Jump to content


N-E Staff
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Nicktendo

  1. 8 minutes ago, darksnowman said:

    I'm sure you can identify as it sums up your activity in the Nintendo threads.  

    You aren't coming across as perfectly comfortable, though. No one here propping your eyelids up with matchsticks and subjecting you to the BBC or any mass media, and no one here is going to pin you down and inject you. It's okay. N-E is a safe space.

    Your point of view (and @Beasts ) is important so that a fair and balanced discussion can be had. We've members who're vaxxed (and glad to be, let's note), @Beast isn't totally convinced one way or the other,  and you're absolutely not interested under any circumstances. There's a nice spread of opinions and positions. But you really should consider presenting where you're coming from in a more approachable way so that others who want to engage with you on this topic can do so without it devolving to this.

    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? 

    • Thanks 1

  2. 1 hour ago, Rummy said:

    I'm gonna interrupt you here - you have argued in bad faith quite a few times here and you just buttload your posts with fallacies to avoid responses to how unjustified the things you slip in are. Scattergun approach and what I currently see a bit as arguments in bad faith.

    I won't argue points with you - but I will argue the meta of critical thinking as it's quite blatant how bad faith you are being sometimes. Let me explain the fallacy in the above - the BBC are guilty of one thing therefore they are quilty of 100% of things and can never ever be trusted with anything. An argument to the extreme loaded with a few other fallacies. It doesn't wash. Does this argument extent to suggest that any criminal convicted of a crime who serves their time are still a criminal and should be judged, even though society already once had? Please consider your rhetoric, your motivation, and how you want to make the points you are making.

    I was wondering when this would happen :laughing: 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. 

    • Thanks 2

  3. 2 hours ago, Sheikah said:

    Ah, fair enough. BBC fucked up with Jimmy Saville and therefore the opposite of everything they say must be true.

    Honestly though, what on Earth makes you think you're qualified to state those under 40 shouldn't be getting vaccinated? I'd bet anything you have no medical background whatsoever.

    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. 

    • Thanks 2

  4. On 25/07/2021 at 11:20 PM, Sheikah said:

    It's painful to read false assertions like this yet not unexpected from someone who said there is no institutional racism in the UK...

    Your post reads like that of a conspiracy theorist. There are scientists far, far smarter than you that have recommended these age groups be vaccinated based on many reasons, and not just the death count. But I'm sure you know better, right?


    10 hours ago, Sheikah said:

    Just wanted to note as well that this very point popped up on BBC's fact check segment today:

    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". :laughing: 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. 

    • Thanks 1

  5. 33 minutes ago, Beast said:

    This right here is what I mean though. Whilst I understand abortions and vaccines are different procedures, what you CHOOSE to do with YOUR OWN BODY should entirely be YOUR CHOICE and yours alone.

    Also, I'm very mad about the right to protest too because it's taking away everyone's right to voice their opinion but isn't it awfully strange that that had come in and then, after saying passports wouldn't happen, suddenly from September we can't go places unless we have one.

    Honestly I can't even believe that there are people who do not understand just how wrong this is. I even know vaccinated people who are just as outraged as I am about this. Also, just for the record, I'm seen as one of these vulnerable people but I still disagree with the emotional blackmail (let's call it as it is) of getting a vaccine to keep me alive. At the end of the day, you do you. Are you going to walk past everyone in the street and ask if they've had theirs? No you wouldn't. Does it necessarily make a difference in my life if you have or haven't? No it wouldn't because I'm still going to live the way I want to anyway. 

    Just to reiterate, although I disagree with getting the vaccine until there's further tests and data regarding future health implications (and for the record, I'm like this with a lot of medicine anyway as I tend to get side effects), I'm not against the vaccine. I'm against the government pressuring you to get it through not allowing your freedom to do what you want to. 

    As I mentioned earlier, I love going to the cinemas but it's MY CHOICE not to go because I don't feel safe enough and everyone who's getting the vaccine for other people's benefit won't change matters for me. I totally realise that I can catch it and possibly become worse but that's my burden, not yours. It sucks but I crack on with it. Honestly anybody having the jabs will be treated just the same as someone who hasn't had it. I keep a respectable distance and that's that. If I want to wear a mask, I'll do so if I have to be in close but even then, it's hard for me to wear them for long before my breathing becomes affected. 

