Rummy

Yeah I hear ya. I really wanna play everything hut I can't. I've gotten a bit deeper back into OW again with this current comp season but it's such a timesink! Imagine I was balancing myself between that and MHW - which I also really wanna get back to but both are just not healthy lol. Psychick-Youth also just gave me some birthday credz so I got Diablo to co-op with him(never played a Diablo before but he's like triple dipped on this himself) but even then I was saying I might not suggest playing for a while(he's feeling same like me cos we both did mhw together) cos I'd rather focus on OW instead. Why couldn't they have had all this awesome online infrastructure when we were kids with all the time in the world eh?! Having said that I'll probs try and find some time to check XCOM out when I'm not fancying anything too much heavy to play(Paradise also very good for a quick race event or two when in that mood) and whilst I'll probably enjoy Trials enough it isn't something that's likely to blow me away with everything else.

All pretty interesting stuff! Curious to see if Nintendo sustains, it if the hacking vulnerability has maybe pushed more current systems off of shelves.

I'd love to have some counter arguments for the sake of the debate; but honestly I don't think it's possible to disagree too much with your post. It's very easy for folks like me and others to jump up and say about how they're doing down PUBG but at the same time they're also doing lots, as you say, to sustain Fortnite in comparison. The model is intriguing given its fundamental F2P nature as it could be argued they might not make money - but they're currently one of the biggest games in the world so it's clearly working out to some extent. Always easy to turn arguments dichotomous, especially when they're particularly not. I think you've excellent highlighted exactly why it shouldn't neccessarily be done for Fortnite/Epic, either.

It's a shame tbh, as I do think they were unfair to do Fortnite but then again can't you argue strong rights when you've licensed something to someone else? It's really on the edge imo. It'd be interesting to see to play out and the legal arguments made and judged - if anyone else happens to follow it down the line do please keep me informed!

Soz brah, but be reassured it went to a fucking good home As for recommendations I don't think our tastes overlap too much; what kind of stuff do you tend to like?

Told you you would! Not plus related but did you ever get Bunrout Paradise? Still need/want to do the multi at some point with @Dan_Dare, who has also recommended xcom a few times!

News coming through of the hardhack making it through to Online - anyone with any opinions on what this might do to the service/value especially given it could affect the experience you're paying for? http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2018/05/25/hacking-is-starting-to-affect-online-switch-games.aspx Will it break it all apart knowing there's irretrievable devices out that with the hard hack vulnerability? Will the 'value' of the service still hold value?

Popped out to see this last week when Magnus Petersen gave me a shout as I hadn't even realised it was out so soon - unfortunately been overshadowed by IW I guess(lookin' at you, Brolin!) - not sure how I feel. On the whole, definitely positive. Compared to the first? Hmm. It's different. The problem with stuff like Deadpool being so quirky and irreverent is how to keep that going without losing yourself or become tacky/obvious - given that challenge I thought it did quite well. On the whole definitely enjoyed it and there was some great Deadpool-style moments throughout, with some really nice old comic book nods(and I don't even know them all that much for Deadpool). I think it's going to get relatively harsh criticism being a sequel to the first, but I think in the face of what it was up against it did really well! Given I didn't plan to see it or go in with much expectation I think I actually really enjoyed it, but I'm well aware it didn't blow me away but not sure I really wanted it to either.

Mod note: attempted to merge H-o-T and RedShell's threads together without even reading them given the titles, hopefully isn't any mess/redundancy between the two topics. Forgive me if there is! So didn't quite delete yours @RedShell just popped it into this. Doesn't seem to be any major confusion/issues.

I think I've generally always been to busy to watch these live, though I catch up later and later these days. There's a few games in there I'd like to see but probably won't end up getting in it all until they're all done. I do enjoy speedruns but I personally end up finding them quite hit and miss when I came to watching them too.

