...Dozens of games on Steam and consoles, nothing of interest.
When you compare it to other games it's not expensive at all. League of Legends is $7.50 for a new character (though you can get them by playing the normal game). Other games charge around $5 for a new fighter. It's expensive when you consider the game is $60 with over 30 characters and dozens of stages and several modes, but based on the market, it's not too bad. I guess people expected a little cheaper when you compare it to Mario Kart.
The problem isn't Nintendo is taking a portion of the money, it's all the restrictions and approval you need to get content out there and make money. If Nintendo took 20% of what you get and left you alone, people wouldn't be making this commotion. But to get the 60% YT leaves you the game has to be from a select list and it has to be something Nintendo sanctions. No one wants to be told how to create their content, or for it to be from a certain game. If I want to play and commen...
Nintendo is low on consumer relevance. It's been 10 years since they've released something truly revolutionary, they've become fairly predictable in their character-IP selection. A game like Bloodborne releases and you have a huge spike in interest towards PS4, when Nintendo releases a new game you know it's going to be good and fun but the response is more muted. Delicious food tastes so good for only so long before it becomes mundane, before it needs different ingredient. <...
Youtubers shouldn't be fiercely against Nintendo taking a cut of their videos, they should be against how restrictive their policies are for putting out approved content. Every video has to be approved and if you want the 70% over the 60%, your whole channel has to be only Nintendo games. And if the game isn't on the whitelist then no deal as well.
There's a reason no one is making a commotion about Twitch or YT taking a cut of their videos. They've provided t...
They're continuing a precedent of stopping re-creations so other people don't re-create Nintendo games and release them. They don't want people to take a recently released game and make texture changes and release them as a free alternative.
This may be for a 15+ year old game, but they want it to be known they don't want re-creations of any kind.
It's because you only have one company making games for WiiU. Imagine Xbox1 or PS4 without 3rd party, would not look as pretty. And Nintendo has a handheld to support with quality exclusives.
Unless they pull another announcement on the scale of this one, it's coming for WiiU. Several times in the video Aonuma said "Zelda for WiiU", so it's pretty much confirmed it's coming for WiiU.
Nintendo will open up NX with Mario most likely, with Zelda next year. Nintendo won't give up on WiiU until it's been a profitable console for Nintendo.
If it makes Nintendo more money, then I'm for it. And it's not like Nintendo will stop making quality games for consoles and their handheld. DeNA is making the games with direction from Nintendo, who owns 10% of their company's stocks, the 2nd highest shareholder. Not only does Nintendo have a vested interest in all three areas (console, handheld, mobile), but they will make sure there is a line of quality. Maybe not amazing for mobile, but their core staples we've come to kno...
Destiny and Watch Dogs shows if you hype a game up enough you get sales. And they weren't bad games, they just didn't live up to the hype. The Order got nice sales, and it got a very mixed response, with strong negative viewpoints. I'm sure Bloodborne will sell quite a bit too. The only new IP's that didn't sell well were on WiiU, they weren't AAA but they were made by known developers.
The WiiU got crapped on because Nintendo were so slow with new ga...
Reminds me when the WiiU got an updated Mass Effect 3 but no 1 or 2. They assumed we had played the other 2 or didn't really care jumping into the third. While it was a quality product, you could get the trilogy, while it doesn't look as good, cost about half the price on another console.
Besides, wouldn't it have been cool to the PS2 original with overhauled visuals? There's more room for the game to grow.
I love when they throw in a mid-fight twist. You figure out how to fight the one boss then suddenly it gains size or summons another gargoyle.
Most Devs seem to run out of gameplay content to talk about, or the game is so similar to the last there's nothing left to say other than how good it looks or the same one addition they made. Plus when you have a franchise with 4 games in the last 4-8 years not much is expected other than graphics by that point, everyone knows the formula.
I'd like a side-scrolling Mario endless runner. You collect coins, avoid enemies and dodge pitfalls. Over time the platforming gets more complicated, maybe a little faster. Every so often a boss from a Mario series appears. You could spend money for a mushroom or an extra life, but theoretically you could do it forever if you're good enough.
I liked how even though the single-player was short (about 5 hours or so), they kept almost every level fresh by adding something cool or exciting outside of cover and shooting. One level you're riding in an armored vehicle down a narrow street, another you're scaling an ice wall into a stealth section finishing on snowmobiles.
When we talk about "cinematic video games" my comparison is always to MW2. It never stayed too long in one form of gameplay, and ex...
I'd love to see these, but I'm saving up. I've already seen too much XO
There's a few weeks between when it went Gold to when it releases. Instead of delaying the game which would push it back and mess with logistics, you fine tune last minute work and release it later. They want the game to release on the original date while still being able to polish it up. If during crunch time you realize it's just not polished enough there's a little extra time to make everything right.
It would be like turning in an Essay on the due date but bei...
With all of this Cloud and wireless technology I wonder if it would be possible to have a 2-part system. Like if you went the Fusion route, could you have a $250 handheld with a little more power than a Vita that plays outside the home, then once you got home you could wirelessly connect it to a $200 console that combines the power of the console and the handheld for something above PS4. The console alone wouldn't operate, but once you synced them together you would have a powerful system...
Good catch, didn't think about that. I don't see why they wouldn't extend their "Nintendo Network" brand to everything based on internet services. The name is already pretty catchy, and it would make sense since you would be interacting with everything over an integrated network.
200cc looks to be around 20-30% faster. Not sure if I want to start the new DLC on 200 or 150 first.