Poll of the Day > Spider-Geek: Homecoming

(+) Yeah! (+)

shadowsword87 posted...

WhiskeyDisk posted...

Asimov is also a Titan of science fiction writing, but I think Clarke edges him out by just a hair for actually inventing some of the tech he invoked.

Both of them were truly great though. I can't even say they were taken too soon. They both lived amazing lives to the fullest and their writings reflected that.

Honestly from a modern perspective, Clarke actually makes me want to read his work less because he us more focused on technology. I would feel the constant need to go, "wait, was that invented yet?" and play the wikipedia game of what's invented or not up to that point. With Asimov I just get to enjoy people in extraordinary situations doing stuff.

Don't take this the wrong way, but if you're that kind of person, definitely steer clear of Philip K Dick and William Gibson because from a purely tech perspective, their bodies of work have aged terribly.

Still solid writing in terms of characters and whatnot, but from a technology perspective their concepts of "near future" technology was completely blindsided by the the exponential growth of gadgetry since the late 80s/early 90s.

At the very least, Clarke still holds up pretty well because for whatever reason, he guessed right on so many things. That's not to disparage the authors that missed the mark, but if anything I think it shows that Clarke was just that much better than many of his contemporaries on the top 10 or 20 lists any reasonable fan would compile.

And I'm not shitting on Asimov either. I think both of them are reasonable to argue safely a close race for the top 2 spots no matter how you approach the question. PKD and Gibson certainly fit in that list too, but I would argue that both Clarke and Asimov were just head and shoulders above just about anyone else you'd put on that list hands down, both for quality and quantity.

Hell, I have serious issues with Larry Niven but I'd still put him somewhere on a top 20 list too without hesitation even if he gets an asterisk for practically requiring a co-author to make his works palatable.
---

I do have a goal for post amputee life.

Wrestlemania is coming to New Orleans next April. The wife and I are planning to go. The goal is for me to be healthy and walking enough to go and enjoy a whole weekend of wrestling without my disability being an issue.

I know it's a lofty goal, but I need something to route for and a goal to shoot for and achieve.
---

The Wave Master posted...

I do have a goal for post amputee life.

Wrestlemania is coming to New Orleans next April. The wife and I are planning to go. The goal is for me to be healthy and walking enough to go and enjoy a whole weekend of wrestling without my disability being an issue.

I know it's a lofty goal, but I need something to route for and a goal to shoot for and achieve.

You should try contacting the company and mentioning your situation as a PR thing since "I'm going to lose by leg but I want to walk into Wrestlemania" is the kind of thing they eat up. Might be able to get a nod at the show over it, if not free tickets.
---

American Gods is still kicking ass and firing on all cylinders.

Still happy that they are sticking to the book pretty darn closely.

Finally E3 is coming very soon. Amy wishes for a game or two to actually get made?
---

Debating even watching any live conferences this year. The past two or three years have been terrible. Probably just gonna watch Sony and Nintendo, and even then I'm not expecting a damn thing. I for sure ain't expecting jack diddly shit from EA, Microsoft, or Bethesda.

I'd like to be surprised by actual new games and not more sequels, remakes, and reboots, but I'm curbing my expectations. Not too excited for this one.

I can't say that I've ever bothered watching a conference. What I have watched, however, is a new(ish) episode of the Simpsons: S28E17 "A Father's Watch" and it was exccceeeelllllent, probably the best so far this season by far (although, as seasons go, this one hasn't been as good as as the last few).

(And that's how you segue.)
---

Well, I'm without hope for Nintendo, so if they bring out a legit Metroid game that apologizes for oh so much regarding the series lately, then I would be impressed. Seeing as how this is unlikely, I'm not counting on it.

Squeenix will announce something, again, despite having a full plate already, with another gorgeous cutscene. Instead, I would love to see them show more of projects already in the works, and how that they are truly serious and dedicated to making those projects flourish. Feel free to laugh.

Sony might introduce something interesting that is worth playing at least once.


Actually, I fully expect this year to be underwhelming for E3 announcements.

"What about Microsoft and Xbox?" What about them indeed?
---

Entity13 posted...

Well, I'm without hope for Nintendo, so if they bring out a legit Metroid game that apologizes for oh so much regarding the series lately, then I would be impressed. Seeing as how this is unlikely, I'm not counting on it.

I want them to go back to doing 2D titles =x MZM was great, and fusion was pretty fun as well.
---

"I don't care about E3 at all, it's just a bunch of hype"

Zeus posted...

Entity13 posted...

Well, I'm without hope for Nintendo, so if they bring out a legit Metroid game that apologizes for oh so much regarding the series lately, then I would be impressed. Seeing as how this is unlikely, I'm not counting on it.

I want them to go back to doing 2D titles =x MZM was great, and fusion was pretty fun as well.

And thus the last good Metroid we'll get was a fanmade remake of an older game, the remake being hit with a take-down less than a week since release. Oh, and Nintendo further took a shit on it by telling reviewers and a rewards show they do not want the game ever mentioned, or the big N would pull out.
---

The last good Metroid was Axiom Verge.

I'll probably watch the Sony conference this year. The last couple years, they were the only ones with a good conference (even if they always announce stuff that won't come out for like 3+ years).

Nintendo HAS to show some cool stuff for their new console. I'm expecting at least one or two big announcements, but I'm not going to hold my breath for Metroid. It's my favorite Nintendo franchise, but outside of Smash and that stupid 3DS game, they've been pretending the series doesn't exist.
---

I'm always happy to relax and hear about it afterwards.
Let other people go through this stuff and I will take it all processed down.

Yeah I'll be working through most of the E3, so likely will be playing catch up on stuff afterwards. Besides new Switch announcements, there's nothing I'm really stoked to see.
---

Metalsonic66 posted...

Nintendo HAS to show some cool stuff for their new console. I'm expecting at least one or two big announcements, but I'm not going to hold my breath for Metroid. It's my favorite Nintendo franchise, but outside of Smash and that stupid 3DS game, they've been pretending the series doesn't exist.

