ShiftyGeezer Comments

Page 1 of 26

  • Judge allows lawsuit over Killzone Shadow Fall's 1080p graphics to proceed

  • ShiftyGeezer 18/12/2014

    @shruteshkumar : 960x1080 is obvious. KZ's solution isn't obvious because it's not 960x1080. It uses an upscaling technique that produces something much better than 960x1080 quality and approaching, sometimes matching exactly, full 1920x1080 quality, without the processing requirements of 1920x1080 that enables 60fps in multiplayer with the KZ visuals.

    It's also not a simple left/right interleaving as you suggest - it's more sophisticated than that. That's why DF had to really investigate to identify what was happening. Simple LR interlacing would have been obvious as there'd be consistent interlacing artefact on any camera motion.
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 18/12/2014

    @arcam : It's wrong to claim the developers are "trying to hide" things. Devs by and large are engineers who care about their work and are only interested in providing the best possible experience. Quite often they'd happily talk about what techniques they are using on limited hardware to get the best experience from it, but are blocked either because 1) marketing says it's a bad idea, or 2) the public can be too stupid to understand technical details and would instead just post mindless numbers, "KZ is only 960x1080!"

    GG's upscaling technique was pretty excellent and quite possibly a foreshadowing of future upscaling techniques (spatial and temporal) that'll be employed this gen. Heck, if we were to get foveated rendering, rendering resolutions would be even more a joke metric than they are now.

    I'm happy to agree that the presentation of the facts was incorrect, and maybe there was a deliberate intention to mislead by Sony, but I highly doubt Guerilla Games are to blame here, and such anti-dev sentiment serves no purpose except to discourage devs from trying new, important technologies for making us better games.

    The funniest thing here is people were playing non-native, upscaled games throughout the whole PS2 era with nary a grumble. Life just keeps getting harder for devs!
    Reply +11
  • ShiftyGeezer 18/12/2014

    What's the compensation? $10 million in personal suffering, or $60 to refund the game, to $10 to refund a small part of the game that otherwise was perfectly playable and enjoyable? Reply +11
  • Splash Damage unveils new "reflex-driven" mobile game Tempo

  • ShiftyGeezer 18/12/2014

    @Baban_Iesu : @ arcam: Yeah, I stupidly missed that! Perhaps the low latency of iThings is why it's exclusive? Actually, I could consider my rhythm game on just iOS... Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 18/12/2014

    I prototyped a rhythm game for mobile in Unity recently and it was nigh unplayable. Did some research and found touch screens can have latencies as high as 150 ms! So I reckon a game based on reactions is either going to be stupidly hard on some devices, or, balanced for longer latencies, too easy on others. It's certainly not going to be easy to have a timing-based game consistent across devices. Reply +2
  • Video: Magicka 2's wizarding is just as good on a PS4 pad

  • ShiftyGeezer 17/12/2014

    "This video is private" Reply 0
  • Syndicate spiritual successor Satellite Reign launches on Steam Early Access

  • ShiftyGeezer 14/12/2014

    @One_Vurfed_Gwrx : Looking into this more, 'off' can function in that place as an adverb. As an adverb, it's perfectly legitimate to follow the verb + adverb with a preposition to relate to the following objective. Hence, you're wrong. It's definitely grammatically correct. ;) The only disagreement is one of style.

    We can't even claim it's a style derived from America (like other obvious Americanisms) and so to be avoided because it originated in England. Basically, English language fashion has moved on in this particular case where US fashion has remained with the historic fashion.

    The grammar police are necessary to uphold the apostrophe and 'whom' and other vital roles preserving an effective language, but grumbling about 'off of' seems misplaced to me. By grumbling and getting the article changed, you're simply artificially reinforcing the fashions that you want to see. What next - bowler hats and umbrellas so that we can be properly British? :p
    Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 13/12/2014

    @delph : did they go looking for a publishing deal? As I say, there's reason to want to avoid publishers. It leaves full control and all profits with the developer. While, as I said, avoiding an investor means avoiding having to pay dividends, so the developer keeps all the profits.

