witchdrash Comments

Page 1 of 5

  • The Dark Below makes Destiny's mistakes all over again

  • witchdrash 10/12/2014

    I finished all the story missions in less than evening, and then got on to installing and replaying GTA V on my PS4. The question I had to ask was do I purchase this on the PS3 so my friend and I can play the new content together. The answer is no, it's a kind of fun game but the content for £20 is painful, it should have been £10, and then it would have felt ok.

    I'll keep an eye on Destiny until after the next "expansion" but unless it makes it more fun long term I think I'm done.
    Reply +1
  • The next major Assassin's Creed is set in Victorian London

  • witchdrash 03/12/2014

    @wgrose yes it's a really good game, but you've obviously not been playing the pc version, as 3/5 times I try and run the game it crashes my graphics card and I need to pull the power out of the back of my machine.

    When I'm in its a lot of fun, not got as much character as Black Flag but is good regardless.
    Reply 0
  • Spec Analysis: Alienware Alpha

  • witchdrash 22/10/2014

    The only advantage, I guess is the size, just priced up a micro tax system (out of curiosity), and it comes out at about £50 more than the Alienware I5 price, yes it's a bigger enclosure, but the CPU is 1.4ghz quicker, it has a GTX 970 and 3 TB hard drive, rather than 1 TB (adding an SSD would have pushed the price higher, especially if you tried to match the 1 tb storage). Reply 0
  • Destiny thrills, but the big picture rings hollow

  • witchdrash 10/09/2014

    To be honest this game suits me really well, I'm really enjoying it, then again I like Borderlands, Diablo, Dungeon Defenders etc etc so as long as I have stuff to shoot I'm really happy.

    If you're looking for an epic storyline not convinced this has it, if you're looking for amazing set pieces, again not really there. If you want to enjoy a solid shooter with looting it's fun.
    Reply 0
  • You can't trade items with other players in Destiny

  • witchdrash 26/08/2014

    @RedSparrows no, you can't read. I'm taking my experience as why I (you can read the I can't you, and I didn't say everybody) don't mind that there is no trading.

    Did I at any point say that this is how everyone plays, no, did I even mention that some people would be upset about this, yes, yes I did.

    You read what you want to read, and don't really pay attention to the rest, if you don't like the lack of trading, well tough shit, there isn't any. And calling anything you disagree with rot on a message board just makes you look like a bit of a dick.
    Reply +2
  • witchdrash 26/08/2014

    @RedSparrows Ahh so because I have a few friends I play with who are obsessive min maxers and my experience with Borderlands 1 & 2, Diablo 3 and various MMOs with them is that there is an insane amount of downtime while they pick through everyones inventory and min max our gear for us from theirs, and your experience is difference, what I posted is rot?!

    Arrogant much?

    edited because previous statement was a little offensive, although probably not uncalled for.
    Reply +2
  • witchdrash 26/08/2014

    Initially I thought, that's a pretty strange decision, and a bit backwards, but the more I think about it the more I like it, although I do understand why some people won't, my initial thought was:

    "But what happens if one of my friends picks up an awesome weapon, not as good as his, but better than mine while we're out wandering around the map shooting stuff, it's a real pisser he can't give it to me"

    but this was immediately followed by

    "Thank god the 45 minutes of fucking around in town after completing a mission trying to sort out the drops between a few players so each person can find that tiny minuscule incremental upgrade to what they currently have that may be in someone else's inventory just won't happen now, and we can get straight back to shooting stuff"
    Reply +9
  • Bungie on the Destiny level cap, raids and game size

  • witchdrash 21/08/2014

    @Some_Goats Guild Wars 1 wasn't, and it was funded in the same fashion, it had no history, and that's linked to NCSoft, who have a pretty awful reputation for doing shitty things to their user base.

    GW2 is nice, but nothing special, in my opinion, and it is definitely very playable, I get a few months entertainment out of it, and go back to it now and then, but I got bored of it. I don't reget the money I spent on it, I got my moneys worth in entertainment value.

    If I get a few months entertainment out of Destiny it's £40 well spent.