I just want them to do a sequel to Kid Icarus Uprising.
---

Zeus posted...

I just want them to do a sequel to Kid Icarus Uprising.

As long as the controls are better.
---

Metalsonic66 posted...

Zeus posted...

I just want them to do a sequel to Kid Icarus Uprising.

As long as the controls are better.

Dawg, you tripping.

No, seriously, it controlled great after you got used to it. Granted, if it's on the N3DS it'd probably use the second d-stick which would solve the problem for people who didn't like KIU.
---

Nintendo is just run by a bunch of old, out of touch, stick in the mud, ads hats.

Games have a learning curve these days, but when you have to put out an instruction video to show people how to properly control or play the game, then you have a problem.

Nintendo does this mess all the time instead of giving the fans what they want they just so the least intelligent and productive measure, and the fans forgive them.
---

Nintendo is so stuck on Gimmick Road , and too many people keep buying into it despite it being the same thing over and over without enough substance to back it up. Mario has become a throwaway series instead of a hype rallying mascot. They stuff Peach and Rosalina in cat suits just for the heck of it, especially the latter who was in the 3D World game for reasons. Their views on streamed videos are out of touch with researched facts regarding sales. They spent so much time doing takedowns of videos on Youtube that had no legitimate reason being taken down, just because they wanted a cut of that money from those videos. They've abandoned Metroid and said Zelda is now an open world series that tap dances around everything established about the series before it. They're still pulling the same dumb tricks with those portable NES and SNES... oh wait the NES Classics could no longer be produced due to shortage of materials but here have this New 2DS model that no one asked for.

Seriously, I'm sticking with my firm stance that the Switch needs at least four exclusive games that interest me (excluding any form of Mario games), but more than that I am hoping they showcase something this E3 to start on that because I have a feeling it's only a matter of time before people realize they've been had with the Switch and that it will have nothing new they can't find on other systems... save for those few games that only the most diehard of fans will buy.

I suspect Nintendo is only keeping up a facade as a game developer or publisher that's stronger than Konami was doing when Kojima was still with them. I hate to say it, but when Satoru Iwata died, the big N lost an irrecoverable portion of its soul and integrity as a gaming company.

Above all, I want to see Nintendo prove me wrong this year in E3. They need to prove me wrong, because it's only a matter of time before people stop pouring money into them no matter what they show off.

Please Nintendo, prove me wrong.
---

Entity13 posted...

Nintendo is so stuck on Gimmick Road , and too many people keep buying into it despite it being the same thing over and over without enough substance to back it up.

lolwut?

Entity13 posted...

Classics could no longer be produced due to shortage of materials but here have this New 2DS model that no one asked for.

Pretty sure it's targeted at the same group as the previous 2DS owners: Parents who want a cheaper, more durable SKU for their kids.

Entity13 posted...

They've abandoned Metroid and said Zelda is now an open world series that tap dances around everything established about the series before it.

Actually, BotW -- which could be a one-off for all we know so your claim is premature -- from what I know of it is very much in keeping with LoZ1. LoZ1 also just threw you into a world, let you tackle dungeons as you found them, etc.

Entity13 posted...

but more than that I am hoping they showcase something this E3 to start on that because I have a feeling it's only a matter of time before people realize they've been had with the Switch and that it will have nothing new they can't find on other systems... save for those few games that only the most diehard of fans will buy.

The value of the Switch is format. It's done what Sony tried marketing itself as being able to do with its ps3 + psp/vita compatibility.

Entity13 posted...

They need to prove me wrong, because it's only a matter of time before people stop pouring money into them no matter what they show off.

They don't need to prove you wrong to keep people buying. Even if anybody in this topic never bought another Nintendo console (which we know won't be the case), they still have countless other buyers.
---

Zeus posted...

Even if anybody in this topic never bought another Nintendo console (which we know won't be the case)

I'm in this topic, so you're already wrong.

I haven't owned a Nintendo console since 1996-97 or so, and have zero interest in owning another any time soon.

And based on their current business model, I'll be long dead before they come up with a tech concept or a game library enticing enough to make me start looking at them favorably again.

That's actually part of why I usually zone out when people are talking about Nintendo, or just offer a cursory "don't care" sort of response rather than going into any real detail - I'm fully aware that Nintendo left me behind decades ago and has no intention of ever winning me back. So me rattling off a list of all the in-depth reasons why I don't care about [insert new Nintendo product here] would be like me listing all the reasons why I don't like a particular brand of tampon.


---

Zeus posted...

They don't need to prove you wrong to keep people buying.

Not to me personally, but when I see patterns emerge I have to point them out or challenge them, because sometimes those patterns lead to bad outcomes. I see a potential bad outcome with how Nintendo has been doing things lately. In proving me wrong, they're proving that pattern wrong and are making a potentially better outcome for themselves.

I literally can't tell you the number of times I've pointed things out to people, they disregarded my warnings, and shit proceeded to happen. I literally cannot, because I've chosen to leave so much of it behind me, only that in itself hasn't been successful because more shit keeps happening that people should be able to prevent.

Zeus posted...

Entity13 posted...

but more than that I am hoping they showcase something this E3 to start on that because I have a feeling it's only a matter of time before people realize they've been had with the Switch and that it will have nothing new they can't find on other systems... save for those few games that only the most diehard of fans will buy.

The value of the Switch is format. It's done what Sony tried marketing itself as being able to do with its ps3 + psp/vita compatibility.

No, it's compatibility in addition to continued motion controls, despite what different people (on an individual basis) think of such controls, and hey lets thrown in games now that we have this much down... rather than a gaming system first, with compatibility being central to Quality of Life second, and motion controls--at their best or otherwise--as an option for those still interested in it. That way there would still be games unhindered by either thing. That way, motion controls aren't being shoved down our throats no matter how much some of us think we like them.