    You're point is only valid if every seasoned dev appearing on Kickstarter has courted publishers first and been rejected, and has had to turn to Kickstarter out of necessity. Otherwise, you'll find some (lots? a few?) choosing Kickstarter out of preference, not because they had to.
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 12/12/2014

    @One_Vurfed_Gwrx :
    I don't like to pick on grammar, but "off of" should not be on a European site (at least without the article being from the American correspondent)...
    Considering the phrase originates in pre-American England and is the counter part to 'on to' (contracted into a single word nowadays) and equal to 'in to', I don't think that's right. I can get on the bus. I can get onto the bus. I can get in the taxi. I can get into the taxi. I can get off my high horse. I can get off of my high horse.

    The 'of' is a bit redundant, but it's not grammatically incorrect (save where the 'rules' of grammar keep changing between our language isn't structured around actual rules). It's just stylistically opposed by people not wanting to pick on grammar. ;) For consistency, we should fuse it into one preposition, "offof"...
    Reply +5
  • ShiftyGeezer 12/12/2014

    @delph : Who says it *has* to be kickstarted? Maybe they want to publish it themselves and avoid using a publisher, and Kickstarter allowed them to source public funding from a wide enough audience to help prove the viability of the idea and with no percentage profits having to be given back, without them being beholden to an individual investor looking to make a profit. Reply +2
  • Killzone Shadow Fall adds in-game currency alternative to microtransactions

  • ShiftyGeezer 13/12/2014

    @spekkeh : 70% of games fail to break even. Monetising one's games most effectively is part and parcel of running an effective business and paying people's wages. The only reason games had cheat codes in bygone days is because the internet and microtransactions weren't possible - not because of some altruistic ideology among developers back then. We got as close as possible with premium-rate tips and cheats phone-numbers and then of course game guides.

    It may be crummy to charge people with less time to play more for shortcuts, but it's also standard business practice. Why does one have to pay more to get Amazon to dispatch their goods in one day instead of three when it's exactly the same amount of effort? Why does one pay more to have a letter delivered in one day instead of 3 when the post goes through exactly the same distribution channels?

    As a professor of Game Design, what do you think Diablo 3 or Destiny would be if people could type in a cheat code and get any item they want? It'd undermine the whole effort<>reward mechanic. Now put a dollar value on those items and the effort has a fiscal value, while maintaining the option to buy a shortcut if one's desperate for a particular item. The effort<>reward mechanic remains intact, while you don't *have* to put in the hours if you want a particular item as there's a purchase option.
    Reply -2
  • PS4 20th Anniversary Edition consoles are already on eBay - for thousands of pounds

  • ShiftyGeezer 12/12/2014

    @LordDemigod : Or, rather than wanting more, set a real entry-level requirement beyond 'follow us on Twitter, get to a store in London early and bring an old PS controller with you'. They should have invited people to apply listing their ownership and history with the brand, photos of their collection, etc. They didn't really select the true fans. Reply 0
  • Tekken 7's chief developer doesn't take kindly to mixed Lucky Chloe reaction

  • ShiftyGeezer 09/12/2014

    @dogmanstaruk : That's wrong. People are allowed to express an opinion. The Gaffers aren't right or wrong - they just have their preference. They shouldn't be silenced or chastised for expressing their opinion of the character (+ve or -ve), any more than you should for thinking your view is the only right one ("There's nothing wrong with the character and everyone who disagrees with me is a 'typical internet wank'"). Reply +2
  • ShiftyGeezer 09/12/2014

    @laserpanda : Professionals are still people. Imagine you've gone through significant struggles to try to be original and reach something people will want, and after months of hard work and with high hopes you release your work only for everyone to boo you. It'd be disheartening! However, he shouldn't say anything. The trick then is to keep one's mouth shut, but people still haven't learnt how to handle 'social media' yet. In by-gone years he'd have had no feedback and been happy with the office enthusiasm. Reply +8
  • ShiftyGeezer 09/12/2014

    @bobfish09 : 'Generic Jarhead' should be an unlockable costume! Reply +2
  • ShiftyGeezer 09/12/2014

    @laserpanda : The silent majority shouldn't have been so silent. I guess you should have all taken to Gaf and sung the praises of the character and told Harada how awesome he is. Creative types need that. ;) Reply +3
  • ShiftyGeezer 09/12/2014

    That's stupid. A few vocal ramblers don't define the entire market. Put all characters in the game and, if people really don't want to play some characters, allow the player to choose their opponent roster.