    Edit: Noticed something else you said, GW2 was cheap. Guild War 2's RRP at launch was £39.99, but more commonly sold for £30 to £35, so no it was not "cheap" it was normal to expensive for a PC game.
    Reply +1
  • witchdrash 21/08/2014

    @Keresky I'm going to reckon there will be no secondhand market for destiny as it will be key locked to your bungie account Reply +3
  • witchdrash 21/08/2014

    @Dynasty2021 of course people will finish it quickly, there are always those that have enough time to race though content, and yes they'll probably get bored, and they may leave.

    But there are still people grinding out WoW at the moment despite there being no new content for about a year at the moment, people can have a frightening commitment to games, especially when they feel invested in it.

    Also just because a few people will have seen everything, done everything and have the best loot ever after a few months doesn't mean that most people will be anywhere near that point.

    Are they catering for the few people who have literally nothing better to do than play Destiny 24/7, or are they catering for the people who will be firing it up a few times a week for run and gun sessions???
    Reply +6
  • witchdrash 21/08/2014

    I'm surprised this is clearly a pay once play forever MMO, is anyone surprised they're already planning DLC?

    It's how numerous games have been funded, (Guild Wars for example), buy the main client, pay nothing until the DLC comes out, then you're pretty much required to buy it because of the inevitable level cap raise and better gear in the new areas.

    Why all of a sudden is the fact that they're planning DLC contentious and Bungie are now money grabbing? Is it because it's on consoles and not the PC, because this model isn't new, they're not doing anything unusual.

    Anyone getting into the game should expect to buy some DLC at some point, and frankly if you love the game a £19.99 purchase of DLC once or twice a year is chump change for the entertainment got out of it.

    Am I also about the only person who played the beta, really enjoyed it, and at no point sat there and thought "I wish there were a few more open areas with monsters in to shoot, this existing collection of open areas filled with monsters simply isn't enough"?
    Reply +27
  • Destiny's six-player raids can only be played with friends

  • witchdrash 31/07/2014

    Odd limitation, especially as I lack friends on the ps4 too, so add witchdrash so I have enough friends to play all of the game :) Reply 0
  • Yogventures studio reveals troubled development, how Yogscast "lost faith" early on

  • witchdrash 21/07/2014

    I think there are several issues.

    The first is most people don't really seem to understand what Kickstarter is for, you are effectively working as a VC for the company, pumping in money, but instead of it being an individual, or a company, who then takes a stake in the company and becomes involved in the day-to-day running of a company it's potentially 1000s of silent investors, many of whom don't realise they aren't preordering an item, but effectively saying, "Here's £100, if the item makes it through to production I will get X in return for my investment", so you effectively aren't buying anything, but the way Kickstarter is set up it suggests that you will get an item.

    The second is that it allows at best naive, or at worst down right stupidity, to creep in. In a normal investment situation there would be someone representing the investor, often with more business experience than the start up (not always), but someone to scrutinise the business decisions (e.g. paying some artist $35k and not having a water tight contract in place and losing that money in exchange for 2 weeks work), but with kickstarted your investors are silent, and no one is protecting them from the stupidity of the people running the company.

    Kickstarter can be great, but because you have no control over the competence of the team trying to implement their idea, you can't determine whether they've properly estimate the cost and work involved, and therefore the needed investment, it's a slot machine, you put your money in, if something pops out the bottom great, if not, shrug and move on.
    Reply +11
  • Blizzard explains $60 cost of World of Warcraft level 90 character boost

  • witchdrash 25/02/2014

    @colicabd because you wouldn't just need to buy another expansion. You would need to create an entirely new account, buy the Warcraft battle chest, buy the expansion, then boost to 90 and then pay for an account transfer.

    All of which adds up to more than $60 by quite a bit.

    As for fans being right, I call bullshit, just because battle.net goes mental over change x, or policy y, it's a screaming minority, the only way to see if Blizzard make a mistake is watching subs, if they drop shortly after a change, bad move, otherwise not. While some fans of wow are intelligent, thoughtful and back their arguments up with logic, they are few and far between, most vocal ones subscribe to Gabe's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory, and they are self obsessed clueless morons who would design a game that they alone would love, and not one that would appeal to as wide a use base as possible.

    Are Blizzard perfect, hell no, are they trying create a successful game so they can fill their Scrooge McDuck style money pit at blizzard hq, yes they are, and if the game isn't fun to as many people as possible, they will unsubscribe and leave.
    Reply +4
  • witchdrash 25/02/2014

    So much QQing.

