Sheikah

That's a bad idea. If people were forcibly 'held' to their promises then rewards/stretch goals and such would likely be pretty shit, safe plays. It's harsh to suggest that the fact they're suspending Wii U support is that they're inept and incapable of understanding. That comment shows a real lack of thought, I think. The whole point of crowdfunding is that you take an idea, pitch it, then use that money to make the game. Ergo, they don't actually know how well it runs on the platform when they pitch it. They no doubt looked at the Wii U specs on paper and made judgements about whether it would run on it, but then when it came to making it they couldn't get the game at 720p to run above 23 FPS without significantly cutting the game back into something not so fun. Sucks, but it's hard to know the intricacies of a platform when you pitch it. The current system for crowdfunding is fine if you ask me - just look at Godus. They totally fucked up making it, and now they will never get funding again. Trust is the best regulator of crowdfunding; if they really screw up, their reputation is ruined. But I think in this case, people won't care too much, as I think people will probably understand why they had to do it.

It's all nonsense at the end of the day. Nobody here can argue that what you're getting is the full game and if you pay a bit more you're getting the game plus an extra 1%. The 'full game' is very much bollocks terminology that nobody here, outside of the development team, can really deduce. And call me a cynic, but I don't buy that explanation at all. For example, you could apply that reasoning to any other game. They could develop Uncharted 4, keep a single level out that they made during development then charge people money on release to access it. Then they could say "hey guys, we gave you the full game, that extra £5 you're paying covers this level". You'll never know whether content was held back, and even if it wasn't it's debatable whether you consider it an added extra or content you should have had anyway. Again, what it really comes down to is principle. Are you ok with that?

It's about the time at which it is sold. They could have easily included that content in the full game to everyone, as it was developed during the development period and is even on the disc. Instead they partitioned off some of the work and said "we'll charge more for that". It's about whether you believe that is, in principle, wrong. I do, and maybe you don't. Probably we will never change our viewpoints on this so there's not really much more to debate.

Of course they don't need to charge for online, but the fact is it costs every company money to provide the service. Whether they subsidise it or not is another matter, but one Sony have handled pretty well by being the best at what they do and giving you lots of games in the process. Nintendo offer a much more limited service that is used by far fewer people, so is going to be much cheaper to run. And hey, their first party games often cost £30+ even years after release. Who is to say that isn't helping them subsidise in ways Sony don't. Really though, I can't see can't see people being happy paying for Nintendo's online service, because there's not much to it. Anyway, back to the point; if the disc is burned with that content on that was produced during development then I'd say it's ethically questionable to hold that content back for people that don't 'pay more'. And yeah, I know Nintendo aren't the only one to do it; any D1 DLC is a bit shit, but it's when people defend it that I take issue. You've paid your money, and they're not having to continuously use resources to provide you with that service. So what gives?

No, it's not. But then you already knew that. Online multiplayer is enabled by servers they keep running and maintain.

Unlocking the content already on your disc. Bargain.

You two (@Shorty) fancy doing this again this week then? I love saving things like this for weekends when you can runover time without consequence. How's Friday 8:30 PM sound?

Good luck with the interview, smash 'em dead.

Oh man. You have to give the guy credit. Rebelling against the institution and all that.

I thought music charts did include digital downloads, but games don't. Since downloads completely dwarf music CD sales these days.

Wee! Well, ain't that a slice of bollocks.

Project Cars not getting a downgraded version of the game in order for them to keep their promise is the developer's fault. Not getting a non-downgraded version is Nintendo's fault.

Impressive! Didn't Microsoft also get the rights to advertise it?

Or in Nintendo's case, "news".

Ah, dazzy. Not like you to not connect the dots, is it? Putting aside the 'honour' of what they've done regarding crowdfunding promise (which I never even touched on), this is a multiplatform game that is probably not going to come to Wii U because of its hardware limitations. You can argue they should have made a technically less impressive game, but that doesn't really dispute the point I was making regarding the wider picture and modern multiplatform releases. What I was pointing out was that the extra work to produce a downgrade means that even when devs appear willing to support Wii U, the extra effort for minimal returns means they abandon it. Yeah, they 'should' deliver what they promised, but don't you see that the hardware of the Wii U is the first, and most important, block to these multiplatform releases coming too Wii U? My comment was more or less aimed at those who think devs are to blame for the lack of Wii U support (abandoning it), rather than Nintendo leaving them little other choice than to abandon it. Also, regarding "they knew the power of the Wii U"; I'm not sure how people know that 100% up front, especially without a game to test when making the pledge goals? Crowdfunding is always taken with a pinch of salt and rarely do people renege out of malice, you know.

Nah it's not. It's bringing it to every modern gaming system, and also 2 less than modern gaming systems.

That should read "Capcom Is Bringing The Nintendo Exclusive Resident Evil Zero To Every Modern Gaming System". I never actually played this one. Any good?

Nearly every day I'd say. Destiny has been doing the rounds recently.

I am with you on this one. The battle system in this game is the same as the one bundled with RPG maker (unbelievably crappy front on view of enemies). It has cutesy graphics that have lent it a sort of iconic status but the actual gameplay mechanics either haven't aged well or just bored me solid. This was probably about 9 years ago, mind.

Who also needs posts like these, right?

Edit: The news is, I am slow with news. This announcement pretty much shows that the state the Wii U is in is entirely self-inflicted, because even when a dev wants to include them in multiplatform releases, they can't (or at least not easily).

Knew I'd heard the new Cryptarch somewhere. He's Balthier in FFXII.

I went for Blood and Broken Bones. Seems ok so far.

Yeah we were. It was funny because we didn't actually know we were 8-0 since we bought the '1st loss doesn't count' partway through after getting a loss. We didn't realise it removed a loss (and left us on 0 losses again) until we got our next loss on the 9th game. If we had we would have probably tried a bit more as we were kinda joking about. Just about every game we played was a 5-0 annihilation so we could have easily done it, was a bit of a shame but great fun nonetheless.