Motion controls weren't perfect during the Wii (or even Motion Plus), but they were neat. Wii U might have failed to convey that it was anything more than an updated Wii, but it continued shoving motion controls on everyone in addition to gamepad design that could have been done better.

Then Switch comes along: "Hey, you know that Zelda game you were waiting for since the early days of Wii U? Well we have it on the Switch now. You want some games in addition to what our system can do? Sure, have this weird looking Mario game that people are bound to laugh at rather than laugh with, have a small tease at a third 'No More Heroes" with nothing set in stone, have a new entry in 'Fire Emblem' because this niche series is at the height of its popularity, and have this silly looking boxing game that you know will rely on motion controls. See? at least one game for everyone; come buy this pricey system for your one game!"

The worst part is people did buy the Switch mainly for Zelda, many of whom expected that version to be something more than it was, which was a literal port of the Wii U version with barely touched up graphics. I'm not saying people aren't buying into this so far. I'm saying that buyers' remorse is down the road for many. It will hurt Nintendo's sales and reputation both in the long run, rather than the immediate future.

Zeus posted...

lolwut?

lolyou heard me. Wii was fine, because it had games. Wii U didn't have enough games, nor enough good press. Switch has a limited worth that hinges on the games we haven't seen yet. But hey! let's enjoy the gimmicks these systems have to offer while we wait for our time and money's worth.
---

All I know is that Capcom said "Monster Hunter is coming to the Switch," and that's when I decided I wanted one. (Insert I'm a simple man; I see X, I Y meme here)

Besides, that Pokemon Direct tomorrow is probably gonna announce a Pokemon game for the Switch, so insert meme here once more.

Not really a Nintendo fanboy, but these are staple series that keep me hooked for thousands of hours, so I flock to wherever they head. E3 can announce all the Zeldas, Marios, and Metroids they want; I don't care. But say Monster Hunter and I'm there. Brownie points for being a series that Whiskey hates because he used a greatsword once and couldn't comprehend how the weapon works, because back in the 1500s they used sticks to fend off chickens and lions, ya hear young'ins?

Raganork10 posted...

Brownie points for being a series that Whiskey hates because he used a greatsword once and couldn't comprehend how the weapon works, because back in the 1500s they used sticks to fend off chickens and lions, ya hear young'ins?

And anyone that hunts bees the size of hang gliders with a fucking fencing foil and a buckler deserves an envenomed death. Nobody that actually wields a great sword as slowly as a MH toon does would actually wield a great sword at all. A weapon that takes longer to swing than it takes for me to microwave a burrito had better be a doomsday device. Introductory trash mobs shouldn't take an hour to kill ffs.

Anyone that designs a crossbow that involves pulling the trigger, THEN aiming THEN releasing the trigger to actually fire it is so bass-ackwards as to be unworthy of my time.

MH games were designed by masochists for masochists and I love watching people justify shitty, shitty controls and endless grinding for marginally less useless weapons to shave seconds off a 10 minute grind on a trash mob. A trash mob that you'll be killing a hundred of for the next slightly less limp noodle of a weapon at that...

I would find a 4 white mage naked run of the original Final fantasy more entertaining, and at least then you've intentionally crippled yourself for some perceived challenge. Just trying to trick a game into doing what you want isn't difficulty, it's piss poor design.

Next you'll be defending the camera in Trapt for PS2...
---

Or the camera in FFXV
---

Sounds like someone got his ass handed to him because he couldn't be assed to experiment with the weapon tutorials before running off to fight Godzilla with a weapon he barely even knows how to lift off the ground.

These aren't actual greatswords you may have seen back in your Crusade days. These are swords that need to be charged up before releasing a burst of concentrated energy used to break off parts or interrupt oncoming attacks. There's actual depth behind every single weapon; you can't just pick up the controller and expect to be proficient with lances because you used to joust back in Medieval England.

This isn't a case of shitty controls. This is a case of simply getting good. Want to fight a mutated tarantula without first training against dung beetles? It's your funeral. Don't bemoan bad game design when you didn't put forth the effort to learn basic weapon combos.

You'll suspend your disbelief when a boy gets force-fed a magatama and goes on to fight angels, demons, an undead matador, ghost rider, and fucking Dante in an apocalyptic Tokyo, but an adventurer wielding Cloud's buster sword that's been enhanced to be more than just a papier mache baton that's twirled around after a battle is won - that's going too far? Someone's holding an unfair grudge here because Donkey Kong carted him three times faster than he could realize which button was used to swing the weapon.

Yeah Raga, i want to dance about like a ballerina for 5 minutes before i poke a monster 10 times my size with a feather duster to tickle it to death. then i have to spend 20 minutes tickling it and the 2 others it called over to death. then i have to tickle 100 of them to death for a slightly improved feather duster so i can go find a monster 11 times my size to tickle.

Speaking of Dante, i'd have the same complaint about Devil May Cry if i had to fight a spider the size of bouncy castle with a pool noodle too while the camera did whatever the fuck it wanted. I'd have the same gripe with SMT:N if i had to tickle Matador et al to death blindfolded without anything resembling the press turn system, and I'd have the same gripe with Donkey Kong if i had to hit a barrel 20 times with the hammer to break it and i had to break 100 of them for a hammer that only had to hit a barrel 19 times to break it. also, the hammer takes 15 seconds to swing at each barrel too.

so in conclusion, fuck MH. its a shitty game with an inexplicable cult following based on a kludgy control scheme masquerading as actual difficulty. hey, some people also find hooking their nipples up to car batteries fun and that's fine. it isn't for me, and no convoluted defense of high voltage nipple clamping is going to make that sort of thing enjoyable for me.
---

I don't know what it was like when you tried to wrestle to keep King Kong under control on stage back in the early 1900s, but typically, when you fight something 20+ times your size, you're gonna struggle. The satisfaction comes from keeping your own against something the size of a skyscraper that breathes fire, and whose steps cause earthquakes. It's no different than leading a team of high schoolers to fight Satan. Actually, I lied. Fighting King Kong with a toothpick is somehow the more plausible scenario.