    There are 3 types of people who this will appeal to
    1 - People who want to play with their level 90 friends
    2 - People levelling another alt for endgame, and the levelling experience is now a chore
    3 - People who level because they have to, but they just want endgame.

    For these three groups this levelling experience being thrown around is not being devalued, because it has no value, it is an obstacle, a barrier to them doing what they want to do.

    For those who love levelling, read the story text, enjoy the lore if the world they get their enjoyment from the experience, and won't buy the boost anyway.

    Blizzard we're obviously going to come out and and spin this to keep people on side, but what they should have said, is

    "If this option offends you, it's not aimed at you. The levelling experience is there for people to. Enjoy as one of the many activities of the game, it represents a significant barrier of entry to some players, so we're doing away with it."
    Reply -3
  • PlayStation 4 doesn't support 3D Blu-rays

  • witchdrash 13/11/2013

    Wrong

    On the other hand, Sony has just confirmed to us that the PS4 will definitely come with both 3D Blu-ray playback (requires the 1.50 firmware update and then a one-time activation) and 3D gameplay (albeit a current lack of 3D titles).
    Source : http://www.engadget.com/2013/11/09/xbox-one-ps4-3d-blu-ray-playback/

    software update version 1.50 for PS4, which will launch simultaneously with the system’s official North American launch on November 15th, 2013.
    Source : http://blog.us.playstation.com/2013/10/25/ps4-system-software-update-1-50-details/
    Reply 0
  • UK chart: FIFA 14 sales down on last year's FIFA 13 by 24%

  • witchdrash 30/09/2013

    UK chart: FIFA 14 sales down on last year's FIFA 13 by 24%
    Possibly due to GTA5. Possibly due to next-gen transition. Possibly because the game hasn't fundamentally changed in 4 years?

    Think it's about time EA allowed people to buy new rosters etc as DLC, I fell out of love with FIFA after FIFA 11, when the game stopped dramatically changing and just got tiny iterative updates.
    Reply +7
  • Final Fantasy 14 companion app released

  • witchdrash 10/09/2013

    @FladgeMangle why would there be a vita version? It's a Square Enix game, not a Sony game. Reply 0
  • Sony offers refunds as Final Fantasy 14 launch catastrophe worsens

  • witchdrash 09/09/2013

    @kosmosagamemnon1 actually I did read that part, however you're trying to use it like a get out of jail free card to cover up the incredibly shaky comment you made.

    You made some grandiose statement regarding cloud computing that most people don't really understand is simply a server in someone else's data centre, and then put in the small print "if this is at all possible", or that they should be able to magically scale their hardware at their end. After all throwing new hardware at it is a solution to the problem, but hardware vendors don't ship preconfigured FFXIV hardware to Square, assuming they're even using off the peg servers.

    It took Square around 2 weeks to solve most of the problems surrounding logging in, which considering they will have had to evaluate their estate, decide where the new hardware needed to go, configured, tested and plugged it in, is pretty good, especially as they wouldn't have wanted to buy machines that would be redundant in a few months when that initial rush is over and the subscriber figures fall to their more permanent level.

    Frankly I'm surprised that you're surprised that someone, in this case me, called bullshit on your comment.
    Reply +1
  • witchdrash 06/09/2013

    @funkateer the cloud provides excellent scalability, if you build your system to exist there. What you trade though is control, you're in someone else's managed data centre, and flexibility, you don't really have too much control over the machine types available.

    For example Netflix exists pretty much entirely in the cloud, but their system is designed that way, it is easy for them to scale up new machines on demand and drop them when not required.

    Most people still run their own data centres, mostly for ease and security, and plugging these in to a cloud infrastructure is complicated, and expensive. There are situations where you can offload time consuming operations in to the cloud with minimal effort, but these tend to be stand alone and non critical (I do video encoding on Amazon EC2 as I can get it done a lot quicker that way!).

