This is kind of a nothing burger. Unfortunately companies say this all the time.
As history has shown, actions speak louder than words. You should only believe these companies statements if they actually allow a union to form without any interference on their part.
They gonna fix sharing digital games with family members? Or do I have to keep cartridges around so my 4yo can pop them out and lose them?
Crazy to think that when I bought a lot of my digital games, I wouldn’t have expected a second kid who wants to play them on a separate switch. Now my saves are all fucked because he’s gotta play them on my profile on the second switch. I bought that switch because my wife and I both wanted to play ACNH, which was also bullshit. And then I got stuck with the Lite because we couldn’t migrate her island over, which was also bullshit.
There’s no reason we can’t share digital libraries with households. Amazon does it.
Sharing isn’t the problem. 4 year olds aren’t the most responsible or capable of keeping track of small objects.
I can’t tell you the places I’ve found Odyssey, and that’s his favorite game. And 3D All Stars is completely missing, which I’m still really upset about.
Sorry thought it was well-known enough without additional context (talking about switch in gaming community). I was going to mention this was 2020 for added context because ACNH launch was exceptionally huge because of Covid lockdowns.
Literally just a rant on Zero Punctuation about “AC” games - Assassin’s Creed, Animal Crossing, Armored Core, I forget the list. (Also Asheron’s Call I guess)
Well, first I can’t comment — or I won’t comment, I should say — on the rumors that are out there. But one thing we’ve done with the Switch to help with that communication and transition is the formation of the Nintendo Account. In the past, every device we transitioned to had a whole new account system. Creating the Nintendo Account will allow us to communicate with our players if and when we make a transition to a new platform, to help ease that process or transition.
Our goal is to minimize the dip you typically see in the last year of one cycle and the beginning of another. I can’t speak to the possible features of a new platform, but the Nintendo Account is a strong basis for having that communication as we make the transition.
Is this him indirectly confirming backwards compatibility?
The two lines you mention do cut off at some points, though. The DS no longer had backwards compatibility with the GB and GBC, the DSi with the GBA, although the 3DS re-added GB and GBC, just digitally. The Wii U also doesn’t support GCN discs. All of these, however, work pretty well with homebrew like mGBA and Nintendont, they’re just not available officially.
Yea, but all the consoles I listed at launch had nearly full BC with the previous gen. DSi wasn’t compatible with Rock Band for DS, or fully compatible with the DS pokemon games that used the GBA slot for pal park, but beyond that, they’ve been pretty good for not starting any generation without a clean slate before Switch.
Yeah, I agree with that. I was just trying to point out how Nintendo’s BC has never been as complete as it could be, for whatever reason it may be, but yeah, they’ve been pretty good at guaranteeing last-gen compatibility so far. Let’s see how it goes with whatever will succeed the Switch.
Is this from the Nintendo part or from the Of America part? (As in, is this Nintendo philosophy or just because it’s supposed to be that way in the US?)
“Said” being the operative word. Talk is just talk. I predict that if any union-forming attempt is made, Bowser’s opinion will change with frame perfect accuracy and this statement will be memory holed. (Although unionization of Nintendo employees is unlikely to happen in Japan anyway. If it does, it will more probably be within their American or European subsidiaries.)
We should remember that Nintendo is a privately held, for-profit company run by Japanese people. They have their own ethic, the company belongs to them, and profit comes first. They might make video games and franchises we like, but they are not good guys. There is tons of well documented past behavior on their part that illustrates this in many ways.
I meant that this is something that not many other companies would say. And it doesn’t matter if it’s the law, big companies still prevent it from happening.
No, you should say it in Bowser’s voice. After all, Bowser led a revolution to throw off the yoke of a monarchy only to be thwarted by an army of foreign nationals.
I think we’re on the right path in terms of ensuring we’ve got a work environment and culture that allows people to be productive, to have balance in their lives, and to grow within the company. Everyone has the right to form a union, and certainly in the future, wherever it takes us, we’ll respect that. But we’re very much focused right now on how to create the best work culture and environment we possibly can.
We’re always listening to our workers and we want to make sure we have both formal and informal ways of getting worker feedback and understanding the needs of our employees and where we can improve. And we always act on that feedback. And, as I said earlier, there is always a right to form unions and we respect that.