Also, the camera? What? You have free reign to control the camera however you please. Unlike DMC, where you have 0 control over the camera and are restricted to fixed angles the entire game. Maybe you'd have a point if you bothered to make it far enough in the single entry that has underwater fights, but that'd require making it past the super scary fluffy lizards that roll over on their backs so you can pet them. Y'know, the same sort of trash mobs that for some inexplicable reason you spend ages fighting. I'm convinced you're hunting with the shadowbox gesture and not actually using your weapon. That or throwing paintballs in vain, hoping they're doing some damage.

Also, it doesn't take an inordinate amount of time to fight the boss monsters. We've left the bronze age, you know. Our weapons are more advanced, but again, maybe it's because you didn't have a boy scout walk up to you to offer assistance for his "I helped the elderly" badge, and direct you to the training missions so you'd know how to actually swing at enemies and not whiff. And for those less capable hunters such as yourself, that's what online lobbies are for. Feel free to roleplay as your real life self and tell the talented, able-bodied young'ins to do all the effort whilst you sit back in your rocking chair humming old folk tunes.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Zeus posted...

Even if anybody in this topic never bought another Nintendo console (which we know won't be the case)

I'm in this topic, so you're already wrong.

I haven't owned a Nintendo console since 1996-97 or so, and have zero interest in owning another any time soon.

I meant to say "Even if everybody." From context, I would have assumed that the typo would be self-evident =x

ParanoidObsessive posted...

And based on their current business model, I'll be long dead before they come up with a tech concept or a game library enticing enough to make me start looking at them favorably again.

That's actually part of why I usually zone out when people are talking about Nintendo, or just offer a cursory "don't care" sort of response rather than going into any real detail - I'm fully aware that Nintendo left me behind decades ago and has no intention of ever winning me back. So me rattling off a list of all the in-depth reasons why I don't care about [insert new Nintendo product here] would be like me listing all the reasons why I don't like a particular brand of tampons

Is it just Nintendo you avoid? Are you still gaming on the other consoles? And are you just skipping handhelds?

Entity13 posted...

Not to me personally, but when I see patterns emerge I have to point them out or challenge them, because sometimes those patterns lead to bad outcomes. I see a potential bad outcome with how Nintendo has been doing things lately. In proving me wrong, they're proving that pattern wrong and are making a potentially better outcome for themselves.

idk, savvy gamers (almost went to say smarks, since it has a similar connotation to the more dedicated gaming subculture) wrote off the Wii but it sold like hotcakes. Savvy gamers questioned the Switch, which seems to be doing okay so far. Of course, savvy gamers were right to question the WiiU but pretty nobody was giving that a favorable reaction.

In general, I think it's more a problem with the expectations of certain gaming demos who basically want all console makers to play the same but, I would point out, we already have *two* companies doing the same thing so that wouldn't really do well for a third company getting into that space. And, on a personal note, I think the high-end graphics race, etc, is a race to the bottom because larger and larger budgets seem to be devoted on more cosmetic aspects which, while nice, might be eating up dev dollars better spent elsewhere and establishes a set of priorities that I don't necessarily feel benefits the industry as a whole.

Entity13 posted...

lolyou heard me. Wii was fine, because it had games. Wii U didn't have enough games, nor enough good press. Switch has a limited worth that hinges on the games we haven't seen yet. But hey! let's enjoy the gimmicks these systems have to offer while we wait for our time and money's worth.

Calling the Switch a "gimmick" is a massive stretch. After all, its primary "gimmick" is the fact that it has a portable option and a stationary option which is hardly gimmicky at all (it's like calling the ps2's ability to play DVDs a "gimmick" rather than a "feature"). Instead, it's something I've wanted to see for decades.
---

Ooooh look! a grizzly bear! let me poke it to death with this blade of grass!

*20 minutes later*

phew! that sure was difficult, but man i feel so accomplished now! maybe i should try a green twig next time! what? i need to kill 20 more grizzly bears with this same blade of grass before i can find a twig? but there's literally trees everywhere! wait, don't question that, its all part of the grand experience! git gud noob! perhaps this cotton t-shirt would afford me some protection! i have to kill 30 Ents with a book of matches to get the cotton? that doesn't even make sense ffs.

yeah, its obviously because i'm old that i think the game sucks. *eyeroll*
---

Zeus posted...

Calling the Switch a "gimmick" is a massive stretch. After all, its primary "gimmick" is the fact that it has a portable option and a stationary option which is hardly gimmicky at all (it's like calling the ps2's ability to play DVDs a "gimmick" rather than a "feature"). Instead, it's something I've wanted to see for decades.

The difference between gimmick and feature is the amount of emphasis put on it when people are wanting the system for games. People wanted PS2 for games and they got games; and how! The people want the Switch--at least I would presume--for games and have so far gotten a few promises, a tweaked port, and loads of emphasis on what neat things the Switch can do as a system.

Furthermore, let me repeat this idea for you, Nintendo very well could make good on its promises. It very well could come out with enough good games for the Switch that buying one is justifiable, rather than spur of the moment, part of the hype, or the latest entry for an avid collector who simply doesn't care about price. I'm referring to money's worth there. While many people do have Switches already, including my own boyfriend, the justification simply isn't there yet, but it can be. I'm hoping it will be. At the same time, knowing Nintendo's trends, it more possibly won't be.
---

Scuse me, sonny. My eyes aren't what they used to be; can't read this here manual. How do you use these newfound contraptions called... oh what was it? Ah yes, swords. Oh, you mean you just swing it towards the general direction of an enemy? That seems a bit too difficult for these old bones. Perhaps I should take up the lighter weapons instead.

