Rummy

I made very many a point of saying your goodbyes! The grander irony was probably in the fact that they were only about 20 seconds away/waiting from us as you guys headed off, which I obvs didn't find out til afterwards! Another great meet imo! Missing a few familiar faces and having a few others, felt different but as excellent as I'd hoped! Many many thanks to @Zell once again for his hostingings, and thanks to everyone who turned up and helped make it a great time! I've mostly spent today napping on and off given I(mostly) managed to stay awake for the meet this year, but it may have mashed my sleep up(here I am at 3am!). No regrets though!

I've acknowledged the two @Pestneb, even in your quote! But why does dazzybee's anecdotal weighting of two+imaginary/undefined group of 'a lot of people' magically outweight my equally anecdotal but more defined and greater group of numbers? I'm just asking for some backing on that group. Can I just point out again that dazzybee(one of his two examples) STILL PAYS FOR AN ONLINE SERVICE IN PS+ TOO. My point IS that people will pay. Are we hardcore gamers, or are we traditional gamers, or are we something else? I know gaming doesn't take anywhere near as much time in my life as it used to(though I do have a subset of tabletop gaming, so what you want to make of that is up to you). I'll take your skewing as a valid argument, but say the numbers and territory is too murky to say whether there truly is a clear bias there or not. Again here, I'd ask you to draw your clear line/boundary/definition of what the hardcore gamer is. All I've really being trying to do is ask for some specifics and definitions over vagueness, I don't think that's silly or ridiculous. I just keep getting same vagueness thrown back at me like it's valid!! Yep, quality of the service is definitely an issue. However I'm saying, business-wise, I think it's better to cover yourself with a subs fee for eventualities we can't see coming yet as a way to earmark a guaranteed a somewhat proportionate amount of money to the service. I mean if they can offer me a service as good as the competition AND it's free, that's bloody marvellous. However consider another thing - if we end up with a free service could it give them more license to do more as they please rather than what consumers may want? Would people more like it or lump it, because it's free? I mean that's getting into a murkier territory of seperating numbers. I disagree on the positive/negative btw. I think you need to be both, not just one or the other. A healthy life is about balance, and realism. Put anything out of balance and it won't last. To quote a wise omnic monk who recently enlightened me - True self is without form. (Aaaand with that I'm sorry to break your hearts on the debate - but I gotta go meet me some N-E folk! I'll be back on Sunday/Monday if there's still some interesting points of relevance)

Excuse you - I don't recall bringing up any points about quantity. I don't recall initiating the discussion, and was under the impression that I was contributing to a debate about variety/diversity as I've clearly gone on to detail further - unless you'd like to find my posts that are points about quantity. I've taken H-o-T's 77 games, and divided it by YOUR 24 genres, to then suppose 3 games per genre assuming the most unlikely perfectly even distribution and then gone on to further highlight and detail my issues on the variety/diversity within said 'genres'. Yet again though - focussing on something that wasn't said rather than the actual points and discussion being made is further excellent contribution. Of course, I could 'counter' your point by saying the discussion is long done and why are you even discussing it we're clearly talking about Online models now, jeez. And I've clearly detailed the flaw in that when it comes to variety and diversity within those genres and thus why the argument was weak in the first place(go see post referencing Terraria, Mincraft, MK series and SMB series). What is it with people saying I'm saying things I didn't? I didn't 'mention anecdotal evidence' - I GAVE some anecdotal evidence yet with examples of specific people and asked you for some too! I haven't done hard, pure fact and number based research into this - but when we're both talking anecdotally you're the one talking about 'a lot of people' whereas I'm talking about H-o-T, his younger family, other members here on the forum(I can define them, if needed, but I presumed you know them), myself and...even YOURSELF WHO STILL PAYS!! You're not talking about 'people here or someone's cousin' then who ARE you talking about? Why can't you come up with some specific examples(ok, yourself and Clownferret, now outweight by my other numbers of people here) or people rather than this vague non-descript group?? I'm talking about people here because we both know the exist and can quantify it far better than your non-descript 'a lot of people'. WHO?! Who is this certain type of people, where is this fact? What is it based on? I'm not the one throwing around vagueness as facts, but I am giving something to back my arguments; even if anecdotal! You want a discussion 'about looking at Nintendo, their fans, people who may buy the NX; would a paid system benefit them or not, irrespective of what we personally want' - well bugger me, if a Nintendo-born forum ain't exactly that sort of place then I don't know what is!!

