Nicktendo

There are plenty of companies that will do the entire build for you depending on your power / cost demands. They can advise you on what parts to go with and it will come out cheaper than a regular store-bought "gaming" PC. I built my own in 2019 having previously known nothing about PCs. Took about 3 months on and off of YouTube research before biting the bullet and spending around £800 on all the parts. A massive time sink, admittedly. The whole process is extremely intimidating and the build was terrifying, taking me around 14 hours to actually do from start to finish, but it was well worth it, and is not actually that difficult given the wealth of information available online. It's the time commitment that's the issue for the average person. I've easily upgraded parts of it over the past 5 years and very pleased with it. I don't know if I could go back to being console only now, but that's just me. Everyone has different time demands and different priorities. I had a old laptop that was on the way out and wanted to get a desktop instead, so a gaming PC seemed like the way to go at that particular moment. No doubt a PC that gets PS5 / Series X performance is probably going to set you back at least double the console cost, if not more, and yes it's true that even if you have similar specs, a lot of games will run worse than on console due to the nature of PC gaming (and horrific lack of optimisation by most developers), but this is why the stuff Valve are doing with Steam Deck and Linux is so exciting. They are doing all the hard work behind the scenes so that the PC market can become much more like the console market. All it would really take is someone taking the Steam Deck's handheld internals, beefing them up a little, putting them into a set-top-box for £50 less than a PS5 and you've got a SteamOS console. Would it have the same performance as a PS5? Probably not, but it would be close enough. Honestly though, the Series X and PS5 aren't exactly setting the world on fire in terms of tech because of the compromises that have to be made in the components to get the box under £500. They have a number of advantages in getting good components manufactured cheaper in bulk, but there is only so much you can do when you're working to a strict budget. Ray tracing and 4K60 were both hyped prior to launch, and neither have been delivered. AMD are way behind Nvidia in a lot of RT and the machine learning stuff that makes it run on weaker hardware and Xbox and Sony are stuck with them. We've got 1440p/4K and 30fps in some games and a blurry "performance mode" which is often 1080p or less. Chasing power is not going to work as it did in the past for either of them when you have to reset every 5-6 years or have a half-step in the middle, because PC tech will always be ahead 6 months after launch, and considerably so in the second half of a console's life. It was absolutely the right thing to do in the early 2000s when gaming PCs were in a bad place and almost impossibly inaccessible, but a significant number of barriers have been removed in the past 20 years. Ironically, we could actually see decent console ray tracing in Nintendo games before we do on PS or Xbox because Nvidia are so much further ahead in this space. None of this really matters, however, because when this eventual explosion of SteamOS mini-PCs does happen, and Xbox and Sony games are available on Steam day-and-date, or 6, 12, 18 months later, what pull will people towards MS's or Sony's hardware? I think they're both relying way too heavily on a short-term strategy and PC gaming is only going to continue to increase in popularity and become more accessible over the next 5 years with the work Valve are putting it.

Nintendo's First Party software is strong enough to be a USP. This has been true of all console manufacturers throughout time for better or worse, but if Sony and Xbox are abandoning that position, I don't see what they have to offer, or will have to offer over the next 5-10 years. Still only available direct from Valve. They've stated themselves it's an experiment and I don't think they have any intention of it becoming a mass-market device. But it has allowed them to develop SteamOS and get a huge amount of games running on Linux, which is very, very good overall for the traditional PC market. It has the added bonus of making similar non-Valve handheld devices and plug-and-play PC-like hardware to function like a traditional console. Exciting times.

Yeah these are some of the points I was trying to get at with my previous posts, just couldn't formulate it all properly. The more these consoles go up in cost, the less value I feel they have, when a realistically decent PC can be had for a little bit more. So if PS5 pro does launch at £500 or more, I struggle to wonder who it'll be for. You'll have your hardcore Sony fans buying day one, no doubt, but what is the appeal to Joe casual who plays only CoD and EA FC? Same for the PS5, outside of shinier graphics and better running games, the first 3 years of the PS5 were basically bare-bones from Sony. Hardly any exclusives, which is why I'm puzzled to why it sold so well compared to PS4. Once you get up to £500 territory, you're getting into PC land, and it has never been as easy as it is today to build your own current-gen level PC at a decent price. With PC gaming becoming much easier and more intuitive, affordable modern hardware like Steam Deck giving people the Switch experience with their PC library, and PS and Xbox games being available on those platforms - what incentive is there to continue keeping yourself tied to a Sony or Microsoft box in the future? We can already see MS failing fairly spectacularly, but I don't see a plan from Sony to prevent themselves going down the same road. Their offering seems very underwhelming from the outside looking in. They seem to have gone all in the AAA story-driven big budget games, whereas during the PS3 era, they had a ton more breadth and depth to their 1st party catalogue to make those big-budget experiences have greater appeal. They also can't seem to get a handle on their budgeting and keep chasing incremental gains for what seems to me to be relatively little advantage if sales of TLOU2 are anything to take insight from. I'm apprehensive about what is coming next from Nintendo, but I feel fairly confident they'll find good success if the next system is just "more of the same". I can't see how Sony keeps going at this pace without taking something from Nintendo's approach to software, namely: strong console exclusives / a sensible budget for 90% of the catalogue / heavier emphasis on gameplay and keeping the output going throughout the year with AA titles. The rise of these handheld PCs, and undoubtedly at some point in the not too distant future, plug-and-play home set-top boxes running SteamOS, is surely going to start eating into Sony's profits if they don't have anything stand-out to offer.

