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.

So as we all know, Epic Games is currently suing Apple for "Maintaining a monopoly" on its App Store and Apple products. They believe that the 30% cut platform providers is unfair and argue that they as developers should be able to distribute their own games on smartphones without paying the platform holder a cut of the money for this privilege. A privilege which essentially boils down to access to more than a billion customers. However, that's not what I'm getting at here, though I encourage anyone who isn't aware of this situation to read up on it as it could affect all digital marketplaces in the future. I want us to imagine a situation where Epic Games wins this lawsuit - and going forward, platform providers cannot maintain a monopoly over distribution on their products. Given the recent news that Xbox Series S is launching at £249, it's clear to me that MS is taking a MASSIVE loss on this console in the hope that they can recoup the costs via GamePass subscriptions and, more importantly, digital game sales. The industry standard, outside the EGS, is a 30% cut to the platform provider. This includes, but is not limited to, the following five companies: Apple (US) Google (US) Sony (Japan) Nintendo (Japan) Microsoft Xbox division (US) As we know, the final three companies make the majority of their profit from digital sales and subscription passes on their platforms (consoles). The reason these consoles are sold either at a loss, or a very, very thin margin of profit in Nintendo's case, is because they know they will make the rest of that money back in the future. Essentially, they are betting on getting enough people into the ecosystem to make this economic model sustainable. Remember the $599 PS3? That was still sold at a huge loss and people completely baulked. Times have changed, and barring a catastrophe from Sony, it's unlikely they'll go that high again. They can afford to go lower because the future returns are basically guaranteed. [Enter stage left] Epic Games / Tencent. If they win the lawsuit against Apple, Sony, Nintendo and MS wouldn't have a leg to stand on having their various stores as the only point of access to the end-user of a console. Think about this - Who has the most to gain from this 30% cut legally being ruled unfair? Who has basically unlimited backing and can afford to run at a loss because they are propped up by a communist state? Which nation is trying to gain a dominant position in the global tech market despite leaking foreign tech companies left, right and centre thanks to COVID, sanctions and tariffs? Maybe, I'm crazy, but I think Tencent are playing somewhat of a long game here and basically trying to destroy Western tech from the inside out. Their Fortnite propaganda video was a rallying cry to their teenage followers to boycott the "unfair" Apple. Who's to say this will stop there? I think the big 3 console manufacturers are next in their sights, and with it, the dominance of the US and Japan in the global gaming market.

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.

Just coming to the realisation that one of the arguments above was "I don't want or have time to think and do my own research so the scientists can do it for me". Parallels with religious belief are striking. Fucking amazing how it's gotten so bad. Critical-thinking skills all but gone and people willingly giving up their rights so they can get back to consuming products as quickly as possible. Keep fighting for your own rights and freedoms, @Beast, look after your own health, nobody should be forced to do anything against their will to carry on being a free person and enjoy their life in the same way they did before. A choice between a vaccine and ostracization is no choice at all. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

There are a lot of scientists who would disagree with that position, not to mention the horrifying VAERS data from the US, where mRNA is used exclusively, but they are the wrong kind of scientist and data of course. Please read or listen to Dr. Robert Malone - creator of the mRNA vaccine as a starter and go from there. If not, try to enjoy life blindly following orders and protecting people, and don't forget to take your tax-payer-funded Winter booster shot.

You'll have to define "basic logic". I read through the ONS statistics every time they are released from the UK and the stats from here. The vaccine clearly helps in preventing serious illness and death in certain age groups. That much is obvious to anyone. I don't see where I claimed anything different. Out of 2400+ deaths here, 4 have been under 40. Still don't see a reason why I personally need a vaccine. I don't have any social media accounts. Why are the single? What's wrong with being a single mum? Why do you want to demonise this demographic? I grow my own vegetables, yes.