    But it'd be ridiculous to deny those want to play this character from the opportunity due to a bit of internet whinging from a clearly unrepresentative forum.
    Reply +5
  • Minecraft dev's Scrolls will cap your spending so you don't break the game

  • ShiftyGeezer 05/12/2014

    @JudasBlitzkrieg : It's a gamers' game for mobile - full arcade, skill-based, controller-supported - with an eye on releasing for consoles/PC too. It's tactical space combat with mechanics based on Star Control if that means anything to you. It'll release single player but the end-game is networked with teams - there's a very strong focus on team strategy.

    If I could be certain of it making enough money, I wouldn't even consider in-app purchases of resources, but I've realised (talking with dev friends) that, realistically, I have to put my gamer ideals to one side if I want to make a living. The plan at the moment is to sell in-game content in terms of new ships and levels, and have the resource collection as a gameplay factor for that sense of challenge and reward (better resources obtained with a better performance, encouraging new tactics and/or improving one's skills). With that structure, the option is naturally there to sell resources as an 'accelerant'.

    If you think how Destiny and Diablo 3 have items and crafting resources in reasonable balance, would it be wrong for them to introduce cheap purchasing of items directly?

    I'm actually close to a full public reveal if you want a link when I announce it.
    Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 05/12/2014

    @DyingAtheist : Regards IAP consumables, I agree with you. I even go so far so want IAP consumables outlawed, preferably by social consent (refusal to buy them) than by a law. Godius turning to that dark side was the final nail in Bullfrog's and Molyneux's coffin as far as I was concerned. The idea of a consumable in bits and bytes is a ludicrous artefact of the digital economy, as you say.

    But if IAPs are to exist, I don't think they should be controlled in price. Though marketed like chocolate bars in a morally questionable way, the law doesn't really extend that far - it doesn't place a law on how much chocolate you're allowed to buy (yet!). Disney has removed junk-food ads from its channel from its own volition and not by State control. Kids spending too much need to learn self control and repercussions and the value of money. I know some kids who were making Scooby Doos (platted strings of plastic) at school and selling them for 50p each. I thought that was good enterprise. They were stopped by parents who were being told by their children that they needed 50p for school, where in detail they wanted to buy some Scoobies. Instead of those children learning that they can't always have what they want, the school closed down the industry of these kids. That's the very opposite way to go about it IMO.

    So for a solution, I say end in-game consumables and only sell persistent in game content with no price controls. Of course, then there wouldn't be anything like as much money for the big names like Candy Crush. And far less money for Google and Apple too! So it'll be very hard instigating change, whatever change it is.
    Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 05/12/2014

    @Agarwel_Idiriz : One reason I hate IAPs is you don't know what the final cost will be. And that's for in game content, not consumables. I do think in game consumables should probably be banned or at least social rejected. I agree that games should come with a 'buy' option that's a transparent purchase price for the whole thing. That's how every other produce and service is sold. We don't see Sky TV advertised as free and then, with only 5 minutes use a day, you have to buy daily subscriptions to see anything! Reply +2
  • ShiftyGeezer 05/12/2014

    @erp : Playing Devil's Advocate (I'm not pro-capitalism), that's against free-market principles. If you're going to impose a legal limit on how much people can spend on IAPs, why not also put a limit on how much one can spend on a night out, on drinks, on event tickets, on bets and numbers of lottery tickets bought, on clothes, on designer brand sunglasses, etc.?

    Because absolutely no-one has to spend money on IAPs (they're optional spends on a non-essential activity), it's entirely in the consumer's power to not be sucked into over-spending. Unless said consumer hasn't the mental wherewithal to stop themselves. Ergo, the only reason to legally enforce a cap is if we believe consumers really aren't capable of managing themselves properly. And if we are to go down that route, don't we end up with something approaching the Nanny State where everyone's told what they're allowed to spend on what?

    I'm not in favour of free-market capitalism as a philosophy, but I don't see that legal controls on IAPs are any more necessary that the same controls on any other purchases. And I'm quite sure if the government decided you weren't allowed to spend above some limit for golf or TV subscriptions or groceries or car choice or a million other purchases, you'd all be up in arms. ;)

    I hate IAPs, but people could just not buy them...
    Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 05/12/2014

    @JudasBlitzkrieg : I don't understand the specifics of the game, but it'll be one of two reasons (as worded).

    1) The game is free to play but you have to pay up to $5 to unlock the full experience

    2) The game is $5 to play and then there's an optional $5 of shortcuts to unlock stuff. This is offered as a business decision for those that are willing to spend more.

