Julius

I think we can quite easily get a Super Mario and Zelda title out of the way for each of Ninty’s home consoles from that period, for starters NES: Super Mario Bros. 3; The Legend of Zelda SNES: Super Mario World; The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past N64: Super Mario 64; The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time GC: Super Mario Sunshine; The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker And, for handhelds, I think Pokémon titles take it for the Game Boy, Game Boy Colour and Game Boy Advance: Red/Blue/Yellow, Gold/Silver/Crystal, Ruby/Sapphire/Emerald.

Sony has launched My PlayStation, a new browser version of your PSN profile for use on desktops, tablets and smart devices. IGN also has some news from DICE: Naughty Dog might make a non-third person game after TLOU2.

Nolan North (whoops) Troy Baker confirmed to be working on the game.

Aaaaaaaand... ...it’s up. Woo shadow drop.

Looks like Balloon World is dropping on Friday in Australia (so potentially tomorrow afternoon here).

Nope, never played any of them, but I've heard quite a lot about them and their soundtracks. I've got a very long back log of "greats" to plough my way through, ranging from some lengthy JRPGs about Japanese schoolkids to short immersive first-person experiences about a family curse. This definitely seems like the sort of game that I'll just be able to pick up when I'm not in the mood for starting up a new game or chipping away at some monstrous level grind or open world adventure, and most importantly, just have some fun with. Added to my "Just For Fun" list

Well, that was fun while it lasted. RIP Platyblue. (Definitely my favourite fan design)

Not sure if I'm buying this "confirmation" as one of her leaks/something she's heard, or rather just some educated guessing. Because it really just sounds like an educated guess, and a pretty safe one at that.

I agree. I think that the campaign is extremely barebones - and a bit VERY boring, honestly - but the core multiplayer experience is actually very enjoyable for the most part. Starfighter Assault could very easily be its own game, but the game does begin to feel extremely repetitive if you spend too long on a certain mode. Bringing command posts back is probably at the top of my wish list for Battlefront III, regardless of whether its EA making it. However, one major problem that I had with my core experience - having knowledge of the scandal - was when I got killed by someone else and saw their cards. Instead of feeling humbled and fairly executed, almost any time that I saw someone with cards better than mine, my initial reaction was to blame my in-game death on their cards as opposed to their ability. Did they spend money on the game? Are they just luckier than me? Perhaps its just me, but it provides something of a distastefully bitter experience with people that you are supposed to be enjoying your time playing a game with. I look forward to seeing how their recently announced major update overhauls the current system. I don't think that I'm necessarily tired of Star Wars, but I must admit that I'm feeling a little bit fatigued. I've taken a break from reading the books since TLJ, and though I'm still enjoying Rebels, which only has a few episodes left, it just isn't holding my interest as much right now. I wasn't that interested in SOLO anyways, but that trailer just seemed poorly constructed and didn't get me hyped at all, so I think the 18 month gap that Disney engineered between SOLO and IX couldn't have been better designed.

Very true. If I recall correctly, it was the Chinese localisation team (or someone related to them) that leaked the final starter evolutions of SM, and they also leaked Team Rainbow Rocket for USUM, so if we do end up with a real leak again...it's probably going to be from that area of the development again. So, if these are real (and I think I'm just trying to temper my expectations a bit, because I really do adore that platypus design) and are further along in the design process than the final starter evolutions of Alola, it could potentially point to the game being pretty far along too. Maybe not in time to release this year, but starter evolutions and legendary Pokémon are, I imagine, the designs that they attempt to have finalised first, because they're normally what are tied to a game's reveal. I would like to imagine that development started pretty early when compared to other main series games (XY was in development since BW, iirc), if nothing else because of the upgrade in hardware from the 3DS to the Switch for Game Freak. I love the idea of NZ being a post-game region for an Australian region, and I think that Australia has an extraordinary array of wildlife and sealife for them to take advantage of. Regional variants could also be appropriate to return here like with Alola (Seviper, Joltik, Galvantula, Ekans, Arbok and Kangaskhan specifically come to mind). Honestly, i hope that they don't show off nearly as much as they did with the lead-up to SM. I think that this is one of those cases where the games might be better suited to an E3 reveal than to a Pokémon Direct, because of how successful the Switch has been so far and how big a brand Pokémon is. I'd love to see an E3 reveal with the titles, box art legendary and starter Pokémon, and then throw out there what they see as necessary if the E3 reveal hadn't already (version exclusives, some regional variants, the return of gyms or trials, etc.). I feel like they showed off way too much of the main story and cutscenes with SM marketing, way too many snippets throughout the game, and waaaaaaay too many of the Pokémon. I think that they'd be best off creating trailers and marketing around aspects that didn't spoil the core aspects of the main game, becayse they honestly don't need to: the Switch main series Pokémon games have the potential to be the first main series games to pass the 20 million units sold mark (something SM might have got closer to if not for USUM) since Gold & Silver, so I hope they don't blow their metaphorical load in the marketing campaign and ruin the sense of true discovery for the fans. Release it that November - you've got a five month window there which is more than enough to correctly market this game. Oh, and maybe don't have a demo this time around. Those never work out well for the up-to-that-point unannounced parts of Game Freak's hard work.