Yes, I'm sure this very small percentage of the population simply can't take sensible measures to protect themselves, so we must force people to chip in against their will. 87% in the UK already had the first dose (well on track to beyond herd immunity), but it's not enough, we must protect the tiny percentages!! What other vaccines have they skipped if they can't be vaccinated? How are they still alive? They could get mumps, or measles or TB at any moment... I joke but this is a supremely weak argument. You cannot protect everyone from everything. Universal safety is not universal freedom. FWIW, if I was in this category of people, I would not need people to be vaccinated to "protect" me. I have my own mind and can analyse and assess various risks of my own accord, shockingly, just like everyone else. Look after yourself and your own health, as is your right and prerogative, and let everyone else get on with doing the same. My health, and anybody else's for that matter, is not your concern. I trust people, all people, to do what's best for them. Why can't you do the same? Why are you so adamant that other people need to be controlled in some way? Why is it the right thing to do? Is banning people who simply want to exercise their freedoms and rights from doing so the right thing to do? Why do you know better? Why do you need to be the voice for people who can't be vaccinated? "Trust the science"? What's with this militant Stalinist thinking? He also did the right thing and look how that ended up. Stop the lazy virtue signalling. "Two weeks to flatten the curve" "We need shield the vulnerable" "It's for your own good" "We'll be free when we have vaccines" "We just need to vaccinate the elderly and vulnerable" "We just need to vaccinate everyone over 12" "We have no plans to introduce vaccine passports" - Look how far we have come. This is where "caring about people" rather than trusting them has got us, it always does. And if your response to that is "well, yeah, people can't be trusted" then you are already gone. Total government control vs. Personal responsibility and common sense. Illness and death outcome of Corona: largely the same, economic impact and suffering: vastly, vastly different. I though you "cared about people"?

The left on abortion: "my body, my choice! A foetus is not alive, dummy, I'm not killing it" The left on vaccines: "NO! my body, my choice doesn't apply here because you are LITERALLY KILLING PEOPLE" Masters of hypocrisy. Loving your hate boner for religion as well. "Stupid religious people shouldn't be allowed freedom". Always the same playbook from the devout holier-than-thou atheists. "Trust the science!" they exclaim, while ignoring the fact that these vaccines are experimental and rushed to market, the pharmaceutical companies are immune from litigation for injury, illness and death, and people are being bribed and coerced into taking them rather than carefully and methodically persuaded. The science, you should know, dictates that a virus become more transmissible but less deadly as it evolves. Look at the case and death numbers for widely unvaxxed Eastern Europe. Only ~30% fully vaccinated in my country, and while the numbers are much lower than Winter, cases are still 10 or more times higher than last Summer, yet deaths are only 2-3x higher than this time last year. No doubt it'll come back again in Winter, but critical care has also had more than a year to improve, we are in a much better place to fight this disease now, which the vaccines are a critical part of. Ivermectin (a very cheap and patent-free alternative to vaccination) has been proven as a very, very effective prophylactic and preventer in Latin America. The sensible thing to do would have been to offer the old and the vulnerable the vaccine, improve medical prevention and critical care, and then carry on as normal. If people, quite rightly, don't want to take the vaccine, that should be their choice, understanding all the risks associated with taking it or not. It seems to me that many of you are motivated by nothing but fear. If you've "done your part" and got the vaccine, what is there left to fear? Why are you worried about whether other people might die? Surely if they have the vaccine too, they'll be fine? Maybe you're fearful of being locked down forever, so you're willing to adopt China-style QR codes, thus far unproven and untested vaccines (with only <40% efficacy against Delta, by the way) and fucking health passports to get back to normal? How many booster shots are you going to take until this is finally over? Is that really "normal"? In addition to banning them from public spaces and polite society, maybe we could get those who don't have health passports to wear some kind of star so we can easily identify and avoid them? All of that goes completely against our way of life, and ironically, by supporting and carrying on with this nonsense all you are doing is making sure the biggest and richest companies get bigger and richer and punishing the small and medium businesses, the backbone of our system. The vaccine has been available for half a year, those who want it have taken it. Those who don't, haven't. If you have it - you are protected. However, if you are under 40 with no comorbidities, you should really have no reason whatsoever to take this vaccine. All you need to do is look up the COVID death rate for these age groups in the US, the UK, and the EU. Here, inject shit this to stop the <0.002% chance you'll die from Corona. Fear. Unless of course Delta is somehow more deadly, which is actually, you know, anti-science. And just remember, those vaccines are not free, nor the boosters that are coming. Long live the tax payer. I am more than willing to take a vaccine against Corona once someone has explained to me: a) a good, medical incentive for me personally to get it which isn't based on bribery (OMG! free stuff!!) or coercion (get it, or you can't go here!). If not, I'll take my chances at <0.002% b) how I am "doing my part" by getting it. If you want to be protected, get the vaccine. This has nothing to do with me. And no, I am not getting a vaccine to protect the <1% of people who can't get it for "medical reasons". That's not a just trade-off. Society should never be bent to the whims of 1% of the population, unless your name is Jeff Bezos, of course. More hypocrisy. c) that there are no long-term health implications from getting an experimental mRNA vaccine - the detailed results of which will start to come out in mid-2023, but will probably take much longer. I'd be much more open to a non-mRNA vaccine, but I can't get one here because reasons definitely helping. The burden of proof is on you, not me, to inject something into my body and I will not budge until all three of the above requirements have been fulfilled. I have already lost one of my jobs because I refused to get the vaccine, and I am completely at peace with that (big shout out to my Pfizer and Moderna shares for helping me through this potentially dark time). I'm willing to fight and to die before I give up my body autonomy and freedom to live under a China-style boot. I wonder how many of you would be prepared to die for something you believe in, or will you just carry on pushing to take away other people's freedoms for the benefit of "society" because you are scared? It is being thrown out of the window because in modern society the individual is king. People should live according to MY rules and only my rules. Feelings, virtue and "the greater good" are more sacred and important than anything else and it's big daddy government's responsibility to make me feel warm and safe. They view people who don't agree with them as stupid, brainwashed or inferior, hence why they think they are in a position to dictate how they should live. The concept of people making their own choice about their own bodies or speech is not one they can comprehend because it clashes with their warped worldview, which is inherently "good" and "just". A generation of man-children who are simply too afraid to live in the real world and unable to make themselves feel safe so they covet and coerce power to remove all aspects of society they are fearful of or disagree with. Totalitarianism, in a nutshell. Sad to see it playing out like this.