Ahhh fair enough. This goes in pretty hard pretty quick in a way I think you might enjoy, hopefully you'll manage to stay spoiler free until you're all caught up! (also ignore the phantom quote above)

Starting to think I may be the only fan left here but did anyone watch? Seems to have gone a lot harder a lot faster than I saw coming. Bit surprising to see but not complaining tbh. @Kav I recall you watched the previous ones; would be curious on your thoughts if you saw last night's opening episode?

Do you do your own tax returns? Would you declare this? Is it actually a declarable or taxable income ie. capital gains tax? Why would you even think or consider it to be? Or maybe, ykno, you wouldn't.

Well I mean sure why not - doesn't have to be exclusive but I think it's better if it is; though interestingly enough a two-tier system may actually foster its own demand. Also you might be able to make something of it(as you could already) with both the sales but also a social interaction to try and judge what sort of market you have on your system for what sort of titles. Given that I feel Nintendo are still playing really rather safe with a lot of remakes and easy choices such as with this service - I think it's a gradual informational approach they could take from progressive user feedback to possibly even tailor the Switch game market to better please their consumers, and ideally grow demand from there. I'll admit that in my own opinion this isn't a positive idea for Nintendo unless robustly done but working old franchise stuff into new franchise stuff whilst keeping it perceptibly wholesome could be really powerful imo.

Tbh I think this is how they should break the mold. Charge a price more in the £30-40 and add a NintendoNow style service where you can basically stream/download/play a game in the catalogue(with save functionality) from a range of generations at any time you fancy. Give some user feedback/interaction and allow potentially votes or open polls for old content people would like to see on there, work to get it ported etcetc. Have it be a growing service(along with it doing everything else it's supposed to and having online functionality elsewhere) and I think it'd add a lot of value that people would pay for, or at least something different to the others; slightly. They have great appeal with their back catalogue(VC across systems, SNES and Nes mini, remakes etc) but I think they've moved beyond monetising it well on a game by game/unit by unit basis because they've almost already oversaturated themselves. That's also basically why people aren't seeing enough value in the NES offerings of the service - they've seen it all before too often too recently and for too much - how many times are you gonna re-buy an old NES game, really?

I'm trying to be civil here Ronnie - did you reach your subjective conclusions objectively? Did you reach them with no reasoning? Was there no reason to your argument about the value? It's like if anyone(or particularly me) points out something in your posts they disagree with it or see a discrepencies they must just be wrong. No weight at all allowed to their thoughts. It's all well and good trying to again present numbers and value objectively - but it IS as you even there yourself realise subjective. However presenting a price and playing with numbers surely isn't subjective, but objective? You're implying that £18 and 4 games are a value across a board rather than your own personal interpretation of the value. How am I able to know what you're presenting objectively or subjectively if you're going to use numbers but not even acknowledge it's a subjective perception or point of view you're trying to get across? Again I wouldn@t take issue with it if this was clear. I felt you were trying to get a numbers based rationalisation across for the value of the service without acknowledging that for some, or indeed many, here that that isn't the same value despite he numerical basis. It isn't the points you make, it's the way you make them. This is something I've generally always been mixed on(and why I generally tend to go physical over digital). The question I'd ask, because I know I've crossed my own threshold here with ps+ running a service of a similar nature, is whether there's a point you'd be ok with it? PS+ is kinda great in that if offers quite a lot of diverse content that I don't feel I lose out too much if I don't have it subscribed to - but also I know that if ever do stop but then re-subscribe all my content will still be there presuming no major reneges or changes on Sony's end. Are we aware of the Switch thing being similar? Or is it a case of subscribe anytime and access these X amount of games whilst you are, rather than getting a title for a library month by month? Kinda middle ground between current sorts of subscriptions and Netflix style stuff? This I'm in the same boat on as well - whilst it won't terribly upset me I do think it's unfair to possibly not allow people an option to permanently buy a game or two that they really want over subscribing to a service that offers access. Interestingly enough it comes back into the online service for me too and some expressions made by others previously iirc - given the small online catalogue and arguable lack of perceived value for the yearly subscription service would they consider giving any sort of one-off game passes? Ie you might not want to pay £18 a year for the service as it is but you might be happy to pay a small one off fee for lifetime online for a single game like Splatoon etc?

