started getting stuff done in Georgia and have started taking action because the government and the people are finally taking a sensible stance against gun violence). That's why the NRA is blamed. They don't want gun control laws since it'll hurt gun sales and the only way to prevent that is to sponsor and bend the Reps to their will.

I repeat. I'm not saying no to guns. I'm saying yes to gun control. More over, I think even you will agree that video games are not to be blamed for the government's shortcomings. You agree to that don't you?

Re: White House Meeting With Industry Execs Focuses On Violence In Video Games

Yasaal

Don't wanna get too deep into politics but "Blame everything but guns"

Srsly. This is just the Reps desperately trying to find a way to escape the gun control laws most people (i.e all sensible Americans) want implemented in the country. Why? Two words, The NRA

It's quite obvious that Video games aren't at fault. Heck, if they are, go ban books, movies and anything civilisation uses.

Why I'm not surprised at this is surprising itself.

Re: Feature: The Big Nintendo Direct Summary - 8th March

Yasaal

@SLIGEACH_EIRE The argument swings either way. Why didn't they call it a sequel specifically if it's a sequel? But then why didn't they show or clearly prove that it's a port either?

Most likely done to generate some buzz much like the NX which had no details for quite a long time and originally left people hanging.

So far as to the analyses made by people (myself included), Smash is a sequel. No more no less. It's all a matter of time before that is confirmed or not. The game is coming this year after all. And we all know how faithful Nintendo is to their promises cough BotW

Jokes aside it's quite possible to see Smash not get delayed this year either since it's been 4 years since Smash 4 and Bandai has been helping out in making the game as well so it's highly likely we'll see the game hit store shelves this year too.

Re: Masahiro Sakurai Confirms He's Working On Super Smash Bros. Switch

Yasaal

@TheAceofMystery 100% agree. They weren't so quick as to call it a port like with MK8D or Pokken DX. The copyright also doesn't state ©2014-2018 like with Ports like Bayonetta 2. It's just ©2018. Looks like the law proved us that Nintendo is making a sequel XD

Look at any port for the Switch and you'll see. Skyrim? ©2011-2017. Mario Kart? ©2014-2017. And so on. That's how the law works. Let's see who denies that. I've never seen a teaser for a port either so it's only a matter of time before we see more details since the game is coming this year.

Re: Switch Helped Nintendo Grab 22 Percent Of The Games Market In 2017

Yasaal

@SLIGEACH_EIRE I'm not surprised Nintendo gamers are least likely to buy DLC. We expect full games

Jokes aside I s'pose Ninty's games are such games that don't need DLC to hype over. Be it any game (although some exceptions are there). As for third parties on Nintendo platforms, it's kinda messed up. Many people buy Nintendo consoles for Nintendo games and not third party (not everyone) so I think thanks to Nintendo themselves not releasing DLC for games that we've become accustomed to additions being done in the form of updates or "Free DLC" as the media likes to call it nowadays. Just a theory. Not exactly sure what the reason possibly could be about third parties but I'm definitely sure about my first point.