    What would be more expensive opening up their security and altering their code base so they could expand FFXIV on to the cloud, or provisioning new servers for their data centre and installing them, probably the latter, certainly where I work we can get a new physical server in 10 days, and a new virtual server on to our estate in about 3 days, it would take probably a month or so to reengineer our code base to work on the cloud, and this assumes that the service dept. don't throw a complete fit about the security implications of sending our data to a potentially foreign country, and exposing our inner workings to the world.
    Reply 0
  • witchdrash 05/09/2013

    @kosmosagamemnon1 really? They could use Azure or EC2 and fragment their datacentres further when latency is hugely important?

    It still amazes me how people just assume that "the cloud" somehow makes it trivial to set up a server exactly how you want it, how exactly do you propose Square set up this fabled "cloud" server? I mean lets assume their set up is trivally simple, they have a a couple of load balanced front-end servers, a few load balanced service servers and a lightning quick database, how do you propose they connect this front-end server, hosted in a completely different data centre to connect to the service boxes or the database, because I seriously doubt they're publically facing?

    Ok lets assume they are stupid and their inner workings are publically facing, how do you propose to route player data, the quickest way is to load balance them on to this new server, so the users hits their load balancer, in their data centre, is then routed back out on to the net, potentially across 1000s of miles, to your new Azure/EC2 box, this then routes back to their data centre to get the relevant data, which routes back to the external server, then back to the load balancer in their data centre, then back to the client.

    Ok so we set up a little private cluster in Azure/EC2, well unless we make it an entirely standalone instance we cannot guarantee users will use the Azure/EC2 box all the time, so we need to replicate potentially gigs of data out across the net, slamming Square with a massively high data bill..

    They're doing the sensible thing plugging in new servers, but this isn't something you can do in 10 minutes, since they appear to have brought on new server capacity in about a week, I'd say that's pretty quick, it's not like these servers are sat in Tescos waiting to be picked up.
    Reply +1
  • witchdrash 05/09/2013

    @darkmorgado think it's a balancing act, there's always a lot of demand at launch but after a couple of months quite a large chunk of those people will get bored and find something else to do, then you get server merges, and once again stories that the sky is falling make the rounds again, when it's just natural attrition. Reply 0
  • witchdrash 05/09/2013

    Last night:
    Bought Game
    Installed on PS3
    Patched Launcher
    Registered Service
    Logged In
    Patched Game
    Created Character
    Played
    Logged Out
    Went To Bed.

    Seems ok for me.
    Reply +18
  • COD developer appeals for calm following death threats

  • witchdrash 24/07/2013

    @jimdove76 your post makes me more stupid. Reply +3
  • witchdrash 24/07/2013

    It's because the COD community is mostly made up of massive arseholes, just look at the amount of abuse screamed at other players mid-session.

    One of the reasons I stopped playing, because its community is toxic and makes it no fun to play online
    Reply 0
  • Blizzard confirms in-game micro-transactions for World of Warcraft

  • witchdrash 10/07/2013

    Not really hugely bothered.

    But then again, as long as microtransactions are a crutch, i.e spend money instead of time, I've never really been bothered by them.

    Since it appears WoW's fall firmly in to, pay us cash to make your life easier, than buy a ticket to get into Y raid, I'm not sure there's much here.

    Wake me up when you have to pay microtransactions to get into dungeons and I'll go grab my pitchfork and flaming torch too.
    Reply 0
  • Xbox One reputation system will punish griefers, reward good gamers

  • witchdrash 03/07/2013

    @FogHeart oh thank god, I genuinely thought you were. Reply +2
  • witchdrash 03/07/2013

    @arcam just give people controls to permanently silence people, you can't be offended by people who you can't hear.

    AssHat41: screw you **** *** ****

    Block AssHat41

    Now whenever you bump in to him, glorious, glorious silence.

    I do it here on EG, there are some people I never ever see, because they annoy me.

    From all the games I've played, most of the talking has nothing to do with the game anyway, so it's not like you're missing much.
    Reply +4
  • witchdrash 03/07/2013

    @FogHeart yes because leaving your mandatory kinect on recording your every utterance in case someone reports you for abusive language would be an awesome idea and make the xbox one that much more popular. Reply +2
  • witchdrash 03/07/2013

    This wont work, the current reputation system doesn't work, I'm sitting below 5 stars because early on one person voted me down as abusing the game, what did I do, I beat them 10-3 on Fifa because they were rubbish, I'm pretty awful.

