Ronnie

The Switch runs better in docked mode, concessions and workarounds need to be made to get handheld play to perform as best it can. If you only ever swap regions to get something cheaper you never had any intention of buying otherwise, then fair enough. If you were going to buy an indie for £10 then switched to Mexico to buy it at £5 instead then that's not cool. IMO.

If last year is anything to go by, NoA will do a Nindies Showcase in the next month or two on the back of this. Personally find those more compelling, but will still be tuning in to this!

You know full well that Doom didn't release at £6.50 on PSN. It's a bargain basement price that's very common on Playstation. You're also comparing games that release at different times, often years apart, which isn't a fair comparison. Let's see what Doom Eternal and the new Wolfenstein will release at on the various digital stores, if they release at the same time, that'll give a better indicator. Don't try and justify it by suggesting the developer wanted you to swap regions. If they wanted to put the game on sale to sell more copies they would have put it at that low price everywhere, but they didn't. A giant corporation that make huge profits on every piece of hardware they sell (at extortionate prices) is a little different than the games industry where studios are going out of business left right and centre. Where hardware is either sold at a loss (PS3 and others) or with only a small profit (Nintendo). Where indie teams are having to pack up because they weren't making enough money, or where big AAA franchises are dying because the games ended up not selling. An industry where games are hugely complex and more expensive to make than ever, yet cheaper than ever. But they did have a hand in getting it to run on said portable console. They don't just press a button that says "port to Switch handheld" and it's done.

You want a loophole to save you money on the "Switch tax", even though games like Stardew Valley, Crash N-Sane Trilogy, Firewatch and Hollow Knight are identically priced between Switch and PS4. FIFA 19 is cheaper on Switch than PS4. South Park is £48 on PS4 and £50 on Switch. Same with Dragon Ball Fighterz. Rocket League is £1 cheaper on Switch than PS4. So you can say you're using the loophole to save the extra money on Skyrim, but what's stopping you from doing the same with any of those games that are priced either identically or practicaly the same? And the "Switch tax" on select games is mitigated a fair amount by a) the hybrid nature of the game and b) Nintendo's loyalty scheme, giving you money off with each game you buy. I wish Sony had any kind of loyalty scheme, let alone one as good as Nintendo's. And I can understand the discussion fine, thanks very much.

I get the impression you think the RRP of games in general across all platforms is too high, so yeah £40-50 for Skyrim will obv be too much for you. That's Bethesda's decision though. There's no way for us to know the exact cost but I think it absolutely can be that sort of cost difference. But again if we're talking the Switch tax then that means we're talking about third party games, where pricing is set by the publisher.

Are we talking eShop only games are a rip off? In which case, I disagree. If we're talking games that also have retail releases, welcome to ANY digital storefront on a modern console. Digital prices are always RRP, it's only retail where you can have discounts or in PS4/XBO cases bargain basement prices. The "Switch tax" is because cartridges cost more than blurays, but that only applies for retail releases obviously. There's nothing to defend when it comes to their eShop pricing, it's the same across every platform. It's down to third party publishers to price their games more expensive than on PS4/XBO, but that isn't down to Nintendo. You and I obviously have completely opposite views of the industry so I doubt we'll be convincing each other any time soon. That's not true, at one point games were much cheaper on the Mexican eShop without any sale. Maybe it wasn't $4 exactly but it was around that, 5 or 6 max. Companies go about things in different ways, just because one does something, doesn't mean the other should as well, as you suggested above. They didn't need to do anything, they chose to do this.

Sure but there's no way of knowing if that's the case, so you have to trust the publisher to price the game at what they think is the right value/would sell the most.

Not saying you shouldn't buy from there, if the opportunity is available to pay much less than your country's usual price, then go for it. I didn't want to buy Stardew Valley for half the price from the Mexican eShop (as one example), but everyone has different circumstances. There's three different situations here... Indie games that are between £5-£20, developed by a small team pouring their heart and soul in a project. There really shouldn't be a loophole where some markets Eshop is half the price of another, on a system that's region free. That's asking for people to abuse it, when more often than not the normal asking price for the game is very fair. Brand new Nintendo first party games are the same price as other AAA games, the difference is they don't sell at bargain basement prices a couple of months later. Fair enough, Nintendo software sales are absolutely insane and they hold their value. Ports of older Nintendo games selling for the same price as they did 6 years ago probably shouldn't be happening. I'm not entitled enough to say they should be £15 like some people, but a bit of a discount is called for. The reality is though they can charge full price because the majority of people will have never played them before, and their software is crazy high.