Huh? Whazzat? Whaddaya mean they do less damage? In my day, we threw rocks at crows to keep 'em away from our harvest and we'd oftentimes kill them from chucking the rocks so hard. I remember one time when I broke a bird's wing, and this young girl tended to it for a month. It was the first time I met Gertrude. We had some good times, I'll tell you. We once headed up north to swim in the lake, and the poor thing almost drowned trying to save a baby duck. Why, just last week I saw a duck at the pond behind the nursing home and it reminded me of my beloved Gertrude.

Anyhow, what's all this about breaking monster parts to obtain specific items to limit the amount of grinding? Give it to me in simpler terms, son. I remember back when I used to serve King Amenhotep we'd have to haul slabs of stone across the desert with naught but a yard of rope and a plank of wood. You kids don't know what difficult is. Lemme tell ya son, this here's what we call artificial difficulty. Back in the day - we're talking 500-600 BC - we had to choke tigers with our bare hands. No camera getting in the way there, no siree. Nothing but man vs nature. And back then, we'd skin the sum bitch for fur. None of this grinding nonsense. That's some shit y'all millenials invented. I tell ya, things just ain't what they used to be.

I remember it clearly. It was ravioli night, and I told Lucy to go easy on the spices because they give me gas. I popped out my dentures and placed them beside the plate, clearly in my line of sight. As I let the first ravioli slide down my throat, Carlton decided to sit right next to me. He takes out his dentures and places them next to mine. I told him, "Carl, stop putting your teeth next to mine. You always get them mixed up." Except it sounded more like "Caaaa, saaaa puuhhh teee nehh maahhhh" because my teeth weren't in my mouth.

Then it hits me. Lucy put too much spice in the pasta. My stomach starts churning, and I feel like I'm about to let loose a nuclear bomb. Carl grabs both of our teeth and runs off just before the missile leaves its silo. Then it hits me: that was no fart. I just shit my pants.

Nurse Anabelle takes me to the bathroom and helps me wipe myself, and I tried to tell her that my teeth were stolen by that damn Carlton. She gives me some sort of blue pills and hurries me off to my private chamber, saying she'll get the teeth back. Two full minutes later; still no teeth. I was tired of waiting. The last time I waited this long, it was when I was watching a leaf follow along the current as it traveled along the streams at the Hanging Gardens of Babylon. The king sat by me and told me that he was planning on marrying off his daughter soon. He then turned to me and asked if I'd wed his daughter. Sadly, I was already a taken man. My wife and I were already expecting our fifth son, Jacob. Jacob and I would later go on to sail across to the new world, where we traded with the indigenous folk. One man that went by the name Toto gave my son a blackberry, which turned out to be poisonous. My son died, but not before he took his spear and impaled the village chief.

As I ran away, I noticed a tiny crab crawling along the beach. It reminded me of the time I invented the world's first airplane and sailed along the southern cape of Greece. I had just finished attending a party that Athena had thrown. This was way back when, when the gods still partook in earthly activities. Arachne had woven a beautiful skirt that I would later present to my eldest daughter Diana for her 16th birthday. She did so enjoy wearing handmade clothing created by the gods. I perhaps spoiled her a bit, but she still grew to be a fine woman regardless. Unlike her ingrate husband Raul, who shamefully whored himself out at the local tavern every Friday evening. Curse him and his remarkable physique. I suppose it was a stroke of luck that he was quickly killed off in battle against the Persians.

Then it hit me once more. Those pills the nurse slipped me were my dose of Lunesta. I was hallucinating everything that had just happened in the past 6 hours. I knew something was off, because Carlton passed away six years ago, back when this surly man wearing a bowtie was admitted. He was always a strange fellow, laughing about how he'd one day break free from the home, as if it was some type of prison. It reminded me of the time my longtime friend Joey Farmigliano, or was it Ramone Farmigliano? No no, it was Jose Rodriguez. Or something of that nature. Speaking of nature, this reminds me of that time I stepped on a wasp's nest and had to fist fight each wasp to clear a path for Gertrude to escape and make it to safety.

Entity13 posted...

The difference between gimmick and feature is the amount of emphasis put on it when people are wanting the system for games. People wanted PS2 for games and they got games; and how! The people want the Switch--at least I would presume--for games and have so far gotten a few promises, a tweaked port, and loads of emphasis on what neat things the Switch can do as a system.

That's a long-term commitment, though. When you look at the ps2's launch titles, there wasn't a lot of support there either. And the ps3 was far worse since several of its worst-received games -- including Gundam Crossfire -- were launch titles. However, if you bought a ps2 or ps3 at launch, that feature would be a bigger selling point particularly in the case of the ps3 since BR players were still novel.

More importantly, the difference between a gimmick and a feature in this case is that playing DVDs/BRs or taking the game with you isn't intrinsic to the gameplay itself, unlike the Wii's motion controls (although knocking motion controls is reminiscent of when the analog stick was called a gimmick, so even that I'm not quite writing off), the WiiU's underutilized screen in its controller, the DS's double screens, and so on.

Entity13 posted...

Furthermore, let me repeat this idea for you, Nintendo very well could make good on its promises.

Then it's a little unfair to even bring up the previous points. After all, by the end of the Wii's life cycle we had enough content to make it well-worth purchasing. Ditto for the 3DS which had a *very* rough launch.
---

Nintendo isn't going to give us a lot of games for The Switch. They just aren't. It's the old adage, "Wish in one hand, and Crap in another. See which one fills up faster."

For example the Pokemon Nintendo Direct this morning... What happened? They did announce a Pokemon game for The Switch. Pokken Tournament.

A port of a trash fighting game Nintendo doesn't care about or support. Hell, Nintendo doesn't even support competitive Smash. You think they're going to support this? They just needed a game to come out for The Switch. So they can go,

"Hey, see... we support The Switch. Games are coming. Not great games, or games you care about, but games nonetheless."

Jesus, Namco doesn't care about Pokken either. They have moved on to Tekken 7, and plan on supporting that game.

Nintendo did announce more Pokemon, for the 3ds.

