Sheikah

Precisely. Quite honestly, the overwhelmingly vast majority of people will not give a flying fuck, or even be aware that this interview took place. By questioning why people will buy it after that interview you are basically contemplating that - A) The article is even going to be read by most potential future PS4 owners (it certainly isn't) B) That people who do read that would for some reason pass up on the superior console out of some weird principle. People already know that there are tons of great games coming to PS4. That is going to factor a million times greater than what some guy in an interview says. Nope, I have gone about collating multiple opinions and reactions to the interview on a multiformat gaming website as opposed to arrogantly (and ignorantly) pushing my own opinion about as if that's how it just is. In your post, you suggested that this interview cast him in a bad light to a large group of people and questioned who would buy a PS4 after this. In the EG comments section there are hundreds in favour, with the positive posts themselves garnering hundreds of votes. So who do we take the word of? You, in that this was bad press and will have a negative effect, or hundreds of other people, who thought this was a good and candid interview? This is by no means a rigorus comparison, but you'd think that if this was such a stupid thing to say, more would be mad about it. I'll lend a little credibility to using the comment section of EG as a valid measure of group opinion. If you want a truly stupid thing, then turn to when Microsoft proposed the used games policy and always online... The comment section sure as shit jumped on that then. The comments section on that site is actually a pretty good 'at a glance' measure of the gamer community's reaction to these sorts of things. You might have your own thoughts, but generally speaking those comments at least give you more of an opinion what other people are thinking, too. Good to see that you've basically admitted that the interview will have no bad effect now yourself. :p So much for 'who will buy a PS4 after this'.

Apart from share/record features that have been already touched on, a more powerful machine essentially has fewer limitations. Originality should always shine through as gameplay and story elements courtesy of the developers, which could arguably be done on any machine. But if a great idea was pulled off on crappy hardware, you would argue it was great in spite of its hardware, rather than it was a great game and that a part of that was that it was able to push past limitations that were present in past games. To branch out to something more than graphics, take a look at this: When I saw the trailer for that, I was pretty impressed. Now game developers can make a far more immersive game through adding additional character models that makes the gamer feel more like they're a part of that world. Which, for a game like AC, complements it perfectly. The game is about going into the Animus in which you view a virtual reconstruction of the world. In order to make the person in the Animus feel like they are really there, the crowds around them as well as the environment should look as real as possible. So I'd argue that the next gen hardware is making the games more engrossing (through graphics, number of character models, and effects), which is a definite leapfrog over the previous generation.

Yeah but that doesn't make it fresh. It looked crisper, but that doesn't make it fresh like you said. It was pretty much the same game that we'd played twice before 10 years back.

Absolutely the opposite in every regard based on the many hours I put into the beta, but different strokes eh? :p

I think I read somewhere that it probably was a Wii game that got moved up to Wii U some way through production (as shown by how the game looked).

Fantastic game yeah, fresh it is not. It really does just feel like a HD version of Pikmin 2. Sequels are fine but they need more new concepts.

Are you kidding? People will want to buy it because it's the superior console and has great Indie support/Plus benefits. Who gives a shit what this guy says. Honestly though, can't tell if serious? A quick look at the comments section on Eurogamer and you can see people love his candid honesty for saying this. So all in all, it pretty much worked. If he is being honest it's not a lack of business acumen, it's acknowledging what other people are too bigheaded to admit. And it's obvious not everyone can see the exact recipes for success, or else all the other consoles would be bloody storming it right now.

I'm still not seeing what's so horrible. What's so horrible about saying you should put them on your ignore list? If someone is being generally disruptive in derailing topics very often or making those sort of frustrating/biased posts, then rather than responding to them every time it seems like a perfectly sensible thing to suggest they go on your ignore list. It would certainly help clean up the site. The other week King V put me on his ignore list and had a conversation with Clownferret in the topic about it (Clownferret commented that it was the best thing he ever did). And you know what, I'm glad! King V was often picking out parts of my posts for trivial reasons (often claiming I shouldn't bother with talking about the sales of games as it doesn't affect us).

