@Wolflink001 I don't know, I've played every major Zelda game and I've loved every one of them but Skyward Sword... was meh. I liked it at first but after a little while, I put it down and just had no desire to pick it up again.
And the same can go for the Wii. It's become a staple of my exercise routine. And by that I mean it makes for a fantastically accurate scale. I think the last game I played for the Wii was the aforementioned Skyward Sword and then before that... I can't say I remember off hand. Either Twilight Princess or Mario Kart...
I can't see myself getting the Wii U at launch. I really don't see the point of paying extra to play games that I'll already be able to play. And the last time I bought into the "We'll really have 3rd Party Support" thing, it never came to fruition.
@rhazzy I'm laughing at you rhazzy because you sound like a tool. You could have simply pointed out that the Tegra 3 is a vastly inferior piece of equipment compared to a modern desktop processor but you started with an insult and swears.
@Hornsqualid He is right though. The Tegra 3 is an impressive piece of hardware... by tablet standards. Tegra 3 is the bleeding edge for a tablet and it's only 1.5 Ghz (though with four cores) with a 1MB L2 Cache. A middle of the line four core processor on a desktop is probably 2.6 on the low side with probably 4MB+ L2. It's similar to how even gaming laptops aren't really gaming computers. They can outclass a lot of hardware but at any price point, you're still a generation or two behind and then tablets are a generation or two behind that. My computer that I built way back in 2006 is still significantly faster than the Tegra 3 (Quad core, 3.6 Ghz and I think 4MB L2 though the architecture is archiac). And then there's battery life.
Until consoles hit the uncanny valley and then pass clean through the other side, tablets will still be playing catch up. Once that point is reached, it'll probably be another 5 years before Tablets are on par with consoles.
@Hornsqualid @Rackjaw definitely a possibility but I'm not feeling it. Mobile gaming has been around for years and while they sell well, they've never managed to get rid of consoles. Social gaming is probably going to be similar. The truth is that they cater to different audiences or where they share an audience, it's usually part of an overall setup where it's only part of the experience.
I enjoy my World of Goo and Cut the Rope but I don't see them as replacing console or main stream gaming any time soon. The hardware just isn't good enough yet. VanOrd was talking about how main stream games are getting to the point where the hardware can do whatever the developers want it to do so now it's a matter of art style and emotional feel than how the graphics look. This is not going to be true for social or mobile games for a while still and until that's the case, people will continue to view them as second tier.
@SlyMC182 ... true but I feel that the biggest problem was semi-solved by last weeks episode and it was skipped over. If you couple the jet pack or jump jet with a powered suit then you can (potentially) fix the energy problem. I'm not saying it would work because it just might not be enough energy to do that but if you're going part way, it seems a small step to go the whole way.
As unimaginable as this sounds... well, frankly, I think it would certainly be an experience sawing through somebody in first person. It would make it that much more grizzly.
@ShadowASH It's an interesting problem you present but (if you remember the matrix), the human mind can't live without some kind of negative and we know that the brain is capable of making negatives on it's own. That's not to mention the different types of issues you'd have to deal with.
Conjunctivitis is a common ailment for kids. But what happens when an optical device loses sync with the brain? You may very well have the same kind of trouble "blinking". Lubrication in the joints can become "arthritic" We would still have physical ailments, they would just be different. We would still have those negative experiences that are required to grow.
@WCK619 I wasn't defending Gamestop so much as saying that it's just silly to complain that you're saving $5 on a game that's guaranteed to work. Craigslist doesn't always guarantee that. In fact, a local ad may put you 15 miles away in the middle of a strange part of town paying for a game that doesn't work... And then if you wanted to get rid of that game to get something else, you'd have to find ANOTHER listing to buy the game from (hopefully they haven't sold it already!) and repeat the process. It's a whole bunch of travelling and dealing and lack of guarantee. That's to say nothing of the convenience.
Again, I'm not defending Gamestop. I've traded one game in to gamestop in 15 years. I sell my games on Glyde if anything. You make a little less money than you do if you use Craigslist but the buyer is probably paying the same and they get a game that's guaranteed to work or the buyer doesn't get their money. That's not mentioning the fact that you literally don't have to do anything. The package comes straight to you. You open it, take out the second package inside, slip the game in and drop it in with your regular outgoing mail (who has THAT anymore, I don't know).
To me, the only drawback of Glyde is that it requires a little more time. It's possible that you could have the game within five days. It's also possible that it might take 15. But it's not necessarily any worse than Craigslist in that regard.
@Frimmel I can understand being frustrated about getting a new game "opened". That's a breach of trust. BUT... I'm not going to choose to spend extra money on a game to protect nothing but my sensibilities. I mean it's not like the person took the game home and stuck it in their pants. They took it home and played it. It's guaranteed to work and if it doesn't, you return it and they give you another copy.
I loath gamestop with a passion. There are many places in the mall that I work at where I consider myself a satisfied loyal customer and despite the amount of money I spend at gamestop (which is a lot), I can't say that I feel that way about gamestop. But I'm not going to let that persuade me to pay extra for a game. All these companies need to do is suck it up and offer their own trade-in policy. Do it online, pitch the game for $50 used and they'll be raking in the dough. It's called competition!
Until they do that, people will still be buying the game used, even if they have to pay extra for the whole game through DLC. I mean it's stupid really. They could get $50 for EVERY GAME sold plus DLC or they can get $60 on every NEW game sold and DLC. They are being greedy instead of being realistic.
ExtremePhobia's comments