    I have exactly the same consideration in my up-coming space combat game for mobile. With a resource based levelling system like Destiny that adds replayability and a sense of progression (when coupled to a decent game mechanic so it's not just grind!), there's the possibility of selling resources as microtransactions. One can shun this option and balance that game for natural progress. However, if I offer that option to people, I'll make more money, and from an 'earning a living' perspective, that's a good thing. So though against in-game consumables, I find myself contemplating supporting them on a small scale to help the monetisation of the product and make it fiscally viable.
    Reply -2
  • Angry Birds developer lays off 110 staff, closes studio

  • ShiftyGeezer 04/12/2014

    @riz23 : Their story is interesting. The company almost collapsed and wasn't very successful. The grandparent's home was mortgaged to give them another shot that could have failed catastrophically. It didn't and, quite the opposite, exploded into unprecedented success (although it was intelligently managed by targeting the smaller markets first). But the people involved, who came so close to total failure, don't seem to have learnt wisdom and humility. They milked and milked and didn't innovate or branch out and create other games and show better appreciation for their consumers (50 PS4 mentioned above). The moment they had a chance to take more, they did.

    Some will argue that's how it should. The moment you have a chance to make money, make as much as you can as long as you can because the well will dry up eventually. That's all wisdom of a capitalistic form.

    Others will instead look at the flop and see it as poetic justice. The guys involved certainly didn't deserve the ridiculous amount of money they got - lots of other devs struggle just as hard and don't get the lucky break - and if it all crumbles, that's all they deserve.

    It's not like they'll ever struggle for money though. If they're going to retire and live off their spoils, who cares if the company folds? And if they want to remain active, they need to find something more to do than regurgitate the same game over and over. The only people to feel sorry for are the ground level workers who are dependent on management to make the right choices and keep their jobs viable.
    Reply +14
  • Kingdom Hearts 3 dev discusses switch from Luminous to Unreal Engine 4

  • ShiftyGeezer 04/12/2014

    The engine may have been fine in operation, but the tools could have been lacking, and/or maintenance could be an issue, and/or future-proofing (Unreal is on mobile). Reply +13
  • Sir Clive Sinclair crowdfunding new ZX Spectrum computer

  • ShiftyGeezer 02/12/2014

    @Sammoore : I think not. 1.4*10^-5 teraflops is 14 megaflops - no way the 3.5 MHz Z80a could handle that!! Maybe you're reporting Gflops? 14 kiloflops sounds about right to me. I know there was no floating point unit and it took many cycles per flop. Games were all written in integer maths as a result. Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 02/12/2014

    @bad09 : But if some major titles aren't there, that's quite significant. Especially for One HUNDRED pounds! Reply -1
  • ShiftyGeezer 02/12/2014

    @mharr : fair enough! Reply -1
  • ShiftyGeezer 02/12/2014

    @Murton : There's always competition.

    Reply +4
  • ShiftyGeezer 02/12/2014

    100? Ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!! Also, freely downloadable games? Unless the creators have forsaken copyright, that's piracy, even if no-one cares about old-game piracy. Reply -14
  • Never Alone review

  • ShiftyGeezer 20/11/2014

    @danielstarkey : That confuses the review score. 10/10 played cooperatively, 7/10 played solo? Or 3/10 (one of the biggest disappointments of your gaming career)? Anyone looking to play this solo expecting a '10/10 experience' is going to be disappointed?

    That's really important info for those using review scores as buying advice.
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 20/11/2014

    @Jayja : We've had two very slanted reviews of late - LBP's "I never liked LBP and now I'm reviewing LBP3" and this "I'm from a dying culture reviewing a game that resonates with my cultural roots in a way it can't do with most people who don't have the same Indian heritage."

    If Never Alone was reviewed by a tech-head raised in the city with little natural empathy, perhaps it'd have started, "I'll admit, I don't much care for Eskimos and cold places and hippy spirituality," and ended with a 7/10, and if LBP had began with, "My childhood was spent building things from blocks and card and fabric, and then playing out puppet shows with socks and cuddly toys," perhaps it'd have scored 10/10.