Saw these last night, and I have to agree on the bunny and platypus. If these are fake, those are some excellent pieces of fan art all the same. Not such a fan of the lemur (/monkey?) though... However, I don’t think these are real. I’d love for them to be - man, I want a platypus Pokémon so very bad now - but, at least personally, the artwork looks waaaaaaay too defined and complete when compared to the leak of the final evolution of the Alolan starter Pokémon a couple of years ago. It just looks a bit too neatly organised and doesn’t feel as cluttered as that concept art did, but I guess we’ll just have to wait and see. Speaking of a platypus Pokémon, though, where would everyone like to see them find inspiration for their next region? Spain and Italy have been heavily rumoured for some time now, which I think would be great, but I also have Australia, China, and a return to Japan on my wish list just hope they’re a little more abstract when it comes to utilising their inspiration/s this time around. Kalos and Alola didn’t feel very fictional when compared to some of the other regions, at least to me, because it feels like they just kept the already existing landmarks of France and Hawaii and traced routes all over their existing respective maps. I’d live to see a little more abstraction this time around, like with Unova.

PS4, XBO, and on PC later on (via EA Origin).

An excellent home release trailer: Releases digitally stateside on March 13th and physically on March 27th; still waiting on a UK release date. It will be the first time that a Star Wars films has been released in 4K. The home release of the film will be backed with bonus content (which The Force Awakens home release was very sorely lacking), the most notable being a feature length directorial documentary and 14 deleted scenes. A complete list of the home release bonus content: • The Director and the Jedi – Go deep behind the scenes with writer-director Rian Johnson on an intimate and personal journey through the production of the movie—and experience what it’s like to helm a global franchise and cultural phenomenon. • Balance of the Force – Explore the mythology of the Force and why Rian Johnson chose to interpret its role in such a unique way. • Scene Breakdowns - Lighting the Spark: Creating the Space Battle – Get a close-up look at the epic space battle, from the sounds that help propel the action, through the practical and visual effects, to the characters who bring it all to life. - Snoke and Mirrors – Motion capture and Star Wars collide as the filmmakers take us through the detailed process of creating the movie’s malevolent master villain. - Showdown on Crait – Break down everything that went into creating the stunning world seen in the movie’s final confrontation, including the interplay between real-word locations and visual effects, reimagining the walkers, designing the crystal foxes, and much more. • Andy Serkis Live! (One Night Only) – Writer-director Rian Johnson presents two exclusive sequences from the movie featuring Andy Serkis’ riveting, raw on-set performance before his digital makeover into Snoke. • Deleted Scenes – With an introduction and optional commentary by writer-director Rian Johnson. • Audio Commentary – View the movie with in-depth feature audio commentary by writer-director Rian Johnson.

We still haven’t heard anything regarding the release date of that new Luigi balloon mode in Odyssey, which is pretty strange, considering that they stated that it was coming in February. Could just be a small shadow drop, but maybe it’ll be tied to a Direct? Seems a bit odd that we haven’t heard much since it’s announcement.

I’ve heard some great things about this series, so it’s nice to see a remaster releasing (and so soon from announcement, too).

Would it be worth seeking out the GBC versions of these games, or are the iOS versions good enough to warrant playing the games on a smartphone instead? Or are there other versions of the games which might be worth tracking down and playing instead? Personally, I’d prefer to play them with buttons, but a quick nose around is showing me that they aren’t exactly cheap to hunt down...

