[...] I can do it on my PC because I know I'll always be able to play them.
[...] steam will still be here in 20 years.
1. No you won't. If there's one thing old school PC gamers like myself have learned is that running old PC games on modern computers is almost impossible. Sure there are modders and services like GOG who take a fraction of the available PC games and make them run, but that means buying the games you already own again. That is not backwards compatibility, no more than HD collections are.
2. No it likely won't. It's possible though unlikely that a service will last that long and the reason is, well... you: if tomorrow a new competing service came and had even better prices than Steam, better offers, more freedom with your licenses, you would buy from them instead of Steam, everyone with a brain would, right? Should Steam fail to keep up and match those prices, it would eventually be put out of business and close shop. They know that, and that's why they have a clause in their EULA declining responsibility in case of cessation of service.
No digital license is yours forever.
@Planeforger said:@Black_Knight_00 said:
Sorry, I blinked and I missed the gameplay
To be fair, that appears to be entirely in-game content.
Anyway, I'm definitely excited for this one. They stand a very good chance of making this the best videogame trilogy of all time - the final game already appears to be pushing the graphical and gameplay boundaries of the genre, it just needs to maintain their story and roleplaying standards to take the crown.
I never liked the first Witcher, but the sequel was really impressive, I bought it on day one.
lol did your crystal ball happen to drop the Lotto numbers on you too by any chance?
Just stop with the wild predictions. I mean Jesus Christ "simply can't go any further"? How long ago was it a Gamecube painted white with a bluetooth adapter conquered the planet? Far, far stranger things have happened than a console having crap sales its first year then doing better, hell by comparison it's common. If you want to make half assed assumptions and start preaching about the future as if it's fact go to system wars, you'll fit right in.
I didn't mention sales in this case. The system is unequipped to handle multiplatform games and is destined to be left behind when it comes to those, can you deny that? Do you see the Wii U running The Witcher 3 or Battlefield 5 next year?
You don't need a crystal ball to see that, come on.
Alls I gotta say is I hope that menu system and combat UI is tuned up. Assassins of Kings's navigation was a bit cumbersome.
Yes, the whole menu system was less than friendly. A fiend of mine used the "meditate" option and sat there for a few minutes waiting for something to happen, not knowing he had to manually exit the menu.
I especially hope they take advantage of analog sticks this time around: The Witcher 2 had a straight port of the keyboard interface, which made walking a pain in the neck, with only 2 speeds.
Reducing the production cost of the system would be a negative if the thing retailed at a high price, but it doesn't. It was designed as a $300 console.
It was made 'on the cheap' so it could sell 'on the cheap', just like the Wii and Gamecube before it.
Yes and that's why it's unequipped to compete and is irrelevant to the market. You can like it and it's fine, even I will buy one for the new Zelda when it comes out, as I did with the Wii for Skyward Sword, but it's still not relevant to the gaming industry at large. It does its thing and trite as it may be it does it well enough, but simply can't go any further.
Vita screen is sub-hd as well.
Digital triggers are a non-factor.
Low capacity battery is easily replaceable.
Touch screen works fine.
I've know of some posters on SW you'd hit it off with, they too like to troll systems and games they are unqualified with and focus on petty negatives. Since you really enjoy emulating such behavior you should head on over there.
I come here to get away from that nonsense, so good day to you, good sir.
In case you forgot, you were the one who initially quoted and instantly insulted me. That aside, you are making subjective excuses for very plain design decisions made to reduce production costs of a controller which without provocation you repeatedly called me a liar, a troll and a fanboy for saying was made on the cheap. On that subject:
Even in late 2012 I can't think of a single upmarket touch device which still mounted a plastic resistive screen, as everything mounts tempered glass capacitive ones these days and did even back then. Analog triggers are pretty much a standard too any home system controller, even the Ouya and the OnLive pads have them and they are the cheapest things under the sun. Sure you can replace the battery, but at an extra cost, and we are discussing production values, aka: what comes in the box here, aren't we?
These are all very plain and verifiable points you insist on denying.