    Point being, all review scores are subjective and shouldn't be taken as anything more than a broad mean average and range of potential appeal. A 7/10 for one person can be a 10/10 for another, and vice versa.
    Reply +22
  • ShiftyGeezer 20/11/2014

    @Alex_Star : Think it's like every game - of subjective appeal and will be appreciated to differing degrees by different people. Clearly it resonates with Daniel Starkey due to his personal heritage so his personal score is higher. If it resonates with you, you'll rate it more highly than if it doesn't. Reply 0
  • Microsoft giving Xbox One owners free gifts for first year anniversary

  • ShiftyGeezer 20/11/2014

    Special limited edition Nissan 370Z, featuring a custom Casio livery
    :o
    for Forza Horizon 2
    :(
    Reply +37
  • LittleBigPlanet 3 review

  • ShiftyGeezer 19/11/2014

    @Dismiss : As long as they are consistent across all titles.
    1 week ago, AC:U didn't have any mention of bugs or performance issues.

    Perhaps give two scores, 1 for game/potential and one down-weighted for bugs. Or even a score on buggyness alongside the game, 0 to 10, where 3/10 is probably tolerable for a big, complex game with lots of potential for issues, 5/10 means you have to be pretty forgiving and hopeful of patching, and higher scores pushing towards unplayability and 'do not buy until fixed' consumer behaviour.
    Reply +2
  • Atari ET game landfill spoils fetch $37,000 on eBay

  • ShiftyGeezer 17/11/2014

    @elsafleming206 :
    if you want to earn handsome amount in the range of $18266 only one month so...
    Sell shit on eBay, apparently...
    Reply +9
  • ShiftyGeezer 17/11/2014

    Another 500 copies will be sent to museums around the world.
    And dropped straight in the trash with the junk mail. ;)
    Reply +6
  • PlayStation Vue is a new cloud-based TV service for PS4 and PS3

  • ShiftyGeezer 13/11/2014

    @Cartho :
    Trying to compete with Microsoft as a media playing powerhouse is not. going. to. work.
    They're not. People seem to be having some real trouble with reading comprehension on this article! :p PSVue is coming to iOS and other devices. Ergo it's basically independent of PlayStation. It's a Sony move, not a PlayStation one. It's just coming first to PS which makes sense from development and support and added value points of view. But they aren't trying to out-media MS on this one. It's just a content service from Sony, leveraging the PS brand.
    Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 13/11/2014

    @Murton :
    PS4 game in US, $60 everywhere, which in real money is about 42 quid.
    PS4 game in the UK, 50 high street, 55 digital
    You've forgotten VAT. 50 in the high-street is 40 game + 10 VAT. So 40 for a game here versus 42 going buy your exchange rate; it's only the 20% VAT (versus ~8% sales tax in US not marked on prices) that makes the game disc prices so high.

    The services are overpriced though! But then our ISPs and TV providers are cheaper. It'd be interesting to see what the total cost over a year including broadband and music service between nations would be for Music Unlimited and others.
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 13/11/2014

    @polandspring : Huh? The analogy's not metaphorical but rhetorical. Netflix is to a Smart TV what PSVue is to MS's TV ambitions. That is, the similarity stops at them both having something to do with TV. Other than that, they have little in common.

    There's little in common between MS wanting to provide TV connectivity with their console, voice control for TV, and TV programme making, and Sony wanting to make a platform agnostic content platform for selling content from many creators.
    Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 13/11/2014

    @PSfourskin
    im not say its hypocritical. i'm just saying that the sony fanboys that parroted the TV,TV,TV memes for month and months must be feeling a little embarrassed now.
    Why? "TV TV TV" complaints were based on the XB1 reveal with the focus on the non-gaming living room coupled with non-gaming hardware to facilitate that. If someone didn't like that vision and complained (and that was all gamers, not just Sony fanboys), why feel embarrassed when a content company releases a (platform agnostic) content service? The only similarity is that both involve TV media. Apart from the subject matter, they are two completely different things. One was a voice-controlled living room to connect with your existing TV box, the other is a content portal. It's like comparing a Smart TV to the Netflix service and suggesting someone who thinks Smart TVs are a bad idea should also be against the existence of Netflix.
    Reply -1
  • ShiftyGeezer 13/11/2014

    @Brev2034 : It added extensively to the cost. If MS had released XB1 without Kinect and TV connectivity and charged that as a separate option, the response would have been very different (same response to PS4, basically).