Kudos to Sony for still believing in 3rd party exclusives. I honestly think that's a main pillar of delivering an enticing console experience. I've seen a lot of MS fanboys hating on them for taking this approach, but it is the bread and butter of the console industry, so if MS isn't willing to stump up the cash (as they did to a great extent in the OG and 360 days), they can pound sand. But outside of that, I really do see very little. PC and Switch is the place to be at the moment, and Sony seem to be losing ground and mindshare in a substantial way. You mention CoD, but that's likely to be "best experienced on Xbox" from October/November moving forward. And I do not believe that Nintendo games will ever be available anywhere but on a Nintendo system, and that's exactly the way I want it to stay. They are the only dev left in the industry and that builds their software to a specific hardware.

I don’t really get the point of PS5. Full disclosure: I haven’t owned a Playstation since around 2008 (PS3), so I may be a little biased, but what’s its unique selling point, outside of it essentially being a PS4 Pro+? It barely has any exclusives and has been mired with cross-gen titles from Sony 1st and 2nd party for the first 3 years of its life. I agree that 3rd parties have been doing the heavy lifting, but Sony as a dev and a publisher seem to be in a really bad place. The fact they’re launching another console this year is laughable to me. They’ve already said there are no big 1st party hitters coming in 2024, so why are they doing this? PS4 Pro++? I can’t understand why the base model is selling so well on the back of basically nothing. Both Sony and MS have really dropped the ball this gen. Demon Souls, Astro, what else is a 1st party PS5 exclusive? I heard on Sacred Symbols that they are making ~6% profit on the PlayStation brand at the moment, which is very low. I don’t really get what their grand plan is. TLOU2 and Spiderman 2 seem to have fallen below expectations, and Ragnorok and Forbidden Wastes were both cross-gen titles that could have been so much more had they not been. Seems things are getting very stale in Sony land. Insomniac being tied to Marvel content until 2035 is a very, very bad idea IMO. 4th year of a console launch and under 10 1st party exclusives is absolutely terrible form tbh. What’s going on over there? The fact a decent gaming PC costs roughly double the price of a PS5 is interesting too. I have picked up quite a few Sony games in the past 2 years and they are giving me absolutely zero incentive to buy another PlayStation, considering releases on PC to be happening sooner rather than later these days. Ghost of Tsushima is dropping in a couple of weeks or so and I will definitely pick it up, but if PS games are going to be dropping within 12-24 months of release, and are likely to run better on a mid-range PC, what incentive does anyone have to buy a PS5/pro?

No, I refuse to believe it. This game is a myth, an Internet legend, and is never coming out. It is but a figment of our imagination. Cherry Team probably doesn't even exist anymore. Maybe it never existed?

The Octo Expansion DLC is part of the Nintendo Online Expansion Pak @Hero-of-Time, so if you sub for a month you won't even have to buy it. I'm with those who say it's a good time. It was the groundwork for the Splatoon 3 main campaign and has a lot of the same features / gameplay elements you find there.

Yeah, it's mostly the backlog, but I've been very impressed with what they've released in the past 18 months. Had a really great time with Splatoon 3, Tears, and Metroid Prime Remastered. Splatoon 3 DLC is just what I wanted. I've picked up a lot of the smaller stuff like Advance Wars, Super Mario RPG and Pikmin 4. Still working my way through all of them. The key thing though is that I feel all of those games either look or run fine, especially in handheld. Sure TotK's framerate has issues, but Metroid in particular looks stunning on the TV and runs like a dream. More power will eventually be needed given how old the hardware is now, but I'm pleased to see them eeking as much out of the OG Switch as they can while throwing out a few fan-favourites and lost treasures. I really want to pick up Hyrule Warriors Definitive Edition and go through that once more, but I'm not paying £50 again for it after owning it on WiiU and 3DS. Can't find a physical copy new or used for love nor money here. Been on my e-shop wishlist for 2+ years and has never had a discount. They've also been supporting NSO really well. I know there's a lot of support for releasing VC games individually for purchase, but I've already done that 2-3 times on past consoles, so don't mind dropping what is ultimately a small amount a year to have access to them. Beat Blast Corps last weekend in a couple of sittings and struggled half way through JFG before giving up. I did manage to snag an N64 controller from My Nintendo though, and hopefully it'll be here soon so I can continue. Diddy Kong Racing is surely next, no? Looking back, there was a big dip in positivity from myself and some of the Nintendo hardcore around the midway point in the Switch's life, but they have done a stellar job turning everything around to get me to the point where I actively don't want new hardware just yet.

