Sheikah

That expectation has been set by the manufacturers. Sony and Microsoft regularly sell their consoles at a loss because it's far more lucrative for them in the long term to get a big install base and make the money back via Plus/XBL subs as well as games. Can't say I disagree with this approach, the competition means we get a better deal. When you look at the iPhone though, people are buying it for the brand even though there are more powerful Android phones for less money.

Absolutely, it's money for old rope in EA's eyes so they won't drop UT unless forced by government.

...wut?

Are those joycons or the controller on the Switch Lite that you're referring to?

Nintendo have already produced a machine with this issue and then outright refused (even to this day) to officially admit there is a problem with the joycons. I don't understand why you think Nintendo couldn't manage it again and instead choose to believe unconnected people are for some reason colluding in a lie, going so far as to join a class action lawsuit? It's bad form to flagrantly support Nintendo on this issue when they have handled it so badly with the original Switch.

They have joined the class action lawsuit, if they didn't have to prove it to do so then the lie would come out later and they'd face legal ramifications for lying. No conspiracy here.

How come? I've no reason to suspect they are lying. I've seen a number of news outlets reporting on this, including Techradar.

I reckon it's that a lot of people really into their RPGs already have a PS4, and those seriously into DQ already picked it up. It's such a long game and not one of those "got to have it on every platform" unlike something like Minecraft. I couldn't consider playing it again after getting the plat on the PS4 version.

Yup, it's a thing. People with Switch Lites are joining the class action lawsuit against Nintendo.

See I think this is where your argument falls flat, at least in the sense of you trying to convince most people of your points. I say this because, contrary to what you said, the vast majority of people actually really loved BoTW, and found it immensely fun. It didn't sell like it did and win all those awards because it wasn't generally perceived as a fun game - and this is a game that didn't adhere to the strict structure of what went before. Stating a game which many people found to be immensely fun, actually wasn't fun, is a bit like telling people who ate a delicious slice of apple pie that actually, it wasn't delicious. It just makes for a very strange post to read. [emoji14] It's fine that it didn't align with what you personally find to be enjoyable, but in this case I think you have to chalk that up to your own unique personal tastes rather than providing some pseudo-analysis of why it fails. It sounds like you do not like the idea of creative play in doing things like building platforms, rather than this actually being an inherent fault of the game. Many loved the sense of wonder and exploration in the game, and tinkering with the engine purely to answer "what if...", but perhaps you didn't. I totally get that you are expressing your opinion, but when you bluntly say things like "games are fun by having solid rules" you ignore so many great, creative games that tore up your rulebook and were all the better for it. There have been great games that have observed the rules and great games that haven't. It's not so black and white.

Don't give the player every ability at the start but allow them to go straight to the end boss, with a severe disadvantage. Similar to BoTW. Let people tackle areas in whatever order they choose, similar to Link Between Worlds and BoTW. Remove the shooting doors for connected up areas that still have puzzles to solve for various reasons. Think how they removed shifting screens from the new Link's Awakening game. Zelda was going from dungeon to dungeon in a set manner, getting the keys and boss keys. And then it wasn't, following release of BoTW. IMO this is a case where people can't necessarily see how it could be improved and so they are a bit fearful of it. But without these leaps every now and then we wouldn't get some of the best games.

I'm not sure he suggested it be open world, just removing the locked doors and open up the levels more, and let you tackle areas in whichever order you want.

Nice post. I definitely agree with the comment about the doors, I remember in MP1 you would shoot a door to open it and it wouldn't always open immediately because the loading wasn't done. So as this shouldn't be an issue anymore; they could do away with the doors and open the game up more in the process. Another thing to note, in response to people saying it would annoy the existing hardcore fans, is that Metroid isn't anywhere near as popular a series as many of Nintendo's others. In this way, Metroid might well be the perfect candidate to receive the BoTW treatment of a big revamp in order to see the game appeal to many more people. For reference, the best selling Metroid game is the original Metroid Prime, but even that only sold 2.82 million units: In contrast, 2D Mario/Mario Kart sold tens of millions of copies on Wii, while Mario Galaxy and Smash each sold around 10 million. For a Switch comparison, MP3 sold just 1.63 million copies - on one of the best selling consoles of all time. Sorry to bring this to sales talk but from Nintendo's view, at Metroid Prime's last outing on Wii there were only 1.63 million people buying it. It wouldn't be crazy to think they are less bothered about annoying a relatively small number of people if they bring in a lot more players.

I think this should be a good lesson to people not to buy these broken games at release based on trust. The writing was on the wall for Anthem before it was even released. Shameful for EA to drop support and go back on its word though. And yet enough people always seem to buy their games at launch!

I'm not sure you can say Sony have "coasted" by focusing on developing excellent first party games, as that is the most important thing to do (and is difficult) as a console owner, and something Microsoft have struggled to do. So long as the PS5 is the place that has the games people want to play again then those other features aren't going to matter so much. Games will always be king, and I'm yet to be convinced that Microsoft will have its own Bloodborne, God of War, Persona 5, Last Guardian, etc... I've also said it before but I think the reason Microsoft released these additional features (such as backwards compatibility) was because they were behind and trying to differentiate their console and attract new customers. I do think however that they focused on the wrong thing - people are often vocal about wanting features like backwards compatibility but ultimately it is very underused and most people play new games. Microsoft acquiring new studios is a step in the right direction for next gen but so far this is a completely unproven unknown as to whether we'll see smash hits.