@ZIMdoom: Nintendo has been notorious at delaying for a very long time now. I can't recall the last time a major title of theirs wasn't delayed going back at least to the N64 era. They make sure every title they ship is polished beyond belief - something that's practically unheard of to many of their competitors who do shove products out the door in order to get a game out within some timeframe.

I wouldn't really say Nintendo is in over their head, either or don't know what they're doing. They've always followed their own path - for better or worse.

I agree that it would have been nice if Zelda was a launch title or at least within the first year or so of the console. I'd love it if just once, Nintendo had a solid launch lineup that gave people no choice but to buy the system. Imagine a Nintendo system releasing with a proper 3D Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Mario Kart, Animal Crossing, etc.? But in the mean time we just have to accept Nintendo does what they want to do and they release games when they feel they're ready. But at least you know you get a rock solid product when it actually is released.

@DawgByte2: Like skipper847 said, money. It costs a lot to get the rights to stream content. And as Netflix has grown in popularity, studios have started charging a LOT more than they did previously. Obviously it's not very feasible for Netflix to keep ponying up more and more money for higher quality films and shows. There's more to it than just that, but that's one of the biggest issues.

That aside - Netflix still offers their DVD side of things which still gets new releases of movies and shows.

@_plaguelight_: Honestly, I was fine with Samus being a robotic, emotionless soldier-of-fortune. She's just a badass bounty hunter, it's what she does. Not every game or character needs some complex backstory, humanizing aspects, arcs, etc. She was a character that was simple and to the point and I think that's what made her so great.

On the one hand, I agree. Why is there even a gaming category now at X Games? I can understand having a tournament there, having a tie-in and all that stuff, but as an actual part of the competition?

On the other hand, it can simply be viewed as just another category. A skier isn't going to win a snowboarding medal or something in the snowmobile category. So it isn't that big of a deal that there are medals in some category you don't compete in.

It seems like ESPN is wanting to shoehorn e-sports into their programming. Let it thrive or fail on it's own merits. Things like DOTA International and other tournaments do exceptionally well. Give competitive gaming their own time slot if you're willing to give it a shot and see how it goes. Piggybacking off X-Games is kind of cheapening it, in my opinion.

I've commented about this elsewhere, but I think it's kind of stupid. The only real changes that should be stemming from localizations are possibly cultural aspects, like jokes, that another country wouldn't understand at all (and I'd argue to even keep those in). Beyond things like that - keep the game intact. We've dealt with this for over 20 years now. It's a waste of time and resources to censor aspects of games like this and creating something to fill the void. It isn't as if controversial stuff doesn't get bought. Last I checked GTA V was shattering records left and right and that game is far from family-friendly. Perhaps pull a Call of Duty and give the user a prompt that the upcoming content is controversial and they can skip it if they would like.

Now, would I have noticed this had I not read about it? Probably not. Will it keep me from playing the game? Probably not. But that's not the point. The point is that consumers should be able to choose on their own whether something is a bit too much or not. We don't need our hands held. Release the content as it is and how the developer intended it to be.

It looks really fun. I'm hoping Killer Croc gets some decent screentime. Not 100% sold on the Joker's look, but I'm going to give it a fair shake. I think it's good that DC is giving some of their lesser known characters some attention. I mean, everyone knows the Joker and Harley Quinn, maybe Killer Croc or even Deadshot. But the rest are pretty much under the radar.

So a multi-platform game has system specific DLC? If it isn't timed and is only going to be available for PS3/PS4, that's kind of ridiculous. It's not like it's completely minor DLC. It's a huge cast of characters and a new level - stuff that people who will play the game would probably be very interested in. Tell me I'm not the only person to find this kind of stupid?

@crimson_gungnir: Blizzard has found a fair amount of success on consoles with Diablo III and I expect Overwatch to do well there, too. So I would assume they'd go with the Diablo III approach and release it on PC first and then port it over to consoles shortly after.

I'm really interested in checking out Overwatch at some point (whether through beta or final release). Blizzard seems intent on maximizing their audience these days. It'd be nice if it comes with some sort of cross platform play, but I wouldn't expect it.