The error in your reasoning for me appears to be exactly what Ashley states - value is subjective. As we've seen already from the thread - many people don't see a value offered in the service to spend the money or subscribe to it even despite this or its affordability. It's all well and good to talk about supposed value - but if a majority of consumers don't appear to actively want it then how much is it really worth? I think if it was more expensive but offered a lot more especially something like a streaming service then yes, many people would pay for that. The problem is that right now it seems to many that it offers very little for its price. Given Nintendo's history should we really expect any major overhauls to the service or reactions that seem in line with majority of consumers demand, or will they bullishly just forge on with the plans they have regardless? I actually think they should make an expensive, robust service(on par with competition), but within it offer a PSNow style streaming service for their back catalogue. They have massive draw from their old titles as mentioned - capitalise on it by offering it in abundance to encourage adoption of the system etc.

Why would they cost that when they've been 3.50 in essence from Wii and Wii U unless I'm mistaken? The bigger issue is sure you think that's value, but it seems for a number of folks here it isn't. I'm worried for what that all means on a wider scale for the console and its future online ecosystem(due to lack of uptake); especially where, as evidenced by a few here, the issue isn't the affordability but that they simply don't see the same value in it that you do. I think in terms of value and market demand, 5quid a NES game won't sell particularly well at all these days; especially given points of cannibalism of their own market with 'Mini' systems and a repeated system of consumers rebuying these games time and time over on various systems such as Wii, DS family, Wii U and now Switch etc. It's part of the issue of feeling a lack of value given you pay for a service and have to repeatedly re-buy games you might thoroughly enjoy time and time again across different systems: particularly if you feel it's due to a poor implementation of an online system wherein others have already managed this many years before.

Inclined to mostly agree - but they're fracturing and splitting themselves here. Backwards compatibility/VC stuff is just one part of the myriad of issues folks seem to be worried about with the system.

Haha yep my first one too! Well, one that wasn't a cartoons racer like mario kart street racer diddy Kong etc. I just recall it came with the PC or some multimedia bundle and we didn't really have/get PC games much but it was there so I would play it! Wasn't very good at first but it's my first foray into a more real sort of driving game. Funnily enough if I had to pick a favourite racing series it would probably be Burnout too - really wish they'd make a new one.

We haven't truly recovered enough since the 2008 crash and these are imo small accumulative knock ons from that. Only the beginning as well, because if they up interest rates just imagine how hard it's going to hit businesses with all time record loans etc. We may actually see a notable death of certain parts of the high street.

Thanks for the insight! Tbh my experience is severely limited in not being a PC gamer(or even much of a user these days) and mostly going by seeing my mates having a good time and chatting about it etc. tho still none of them did buy it after the trial. I didn't realise it was feeling bare to folks, but I again must profess my ignorance. I wonder if it's something, or even the attitude, or releasing something that isn't neccessarily end market but tailoring more real time to users etc? The world of day 1 patches constant updates/changes and content etc is certainly upon is.

Are folks here generally anti, pro, or indifferent to loot boxes? I understand the rulings to a point and don't particularly disagree with them - but I've dropped good time on OW loot boxes without much regret and felt they were informed choices etc. I can see why people both like and dislike them, but I feel on the whole the OW implementation has been generally the best way of doing it so far. Curious to see how the publishers etc react in the countries of the rulings though.

I've always been inclined to agree but my SNES yellowed a bit and weirdly more in a non-smoking household than a mates' did. Ofc this all happened when I was younger and unaware of it being a thing and full console history his side etc but I may be tempted to unase and try unyellowing it via lost's method. Ofc in my slight ignorna cemy first question was the exact same as yours - how did it get there in the first place!! #NotAllYellows

Only just seen it myself! Remember I had it as some massive PC kit bundle thingy. Unless I'm mistaken Four to the Floor was one of my faves tracks of the time... (such a blast from the past!) Edit: actually I think I may have merely had this as one of my favourites. Very tempted to put these on my usb stick for the car...