Have to say, I'm very impressed with the traditional controls in this game. Having the sword on the right stick works so well and is very intuitive. My only complaint is that it can be a bit awkward moving the camera while holding L. The motion controls have impressed me as well - they feel much better than the WiiMotion+. If finding the Joy-Con is able to replicate my movements very accurately, the curser is smooth when required and it is blindingly quick to recalibrate when tapping Y. I'm halfway through the first temple and absolutely loving it. Such a far cry from BOTW but still a superb "traditional" Zelda game. Movement, climbing and jumping off ledges feels a bit janky after BOTW, but the swordplay is so much fun, so I'm happy to ignore it. Graphically, the game looks much better than I had expected. A really lovely HD update. 60fps feels great and everything is just lovely and smooth. Kinda disappointing that the watercolour effect, especially for stuff far in the background, has been vastly reduced, which kind of makes the game lose a fraction of the charm it had back on the Wii. Very pleased I picked this up.

I've been on a bit of a roll this month and have already managed to beat a few games. The first one was Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker, which I bought on a whim when Greg simply said "do it" after I told him it was on sale. Surprised at how difficult this game gets in the third chapter. I've managed to do the first two to 100% competition, but I can see it taking me a long time to do the third. I had a great time with this game. The gameplay is unique and the almost 100 mini challenges give it the perfect pick-up-and-play appeal. The only thing I really had an issue with was the camera, which always seemed to be cumbersome and awkward at the game's most tense moments. Like I said with Box Boy, I really like how difficulty is implemented into this game. Beating it (which is what I did) is relatively straightforward, but getting all the diamonds, doing the level's challenge and finding the hidden Toad take a lot of work. Probably not quite worth the £30 I paid for this, but there is a fairly good amount of content + the DLC which comes with the gold version. I'll be going through that soon. I had gone through the majority of Eliminator Boat Race last year but couldn't do the final couple of races. Well, I finally did them the other day. Not easy at all - took me multiple attempts and probably around an hour of trying. This game is great to be honest, a really fun NES game. However, I much prefer the top-down Micro Machines style racing over the mode 7 style racing, which is hard to control and frustrating when your opponent starts ramming you. Give it a go on the NES app if you want something a bit different with fun dialogue. At the start of the month, I got convinced to give Super Metroid another go after a group of lads from a discord I'm in started talking about it and replaying it. Having never beaten a Metroid game, I thought it was time to finally put this game to bed, especially with Dread on the way. After about 6 hours, I got stuck. Spent an hour trying to figure out what to do next and then gave up... So I started playing Metroid: Zero Mission instead, which I had on Wii U for some reason! Turns out that just buying stuff that's on sale can work out sometimes! Anyway, I played this handheld with the Wii U plugged into the power supply in the corner of the room. Amazing how nice this game looks, I love the sprite work here and how colourful everything is. The first few screens were familiar as someone who's started Metroid on NES no fewer than 10 times, but I'm so glad they made this remake and I don't have to put up with horrible slowdown in the original. I managed to beat this in about 3 sittings. Took me around 5 hours. I absolutely loved it! I really found the ability to hold down R to access the missiles useful as it became annoying to constantly be pressing Select on SM. The exploration is great, especially because the map is not that big, though I did start to get a little tired by the end, but I think no one really likes heavy amounts of backtracking in these types of games. Once I was done with Mother Brain I thought the game was over. However, I was pleasantly surprised by Space Pirate ship at the end of the game. Completely changed up the gameplay from quiet exploration to intense battles and chases in a much more linear fashion. Great stuff! Accidently stumbling