Looks like a good weekend was picked - it's bloody baking Dave! I'm still at work, was slacking but realised I had to come do some shizzle. Leaving imminently for home then stuffing tings in bag and heading out - should hopefully be up with you by 7/half 7ish @Zell and co. If there's any last minute shouts for things for me to bring then this is the moment - got about an 30-60 minute window before I'm back out again!

Ahhhh, a feeling I'm only too familiar with ! /melancholy

Ah, but that sounds like a barrier unrelated to the console itself - so it isn't particularly fair to raise it as a point is it? I mean, I'd never pay for online if I didn't have a decent/any internet connection. Out of interest how/why do you not have internet connection if you're in London?? Would you pay for online if you did? How tempted would you be by maybe a £3 a month cost to get a free gamecube/wii/few selectable number of VC titles a month, if you could download them over at Dcubeds? Yeah one thing I made the most of on 360/XBL was just party chatting with mates, either whilst playing the same game online(same as we do on ps4/overwatch atm) or doing other things. Sometimes was fun venturing into random game chat, but as you say you can avoid the drivel of idiots by just going private party. Sadly I have to use examples from people such as yourself/others because I don't actually have many younger people to ask(I don't know if @Fierce_LiNk gets a better insight as a teacher) but I think I've still got a pretty good handle on the 21+ bracket taking from myself, friends, and people here. I think I'd definitely be the same. Chatting+Smashing is great. Easily joining/setting stuff up is great. Splatoon we skyped for sometimes - I recall one day I think me, @Cube and @Goron_3(with some other passing stragglers) all ended up on it for the good part of an entire Saturday afternoon one time, when we were all sort of supposed to do something else lol. Admittedly I've recently been included in the whatsapp group for Overwatch where we can organise - but still often it's just done by seeing someone on PSN and going from there(last night I got seen and invited). Even without, PS Messages and its convenient functionality on phones allows you to organise things even when you're away from your console just like Whatsapp would. I think the Whatsapp distinction is simply because we've all known each other for so long and don't mind passing that barrier, rather than any fault in alternative functionality. (Damn. All this social talk's got me super hyped for the meet tomorrow!) Do believe someone posted it up not too many posts ago! The patent picture at least, but I err on taking each patent with a pinch for now.

@drahkon this is going to sound weird but I absolutely loved just fucking collecting shit and my worlds in Terraria(so much I never brought myself to hardmode them) and something about this exploration and gathering/investigating aspect along with the sci-fi feels and silly animals makes me feel that I might end up quite liking this - but then I wonder and I'm not sure. I know it isn't Minecraft/Terraria but knowing that's the bit I did most - do you reckon I'd get on with this? Something about the sound of its vastness and you as a lone dude/dudette makes me think I might.

Ah, I see you're saying the ability to play Online should be free. I agree with Ashley others shouldn't be extras, but also stand by the fact that Online has an ongoing cost in terms of servers, maintenance, balance patching etc to name a few. I think as such it's smart business to have its own revenue stream dedicated to it, to help buffer any unexpected issues. As for the 'a lot of people' who would be against it - who? Who are they? I've already given the examples of H-o-T(I think it is)'s nieces/nephews, Ashley and me have given examples of people who buy subs in shops. How many people here own and actively use the PS4 or an XBone and don't have the online subscription service? Right now I can see 'a lot of people', actual people, who do and probably would pay. People in this thread saying they'd pay. Even you, who dislikes having to, still pays!! Think of all the things some people sub to a month. Think that you've got 2-3 kids in a household - £40(even though you can get it cheaper) split 3 ways for a year really isn't that bad either. People pay more for Amazon/Netflix etc! People used to rent games for a few quid for a night or two - are we really saying people now won't pay a few quid a month for a wealth of online content/features? I honestly don't think these supposed group of people who wouldn't like it are really going to have such a significant effect compared to having a funded online system - but the important thing is, as was originally being said, that said online system appeals for more ways than just Online features. Moving slightly off but take also that I barely touch my WiiU now. Why? Due to a lack of a good online system with features on par with standard. I loved Splatoon, but it was a pain. You know what made me buy Overwatch? Because I thought if I could put so much time into Splatoon with a lesser system, I'd definitely get my money's worth on the PS4. Add to that the fact I bought the sub last Oct/Sept when I bought the console - it isn't even an ongoing cost to my mind at the moment. Of course, with the WiiU, it's free, but it's not getting me playing the console. I, and as the VC argument has probably pointed to time and again, would gladly pay a few quid a month for a more robust and social online system. The Wii U did enough damage to me and my perception of their brand/direction that it made me have serious doubts about jumping into the NX. I'm not going to be the only one(as, indeed, many here have expressed similar sentiments).