Sorry for the really late response, I never noticed the notification! Thanks a lot for your insight @Ike and @Glen-i. Unless my TV situation drastically changes, I’ll probably pick up the 3DS version, but I might make a point to play the PS2 version of the game if I ever replay it, as I really want to hear the orchestral soundtrack and see the game in motion on a larger screen. I think my main reason for choosing the 3DS version is just how long the game is - around 100 hours is probably much easier to chip away at on the go, even if it’s just when I’m moving around the house @Ike, I think I’m probably going to reorder how I play the DQ games based on your advice. I won’t be able to get around to playing much of anything after the end of this month until summer (woo exams), and I’ve never played a game nearly as long as DQVIII before, so I think I’d like to work up to it with other games in my back log so that I don’t get overwhelmed or distracted when I do manage to get around to it. I think that I would to focus on playing I - III prior to XI, as they seem much shorter and, as you alluded to, are more relevant to understanding and enjoying XI than some of the other entries are. After that, I’ll probably go venturing off to play the other games. So, I have another question, if you don’t mind me asking: what’s the best way to play Dragon Quest I - III? I can’t seem to track down localised copies of the GBC version of the games (I’d be purchasing a Game Boy Advance to play those), and I don’t own the NES or any of the other systems which they might have seen rereleases from (at least in English). I’ve actually heard some pretty good things about the mobile versions of the games - would you happen to have any idea if these are any good?

It’ll probably be £20 I think the problem, if there is one, is more to the effect of what @Goron_3 mentioned earlier. The original plan was to have the service up and running by September last year, 6 months after launch. That might have been fine for consumers, and wouldn’t be that considerable a fraction of the console’s life. The plan now is for it to launch this September, some 18 months after console launch, and some 20%/25% into the console’s life cycle. I think that what myself, and many others, mean to say is that it is going to be much more difficult for Nintendo to appease and effectively communicate with over ten million more users than if they had effectively communicated their desire for such a service, and their plans for it, much earlier. And by plan, I mean something a bit more substantial and definitive than: It seems like something thrown together in a rush, and doesn’t effectively communicate what exactly it is that they plan to be selling me beyond the ability to play online. @markderoos in an ideal world, honestly, that’s what I’d want to see. Publishers are leaving millions of units sold on the table when it comes to mostly online games, because not every single consumer with access to their respective network wants to pay to play online. Likewise, these “ongoing server maintenance costs” are a tiny blip on a spreadsheet for these companies, at least when compared to the profit that they make from their respective paid online services and on their games, consoles and accessories.

But don’t you think that has the potential to be a problem for them with games that have already been released? It might be common knowledge to us that this has been on the way since the start, but that doesn’t mean that every other consumer has been privy to that information up to this point. Like I said before, some parents might have purchased a Switch and Splatoon 2 for their children this past Christmas, but might not have been aware that future cost will be incurred in the form of an online subscription. Sure, we might argue that they should have done their homework on the matter, but at the end of the day it means that - besides a few offline modes - that game is going to become a pretty useless chip come this September. And not everyone will pay online, which only narrows down the active user base, which is a similar problem to the one we’ve seen with DLC season passes in years gone by. Uh, Sony had been selling an extremely overpriced console at a loss in the PS3 and were miles behind Xbox 360 in terms of units sold for the early parts of the last generation. They’d already seen that Microsoft were making a very pretty penny from Xbox Live, but still decided to not join them in offering an online subscription service. Even when things were going very badly for them last generation, they still decided to not go that route. Fast forward a few years to the PS4, and the PS3 having recovered to nearly catch up on the Xbox 360’s sales, and Sony then decided to make the shift. Why? Because it would make them a pretty penny, despite them knowing that their free online is something that factored into nearly catching up in the previous generation. Oh, and at launch, the PS4 was being sold at a profit. Sony had every reason to shift their focus mid-generation with the PS3 to have an online service, and yet they didn’t. If that’s not because of business know-how, then I don’t know why they didn’t try to actively take advantage of consumers in the same way that Microsoft had been doing for a few years. I’m not fighting it, actually. It makes very little difference to me, thankfully, but I thought that I’d suggest the possibility to open up the discussion, as I’ve seen it brought up elsewhere. I’m not just arguing against it, but I’m arguing for it, too; I have a fairly balanced opinion of what Nintendo should do, because honestly I just want them to succeed in every way that they can with the Switch, and I don’t think that offering free online for games released prior to a certain date - to maintain their user base and activity - is going to harm them in any great way. Like I said before, if anything, it’s just a smart PR move, which doesn’t cost them much of anything to do. That’s great, but like I said before: not every gamer is as informed or as involved with gaming news as many of us are. Of the ~15 million Switch owners, I guarantee that a large portion didn’t know that Nintendo had informed us of their plans to inplement a paid online subscription service last January, and that a fair number still don’t know that such a service is on its way. My problem is with how they’ve communicated things with the paid online so far. We’re probably looking at them having 20-25 million Switch users by that point; it needs to be made crystal clear that this is something that’s going to happen, and notifying everyone that they can about it via the Switch would be the smartest thing, I think, for them to do. Seriously. Get ahead of the curb on the objectively bad news, at least from an average consumer perspective, that’s in store with the paid online and how it’s all going to work, and just focus on games this E3. Heck, take Virtual Console, or whatever they plan to rename/retool it as, because that belongs at E3. A 20 minute demonstration of how the paid online that no-one is begging to pay for? Not so much.