Sorry but that is poor reasoning; people were doing this because the games were prohibitively expensive (costing more than physical copies in many cases). It wasn't about paying full whack, it was because the games were priced at more than full whack. As stated above, the eShop prices in these countries are now more expensive than the UK shop. Which makes no sense. And if Sony are doing it, doing so well as they are, at the very least we can say it mustn't have been hurting their bottom line too much or they'd have patched it back in the PS3 days. People are paying the cheapest possible price for eShop games because they can, it has nothing to do with games being more expensive than at retail which only applies to the major titles anyway. It's open for abuse, you only had to look at ResetEra thread about Stardew Valley and how tons of posts were suggesting buying it on the Mexican eShop for like $4 or something. It's a really bad precident to set, especially when the retail value of games is dropping so rapidly. Mobile gaming and free to play games like Fortnite are seeing to that.

Oh well if Sony does it, it must be right? Just pay developers the full value for their hard work and don't find loopholes to fleece them. It was either raise prices in certain markets or make the Switch no longer region free for everyone, they absolutely made the right choice.

Mobile gaming is doing its best to destroy the value of games, so things like this, annoying for your wallet as they might be, are probably a good thing in the long run.

Trouble is how do you market a game that requires two Switches to function. It’s a tough fine print to put on games, especially single player ones like Starfox Zero

Nintendo Land definitely one of their most underrated games. It got a lot of flak at the time for not being up to much but I had a great time. Loved most of the mini games and it was lots of fun collecting all those trinkets from Nintendo’s past games.

I'm going to France tomorrow for 5 days, lots and lots of train journeys so I'm trying to figure out whether to play The Messenger or Moonlighter. I'll probably end up playing both, the Messenger certainly. Has anyone playing Moonlighter on Switch? I love the visuals but can anyone say how it looks on the Switch's screen? Seems like a lot of the UI would be pretty small.

Finished the Epilogue, 88.8% total completion, that'll do me fine. Sufficed to say I'll be thinking about this game for a very long time, it really is that special. I can't imagine ever being as impressed with an openworld ever again, at least for a long. It did the Breath of the Wild thing where it doesn't flood your map with a million checkboxes and instead let's you explore at your own pace, go wherever you want and see what you find. I really appreciated the design of the world, everything felt so seamless and organic. Visually the game is absolutely stunning, ever 60+ hours in I'll be galloping along on my horse with my jaw open gawping at the incredible scenery. The Rhodes area in particular is just lovely. It's not just the landscape either... building interiors, animations, everything. The map is probably the most beautiful I've seen in a game, and I love the UI and on-screen graphics. I've seen plenty of complaints the gameplay is too slow, Arthur walks like a tank etc... I didn't have a problem with it at all. Not every game needs to be fast paced and all action. The environmental story-telling was great too, so many mini stories dotted around in the various cabins. Loads of easter eggs I would never have found without looking them up online though. Characters were amazing. Arthur is GOAT protagonist, Sadie stole every scene she was in, likewise Dutch. Loved Jack, loved Charles. Incredible game, will live long in the memory that's for sure.

Could be March for a major Direct, like last year. Or could be next week. Who knows

Welcome to the club, one of my favourite games of last year, easily.

This is worth a watch. Great stuff from Gamexplain as always

What a weird/annoying missed opportunity. Ok thanks!

Do you mind if I ask... I’ve got 4 missions left in Epilogue 2 and I’ve barely explored any of the new area. Does the remaining story missions take me that way or to the town(s?) past the valley or should I just go ahead and explore on my own before finishing up the last few missions. No spoilers please just a vague idea

What's funnier, is someone actually reading T&Cs

I think the worrying shape of things to come is the community, especially judging by this post Greedy developers? Really? If you’re calling out investors then maybe direct your attention to publishers, not the people hard at work making games you love, all while entitled gamers demand they change the ending, or that they give you an extra costume etc. Games are better than ever, Cheaper than ever, and with 10x the scale and budget of back in the day. The only thing I worry about is dropping retail costs of games and above all, the generally immature side of the gaming community.

Finished Chapter 6 last night. Arthur is probably my favourite character in video games, in terms of cinematic games. Love him.

Full of deserved people getting pats on the back and being recognised for their contribution to gaming. The gaming community is full of negativity. Not a week goes by without a crusade or witch hunt against something or someone. Games get review bombed, publishers get harrassed or destroyed in comments. Fans demanding things from devs, or complaining that they don't get something for nothing. The Game Awards is a rare bit of sunlight, in an otherwise pretty toxic and immature place. And yet you still want to celebrate "the worst" the industry has to offer? Come on (If you want people giving themselves underserved pats on the back about everything, I'd avoid social media though.)

Nintendo is doomed