I still check in often to read the Nintendo board and the Gaming Diary, but I went back and listened to episode 50 when I saw Wacker's post and wanted to say thanks. If you want the first hot take from me in a good three years, I hope Nintendo delays the launch of Switch 2 for as long as possible. I'm good with what we've got right now.

This was a really fun episode to record. Thanks for bringing back good memories, Wacker.

Look at my post history. That is not true at all. We had one member a couple of pages ago calling for the unvaxxed to be excluded from society. My arguments were met with "BBC Fact Checks". Are you following?

I was wondering when this would happen Absent for months at a time until someone needs putting down. bad faith - Marxist mumbo jumbo. The commies on ResetEra would love you. I gave three very good reasons why I don't trust the BBC: 1) Jimmy Saville 2) Lies about Russia which directly contradicted reality. 3) Protesting is safe but also very dangerous depending on what's the flavour of the day. I wouldn't judge someone who had served their time, but I also wouldn't trust them. Very different things. Trust is easily eroded and difficult to earn. I don't need to reconsider anything. I'm perfectly comfortable in my position that I will not be forced to take a vaccine against my will, you'll have to pin me down and inject it into me if needs be, at which point you've lost the argument. Does @Beast have any medial education? It's always attack the messenger and never the message. Carry on.

Compelling.

If you want to automatically trust an institution which harboured a paedophile for 30+ years then be my guest. My almost blind faith and support in the institution of the BBC was crushed in a single day because of a stupid needless lie. An completely unnecessary and pointless lie that I happened to notice because I was living on the other side of the world at the time they decided to tell it from right under my office window. If they'd lie about something so pointless as "Russians panicking to buy foreign currency", "dollars all but gone!" and "the line at the currency exchange opposite me is almost a kilometre in length" when it was quite literally the opposite - it was a normal day and no one noticed or cared what was happening bar a few ex-pats, what else would they lie about? Why lie about that, seriously? What was there to gain from it? Would they, therefore, lie about much more important things? Trump? Brexit? Corbyn? Coronavirus? These are logical conclusions anyone would draw when faced with such a situation. Why do they tell us that protesting against racism is safe, encouraged and necessary in a pandemic (Summer 2020), but protesting lockdowns is irresponsible and dangerous (always)? An epidemiological contradiction with zero "science" to back it up. One of those positions is objectively right, one isn't - the BBC can't decide which it is though. Objective truth no longer matters. With regards to your second question - that is my science. See how this works? If you get to have your truth, your science, and your facts (even when you slyly replace my with the), and I get to have mine as well. Yours is supported by the mainstream media (even when they change their mind), not banned from social media (until they finally admit it), and is promoted by the government (who just get everything horribly wrong), mine isn't. I'm being forced to do something against my will as a result. Comply with the "science" or face the consequences. This is what happens when society plays dangerous games with critical theory and wilfully discards objective truths. If you can't see the parallels between this vulgar infringement of liberty rights and The Weimar Republic, I don't know what to say. I can find studies, evidence and data that suggest COVID-19 is not inherently dangerous or life-threatening to under 40s, you can find the opposite. Neither of us know for sure because we're less than 18 months into a novel coronavirus pandemic and neither of us are trained epidemiologists. But, trust the science, bigot. But which science, tho? I have never said that vaccines don't work, that masks are useless, that social distancing isn't beneficial (despite supporting and contradicting evidence) - I've simply stated an opinion, based on the opinion, research and data of epidemiologists, that I don't want to take an untested vaccine, and judging on the lack of long-term data and relative lack of threat COVID poses to younger people, I think it's quite clear why anyone could make such a claim in a politically-charged world of lies and falsehoods if safeguarding their own health was their primary motivator. As much as I despise and distrust the Russian government, I would take Sputnik V, because it has been proven (so far) to be very effective in UK based preliminary studies and has been created using old tried-and-tested technology and the repurposing of a traditional flu vaccine. Why is that not available to me? If I ultimately had to take one against my will, it'd be that one. Nope. Sorry. Not available in your country. Experimental Pfizer of pfuck off. I don't know how we solve this problem. I know getting completely off social media is very important, but I doubt many will. You lived just fine without it before, why can't you do it now? Easier consumption. News aggregator. Easy log in to this and that. Laziness. Twitter is less than 2% of the population constantly shouting into the ether hoping to be noticed. That and Facebook are filled with Bots, foreign and domestic, which repeat the same nonsense ad-nauseum to get things artificially trending or shared. Has anyone here ever actually read and shared a post they disagreed with? Without the customary "omg, can you believe this?!" comment, of course. How many of you have unfollowed someone when they say something unsavoury, offensive, or something you perceive to be untrue? How many of you have called for someone to be banned because they challenged your worldview, your comforting little bubble of niceness and rainbows, or "harmed" the "wider community"? Remember when the BNP went on Question Time? How did that work out for them? For our Tik Tok generation though, Digital IDs and the locking down and removal of "harmful and dangerous content" is nothing to fear. Nay, you encourage it! A threat to democracy! There is no democracy without objective truth, that much is blatantly clear. I know some people here want me banned, I'm well aware of that. Well, what's stopping you? Incidentally, 45 of the hundreds of thousands of racist tweets and comments directed at England's footballers on social media after the Euros came from real, actual people based in the UK, many of whom have been arrested. 99.9% of them came from bots or overseas (Pakistan, Saudi, UAE, China, Russia, etc). How many of you knew that? Was it reported on the BBC after the outrage had cooled a little? Certainly not in the same manner the BREAKING story was. Is 45 too many? Of course it is - did it warrant the absolute shit storm that followed it? Probably not. The UK is not a racist country, no matter how many of you like to pretend it is when something like this happens. Once again, spoken like a true conspiracy nut.