Back in December, Shin Megami Tensei V’s producer, Kazuyuki Yamai, said that the game’s development was in a “build-and-scrap” phase. In a recent interview with 4Gamer, however, Yamai revealed that the game is now in full-scale development. Yamai also added that he wants to make Shin Megami Tensei V in a way that works well for both home consoles and handhelds, by featuring impressive content for TVs as well as elements that lend the game to the casual feeling unique to a portable device, similar to what was in Shin Megami Tensei IV and Shin Megami Tensei IV: Apocalypse on 3DS. Yamai thinks that the production time for one demon’s model is about three times as much as previous titles, due mostly to Atlus’ ambitions of including many demons suited to a higher hardware specification.

But, for an existing player base, the introduction of a DLC season pass and the introduction of paid online would largely have the same effects, surely? They’re both additional costs which put a paywall between the already existing player base and the ability to play the game in its most complete form. @dazzybee, I think you’re actually making arguments against your own points - which are perfectly valid - here. Like I said above: I agree that, ideally, it would be a cost across the board for all games and leave it at that, but I think that many contributions to this conversation have shown that that might not be as straightforward as we might want to believe. But to say that “I don't care if no ones ever launched a service half way through”, and then follow that up with “It makes no business sense” seems woefully ironic, considering that the very reason that no-one has launched such a service 18 months beyond the original hardware launch is because it makes no business sense to do so. One of the main reasons that the PS3 nearly caught up to the Xbox 360 in terms of sales last generation is probably because its online service remained free, and I don’t think that a free online service - even if just for a few games - is that perplexing a thing for consumers to get their heads around. Have you seen how well Fortnite is doing on PS4? I think that thinking in such absolute terms when it comes to something we know very little about just sets us up for disappointment, and it wouldn’t be the first time that Nintendo has rewarded early adopters for something that was changed not so long after. Remember the 3DS Ambassador Program? I hardly see anyone getting up in arms about that being a thing, and yet that’s one of many instances that Nintendo has put its consumers first. Where you see clumsiness, I see yet another smart PR move for a company in the midst of its greatest comeback. How many parents buying Splatoon 2 to give their children for Christmas were readily aware that a paid online subscription service was coming the Switch’s way? How many people in countries who play this game online in developing countries are aware that the service is even coming? I fail to see how it’s a bad decision in nearly every way for Nintendo, but hey, you’re entitled to your own opinion. I just hope that you factor in that not everyone is in the same financial situation that you are, or has access to the same information that you have, when you express such bold and absolute opinions. And I can’t wait for news on VC either. I feel like that’s certainly something which would be best positioned to be present at E3, especially if they’re thinking about changing how it’s set up.

