Huh? Has this guy ever played a Doom game before this one? Judging by this article, no, he hasn't. Maybe he's the type who would actually enjoy Doom 3.
Agreed, but isn't that a reason why both companies would be rolling out new systems in the next year or so? Of course they're doing what they can to improve their services to go with those new systems, and rolling out new hardware is literally a step to improving hardware. The difference between Sony and MS, and Nintendo is that Nintendo just doesn't care about investing more than is necessary into hardware and services. There's always room for improvement for any company, ...
Here's hoping the components of this thing are built better than those overpriced joycons as it's not like you can swap them out here. It's good to know it has a decent d-pad, but I still think this is a terrible deal given all you have to sacrifice just to save $100.
Yeah, come to think of it, that's going to be a problem too. And games are a much more complex beast than other forms of media. Even ignoring the logistics of having games streamed from a server, latency and all, it's not just a matter of companies taking money and dumping content on a service. If there are issues, patches will need to be made. If DLC is created, that too has to be ported over.
On Google's side of things, maintaining those servers and the co...
In this case it's a little worse than that as there's no subscription fee to access YouTube (thank goodness). All Google is doing here is selling me on the idea that game streaming is the devil and I should stick to other forms of game distribution. At least buying a digital game will ensure I can access it at any point of time regardless of whether I'm connected to the internet or whether I'm paying for the continued use of a service. If I'm going to be convinced to sa...
The thing with those other services is that the systems they're available on can do other things besides run those services. If you don't like those services, you can opt not to pay for them and still get a lot of enjoyment out of those systems. If you buy a Stadia, you're committing yourself to that service, because without it, you just have an expensive paperweight. Moreover, Google is making you buy the games on top of paying for the service, which will not get you ownership...
Rocksteady and Insomniac send their regards.
The $100 less price tag, and the for kids angle is pretty much all this thing has going for it. Haven't you heard that the new model Switch has a longer battery life than the Lite? If you're looking for a Switch to use as a handheld that's a much better choice, and it's a full-fledged Switch with all of its features if those who purchase it feel inclined to use them.
So, let me get this straight. Games that launch with these new systems aren’t likely to push them to their limits? So, basically, like with any system that has launched ever? Who would have thought.
The most interesting thing about this new SKU is that it somehow has a better battery life than the handheld-only Lite model. WTF? I guess the only thing the Lite has going for it now is the lower pricing, which isn't all that great a selling feature given that it's only $100 less to my understanding and is far more limited.
And the latest season of Stranger Things isn't behind a second paywall, nor is anything else you may want to watch on Netflix.
High people are pretty excited for this supposed streaming future. Although, if I were to get into streaming, which I won't, I would hope that paying for the service would be sufficient to access games. I don't even want to know what kind of drug would make me want to pay for games on top of paying for the service and not even owning the games after that exchange. WTF kind of service model is that?
Third place is really working out for them, I see.
So you get to keep your saves? Cool. But you know what would be even better? If you still had access to a game to load that save. Also, where do they get off charging for both the service and games when you don't even own them?
Odd numbered gens are generally worse than even numbered ones for growing pains, but that's only because that's usually when some big shake-up happens, such as the transition to 3D, or online infrastructure on consoles and all that entailed. I guess the greater proliferation of game streaming than we've seen this gen might be a thing, but I just don't see the next PlayStation or Xbox being all that different overall, besides a huge leap in graphics and the switch to SSDs. I ...
But games are why I buy game systems. If I wanted a Netflix machine, there are cheaper options for that. I’m not a big fan of services, and no, MS has not convinced me that I need them. I’d much rather invest in a system with great exclusives that set it apart from a very similar competitor system. I want whatever this author is smoking.
You're probably still young then. I've been way more into "kid stuff" as an adult than I was growing up once I passed a certain age, because there was a time when I was self-conscious about what others thought of me, and I adhered to common ideas of what "grown-up stuff" was. In my late pre-teens and early teens especially, I was keen on distancing myself from anything associated with being a kid.
Of course, I eventually grew up and decided lif...
These companies advocating for an all-streaming future clearly aren't taking into account what the consumer thinks, because it seems as though they believe the consumer will think what they want us to. Well, we have the power to prove to them just how wrong they are. I mean, why would we want to stream games from a server who knows how far away when it's easier, cheaper and doesn't have latency issues to just play the game on your own system?
It has been a success for Nintendo, yes, but this is an article about an issue with its accessories. Saying "well, it's selling well" is neither germane to the topic at hand, nor does it mean that this is not an issue that is occurring. Ergo, Donald84's post is irrelevant and pointless. I guess by that logic every time we see an article talking about Sony censorship or harping on crossplay for the billionth time, it would be pertinent to drop a post saying that the PS4 is...
I read the article and it does not address my main concerns with the Stadia at all. "Welcome to the world of DRM"? No thanks. I like being able to access my games whenever I want without ties to a service or requiring constant internet. I can put up with having to wait for my internet to come back on to sync my trophies if it comes to that, but I can't put up with not being able to play my games at all. What a load of BS. The author even admits that data caps are a concern...