Ah yes, the same BBC the hid the Jimmy Saville crimes for decades and helped him evade justice, the same BBC that stood outside my workplace on the 17th of December 2014 and brazenly lied about what was happening on the ground, and the same BBC that told us last Summer that going out and protesting for BLM was OK because "racism is the real virus". Give me a fucking break. It's painful to read Fact Checkers like this yet not unexpected from an institution that has done nothing but lie throughout its existence. The "experts" and "studies" that are constantly referred to are often nothing of the sort, they are unfortunately just another highly-politicised branch of society. Whether they find the correct and scientific result is irrelevant - find what you want to say, and bend the data to make it say that. Blessed be our righteous critical theorists who brought that little trick into academia. If you don't think that is happening, and not just in medicine, you are a fool. All you need to do is look at how the narrative has shifted over the past 18 months in the mainstream media alone. Full of flip-flopping and contradictions, full of "science" and "studies" to back up whatever the flavour of the day was. Then we have our almighty SAGE - full of behavioural psychologists, not epidemiologists, including a card-carrying member of the Communist Party of Great Britain, supposedly guiding the government through this pandemic - is that following the science? I am listening to the scientists - the scientists that present their data clearly and understandably, who I (rightly or wrongly) believe I can trust. Certainly more than the BBC referring to "experts" or "studies", which is not the same, to be honest. Why do they often not link to the raw data itself? And yes, I still read what the BBC and the Guardian write, regardless of my level of trust in them. I also don't think there's anything particularly wrong with listening to world-renowned and widely-published and respected scientists, biologists and epidemiologists who actually issue corrections when they get something wrong rather than just conveniently forget it - "Don't wear a mask. Wear a mask. Don't wear a mask. Wear two masks". Isn't it better to have a more encompassing view of the situation? No, apparently, and when many of these scientists that have been hounded and harassed for having the gall to go against the mainstream narrative, losing their jobs, their livelihoods and their incomes, listening to what they have to say suddenly becomes a gross violation of "what's best for society". Again, not how science works, not that anyone cares, quite clearly. The science has spoken! Like I said before, the ONS data is publicly available, that's always a very good place to start without the need for any filter, bias or "framing". I wonder how many people do that? Science should be open to all. Silencing people is not science. You do not remove those who you disagree with. If there is no consensus that the vaccine is effective (down to 14% efficacy after 6 months for Pfizer in Israel now) or doesn't cause lasting damage and that it might better to wait, which is what I was told by my own GP in March due to my own comorbidities, then I'll do that. I know I am a vile, disgusting science-denying scumbag for simply wanting to do what we've always done with vaccines - test it (for a long time) and make sure it works. Sorry if that delays your urgent mass-consumption plans. I personally would blame China for this mess (another media flip-flop), but you do you, blame me for not falling in line like the rest of you. Again, I only see coercion, threats and bribery in the media and coming out of the mouths of politicians. In a free society, that's not how things work. I will take the vaccine when I know it's safe and has been rigorously tested. Billions of people may have taken it, but that still doesn't mean it is safe. Prepare you arms for the Winter booster. Back to the conspiracy theorist labels then.