I agree. Personally, I too would rather see them charge for everything, but I think the main problem is that, even if Nintendo has been clear that a paid online is coming, retroactively adding that 18 months into the system's life seems a bit...odd, and it could be a pretty confusing for more casual and/or younger gamers who frequently play games like Splatoon 2 already. I think that it has the potential to divide a game's player base in a similar way to how DLC season passes have in recent years, such as with EA's first Star Wars Battlefront game. I think that consistency across the board is vital, but you bringing up Pokémon specifically does make one wonder about how they're going to deal with this. Online trading and battling are already a huge part of the games and offer hundreds of hours more of gameplay, yet Pokémon already has an annual online subscription with Pokémon Bank, for transferring Pokémon from older games. Would Pokémon Bank be part of the surely pricier Pokémon game package, be included in the cost of Switch Online, or remain separate, meaning that Pokémon players specifically are paying £5 more than everyone else? In the case of Mario Kart 8 Deluxe and Splatoon 2 specifically, I think that we're very likely to see Mario Kart 9 and Splatoon 3 during the Switch's life, so could Nintendo continue free online support for the older games until the newer entries come along? As you and @DazzeL have alluded to, I'd also love to see some of the better parts of PS Plus' service come over to Switch Online, such as the exclusive discounts. @dazzybee sorry if it seems like a stupid idea, but my reason for suggesting it was because of what @Sheikah has stated: no-one else has added a paid online subscription service post-launch. In fact, I'm fairly confident that it's something that Sony decided to hold off with doing a few years into the life of the PS3 in favour of launching such a service with the PS4 simply because of how mixed such messaging could potentially be to customers. @londragon and @Happenstance have rightly pointed out that Nintendo has been fairly up front about the Switch having a paid online service from the start (though, I can't remember if it was something mentioned at their January Switch presentation last year...), but I think the problem, at least from my perspective, is that we know so little about the form of online infrastructure and paid service that we're going to see and what benefits it will have to the subscribing consumer. If they'd stated at the start that you'd be paying £20/year (or whatever the exact number is) to use online capabilities across all games and that such a subscription would offer exclusive discounts and monthly free games, and stuck to such messaging, then I don't think they'd be in for a potential mess this September. Instead, I don't think we're even sure if we're still getting NES games with online capabilities. Will the service tie into Virtual Console, which we know nothing about? Are they going the Netflix/PS Plus route, perhaps, with consumers being able to download and play a few free games per month/at a time whilst they're subscribed? If they have this information ready to go, I think that they need to announce what they're doing as soon as they can. They can bring all the great games that they want to E3, but a 20-minute focus exclusively on how the paid online service is actually going to work and its benefits could very easily sour a potentially great E3 for them. I think they need to get ahead of the curb on this.

I was thinking about this a bit earlier today, and sorry if someone’s already suggested it, but maybe Nintendo should continue the free online component in games with a heavy online element (such as MK8D and Splatoon 2) released prior to, say, Summer 2018? Because adding this 18 months into the console’s life will just eat away at the potential sales and player activity for such games.

Mega Man Legacy Collection 1 and Mega Man Legacy Collection 2 have been rated as one title for Switch by ESRB.

I think I was just going through that phase of “I’m too old for Pokémon now” and tried to put it down, which ironically only lasted half a generation until X and Y, but I actually helped my younger brother with pretty much everything related to the main story from the 5th or 6th badge onwards. I don’t count it as having played it for myself, though I’ve been meaning to pick it up ever since X but just haven’t got around to it. It’s definitely one of the games from my back log that I want to get to first, and I’m glad that it sounds like they took some risks with the story and characters with BW2 too. X and Y just felt a bit paint-by-numbers in terms of storytelling for me, and it really feels like they’ve dialled back the risks they’ve taken from those games onwards, really. It’s a shame, too, because I think that Pokémon probably has the most storytelling potential of any of Nintendo’s first/second party franchises. It’s going to sell well regardless of how objectively good or different the game is from the last, so long as the core of the game - it’s simplicity - remains, so I think they’d be best served to take some risks. I think it’s also worth mentioning that, at least from my perspective, Kalos and Alola just felt like France and Hawaii in Pokémon, as opposed to simply being influenced by them. I mean, Unova in its entirety is based on New York, yet many fans never notice that the inspiration goes beyond Castelia City. Likewise for the first four main series regions: apart from perhaps Johto, I wouldn’t have been aware that they were all based on regions in Japan if I didn’t read around about it. From a storytelling perspective, I imagine that has to be fairly restrictive to them, as the more like-for-like representations of these areas means it’s much easier to offend a particular group of players, which could perhaps be one reason why they’ve taken less risks in terms of storytelling as of late.