This is the reality of what Nintendo does now. If you think the switch will be any different from the 64, GameCube, Wii, or Wii U, then I'm not sure what to tell you. Because clearly if you fall for this you are in an abusive relationship, and should probably get out.
---

As if rereleasing Pokken - a game that released last year - wasn't bad enough, you have to remember that the Switch charges you to play online. Five new fighters and a ranked mode is not justification to charge $60 + online service fee.

Also, maybe it's just me, but when I buy a system I expect new games. Rereleasing MK8 DELUXE, OOOOHHHH, and Pokken DELUXE, AHHHHHHH, is fucking insulting to anyone that was hoping the Switch wouldn't be the same failure as the Wii U. It's very telling that the best Nintendo can come up with to convince people to buy their system is releasing the same shit that they released on their failed system.

Can't wait for E3 to unveil Xenoblade X Deluxe, New Super Mario Bros U Deluxe, Pikmin 3 Deluxe, and Mario Maker Deluxe. That'll get people to run out and buy a Switch you money-grubbing, out-of-touch scum buckets. Thank God for Monster Hunter.

WhiskeyDisk posted...

Nobody that actually wields a great sword as slowly as a MH toon does

WhiskeyDisk posted...

a MH toon does

WhiskeyDisk posted...

toon

I hate you.



Zeus posted...

Is it just Nintendo you avoid? Are you still gaming on the other consoles?

Absolutely - because as I have always done, I still loathe PC gaming.

(Even if console fuckery has dramatically increased over the last decade or so, to the point where most of the issues I had with PC have infected consoles as well anyway. But PC still annoys me more. In a PC-only future, I'd probably just stop gaming entirely. The same is likely even in a future where consoles still exist but games go entirely digital.)

Last gen I gave up on Sony and went all-in with the 360, but this generation the massive fuck-ups of Microsoft at release turned me against the One almost immediately (and the sales performance and game libraries of both consoles since has pretty much confirmed that the PS4 is by far the better choice anyway). And I've been playing a lot of newer console games lately (if anything, I think the launch of this gen was way stronger and faster than it was last gen). Some of the games I've played this gen (or late last gen) have been some of the best experiences I've ever had as a gamer.

The problem with Nintendo (for me) is that, if you don't like platformers, and have lost almost all nostalgia for the "brands" of your childhood (ie, putting Mario or Link in a game doesn't instantly win me over automatically), they offer very little of substance. Almost every game I've wanted to play for the last 20+ years has either been exclusive to other consoles, or, if it was on a Nintendo console at all, was also available on other, better consoles. There's never really been any motivation to buy a Nintendo console at all - and considering I hate the idea of motion controls and touchscreens, the last 10 years have basically just been motivation to AVOID Nintendo like the plague.

Out of all their "killer apps", things like Smash Bros and Mario Party don't sell it for me, because I've never given a single shit about them (remember, I'm not a 90s kid who grew up with the N64 like 98% of the other people on this board - I'd already "aged out" of Nintendo by that point into a PS1). Mario Kart doesn't help either, since the last game in that franchise I actually enjoyed was the one from the SNES. And I didn't like CastleVania or Metroid even during their NES/SNES eras, so the occasional hints of a new Metroid game maybe eventually someday don't mean much at all.

Zelda's probably the sole franchise that could even make me pay attention on the off-chance that a new entry COULD be good, but considering the last title in that franchise that I liked at all was Link to the Past, odds are pretty slim they're ever going to release another Zelda game I care about at all. And while I can acknowledge that Breath of the Wild is a game that does what it's trying to do very, very well, it really isn't doing anything I WANT a game to do in 2017. It's like playing Skyrim with even less narrative, less personalization, and cartoony graphics.

I don't begrudge people who DO still like Nintendo games. It's just not a party I have any interest in attending.


---

Zeus posted...

And are you just skipping handhelds?

I've been skipping handhelds since 1989.

I've said this in the past, but being an adult who actually drives himself everywhere he goes and who doesn't have a ton of "downtime" at high school/college where I'd be just hanging out and killing time (ie, the scenarios where a handheld would be super-valuable), there's almost zero value in handhelds for me.

And even when I used to commute into NYC on a regular basis (meaning I had an hour-long trainride in both directions), or if I have to drive my mother to a doctor's appointment and wind up waiting for her, I MUCH prefer just reading a book to kill that time.

I don't NEED portability, and given the choice, I strongly dislike playing games on a tiny screen where visibility is an issue, when I could be playing on a large TV while sitting in my own comfortable chair instead. And in this day and age, if I DID want a portable electronic device to kill time with, I'd much rather just use a smart phone to go on the Internet than a dedicated gaming handheld.

I bought a GBA SP way, way back (mostly for FF Dawn of Souls and the original Zelda port, so I was basically using it solely to play old NES games), and I think I used it for a combined total of about 6 hours, max. Even then it was pretty much worthless to me, and I'm even less open to the idea now.

And again, I get why SOME people might want a handheld, but it has literally never been for me.

So yes, that's part of why I don't give a shit about the Switch - it's basically a weaker console playing games I don't care about, mostly being sold on the strength of a gimmick that has never appealed to me once in more than 20 years.


---

Zeus posted...

idk, savvy gamers wrote off the Wii but it sold like hotcakes. Savvy gamers questioned the Switch, which seems to be doing okay so far.

Yeah, but that's a shaky analogy.

People questioned the Wii at first because there was a strong undercurrent of "Why would I want this? How does it improve gaming?" And a lot of actual gamers DIDN'T buy into it (whether because of the gimmicky motion controls or because it didn't have any of the games they wanted to play). The majority of the Wii's success was its lightning-in-a-bottle success with casual gamers or non-gamers, who bought it more as a novelty experience or even a toy than they did as a gaming console.