    People you play well with, especially in COD etc will not bother voting for you, because it's too much like hardwork, however people who you annoy, whether its because you're a griefer, or simply better than them, will vote you down.
    Reply +4
  • Désilets: the future is digital, Microsoft just fluffed Xbox One message

  • witchdrash 01/07/2013

    @hiddenranbir but you're quoting the WoW argument.

    "I know X mmo is shite and unstable, but so was WoW when it launched!"

    The fact that iTunes was a DRM'd nightmare, and that Steam would regularly buckle under its own weight is irrelevant.

    Today iTunes has no DRM, I don't need to connect my iPhone to the net every 24 hours to play my songs.

    Steam has an offline mode, something the Xbox One never had in it's original announcement.

    I'm happy to embrace an all digital future, when I don't feel I'm getting screwed out of more than I gain in benefits.

    When I can lend, gift or trade my digital purchase, when I can know that having my net connection fall over doesn't mean I can't play the games I've bought, when they provide a console with a replaceable hard drive for the terabytes of data I'd need to store. Then maybe, just maybe I'll say yes.

    For now though I'm sticking with physical discs and no shite from companies trying to force their impotent vision of the future down my throat.
    Reply 0
  • Microsoft names next free game for Xbox 360 Gold subscribers

  • witchdrash 01/07/2013

    With people defending Microsoft's strategy for me it's simple:

    With XBLG I went out and bought games, at around £30 a month after release, and then I paid £40 a year for XBLG, as XBLG is not only about playing online, which I don't do exclusively, I play some, but I also play a lot of single player, but a heck of a lot of the basic functionality of the console just doesn't work without a gold subscription.

    So having got a PS3 after the whole PSN debacle I got a free month of PS+, grabbed a couple of games, played them, thought this is cool, didn't renew, went back to playing on my Xbox. Every now and then check the PS store, and kept seeing games I wanted to play, but not having buckets of spare cash I hadn't bothered getting many of them, but I decided to take the plunge and grabbed a 3 month subscription.

    6 months later my XBLG account has been cancelled, I have more games than I can play, and I can play those that I get online for the £39.99 I paid for a 12 month subscription.

    So XBLG vs PS+ comes down to this

    XBLG:
    Online is slightly better

    PS+
    I've got about £300 worth of games sat on my hard drive waiting to play, this month that pile will be added to.

    Since they both cost the same, I'm willing to go for a slightly, and it is only slightly, worse online system, and a ton of games, than an expensive system, required to unlock the full potential of your console (it's a piss take on the 360 that I can't watch Sky Go without a Gold subscription...)

    XBLG, for me, is just awful value for money, and my 360 is going to probably head up stairs into the museum, and sit next to my snes, nes, mega drive, etc, because I just don't use it, because I don't have to buy games any more because of PS+, and because I've got used to using my PS3, I tend to gravitate to the PS3 games section anyway, so Sony have won me over using the carrot, whereas Microsoft have pushed me away by using only the stick.
    Reply +9
  • Xbox One doesn't come with a headset because it includes Kinect, Microsoft explains

  • witchdrash 26/06/2013

    The problem is not Kinect picking up the TV, I had to use my original Kinect as a microphone after we moved and I couldn't find my headset, fortunately I only play co-op with friends, not randoms. The pick up was decent, no one complained they couldn't hear me.

    The problem was their voices coming through the TV, and this is why the headset will also be better.
    Reply +11
  • Microsoft reverses position on Xbox One DRM

  • witchdrash 19/06/2013

    @TheChieftian I read it as you only need to register your console, not each game. Reply +3
  • witchdrash 19/06/2013

    Wow, real disaster for Microsoft, but at least they finally came to some sort sensible decision. Reply +20
  • Microsoft kills game ownership and expects us to smile

  • witchdrash 07/06/2013

    I'm intrigued as to how Microsoft can feel this is a good thing. They are taking away a lot of expected functionality, I don't buy preowned at all, but I do borrow games fairly regularly, these are the games friends buy, are kind of fun to play, but just aren't worth the £45 price tag publishers seem to whack on them.

    Now, if Microsoft completely change the model, no resale, no lending (effectively!) but the games are £15 a pop, you know what fine, if they're still asking for £50 rrp then they can piss off.

