What does Xbox even have that I couldn’t already play on my PC? Halo’s dead; there’s no reason to humor Xbox as a console anymore. Microsoft’s still-surviving exclusives are all mid; so really, why would I get one of these when I could just play on my PC, or pick up a Steam Deck to have access to my PC’s library?
Valve only makes the deck available in a handful of countries while Xbox hardware is available pretty much everywhere, so I’d say it’s natural to assume a hypothetical dexbox would too
Because Xbox deck wouldn’t be made by a tiny gambling company. It would be made by a massive corporation with footholds for tech already established in practically every country.
I don’t think this guy understands what innovation is. The Steam Deck and Wii aren’t particularly innovative. The Wii is a bit unusual, but pointer controls didn’t stick (though gyro controls have, in a minor way). The Steam Deck is just a regular handheld but with an x86 CPU.
I don’t think people are going to buy small consoles to play big games. And a powerful handheld is overkill to play small games. If people want to play small games, they use the phone they already have.
The handheld console sweet spot is slightly more powerful than the Switch. But the Switch’s selling power isn’t its hardware, but its library. Nintendo games have selling power. And even outside of that, the Switch has a surprisingly large library of third-party games like Skyrim and Doom. But if people really want a console that will do everything, they’ll get a Deck, because I know you won’t be able to do whatever you want on Microsoft’s handheld.
When the C-suite says “innovation” they tend to mean either “things other companies did that this company hasn’t done yet” or “obvious stuff that we should have done already but didn’t”.
Valve are the only ones confident enough in their systems to do that. Valve’s mindset seems to be that trying to lock people in is a losing strategy, long term. Instead they are just making sure that their offerings are better than anything else available. If done right, it has all the advantages of locking people in, with none of the downsides. It also combines with the perceived openness, which gains you a lot of credit with the geek community.
Microsoft are too reliant on lock-in to risk opening it up.
People pretty often completely understate the Vita’s popularity/lifespan. Less than the 3DS for sure, but early metrics were stupidly counting hardware sales when it was moving early to digital.
In Japan it stayed popular long after the USA stopped talking about it.
This is cool but I miss being able to grind for skins. Playing events and earning a bunch of loot boxes just for playing was great. I’m not giving them any money.
Instead of having to pay for the game’s premium battle pass or unlock that new hero through dozens of hours of gameplay, Blizzard will make Venture and all future heroes available to free for all players when they launch.
Wow, Blizzard actually taking a factually negative change back. No further modifications, no further rework, just a straight rollback of something that was a bad idea to begin with. That’s really a sign of the times changing, that always felt like something that is strictly forbidden at Blizzard! 😮
The new hero Venture is so/so though, IMO. Yeah their movement ability is awesome, but that weapon is so boring. And they hype it up so much, but it is just Sigma’s primary fire, including the ability to fire around corners and all. Unavoidable with so many heroes and not nearly enough niches for all of them that things will get doubled and tripled up, but it’s still disappointing to see something copied&pasted so directly.
I played the hell out of OW1. They turned off OW1 servers and required my actual real phone number to continue to play on OW2. Wouldn’t even let me use a VIP number. There is no time in this universe where I will want Blizzard/Activision or its advertising partners to have my real phone number. No interest in OW2.
It's a good change for sure, but the cynic in me can't help but think they're doing this solely because they believe it'll make them more money this way.
The actual reason is to hide the fact they’re probably not gonna have much if any pve content soonish. That’s the whole ‘reason’ behind ow2. They just layed off a bunch of staff too.
I don't see the correlation between those and making new heroes free. Maybe as a way to douse the community flames.
I think it's simply because people want to play the new content. While some cave and buy the battlepass, it doesn't offset the losses of the grind and paywall that stops people from coming back and investing to begin with.
The actual reason is to hide the fact they’re probably not gonna have much if any pve content soonish
They literally out right said multiple times that PvE content is mostly shelved and to not expect anything. This isn’t some sort of secret they are keeping
Nintendo: “Let’s force retro gamers to buy the Switch if they want to play our titles, by pressuring Steam to remove all Nintendo emulators, and by suing Switch emulators into oblivion.”
Also Nintendo: “Why don’t retro gamers want to buy our products anymore?”
You will just purchase rent your old Switch games on the New Switch 2 Eshop2. Then you can play up to 30 days so long as it is on your Home Wifi, and you do not have guests over.
If the Switch 2: Electric Boogaloo detects an emulator running on any device on the same network the Nintendo Security Devision will dispatch a crack team of lawyers to dispense justice immediately. This team is called … the N-Team!!
Don’t get me wrong: I’ve played through games with it and it’s really great. But there’s a ton of glitches and games that don’t play well. In another 5 or 10 years (hopefully I’ve upgraded my hardware by then) it’ll probably be great. But today it’s reserved for enthusiasts who enjoy tinkering with settings or playing less demanding games.
I only used it to replay Kingdom Hearts a few years ago, but I never had any issues with it. And based on this video RPCS3 released yesterday, it looks like there are plenty of games that are very playable, by any definition.
Playable status with the green mark has been a pretty polished experience for me without issues after putting the settings recommended in the wiki. Those that have issues have been stuff like Mgs4 and infamous get ingame status.
I played through MGS4 recently on Arch Linux. Lots of community patches, and tinkering with settings. But it was mostly playable. Textures on any kind of screen in-game (like when a character is video chatting you), some of the flashback sequences, and a few random times the NV mode in south America went completely out of whack. But it was enough to look past the issues and enjoy the story and gameplay after playing MGS1-3
polygon.com
Najnowsze