But those types of owners had a tendency to buy the console, play a few of the motion control games for the first few hours, or every once in a while when they were having a party/were drunk/etc, and just stuff it into a closet when they were done. Install base for the console never really translated into follow-through purchases on most games afterwards (which would have made the Wii a catastrophic failure for Nintendo if they followed the same business model Sony and Microsoft do, where they basically sell their consoles at a loss and hope to recoup their money through software sales. Nintendo's strategy of selling cheaper consoles for profit and then maximizing software profit by mainly relying on first party titles allows them to thrive even under conditions that would ruin other companies).

Those owners also tended to feel a little burned by the Wii (most of them thought they'd get more out of it than they did, then felt like they'd overpaid for what they did get). When the Wii-U came out, Nintendo couldn't really sell it on novelty (it's sole selling point was that it had a tablet, which tons of people already had). That, combined with incredibly piss-poor marketing, meant that there was no real push for anyone to buy the console, and it withered and died on the vine. As much as they'd gained the casual audience for the Wii, they lost it again almost immediately.

With the Switch, the main question was whether or not people would want a handheld console at all, and it seems like the answer is yes... but it's appealing to a very different demographic than the Wii did. Nearly everything we know about the Switch paints it VERY much as a "handhold console that you can also play on your TV" rather than "a TV console you can also take on the go" (which is how Nintendo seems to want to market it). In other words, Nintendo desperately wants to sell it as the successor to the Wii-U, but most gamers seem to be buying it more as a successor to the 3DS (which has ALWAYS been Nintendo's strongest market share anyway).

Most of the casual audience likely ARE sticking with their tablets or smart phones for "on the go" interactivity rather than dedicated gaming handheld. The Switch isn't pulling in people who are wowed by the novelty of it (which isn't even that novel, considering the Wii-U tried to do something similar, and the Nvidia Shield basically WAS the Switch 4 years ago), as much as it's pulling in the same people who buy every successive handheld from Nintendo because they're dedicated Nintendo handheld gamers (which is why the Switch could sell so well when all it really had at launch was a Zelda game and the whispered promise of a Mario game at some point eventually).

If you look at the Switch as the successor to the Wii-U (which is how Nintendo was marketing it, and how most "savvy gamers" were evaluating it before launch), then yes, it's success defies most expectations and makes the doubters look foolish - but if you look at it as a successor to the 3DS (which is what it basically is), its success makes perfect sense, and isn't all that surprising at all.


---

It's also worth noting that one of the other early criticisms of the Switch involved their marketing showing people playing a Switch, then taking it to a party where they proceed to play the Switch and show it off to all of their friends - to which a lot of people said "Who the fuck brings a handheld game to a party and plays it instead of actually socializing and being a normal human being?". But those people underestimated just how socially awkward a lot of the younger generation is today, because apparently they WILL do that.

I don't know a single person who would ever do that (and if they did everyone else at the party would probably look down on them for it anyway), but then again most of the people I know are also old enough to own houses and have kids, and grew up in a time before everyone had a screen glued to their face at all times and forgot how to communicate except through a keyboard.



Zeus posted...

Calling the Switch a "gimmick" is a massive stretch. After all, its primary "gimmick" is the fact that it has a portable option and a stationary option which is hardly gimmicky at all (it's like calling the ps2's ability to play DVDs a "gimmick" rather than a "feature"). Instead, it's something I've wanted to see for decades.

Yeah, but regardless of whether or not you've wanted it, it's still a gimmick.

When the entirety of your marketing push is basically focused on "here is this one thing that our system does!", then yes, it's a gimmick. And yes, the fact that the PS2 played DVDs WOULD be a gimmick if that was the main selling point of the console (which it wasn't, nor was the PS1's ability to play CDs). Even the PS3 - which was rolled out almost exclusively as an engine to push the Blu-Ray format - didn't push the gimmick hard enough to really be seen as a "gimmick console" (ie, the sales pitch was still more or less always "come for the games, stay for the Blu-Ray").

That doesn't mean the Switch is destined to be a "gimmick console" - if it builds a strong enough game library it can transcend its beginnings as being built entirely around the gimmick (which is blatant when you think about how the NAME of the console itself is entirely predicated on that gimmick).

Again, the 3DS is the prime inspiration to look at for the Switch. The 3DS was absolutely pushed as a "gimmick" early on, as its 3D feature was more or less the entire reason for its existence. Over time, as it absorbed most of the DS market (which ITSELF was a gimmick that built off the previous GameBoy brand), and transitioned from being a gimmick to being something that people saw as valid in its own right. The main reason why the Wii never really transcended that label is because so many people DID buy it as a gimmick, and then most of those people never saw it as anything else.

At the moment, the Switch is absolutely a gimmick. Whether or not it transcends that remains to be seen.


---

Zeus posted...

Entity13 posted...

Furthermore, let me repeat this idea for you, Nintendo very well could make good on its promises.

Then it's a little unfair to even bring up the previous points. After all, by the end of the Wii's life cycle we had enough content to make it well-worth purchasing. Ditto for the 3DS which had a *very* rough launch.

Not really, because one can always point out the fact that they basically left Wii-U owners out to dry the moment they decided it was no longer viable.

Nintendo COULD make good on its promises. It also might not. Anyone who bought a Wii-U waiting for Nintendo to release a massive library of worthwhile games to justify their early adoption basically got fucked. So "maybe they'll follow up" isn't really a dismissal of all of the alternative options.

That being said, the Switch had strong adoption out of the gate (though it's leveled off HARD since then, and if it doesn't pick up, it MIGHT be a problem for them later), which means they're more likely to stick with it long-term. But nothing is guaranteed in this business.

At the end of the day, "Ehh, we'll see" is about the only thing we can really say about what sort of lifespan the Switch is going to have when everything is said and done.


---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

WhiskeyDisk posted...
Nobody that actually wields a great sword as slowly as a MH toon does

WhiskeyDisk posted...
a MH toon does

WhiskeyDisk posted...
toon

I hate you.