    Hopefully Sony have watched this saga unfold and if they were going down the same track are now running firmly in the opposite direction, because I really can see a situation where I end up with neither Xbox One or PS4.
    Reply +8
  • EA acquires Star Wars video game license

  • witchdrash 07/05/2013

    This is ok.

    While EA tends to take a series and run them into the ground it does produce its fair share of good games.

    And lets be honest, we all loves 1980s Lucasarts, 1990s Lucarts was amazing, its true golden age, from 2003 anything from Lucasarts direct (I'm ignoring those produced under license (e.g. Kotor etc) has been an utter steaming pile, and almost everything from those who produced under license has been an utter steaming pile.

    Lets see what EA does, they can't mishandle the license worse than Lucasarts have for the past decade, so worst comes to worst we have more shit games dressed up in Star Wars clothes we continue to ignore.
    Reply 0
  • Next Xbox to be released in "early November" - report

  • witchdrash 26/04/2013

    $499, when converted to pounds using the Microsoft formula (£469) is a lot, and I have no particular desire to add another subscription service to my living room, or resubscribe to Xbox Live Gold, which is horrible value for money.

    Soo... ok.

    Edit: However the subscription route is genius for people who fail to understand total cost of ownership, it's the same scam a lot of catalogs have for years, can't afford this £500 item, well you can have it for £30 a month, for 36 months, it's an amazing deal BUY BUY BUY!
    Reply 0
  • FIFA 14: recreating the emotion of scoring great goals

  • witchdrash 17/04/2013

    @Percinho Got to agree, all these changes just sucked the fun out of these games for me. There's no fun in contorting your fingers to the point of dislocation to pull off various skill moves.

    Wish they would introduce an arcade mode, where you felt like you'd probably score each time you went forward rather than expecting failure, yes Fifa 10 produced some horribly unrealistic scores (had a 15-15 draw once), but it was fun.
    Reply +3
  • Amid growing anger at micro-transactions, CliffyB calls on gamers to vote with their wallets

  • witchdrash 01/03/2013

    He's actually correct, EA are only adding micro transactions, because they work, people spend money on them, they analyse how much every game makes, and if at some point it becomes cheaper to give the discs away and micro transact everything, they will. But while there are a large number of people who will buy the game at full price, and sink another £30 or £40 on micro transactions they will keep doing it.

    I also don't think that any of us can do anything about it, the sort of people who sit on here and actually make an effort to be informed about all the things that effect one of our favourite past times are the minority.

    I have huge number of friends who simply buy what looks cool, I mean if even 50% of people actually came to sites like this Alien Colonial Marines wouldn't have even charted, let alone start at number 1, yes the worst game coded in the last 12 months entered the UK gaming chart at number 1...

    That is combined with the fact that we're part of the problem as well, I bet that half, if not more, of all the people on here moaning about micro transactions have actually participated in them at least once, if not a few times.

    We're pissing into the wind, and we will just have to choose our games carefully, or accept micro transactions are almost definitely the future, the only real ray of light we can hope for is a nice balance is sought, and more games become free up front, and all we end up with is basically the demo system turned a little on its head, game is free, but to get all of it you need to pay, the new version of shareware if like :)
    Reply +1
  • "A bone wall that sheds half-skeletons is just cool": Meet the man behind Torchlight 2's most ambitious mod

  • witchdrash 27/02/2013

    @Ryboy uh yeah... Reply 0
  • witchdrash 27/02/2013

    I preordered this, forgot completely about it, must go and check out the game :D (Yes I'm an idiot I know! ¬.¬) Reply 0
  • Every PS4 game will be available for download

  • witchdrash 26/02/2013

    @jrb xbox live gold and ps+ are completely different products, ps+ has a load of free games and discounts, xbox live gold offers the ability to play online.

    The xbox 360 without a gold subscription is severely lacking in functionality, unless you don't ever plan to connect it to the internet, the PS3 offers almost all it's online functionality for free, so PS+ offers games and tangible rewards. Yes the online service isn't quite as slick, mostly around the voice chat functions, which are game by game on the PS and OS driven by the 360, so I can talk to my friends while playing different games. But that's it really.

