Sheikah

Sure you do, just read the review. It's kind of funny, the way people are talking it's as if the removal of the number has led to the review being incomprehensible, illegible almost. Maybe this change will herald a time on their site where their readers will actually take the time to enjoy a good review rather than primarily form their own judgement based on whatever they perceive a number to mean.

Also Defender Titan.

Is 8PM good for all?

Seeing this has reminded me how MoogleViper didn't associate the Dodge Viper with himself. Good times.

It might have been you if your last post wasn't 2 and a half years ago. Blast from the past bumpage?

Ah I can probably run the normal raid on my Titan tonight if you guys have space for me? Maybe not until after 8 though. Don't need any more gear though, but it would be nice for a chance at some exotic loot.

To be honest, I think most people probably click reviews and check the score before actually reading the review, so I'm not sure it'll make much difference for your average reader. It would be a good idea to remove that though, for the people who do actually want a surprise.

Sad times. Good if you're that 1 guy still without an Ice Breaker though.

He told me he did and that he loved/loves it. Need to get that myself at some point, too many games at the moment though. :S

*crosses fingers for 2 3DS XL units tomorrow*. : peace:

Daft's comment is exactly how I interpreted it initially. Most of life is relative. If you say something lacks content, you're saying that based on how much content you expect to see. And what you expect to see is based on what you've seen from elsewhere, or before.

When you think about it, they really do. At least, definitely for Wii U. They're basically propping up their own console. Sony have tons of third party games, Nintendo don't. You're always hearing complaints about droughts on Nintendo consoles, with people having to wait months until there is any game at all. You've also got the issue that some games are "1 per console" like Mario Kart. Once that's done, what next?

As I expected of you, all you've done is focus on the comment about the cretinous mindset (which it is), rather than focus on the actual reasons I'm attacking it. Sometimes people deserve to be challenged for making really crappy comments. Look at what you're doing - you're essentially reducing the worth of a game to what system it releases on. It's such a futile exercise, and it's the reason only the most religiously insular members on the forum are thanking your posts right now. As I said to you, there's a shedload of games that the Wii U doesn't get - it's quite easy, therefore, to view these many games as 'exclusives'. If not exclusive to PS4, at least exclusive to specific consoles. To many of us, we're only going to get one PS4 or X1 - because each console costs upwards of £300, along with a £40 subscription that must be renewed each year. For that reason, I view the PS4 as incredibly valuable to me as it is my means to play, say, Witcher 3, just as your Wii U is valuable to you to play NSM3DW. At the end of the day, the same value is placed, so the argument about exclusives is such a shallow one. And it really does you a disservice to constantly bring it up a if you have a point.

Well thank god most people don't view the world with such a cretinous mindset. As I've said before, if you have both a PS4 and a Wii U, then for all intents and purposes the PS4 has far more exclusives. I have no need for an X1 and the subscription it brings with it, so to me it makes no difference if some of the games I buy are also releasing on X1. I can't get them elsewhere, so to me they're exclusives.

Not sure what those stats have anything to do with? They were showing off a new Zelda, last year, they had every opportunity to repeat similar levels of epicness.

Dunno what you're toking but PS4 won it hands down for me. Bloodborne, No Man's Sky, Witcher 3, Destiny, Grim Fandango. Different tastes and all that, though. The Wii U had Zelda and Xenoblade as the only 2 fresh/interesting games shown to me. Was not really interested in Splatoon. But I bet the PS4 one put you to sleep, you Ninty boy, you! Serious note though, if people preferred Ninty's lineup then that's the power of Zelda doing its rounds again. Think back to when Twilight Princess was revealed, an ultimately less-than-amazing game that generated epic levels of hype when Miyamoto hopped on stage donning sword n' shield.