    Or putting it another way, when XB1 launched, you spent $500 on a $350 console and a $150 TV living room lifestyle experience. When Sony released PS4, you spent $400 on a console that could also play Netflix and iPlayer. And this announcement is just one more of several TV options that no-one's ever complained about because they don't take anything away from the console and/or don't add to the console's cost.
    Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 13/11/2014

    @PSfourskin : MS included a $150 peripheral, HDMI in and IR blaster, jacking up the price, with little real functionality beyond voice control for TV viewing. If they hadn't included Kinect, sold much cheaper (the current price, which has resulted in much greater uptake), and added voice control in a simpler form, there'd be no complaints from gamers. And that's what Sony has done. They have a box to play stuff on, including media content (which it's actually pretty crap at at the mo'), like every smart-box out there, but with the emphasis on games (which are kinda lacking at the moment too!).

    There's absolutely zero wrong or hypocritical regards this announcement. It's Sony, a large content creator as well as CE company, offering a content service that just happens to be launching first on PS but is being extended to smart devices. It gives another option competing with Netflix, Amazon, and Now TV or whatever one's regional options are. Depending on the content and the pricing, it might be a good thing. It's certainly not a bad thing and not something to get your knickers in a twist over due to a confused perception that complaints against XB1's focus and pricing, and interest in a content application on PS devices, are comparable.
    Reply +4
  • ShiftyGeezer 13/11/2014

    @Brev2034 : This is a TV service same as Netflix or NowTV. No-one complains about optional services being available on their device. Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 13/11/2014

    @johnson81 - $3 for 4 hours is far better economy than a 2 hour movie rented at $4, so for an evenings entertainment, PSNow is good value.

    If you want to play longer, you pay that bit more ($15 for three months). Obviously if that's an old game available cheap, it's not good value, but for some titles it could save you ~$40 on the full price, especially good for those shorter must-play solo games.
    Reply 0
  • Unearthed ET copies now going for up to $500 on eBay

  • ShiftyGeezer 05/11/2014

    @Sicho : It's not a collector's item if there are ~800 thousand of the things (and other copies of the game not from landfill), save for the artificial restriction on numbers creating a collectable status.

    They could give these things away to anyone who sends a SAE for crissakes, and still be left with hundreds of thousands to dump back in the landfill.

    And equating $500 on cigarettes is perhaps the worst possible comparison you could make. Alternatively, people could waste $500 on a bit of scrap plastic dumped in a landfill, or some old socks from a landfill, or a *new* item like a new console, or gifts for loved ones, or give it to charity, or a *real* collectable like a rare stamp or a rare game (that still works) that wasn't picked for free from a dumping ground! Because that's the key point here. 1) the 'collectable' is available en masse. 2) It's in dumped condition, unlike true collectables that are preferred in mint condition, preferably in original packaging. 3) It's picked from the trash. Could one dig a smashed up collectable computer from the trash and sell it for any money on eBay? No, because it's trash. If it doesn't work, it's of zero value, especially when working collectables are available. So $500 for a bit of twisted plastic is ludicrous, when good quality copies of the game are cheaply available. People buying this are confusing it with a collectable when it's not. It'll have no ongoing worth, and has no historic significance.
    Reply +4
  • ShiftyGeezer 05/11/2014

    792,000 cartridges recovered from the landfill are only going to be dumped in landfill again, minus a few sold to...folk. I suppose they may be incinerated.

    Point being, it's trash. It's trash that was trashed, then untrashed, but has been untrashed for no good reason because its going to be trashed again! So what was the point in digging it up in the first place?
    Reply 0
  • After Burner 2, Fantasy Zone, OutRun and more remastered for Nintendo 3DS

  • ShiftyGeezer 04/11/2014

    At the time these games originally released, Nintendo was the mortal enemy of Sega. Gives hope that at some point in the future, the Sony/MS/Nintendo fanboy warring will have ended and we'll happily reminisce about the good games on all machines. In between Samsung and Amazon console warring... Reply 0
  • Performance Analysis: Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare

  • ShiftyGeezer 03/11/2014

    Is there any more input lag to accommodate the dynamic resolution (accounting for a(n extra) buffered frame), or is input latency identical across machines?

    The removal of dynamic res in multiplayer suggests to me there is, otherwise why remove it?
    Reply +1
  • Super Mario Bros. movie originally a "personal, emotional story" between Mario and Luigi

  • ShiftyGeezer 03/11/2014

    Although that explains why the released film was crap, it sounds like the original vision would have been crap anyway. A 'dark' Mario?! Who's idea was that?!! Reply +42
  • PlayStation 4 sales help Sony's game division to profit

  • ShiftyGeezer 31/10/2014

    @natureboy : PS2's are no longer manufactured. Dec 2012:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20875176
    Reply +2