upon upgrades and secrets and the boss battles were highlights of this game for me and it was super comfortable to play in bed on the Wii U pad - much better than on a small GBA screen I imagine. But that's not all... Yesterday I did finally beat Super Metroid! Went back to it on Monday evening and worked out what I needed to do pretty quickly. I have to say, the final boss and escape sequence puts many modern 2D games to shame by way of how goddamn epic it is. I honestly couldn't believe I was playing a Super Nintendo game. Had I played this game back in 1994, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that it would have easily taken the top spot as my favourite game on the system. As a product of it's time, it is absolutely perfect. The map is obscenely large for the time, but not too big (even if I did get lost a couple of times). What I mean by that is in 1994 we all had more time. This type of game design doesn't really work today because people don't have the patience for getting lost or getting stuck. However, being sat on the bedroom floor on a Saturday afternoon, you could easily just spend three, four, five hours wandering through the world, finding secrets and trying to work out what to do next. It was acceptable back then in a way it isn't in 2021. I can really appreciate that, but still occasionally used save states anyway The atmosphere in this game is unrivalled. What they've achieved with the feeling of loneliness and isolation in this game is just unmatched. I've always read people saying this and thought it was hyperbole. It isn't. The way the music, level design and superb graphics blend together to create that feeling is something I haven't experienced to such an extent in a SNES game. I think it does environmental storytelling very well as you move between the different worlds, enemies and bosses and kind of lets you make up your own mind about what's going on. Very cleverly done, especially as I'm someone who generally likes to be told the story and walked though it. Here, I found myself interpreting stuff and enjoying that process. I love the way the game doles out power ups, the feeling of becoming more powerful is explicit and engaging, and being able to go back to previous areas when you saw something that looked a little off is probably one of my favourite gaming tropes. Here it is done to a masterful level. Spending 20 minutes trying and failing to understand wall jumps was extremely frustrating, but then it suddenly clicked and became second nature. No explanation. No hand holding. No text. Just - "haha, try and get out of THIS!". A feeling of accomplishment I very, very really feel in modern gaming. 5 minutes later I was wall jumping everywhere and finding new areas and power ups all over the place. Superb game design. The bosses, also, deserve a special mention. I don't think I managed any of them first time, but kept going back and working out when to attack and when to avoid. Again, just excellent design. Nothing ever felt impossible, I just needed to get better, faster, take my opportunities at the right time. The way Samus moves seems clunky at first, but does feel much more natural once you've spent a bit of time with the game and got used to the various differences between this and other side scrollers. I think the game still holds up very, very well. Amazing that this game is almost 30 years old because it certainly doesn't feel like it is. My only niggles were getting lost for long periods of time (but again, that's a 2021 complaint) and I really hated when you get stuck in sand or an enemy which swallows you and can't jump out of it. Seems entirely random, but that's a minor complaint. I'm so glad I finally gave this game a fair shot. I've started it so many times and never made it further than the beginning of Brinstar. At the risk of annoying H-o-T, I have to say that this game also made me appreciate Hollow Knight on a whole new level. The inspiration from Super Metroid is obvious, but they've taken what works from this game and built and interesting and vibrant world with superb modern combat and movement. The foundations and philosophies in game design and worldbuilding are the same though, and finally playing through the "blueprints" of Hollow Knight has impressed, engaged and entertained me in a way I never thought possible for a Super Nintendo game. Metroid Fusion is next on the list.

Sony should make a 3rd Person Action-Adventure game out of that redemption arc.