    I just honestly do not buy that everyone is getting the vaccine for unselfish reasons though. I don't buy that the majority has booked theirs and said "I'm not doing this for me, I'm doing this for the random stranger I might meet in a bus stop. I'm doing this for a better society! ". Let's not lie here, the majority are not really doing it for a better society but for your own health and that is okay to be selfish because I don't honestly blame you. That is entirely your choice. If you were trying to gain a better society, there's a fuck ton more that needs doing. 

    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.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  6. 1 minute ago, Goafer said:

    I don't. Which is why I turn to those who do, the promoted preachers. They say getting the vaccine is what will save lives so I believe them. They've done far more trusted preaching than any of us, so they are THE people to believe. 

    If you genuinely think you, or anyone else, know more than the preachers who have dedicated the last few years to profiting off this pandemic, then that is a level of arrogance that is impossible to argue against, so I'll just leave you to your "me and mine" attitude and continue to do what I believe is right.

    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. 


    • Like 1

  7. 1 minute ago, Cube said:

    Only hypocrisy to people who don't understand basic logic, who are too terrified to do any research in case they find out they may be wrong about something.

    Single mums on Facebook aren't valid sources, btw.


    Out of interest: do you grow all of your own food? 

    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. 

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  8. 4 minutes ago, Goafer said:

    Can't believe I have to say it, but caring about others is the right thing to do?

    And to be clear, it's the people who CAN'T have the vaccine that need protecting, not the people that WON'T. The more people get vaccinated, the more those people are protected by proxy.

    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"? 


    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  9. 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 ::shrug: 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? 

    1 hour ago, Beast said:

    Here's the thing for me: whilst you're not harming people, you're still effectively harming the homeless and your society. Also, you say this but isn't it harming yourself (mentally or physically) getting a vaccine. People can say all they like that they get it for strangers but let's be real, the majority are not really doing it for society but for their own health and potentially their friends and family too. I do agree that PEOPLE have a PERSONAL right to stay away from those who have not been vaccinated as it is THEIR CHOICE but for the government to make it law to treat others differently just doesn't sit well with me. Also, I'm not religious but I believe that it's their right to not have one if it falls on to religious reasons. We've been taught growing up to not treat others differently due to their religious beliefs, race, sex, orientation, etc. Wouldn't this be totally throwing it all out of the window?

    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.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  10. 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. 

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 2

  11. 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 :heh:

    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. 


    • Like 6
    • Thanks 1

  12. 17 minutes ago, Dcubed said:

    One of my favourite memories from Skyward Sword was when I found out that you could stab the pumpkins in Skyloft and get them stuck on your sword; then you could fling them off in whatever direction you swung your sword (oh and they would float down the river if you throw it in as well!).  That attention to detail just blew my mind!

    Wasted a good hour or so just messing around with the pumpkins by flinging them at people, enemies and things! :D 



    • Haha 6

  13. 5 minutes ago, Aneres11 said:

    I do use my switch in handheld quite a lot. As I’ve said before, Mario Tennis is my most played game and I feel when playing online that the pro controller has lag. So I much prefer handheld. 

    But my concern here is whilst OLED is great, the increased screen size and the lack of resolution bump is just going to make things look… worse? 
    Interesting we’ve still not seen any picture with the screen on. 

    Looking forward to when some tech sites get some hands on! 

    The slightly bigger screen should not make it look any worse from a resolution point of view. It's a very small increase in screen size, much less so than the jump from 3DS to 3DSXL. 

    If anything, the OLED display should look considerably better both in terms of colours and black levels. Lag should also be reduced to a tiny extent. 

    I'm honestly looking forward to seeing it in person - a video on an LCD TV or PC screen cannot do it justice. Definitely going to upgrade my base model and pick this one up.  

  14. 10 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

    Fair enough, though Altano never professes to be a Nintendo "expert", he just loves Nintendo, but I agree he can be a bit ignorant about the industry. And Whitta... yeah. It was more their words I felt like highlighting rather than the people saying them.

    Altano has been one of IGN's main faces of Nintendo for almost 10 years, he should be better than this considering the amount he gets paid. It's also nice to know that Gary Whitta considers Bloomberg to be "internet bullshitters". He, of course, is not. So fresh, such superiority. Twitter was the biggest mistake humanity ever made. 

    That doesn't make them wrong about leakers though. It's just a bit cringe seeing them trying to count this as win. On Twitter, nobody wins and society loses. 

    • Like 1

  15. 18 minutes ago, Ronnie said:


    Oh great, our daily dose of "Trust the REAL games journalists!"