Oh boy, I'm waiting with baited breath to hear your long winded and utterly pedantic explanation of why my chosen nomenclature triggers you so.
---

It triggers me as well, though not nearly as much as your ineptitude at simply playing Monster Hunter.

Zeus posted...

Dawg, you tripping.

No, seriously, it controlled great after you got used to it.

It was functional, but still incredibly uncomfortable. They could definitely make improvements, especially if the sequel is an actual console game.

Raganork10 posted...

All I know is that Capcom said "Monster Hunter is coming to the Switch," and that's when I decided I wanted one.

I love Monster Hunter, but unless MH5 is a Switch exclusive, I'm not going to go out of my way for it.
---

WhiskeyDisk posted...

Oh boy, I'm waiting with baited breath to hear your long winded and utterly pedantic explanation of why my chosen nomenclature triggers you so.

Then I'm just going to disappoint you by tersely pointing out that its a stupid term that grew out of the worst parts of MMO culture that was, is, and always will be kind of terrible.

Whenever anyone refers to their character in an MMO as a toon, I die a little inside and lose a little bit of respect for that person. But when someone uses it to refer to a character outside of MMOs, they just need to be beaten with a sock full of oranges until they repent their evil ways.


---

Never played a Monster Hunter game. I can't comment on the grind or the controls.

I will say that a game ceases to be fun or entertaining when the grind IS the game. You kind of get that MMO vibe from a game where it becomes work, becomes a second job, and the game is work. To me, thanks not fun.

That's why games like Dark Souls and Bloodbourbe do not appeal to me. Same applies to MMORPG's.

As for controls. How long do I need to play a game before I have to "Get Use" to the controls or the camera?

Actually one of my chief complaints about The Souls games are the sluggish controls, to me. I preface, to me.
---

Grinding is definitely a major aspect of Monster Hunter, but if you enjoy the game, the grind never feels like "work" to me.

If you think Souls games are too sluggish, though, you're probably not going to like Monster Hunter. People compare the two series a lot due to similar-paced combat (even if most other aspects are different).
---

I don't necessarily hate grinding if it's done right. This is why I take breaks from FFXIV--or one of the reasons--because the grind for more gear often leaves a lot to be desired. Any amount of grind needs to feel rewarding, rather than countless hours for something that either makes one little thing more convenient or one somewhat bigger thing that will cease to matter within moments. Another thing that irritates me is when you have to grind in orer to effectively grind. Final Fantasy as a series has been guilty of this for a long time. Like, if you wanted to Beat X, you didn't have to grind, but if you wanted to endgame grind, then you needed to keep up grinding throughout the main game, grind some more, AND THEN grind through the endgame.

In FFXIV, it's little better, but a lot of that is from MMO trappings with tiers of gear. Get to the current endgame, grind for semi-relevant gear so you can run better content with which you grind for decent gear... so that you can raid for high-end gear that will cease to matter in the next major patch. Again, that's among the reasons I take breaks from ffxiv. It's also one of the reasons I both loved and hated CoX (City of Heroes/Villains), as you didn't need the best Enhancements, which made minuscule difference in terms of stats, but the optional reward was still there both from the get-go and after so much work; the game cared more about giving you content every few months that lasted anywhere from an hour to two weeks. Gods I miss that game.

Speaking of: In regards to "toon" to mean character, I see it as an eye of the beholder case that depends on whether or not we see the game's setting and characters as cartoonish enough. CoX was cartoonish enough with how it did the superhero and villain thing. FFXIV is not cartoonish enough. Warcrack might be cartoonish enough for some and certainly not for others. Monster Hunters... I can't help you there since I couldn't see the appeal in playing it back on Gameboy, and the anime was considerably dumb even back for late 90s me.
---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Zeus posted...

Entity13 posted...

Furthermore, let me repeat this idea for you, Nintendo very well could make good on its promises.

Then it's a little unfair to even bring up the previous points. After all, by the end of the Wii's life cycle we had enough content to make it well-worth purchasing. Ditto for the 3DS which had a *very* rough launch.

Not really, because one can always point out the fact that they basically left Wii-U owners out to dry the moment they decided it was no longer viable.

Nintendo COULD make good on its promises. It also might not. Anyone who bought a Wii-U waiting for Nintendo to release a massive library of worthwhile games to justify their early adoption basically got fucked. So "maybe they'll follow up" isn't really a dismissal of all of the alternative options.

That being said, the Switch had strong adoption out of the gate (though it's leveled off HARD since then, and if it doesn't pick up, it MIGHT be a problem for them later), which means they're more likely to stick with it long-term. But nothing is guaranteed in this business.

At the end of the day, "Ehh, we'll see" is about the only thing we can really say about what sort of lifespan the Switch is going to have when everything is said and done.

Furthermore, so much hype at the start of the Switch means more people than the start of the Wii U's time. That's more people who can be hurt or jaded. That's more people who can be left out in the cold after a couple years of the system's library going nowhere. It has already been a few months since Switch came out, longer since it was announced and its initial line-up revealed. E3 is coming, and thus here is the first test of the system's viability. People need more games to care about. People need their money's worth. Another failure on Nintendos part would have a greater impact than the Wii U had, so if E3 doesn't turn out well then it will not bode well for everyone who bought into that hype.

So no, saying "Sure, they could make good on promises this time around" does not deter from the central concerns around the Switch. Time is a fickle bitch that moves faster than we want it to at times; the next thing we know it'll be mid 2019 and we'll know for sure how the system has faired. This E3 is the first test of that, as much as we all like to joke about E3's relevance these days.
---

Entity13 posted...

Monster Hunters... I can't help you there since I couldn't see the appeal in playing it back on Gameboy, and the anime was considerably dumb even back for late 90s me.

I think you're thinking of Monster Rancher.
---

Metalsonic66 posted...

Entity13 posted...

Monster Hunters... I can't help you there since I couldn't see the appeal in playing it back on Gameboy, and the anime was considerably dumb even back for late 90s me.

I think you're thinking of Monster Rancher.

Might be.
---