Giving a choice? Isn't it the same on PS4+XBone atm? Some limited aspects without it, more online functionality with. I was assuming that as a standard when saying no free online. As for putting people off? Well, you know it when you're buying the console though. Also it can help reduce the price of a console to a more appealing mark, AND consider that if this is a handheld/console hybrid maybe you won't be as 'forced' to have online due to its portable/still locally playable nature. Consider however that that in itself might even become the seller to move people onto Online, and generate the revenue for them. Technology is moving and evolving, and quickly. What happens if they encounter unexpected issues, or loads, or want to do work, or change this or change that; but don't have any specific money to do so because their system hasn't taken off very well or is in a similar situation to the WiiU? With an online subs fee that can go into a pot for that(let's say they make £1 profit per month per subscriber) then it gives them a buffer to address such things. What if their paid online proves to be wildly popular? That's even more in the pot to then consider putting towards the service in other ways. The ultimate question is, will having a free online honestly make more money that they can account for than having a subscription system? I don't think so. The world is constantly online and social right now - that's far more important to a lot of people(I think H-o-T has commented previously about nieces/nephews etc). I'd have to ask/wonder - did they get into the spot(alol) with the GameSpot servers because they went for an initial free online approach? Do we want that to happen again? As Ashley says - yes, families will buy online subscriptions. They were doing it 10 years ago in a less online world, and I'd dare say they're even more likely to do so in the current online world; assuming the system gives a decent amount of online and social features. Another point this brings it back round to is the earlier one - do things to add value to the subscription too, such as free games or VC credit, exclusive deals or demos etc.

I think free online would be a silly, if on the surface nice, idea. A paid online allows them to guarantee an income directly related to the service - then the money can be earmarked and budgeted for in line with that. It's a short-term appeal but I think long-term it's best to secure something to put into the service, lest they run into any problems down the line. Paying a small monthly isn't all that bad these days either - people do it for lots of things now and it's more of a norm.

What is that @Cube??

I've got 47p and a couple of polos?

I'm out of thanks for some reason but given we've both just played back through OoT somewhat, that was pretty fooking awesome. Got some hype feels.

IF I did get an NX I would happily pay an online subscription for a decent service like H-o-T says. I don't mind PS+(nor did I Gold, even before Games with Gold) and the added bonus/incentive is given by the fact you can get free games each month. Sure, it might be copying the competition, but Nintendo should jump on that model as well. Offer up certain titles to give them exposure, maybe even offer up a certain aspect of a certain number of system titles a month. I.E you can opt to get 3x NES games, 2x SNES games or 1x N64 game per month in addition to their 'free' offerings. So to counter the point made by H-o-T re: games you've already got it almost gives you an opportunity to check out back catalogue titles you wouldn't have neccessarily bought otherwise. Yes, you'll be getting it for your sub fee which is less than buying the games themselves, but that's the point - these are sales they probably wouldn't make otherwise but it'd give a good incentive to get so many folks up on your online subs service - and it's appealing slightly different to the competition in that it's offering you some more control over your choices.

Dannyboy takes his THE very seriously. Unbelievable! What happened to you man, you've changed...:p

I'm willing to do the work, I was just asking by what categorisation it was determined for exactly that reason :p Not that I'm saying wikipedia is necessarily as credible - but I'd prefer to take a classification of the genres(not saying it wasn't, I in fact asked for the basis) from an outside source, given the context of the discussion :p I can hardly disagree with any of it, if I know what none of it applies to! Taking a list of 77 games, and listing 24 'genres' for them, without really defining it, is rather weak and disingenuous in a discussion about variety. It's making a point whilst very likely missing the essential point. For example - let's take Minecraft and Terraria - are these games in the same genre? I hear Terraria called a '2D minecraft' does that distinguish it enough from the former? Are there more similarities or differences? Where do the lines get drawn? Throw Starbound in, which is more like Terraria than Minecraft given the 2D nature but still rather distinct in a number of ways, are they still the same genre? There's a lot of variety between the latter two, and between the three, but are they still the same genre? THEN let's take, from H-o-T's example - NSMBU, NSLU, and maybe NSMB2(and be mindful of both NSMB1 and SMBWii, which aren't represented here). Let's take MK7 and MK8. Clearly these fall into 2 genres each - but then how much variety is there between games within those genres? Again, to try to put it all apart as varied 'genres' and argue that is good enough is quite simply not, when the games even within genres are incredibly similar. The argument was about diversity and variety, presumably applied on an individual game level, rather than just on 'genres'. Hating to go back to the previous allegory but would you go to the cinema to see 4-5 different films within the same genre if they all had the same plot, actors, etcetc?