    The lack of self-awareness is hilarious. Part of a mainstream industry that is hated by the large proportion of its consumers. Peddling their own lies and clickbait non-stop and he has the gall to attack independent people doing exactly the same thing. I hate leakers as much as the next guy, but Altano and his other "journalist" friends are cut from the same cloth. Gatekeepers and political warriors that couldn't actually give a damn about games or their audiences anymore, desperately trying to shine a light on anything and everyone that doesn't conform to their narrow world view.

    This supposed "Nintendo expert" also conveniently forgot that the DS and the 3DS both received GPU clock-boosted models faster than the Switch received this OLED update. Pitiful attempt at sarcasm for someone who can't even get basic facts right. 

    Gary Whitta - Another clown who loves the smell of his own farts and sense of superiority. 

    "Get mad at the Internet bullshitters for feeding you a bunch of unfounded rumors and speculation"
    Replace unfounded rumours and speculation with "faux outrage" and "imaginary problems" and you have Mainstream Media Games Journalist™ 2021. If people actually trusted and respected the games media, they wouldn't need or want to go to YouTube idiots. 

    • Like 1

  16. That design is majestic. Absolutely love the new dock + kickstand + ethernet port. Good job, Nintendo.

    Now about those internals...

    What do we think? Just a new screen + dock or is it hiding something more?

    Surprised at the 3 month lead time from reveal to release. Seems like a good way to kill the OG and Lite momentum. It'll be interesting to see how news trickles out for this before Oct 8th. Obviously I want a bit more power, but with my Switch being 4 and a half years old now and showing signs of wear, I'm glad I held off on the V2 revision. 

  17. 11 minutes ago, Hero-of-Time said:

    Are Camelot just not up to scratch anymore when it comes to making these games?

    I think this is the issue. They’re clearly a great team and a have a long history with good sports games and RPGs, especially on weak hardware like the GBA and GBC. Their three HD games have been very low on content and have lost a lot of the “magic” which made their older games special. I think it’s clear they are not up to modern HD development with the likely very small team they have. It’s a shame, but I don’t see it changing unless they expand or get much better support from Nintendo. 

  18. 9 hours ago, nekunando said:

    I think I've probably played enough to be able to start giving some early impressions of the game.

    Before I go into it, I will just clarify that I'm glad I picked it up, I am enjoying it and am  sure I will continue to have a lot of fun with it..

    ..but man, it's a little disappointing so far!

    I've sprinkled a few rounds of Mario Golf: World Tour into my last couple of weeks and it's such a shame to see Super Rush tamper with the formula enough that it's easy to make a case that it's an inferior game at this stage.

    We're all aware of the adjustments to the swing meter, none of which I would really consider an improvement, but even pressing the X button to select where to aim your shot has been unnecessarily changed and you can now bring up a scanner with R to get a different perspective.. but it's still just not as convenient or helpful, in my opinion.

    Also, the courses themselves (from the 3 I've played so far) seem to lack the character that all of the 3DS courses and DLC ooze.

    I haven't experienced enough of the Speed Golf to know if it's fun yet or not so I'll post about that at a later date (as I will do when I finally try Battle Golf) but it may be a little hard to shake off some of the criticisms, despite the fact that it's still fun to play!

    With the amount of Wii U ports, and perhaps some 3DS ports to come, Mario Golf on Switch feels like it may have been wiser to simply port World Tour and add in a couple of enhancements, such as motion control. 

    Despite already owning it on 3DS, it may yet prove to have been a preferable option!

    Yeah, I'd struggle to disagree with any of this. 

    Not a big fan of the new swing meter. Courses are uninspiring so far. Game seems a little bare-bones (I'm sure that will change with free updates). 

    It's okay, but not up their with typical Mario Golf fare. I had similar feelings about Tennis, but the gameplay in that was so good, it was much easier to overlook some of the drawbacks and I ended up putting a ton of time into the game. There is nothing in this game that I feel can really match 64 / Toadstool Tour so far. 

    • Thanks 1

  19. 2 hours ago, WackerJr said:

    I feel better that others are struggling as I don’t have the foggiest!  I’ve no reason to ever doubt Jonnas’ guesses, so in case it’s somehow not right, I’m going for:

      N64 title.... still no idea but at least the list is smaller! (Reveal hidden contents)

    Cruisin’ USA


    Painstakingly close!

    • Thanks 1