I do love a good conference. It's simply the best way to deliver important news and generate hype and interest. People saying it's not that important; it absolutely is if they want to be seen as a relevant contender. More than that though, people want a show. They want to tune in and see that hysteria that can come about from a conference like this. Awkward moments and exec trumpet blowing are part of the package and not really a negative, more like the filler that pads out awesome reveals (and to me adds to the tension). We've also had some great moments over the years that we'd never have had if it was done any other way.

Maybe they'll show oodles of awesome third party games instead? Not like the consumer really cares where else they're releasing anyway.

Ah ok, thanks. Will probs do that tomorrow then in prep for Sat.

You've totally lost me here (step 3). Why are you putting a new SD card (assume you mean micro SD into an adapter) into your old 3DS? Why wouldn't you put your old SD card back into your old 3DS?

Haven't used ShopTo in a while. Tesco actually became a pretty sweet place to order from since they started doing £10 and £5 off codes, and they always got to me on time. ShopTo now always seems to be one of the most expensive places.

The situation was the same with both PS4 and Wii U - they made a loss on hardware, but with the sale of some launch games (and in the case of the former, a subscription) they expected to make a profit. That's the right thing to do, if you ask me. It's all about hooking customers onto your machine, so they will then spend mega bucks on subscriptions and games. Those extra customers you get because your machine was £80 cheaper than the competition will then immediately spend £40 on a subscription and will likely continue to do so for at least 5 years.

Where's the 'non-fugly' tickbox for the face?

PS4 pushing up a little. Genuinely interested in how well it'll do when FFXV, KH and Persona hit.

I guess it seems that all you need to believe a specific method is best is for most people to continue to do something the way they always have done. Nothing would have ever changed throughout history if we continued to do things in exactly the same way, purely on the basis that it's the way it has always been done. That's tradition rather than evidence-based behaviour. What we have here is two (maybe three, if you count Joystiq) reputable reviewers. Both present similar experiences and findings as a means to justify changing their system. Arguably they could have changed more when they changed to a new system. They could have much more experience and understanding than what they have told us as their reasons for switching, throughout their many years of dealing with the industry, but we don't know. What I can say though is that there doesn't appear to be underlying, profit-related motive for their change. To me, what they've reported and the lack of a financial goal here forms a rather compelling argument (again, it may not for some, but that's just fine). Large groups of journalists are independently reporting similar things, while I don't see much evidence on the contrary (from review sites that retain the scoring system). Again, purely using a system that has always been around does not, to me, prove its worth. Hmm, not sure if you're doing this on purpose now. :/ I think it was pretty obvious what my point was. If it was generally a change that people didn't want, then let's say that cluster of ~350-400 EG readers who regularly vote on comments there wouldn't have been overwhelmingly positive. And as I pointed out, people on that site can be very negative towards EG. Sure, you can focus on the fact there's only a +300 score, but you'd do yourself a disservice to do that. If most people hated the removal of scores then we'd have seen a different spread. There's no actual research involved in that (as in, speaking to people involved in publishing or game making - at least not to our knowledge). It would be the same as if Zechs made a video now slamming it, or me praising it. Also, his argument does have some merit, as he slams EG for now just going with Google instead of Metacritic. That's a fair point, but it doesn't really argue against the use of review scores in general, just that EG were being a bit hypocritical. Actually, I've said I don't like review scores either, purely because they are falsely interpreted (e.g. many people will consider an 8/10 game to automatically be better than a 7/10 game, even if one is train simulator and the other Uncharted - it's just daft). It puts certain games on a scale that just doesn't 'fit all'. Now, EG might recommend both. You may argue that this is a problem with the reader, but ultimately a writer has a responsibility to get their point across. If people falsely interpret meaning from scores that they never envisaged, then arguably their review isn't doing the right job. You may argue differently, and I totally accept that. What I'll also say is that the inflated use of scores kinda makes them pointless anyway - 'good' scores can usually only be 8/10, 9/10 or 10/10. So really, you're looking at an /3 system (plus 'avoid') which pretty much gives 4 variables, the same as what EGs new system gives. So...yeah. Not seeing how EG's system is giving so much less information. :p