Sheikah

That's a good point actually. I distinctly remember him passing much negative criticism towards non Nintendo games he'd never played not too long ago.

This reminds me of the "since records began" gag. That first day when records began was surely extraordinary.

From 2 nightfalls yesterday I got 21 ascendant energy. Smashing stuff.

Great news. :p

Look back and you'll see most of this discussion stemmed from "Nintendo has lost the gamer". So rather than people's anecdotal +1s of "they've not lost me", the sales really do paint the real picture. If Nintendo weren't losing gamers (ie. most people were happy with their offering) then the console wouldn't be selling so badly, relative to how their consoles used to sell. Likewise, if PS4 wasn't resonating with gamers then it wouldn't have sold 18.5 million in just over a year. Sales talk may be a bit cold but it makes for a watertight argument.

Assuming Nintendo's Wii 3/etc console launches in 2016 or early 2017, by the time the PS4/Nextbox come out that Nintendo console will be outmatched again. So even if it was supported by a smattering of ports, it wouldn't be for long. Unless they continue Wii U right up until the end of the other console's lifetimes then they've no chance of matching on hardware, because technology improves massively in even just a few years. Thus, software will suffer again. I don't think anyone here thinks they're going to keep the Wii U going that long given how the state of things are. You seem to be falling back on the 'who knows what will happen' air of mystery. The truth is, Nintendo show no huge signs of adopting a PS4-esque 'for the (core) gamer' approach with the intention of taking on the other 2 consoles, which is basically how PS4 got people to switch. So long as they don't, they're not going to become the console of choice for the kinds of games that attract youth (like somebody mentioned, FIFA and COD). The exception would be if they came up with a 'wonder' game with the impact of something like Minecraft or Wii Sports. But really, that sort of wonder could happen for anyone and we've no reason to really believe that's going to happen here. I think new IP is very important as it provides a fresh experience that can grab new audiences. I really do think that Nintendo do need to focus more on it, as, well as moving away from very formulaic ways of making specific game series (e.g. NSMB). The problem with a gimmick is that it's a lottery, and one that really hurt their current console in terms of its popularity and pricing. In contrast to this, listening to your gamers, working with developers to include features they want and making the machine that ultimately wants is no lottery. Saying that they might make a gimmick that people adore like the Wii (which is the scale of gimmick they really would need to really be a home console success again) is really stretching it, to be honest. They've only ever made a home console with that level of hype around a gimmick once. I don't think we should really entertain what so far seems to be a one hit wonder event. Last point, with regards to this, I couldn't disagree more. All the problems together represent one colossal, incredibly different problem that is in no way easy to fix. The image problem alone is a difficult fix, without even accounting for the other problems. Mainly, the catch up they'd have to do in terms of tech in line with the competition is humongous, even if they even managed to regain goodwill with third parties. It's overwhelmingly more likely that they're not going to fix these problems and become a worldwide home console contender.

Terrible comparison, if that were true then the new trilogy would be more popular than the old. Whaaa?

I think saying "anything could happen" regarding Nintendo and the competition is a bit of a crude way of looking at things and possibly even ignoring the way things really are. Really, if you look at those game-changing moments throughout the generations there's always a strong (and fairly unique) reason behind the shifts in power between console developers. Sony's rise was mainly the result of adopting technology that Nintendo didn't, making it easy to develop games and much cheaper for the customer. Microsoft were already a giant who appeared at the right time and brought with them a very good understanding of networking (although, at the end of the day, the PS3 still did better overall; adopting Blu Ray made it hella expensive to begin with but was a really good decision in the long run). The 'shifts' in power usually either occur because of an exciting new technology (only rarely though, but that happened with the Wii and somewhat with the PS1) or by making a machine simultaneously affordable for both developers/customers and also ticking all the boxes for gamers. At least recently, the former example (new technology) is the thing Nintendo excelled at with the Wii, while the latter (machine that ticks all the right boxes for customers/devs) is what the PS4 and (to a lesser extent) X1 are excelling at. The problem with this is that the exciting new technology is the only front that Nintendo seem able to win on. They can't pluck online from air, or entice the developers back. And creating an incredibly 'must-have' exciting technology to buffer this situation seems such an incredibly unlikely event; in the past several Nintendo generations, only the Wii managed to do it.

I suspect from the 18.5 million PS4s sold that a lot more people are thinking kav's way than yours. That could be pretty damaging for Nintendo's future in the long run, tbh.

I eddage'd the raid last night, in one run getting the gloves (already had), body armour (didn't have) and helmet (didn't have). Combined with the maxed raid boots I already have, that's a full set. :p Also got a third piece for my warlock in a 3 man half-raid with Zell and Shorty so he can get to L32 at some point too.

If you input your name as Ben, you live the dream. Imagine the phone calls to Nintendo customer service from outraged parents.

Because you like a bit of blue? matron...

Last year I became a Dr, so that's nice. Not that I really set it as a resolution or anything. Aside from a couple of months at the end of year when I first started work here, this year is kind of the first proper year that I'll have been working outside of academia. So I guess I'll work hard and aim for promotion.

AC Rogue is actually set on the sea too, so maybe worth checking out?

With Witcher 3 coming out this year, not a chance. :p

It doesn't really look generic; most FPS games these days are set in either the modern day or the future (or an alternate present/future). Generic would imply it looks like all the rest, which it doesn't.

I'm not expecting The Order to be an amazing game based on what I've seen/heard so far, but it's nice that they've tried to go with a new franchise and an interesting setting. Bloodborne though, cor. Not sure how they managed to swing that as an exclusive.

It would be epic to see a no gimmicks, cutting edge Nintendo console (which the N64 pretty much was back then) launched with an amazing Mario title.

It is mad when you consider there's nothing out on the Japanese side of things that are must-haves... all that is yet to come. Although the home console market is pretty crap over there these days. Mind you, there's still so much to come this year for PS4. I imagine PS4 sales will go through the roof when Uncharted hits.

Part of the Moto G-unit.

A tribute to Ben in Majora's Mask. :awesome:

Agree on that, Galaxy and SM3DW are pretty similar in their contained, 'bitesize' sort of style (in Galaxy you move between small, self-contained planets for the most part in a linear fashion). Galaxy had the whole gravity/space theme working for it though. I'd like a Mario game on an epic scale, like Mario 64 but bigger.

Ok, since Daft is out and Zell might struggle, let's say 8:30PM as the time now instead: Me @Shorty @Zell @lostmario @ReZourceman @DriftKaiser Next in line if anyone drops out: Map

Sorry my post was in response to dazzy's, you ninjad me while I was typing. :p

That last part is a good point, really hits home how this is one of the problems with the current system that people have been saying. Say I used US Netflix to watch your film rather than wait 4 months for it to come to UK (because let's say that wait would be the trigger for me to go to US Netflix instead). Ultimately it's +1 view for your film whether it's UK or US Netflix you viewed. In the past, those distributors had much more importance as people had no other means of getting content. Now, there's no reason at all why people couldn't get their content from one Netflix site rather than it being available at several different ones at different times. Nobody here is providing the answers because they no doubt require a lot of thinking through, but you can see where the criticism is coming from.