Sheikah

I think the initial Pokemon fans of red and blue had sorta grown up by this point to teenagers, the only time in your life when it seems uncool to like Pokemon. I didn't play this at the time, actually...much later on I think. I didn't like the transition to be honest. Blue/Gold were my favourite games and I felt like Ruby/Sapphire was the start of bad looking Pokemon (possibly artist switchover or something), particularly the legendaries which looked a bit ridiculous/almost computer generated. I think by this point too, having had two previous games where the objectives/gameplay were mostly the same meant I was left burnt out on Pokemon. It also felt like a downgrade from Gold, which had more gyms and the day/night cycle. I actually preferred Pokemon when it was far less complicated like in Blue; it was more fun. Having a Pokemon you have to arduously track down across maps, having berries (fuck berries) to learn what they do, and god knows there were loads, and an ever expanding encyclopaedia of Pokemon such that getting them all between generations had started to become difficult and tedious....shit. Keep it simple, that's what I like. The first 151 Pokemon were the best anyway, and 151 was enough for me. Pokemon was much more fun before this game hit, is pretty much my feelings. 6.9/10

One of the dungeons gives you an upgrade so you take half damage so might be worth sourcing that one out first. The last dungeon gives you another half damage upgrade too. Also same can be said for Master sword upgrades.

This is why... I never died! Hurhur... Loved this game, finished it with all heart pieces some weeks back.

Yeah, that would be a better term. It's worst when they're related to something 'online' (like Mass Effect 3 or F2P MMORPGs) - anything where there is an economy or where you interact with others that have paid their way to success, since otherwise you can generally ignore it. Games like Red Dead Redemption, The Last of Us and Borderlands that release DLC many months after the game came out that have cool extra missions/stuff is something to be appreciated I think. Given you've most likely completed the game by that point it's not going to affect your enjoyment of the main game if you don't want to buy the DLC, but it's there if you want to do more in the game.

The thought process there is flawed. They think if they have a good first party lineup then 3rd party developers will come in... Even if the Wii U got a decent install base and attracted third party games, if the 3rd party devs make the same multi format games to release on both Wii U and PS4/X1 then most people will buy the next gen versions. The PS4/X1 versions will almost certainly look and run better, with potentially better online features (if applicable), so it's more likely people will just buy those. The only way it would work is if devs said 'because the Wii U has a decent install base now, we will make this game exclusive for Wii U'. Which is unlikely to happen, given how much money they would lose releasing only on Wii U.

Sorry I'm also gonna sit this out. Wrestling never interested me tbh.

It's a game that came out not that long ago though (but still being charged full price) to be fair, and being bought by people who likely already had the opportunity to buy the PS3/whatever version.

Yeah it's good for money too. I just finished them quickly to make money without returning to shops.

The name's Moogle Viper... Moogle, Moogle Viper... Doesn't quite have the same ring to it.

Yeah I had lots of Amazon vouchers too. I've put a preorder down on PS4 + Infamous bundle that is £385, knocked down to about £345 with vouchers. Praise be to Topcashback and relatives. :p

Do eeet. Why don't you want to buy a plug? Aren't they a pound? Sounds like you don't need one anyway.

UrghhhhhhhhARRRRRRRR! (Perhaps)

One console's launch titles, so what's that - 5-10 games max? Nothing to suggest it will become the main way of doing things either. The vast majority of games aren't doing that. Uncharted 3 and KZ you can just buy the game as usual and play as usual (you somewhat conveniently forgot that...). Seems weird to criticise an alternative model that might mean some people can play it for cheaper with less content, while other people can still play the way they're used to. Hello Wii Sports! Additional maps are new content. Of course you should expect to pay for new content, really. Just to reiterate - in app purchases are the kind of 'boost your character for 50p per use' kind of garbage. DLC maps, levels or missions that has had resources used to make long after the original game released isn't an in app purchase that has been popularised by smartphones. This model has existed for decades with PC expansion packs. See Baldur's Gate!

Nearly all of them. Most console games (not companies) aren't like app store / free to play games in their models. Most are 'pay £30 to get the game, no in app purchases to boost your character'. Even if some companies have done that, they still release an awful lot of games that aren't like that. The majority of home console games don't have in-app purchases; DLC is usually different to what I'd call an in-app purchase. More like PC expansion packs of old that come out way down the line after a game releases and don't usually affect the game you've already played. They give people more content, which is usually what they want. In terms of the article that sparked this, with Candy Crush type purchases - no, the vast majority of console games do not do this. A game that did do this was Mass Effect 3, but really, that was very unusual and hasn't been widely adopted by other games.

May as well put this here too: PS4 Console £329.97 from GameStop.

PS4 Console £329.97 from GameStop. I would jump but I have a load of Amazon vouchers and will happily wait for Infamous to hit.

That's a good list of games, but then also factor in New Super Mario 3DS World and NSMB/ Luigi that not long since came out - and aside from a main Zelda title Nintendo are pretty much spent in terms of biggest/most anticipated titles in just over a year. I think without lots of third parties they're going to have trouble getting games/quality games out every month. Either that or start up a lot more studios.

Dude, it's a Dynasty Warriors game with Zelda characters, that much we know for sure. I was just saying that it's not 'new IP', even if they add extra polish to it on account of it having a Zelda theme.

Hyrule Warrios is as non-new IP as you can get. It is a cut and paste job of Zelda characters onto the Dynasty Warriors archetype. You can't even say as a crossover thing it's new, because the exact same thing has been done with Gundam (Gundam x Dynasty Warriors crossover). It blew chunks.

The problem with the 'killer app' approach is that it is all or nothing. You either manage to create a killer app, and do well, or you lose all support. It's not really sustainable given that the Wii was totally unexpected and in many ways was in the right place at the right time. It'd be very unusual for them to have a Wii situation again any time soon.

Don't ignore all the new IP just to make a point. You and I both know there was a lot of exciting new IP created last gen on the non-Nintendo consoles.

What do you mean by that? There's plenty of developers still releasing games on dedicated hardware that that lack an in-app purchase model...

My problem with that is that the guy at the front can hold a banana/shell behind him and be pretty ubstoppable so long as he doesn't screw up. People around 3rd/4th can get hit by all sorts like three red shells, bombs, even a bullet bill. I think sometimes it can be really pure luck depending on who gets the 'last' blue shell of the race, but at the same time not having it could be pretty damaging.

Only Chapter 7 has some decent stuff to steal from the recurring bosses, really.

That's all you'll get I think.