Not much to say to this, other than I totally disagree and I find it pretty shameful that you've just played the bullying card. Rather than consider the possible reasons why you think a group of people have, individually, considered putting a person on their ignore list, you've immediately opted for one possibility (which at least in my case couldn't be further from the truth). If I was to ignore him, it would be based on his constant derailing of topics and religious defense of Nintendo to the point that he either makes things up or ignores reason and logic.

I would if the ignore function really worked (I'm on Tapatalk and pretty sure it doesn't). Even then, people quote their posts and you see them and you have that tempting option to unhide them, so it doesn't really work. :p

lol. What absolute bollocks.

Typical for you to concentrate on a couple of examples out of thousands to drive your point home. Sony's way of emulation is far better because it means people actually get to play the games they want to, instead of this seemingly autistic strive for perfection that nobody seems to really care about, yet is dished out as an excuse by Ninty fanboys as a reason for the poor show. By the way, I have played FF7 from start to finish without encountering a single problem. So this is a case of you finding a problem some people had, then pretending the game is unanimously broken to suit your argument.

Complete opposite of arrogance. They are admitting they don't know why it sells. Arrogance would be pretending it's to be expected or that it's because they're the best. Arrogance would be releasing another console called the Wii_ with barely any discussion with third parties because you think your own output alone is so hot sauce that that's all your customers need. Arrogance is thinking you're usually always right.

Play until you can freely use the boat, if you haven't got that far already.

Ooh. That's some level of crazy.

You could even add a comedy element, put an impaled Magikarp on the bottom end of the sword.

I'll say it again, the sooner Nintendo stop pretending to be home console manufacturers these days the better. Some great software here and there but for most it's simply not enough to really justify their own (crappy spec) hardware. Become third party - we can only dream.

A year fellowship at London/Whipsnade Zoo for £34.

God damn, this looks so good. I don't normally watch long gameplay trailers but that looks awesome. The town also looks so fleshed out.

The games being re-released aren't playable on the previous consoles. They're being remastered such that they take advantage of the extra grunt of the new consoles. Those remasters wouldn't run on the previous consoles. It's no different to how, say, Jak and Daxter was remastered on PS3 when it was originally a PS2 game. The real reason there's a lot more remasters is because they're easy cash and can grab customers who never bought the games last gen.

No release date yet, apparently it was being held up a little due to big fixing on the X1 and Vita versions. Apparently they sent the final versions off recently though.

Probably not, the heavy reuse of assets as well as this being confined to last gen means I'll probably just wait for their first PS4 offering.

No, it's something anyone can do and you don't need to have built up any Tesco clubcard vouchers. Basically you buy AC Unity (works with Destiny too) from GameStop for £42.97 but select the option to also add the trade in envelope to your basket. Buy this game and this game for under £20 combined. Then you put them in the freepost envelope GameStop send you and they knock £40 off the price of your AC Unity order. Requires a bit of planning but ultimately you're saving maybe £20-25.

Pre-ordered for the cheap price of £22.88.

Why are people blaming ports for not being up to scratch, then using the gamecube to show that a hardcore audience was there? It really is NOT due to porting issues that nobody bought them on Wii U. Why focus on a specific and almost irrelevant aspect while ignoring the truth? It wouldn't matter if the ports of ACIII or anything else were exactly as good as PS3 and 360 versions. The latter two consoles were LAST gen and people already had the machines to play them, or could pick them up cheap. Who in their right mind would pay £300 for a new console to play a game at the same level as their current consoles? It is NOT down to porting issues, @Serebii. If Nintendo hadn't fucked up and gimped their consoles, ACIII could have been as definitive to the PS3/360 versions as ACIV was on PS4 compared to the other consoles. Which I'll bet you're not going to argue is much, but at 1080p there is a definite reason to upgrade there (and I can tell you, it looks a whole lot nicer on my PS4 than it did on the PS3). Second, the gamecube had a core audience but you could easily argue that since then the other consoles have developed their online infrastructures and OS features so far ahead that now Nintendo doesn't stand a chance. People know where the meat is these days.