You simply cannot respond to criticism by yelling "fanboy," that is not how polite and constructive conversations ad/or disagreements are conducted, animated and opinionated as they may be.
lol no. I'm under no obligation to dis-prove your fanboyish assumptions and false assessments. You took it upon yourself to make inexperienced statements about hardware and software you're unfamiliar with. It's your own responsibility to not make wild assumptions and stay neutral in areas you're unqualified to discuss.
All gamers should heed such advice to avoid looking ridiculous and out of their element. That's what System Wars is for. The Games Discussion board is supposed to be a place where posters discuss games and systems they've experienced, and avoid trollish behavior.
For that reason you'll never see me making silly claims of knowing about gaming PC hardware, or about systems I don't own like the Xbox One and PS4, until I own them and get real and personal feedback that you can't get from blind assumptions or store kiosks or limited time at a friends house. Same goes for games.
So your point is that when I say the Wii U gamepad has a low-res resistive touch screen, digital triggers and bad battery I am saying things that are not true?
Yeah I was right about you all along, you're judging stuff you've never had any experience with. I think we're done here.
If I'm wrong show me how. Don't just call me a fanboy every post you make and never counter an argument.
This is not good. Xbone needs to sell or Sony will fuck us.
@zijuun: Pretty much. Next gen can definitely wait when you still have a wealth of games to play from last gen.
WHy the hell are people talking about skyrim and runescape? Who gives a shit? They are both old hat now.
We'll talk 1979 games if we want to and there's not a thing you can do about it.
It actually impacts Nintendo systems less than others, as I've already explained in previous comments in this thread.
I'm looking at your comments as an attack on Nintendo and their fans. You wrongly assume that only casual gamers bought Wii, when the numbers, being so high would indicate that groups of every customer bought the Wii.
The tablet controller is innovative, and offers a more functional controller than any other game company offers. Sure, Nintendo started out bad with Wii U but sales are picking up, they're getting high-quality exclusives and have a much more attractive price point advantage over the competition. Their hardware is not irrelevant, just looking at the quality of visuals, gameplay and critical favor of Super Mario 3D World proves this.
Launch numbers for the other systems are not a clear indication of future sales, when the ardent fans are the ones who bought them up.
Third party devs haven't warmed to Nintendo consoles since the days of the SNES, so regardless of system sales, Western third party devs avoid Nintendo consoles. This doesn't change with high sales or low sales.
At $500 the Xbox one isn't going to be flying off shelves either. I can already find them sitting on shelves at all my local stores. Microsoft heavily depends on third party titles because they lack their own quality developers.
Sony has the only console that seems to be fated for high sales this gen, and for their sake, I hope it continues to do well. Sony couldn't afford another Vita/PS3 situation after they lost so much market share after the PS2 days.
The tablet controller is not innovative, it's basically a DS with a TV as a top screen, it's redundant and pointless. It's also fairly low tech, with its resistive touch screen, low resolution, digital triggers and poor battery. It doesn't take a hater to notice these very self-evident flaws. It's made on the cheap and that's plain for everyone to see. That's not even to touch on the console system specs, which were inadequate a year ago and will be completely eclipsed in 6 months or less when the real next-gen games start rolling out.
The SNES had the largest third party support of the 16-bit era, the N64 compensated the lack thereof with a robust, varied and still unmatched (among Nintendo systems) first party library, courtesy of the Yamauchi/Lincoln administration. Gamecube fell victim to the ludicrous Iwata management, which culminated in the shovelware avalanche that was the Wii and hopefully will end after the Wii U debacle, opening the way for an executive with a better grasp on the workings of this industry. A change at the top is literally the only way Nintendo can once again be relevant, which it hasn't been for some 10 years outside of the handheld sector.
Concerning Wii owners, all you need to do is compare the number of systems sold with the number of games sold. You'll find out that there's a disproportion between the two when it comes to the Wii. Why? Because most of the people who bought a Wii are casual gamers who only buy two games a year. Of course if you insist in claiming that I said that only casuals bought a Wii then I must begin to doubt your objectivity.
By the way, the Xbone is already flying off the shelves, everyone is talking about how it sold over 1 million units in 24 hours, and who knows how many in little over a week.