    The way I see it is:
    PS+ = the carrot, Xbox Live = the stick.
    Reply +2
  • witchdrash 26/02/2013

    Subscription idea I like. I never sell my games and have an increasingly small amount of time to actually play, so PS+ is a god send as it lets me play 3/4 month old games that I probably wouldn't have bought anyway. I haven't actually bought an Xbox 360 game is about 8 months as a result.

    As for digital sales, I can't see them being cheaper than retail at release, otherwise they risk annoying the retailers, who still sell a lot of copies of new games. What would be nice though is massive discounts on 6+ month old games, that you can't really get hold of in the shops any more. I mean who wouldn't cough up £10 for a decent 6 month old game? And it's basically free money for the developer who's product is now nearly impossible to find, except as a scratched pube covered 2nd hand copy. (Which raises the next point, is it a requirement that every second hand game that Game sells comes with at least one pube in the box....)
    Reply +1
  • Sony sounds uncertain about European PS4 launch timing

  • witchdrash 21/02/2013

    @simsini see the definition of SCEE, it says "See Incompetent".

    But yes, if they release in JP and NA at mid Nov, and EU start of Dec, then that's a nuisance, but ok.

    If they release in JP and NA in Nov 2013 and then in the EU March 2014 (I know I'd written 2013, I can't type), that's just stupidity on Sony's part
    Reply +3
  • witchdrash 21/02/2013

    The release of the PS4 in the EU being after everyone else is pretty much a dead certainty, it's almost entirely down to the cluster fuck that is SCEE.

    Never has a branch of a tech multinational failed so miserably where all their primary competitors have figured out how to succeed.

    When a branch can't push out DLC and games for months after they've become available in the US and Japan, the odds of them actually putting out hardware anytime this year is frankly, impossible to see.
    Reply +4
  • Nintendo's Wii U sales struggle

  • witchdrash 29/01/2013

    @megatronx I was going pull a massive list of games out and go AHA however all I could find

    Xbox 360:
    COD 2
    Oblivion
    Battlefield 2


    PS3:
    COD 3
    Oblivion
    COD 4
    Lego Starwars

    So to say none was not entirely accurate, to say few would be better :)

    Makes me wonder if it's worth getting any console in the first 12 months.. Hmmmmm
    Reply +2
  • witchdrash 29/01/2013

    @RawNinjaKid I think it's that over reliance on very few core IPs, mostly Mario and Zelda, especially Mario in one of several repeated guises.

    It's hard to nail down any one IP that the Xbox or the PS3 effectively pin their identity on.

    Whenever a Nintendo discussion come up the common line I see over and over is "Well when they release Mario X, Zelda X or Metroid X I'll get it", I can't really think of something like that on the Xbox or PS3, they feel more general, for some it will be God of War, for others COD, Gears of War, Halo, Fifa etc. neither the PS3 or Xboxe appear to be defined by so few titles, with the seeming consensus that if anything good happens to come along between its a bonus.

    Mario (I include Kart in this as it's fun but like Smash Bros is a fair bit of fan service too), Zelda, Metroid etc have been around since the beginning of time for Nintendo, doesn't it worry anyone that they haven't really successfully produced anything else that is so noteworthy that it joins those 3 since the mid 1980s?
    Reply +6
  • witchdrash 29/01/2013

    @Jimjamyaha Nintendo tends to not lose much, if anything on its consoles, I know in the past they've always sold at a profit, so it's unlikely a slow launch will hurt them as badly say the PS4 or XBox 720 would hurt Sony, MS.

    However the N64 and Gamecube were made up for by the Gameboy and the DS, as neither were exactly massive successes, modest, yes, but massive, not when compared to the other consoles of their day.

    The problem with the Wii-U is it's likely to have to stand on its own 2 feet, while the 3DS is, or will be, the best selling gaming handheld smart phones are pretty much taking apart the handheld market, which probably means the Gameboy gravy train is running out, which means we may see a much weaker Nintendo in 3 to 5 years if the Wii-U doesn't start to perform better. Will the Wii-U kill Nintendo, almost definitely not, in the same way the Saturn didn't kill Sega, should it turn out to be Nintendo's Saturn.
    Reply 0
  • Facts and figurines: Is there more to Disney Infinity than a Skylanders clone?

  • witchdrash 29/01/2013

    @orangpelupa kind of defeats the purpose of collecting the figures though doesn't it :D Reply 0