Well, yeah, congrats, he basically just stated the law: yes, everyone (in the US and many other countries) has the right to form unions. To “respect that” is to acknowledge that right.
I know the bar is damn low for good corporate behaviour, but man, it’s apparently way lower than I realized…
I think bg3 is also a lot easier to get into than dos 1 and 2. Having actual cut scenes and voice acting for everything goes a long way in making the game immersive. I also feel its easier to get into the combat (though that may just be me having got used to dos beforehand)
I’m really looking forward to playing it (I’ve promised myself to fully beat TotK before I pick it up). I played a ton of BG 1 and 2 when I was a kid and even for me they are hard to pick back up now. A slightly more accessible version of that sounds amazing.
I tried playing bg 1 and 2 about 10 years ago. I put about 40 hours in between them and enjoyed it, but I found it tough going. I’ve found bg3 way easier to get into and have already far surpassed the hours I put into the original games. On top of what I’ve already mentioned, the change to fully turn based is a huge improvement on that weird pausable real time used in the previous games
I’m really excited to hear that. The real time but actually not combat I think is what really killed me when I played them. I was only like 15 years old but I think I just didn’t “get” it and tried to just go for it in real time which made many encounters incredibly difficult.
I meant … it’s not. There have been 3 larian games in the last 9 years, and all 3 have been great. And they’re not the only good games or RPGs. So the title is just the usual click bait crap
I played Divine Divinity some when it was released. It was interesting but clunky. It was no Neverwinter Nights.
I want to see us as gamers get away from sequelitis and get full games again without lock boxes or cash shops or battle passes. The excitement of Doom or Battlefield 2 or Elden Ring.
Wont happen. Average consumer consumes without thought for the larger picture, theres a reason we got to this point, people are suckers and buy it all, the most recent trap they willingly jump into is "pre order for X days early access", I will never understand.
Early access as in still in development, sure some are, but that is not what I was talking about. It's preorder our finished game (and/or buy a 'deluxe' edition) and get the game 'early' before its release date. Reality is, its just a delayed release for smarter consumers.
How is that not bad? It's preying on people to soak up more money. If you cant understand the difference between buying a game in development vs spending extra to play a game a few days early, then the sun might as well be the moon.
I wouldnt recommend buying games in early access either, especially if they are not discounted. If done properly theres no malice in a company asking for funds as you join the development process of a game. Whereas asking for more money to simply play a game 3 days before its official release with no other differences to the game is just predatory, abusing people excitement and hype to squeeze every last penny out where they can. Keep in mind its the multimillion or multibillion dollar companies pulling this, not your indie studios who are the ones who usually use the in dev early access program.
If you cant understand the difference between buying a game in development
I didn’t say anything about development.
If people want to spend money to play a game early that’s their choice. Just because it’s not something you wouldn’t do doesn’t mean it has no value to anyone. If anything it provides value to the people who aren’t going to buy the game blind on release date (unless the company postpones the release date to make room for early access I guess). Plus the dev has a chance to find and fix bugs before most people start playing.
Also is there a specific game you’re talking about? I’ve only seen games get more expensive after early access, not less.
I imagine the term Early Access is causing confusion here.
I am not talking about the Steam Early Access program, where developers can get some early funding of their game and community feedback on the game during development. I have no issue with this program if it used correctly, which it is mostly. Games generally do get more expensive when leaving yes, as most developers recognise that charging people full price for an unfinished game is unfair.
What I was referring to is different, the early access I am referring to is a recent marketing strategy, generally used to make people spend more money on 'deluxe' editions of video games.
The most recent example would be Starfield, Bethesda are offering a 'Premium Edition' which costs almost 50% more than the base game, it contains some art and soundtrack along with some skins (I won't rant about that right now, but come on...), but it's main selling point being the '5 days early access' to the game. The game releases officially on 6th September, but if you purchase this 'Premium Edition' you can play the game on the 1st September instead.
This is what I have issue with and it is a horrible new practice that many of these multi-billion dollar companies are pulling to try and get more money from people. I understand it's ultimately the choice of the consumer to buy this, but it is preying on their hype and excitement for a game to make them fork over more money that they otherwise would not do.
It's sad to see. Games used to just have a standard price, you paid it got a full game and off you went, now there's all these special editions with extra bullshit attached in an attempt to milk consumers. You should absolutely be against these practices.
inverse.com
Aktywne