Excellent debating skills as ever - taking my own criticism and throwing it back at me whilst completely ignoring and not addressing my actual points and requests. Good contribution to the discussion.

Those genres being concretely defined by....? Any chance you'd want to actually put the games into their categories to open such a weak argument up to some actual scrutiny? 77 games there to 24 genres btw. Even assuming an even distribution, which there most likely isn't, that's a minimum of about 3 games per 'genre'. Take that it's likely some are less than the others, you're possibly looking at some 'genres' being more heavily populated than others - is there then diversity and variety in the lesser represented genres?

I do like the idea! I'd wonder for that though with obvious concerns over whether you want people figuring out where you/your NX lives though :p?

If you haven't already, consdering giving the Boss Keys vids on youtube a watch(go LttP, LA, then OoT). They're not too long(sub 10-15min) and just a quick but interesting look at the dungeon designs in quite a simple and refreshing way. Anyhow on the Zelda note - I did, on Monday, finish up Ganondorf's tower and then had me a slice of Ganon Steak. Master Quest all done! Not gone for 100% collectibles and probs finished up on about 14 hearts, but got my gold quiver and biggest bomb bag+biggoron sword. Things to get if I do decide to 100%(which I probs won't) are The Last Bottle, Golden Scale, Ice Arrow, Heart Pieces and like 40somethingish Skulltulas. Don't think I missed anything else except selling the Bunny Hood and maybe planting all my beanstalks etc.

That's rather selfish of you considering how many people seem to be looking forward to it. I'm a bit with Blade/Liger atm - need impressions from folks here! Obvs maybe consider spoiler tags for the others, though. Don't know how much is and isn't obvious to each person in their playthroughs.

I actually think yes, because those titles are very good initial system sellers. The problem is - they need to be good titles to hold interest for potential buyers down the line. I still remember the N64 - even months(maybe years?) after its launch - it was still selling with two of the original launch games of MK64 and SM64. They were great and somewhat revolutionary/fresh games at the time. Personally, barring Smash, the Gamecube launched with a slightly weaker line-up of launch games but still there seemed enough to hold interest for consumers over time(Smash did a very good job riding its own and previous success, something we still see to today with the competitive scene). Which anyway brings me to the point I was about to post to make anyway - if the rumours are right about this being a handheld on the go and a dockable at home - then I think(as I did say previously) a brand new/fresh Monster Hunter than takes advantage of that will be a massive system seller in the East and maybe even the West too. A remake could possibly even cut it, but it'd have to not be MH3 as that's been done via Wii/WiiU/3DS already. Imagine the marketing potential - play hunts on the go whilst out and about, befriend people, and then play at home online for bigger hunts or something(maybe) exclusive to the home docking aspect. Ofc, it requires a realiable and robust online(and yes, with VC), but social's where it's at now and a Monster Hunter on launch could really do a good job of showcasing some of that given what MH3 did on 3DS/WiiU. Again some sort of exclusive mobile data/on-the-go network to help you find people nearby could really help this along. Imagine you're waiting for a train or something and find out someone nearby has the system and same game as you - it's almost what Pokemon Go's doing right now, and you can befriend or meet some really cool people potentially. Ofc it also has potential for you to meet equally uncool people - but we're in a very digital and social age, and that would really bring the system into the current consciousness in such a way I genuinely think it'd sell the shit out of it.

Right you both are! I am not familiar with the series and assumed it was the next one despite knowing in the back of my mind DQX had already happened. As liger said though could be indicative of future things(but imo still possibly too early days to really say).

Bringing your copy of Coup, @Cube? Mine's a bit missing/box fallen apart. Also think mr-paul is probably still on point about Loading over Meltdown @Zell, I've only ever been melt down for Smash nights but I don't really know how much table-age they have there. Totes agree with you on trying to avoid a split if possible, and maybe considering something pubwise for eats in that case.