but honestly, I just want to be able to play the next Smash Bros online without it being a complete fuck, that's all I ask.
This would be nice.
but honestly, I just want to be able to play the next Smash Bros online without it being a complete fuck, that's all I ask.
This would be nice.
but honestly, I just want to be able to play the next Smash Bros online without it being a complete fuck, that's all I ask.
Don't we all, my friend. Hopefully Nintendo's online is improving by making MK7 have a much better network than MKWii. Then the next big step is improving Smash's online.
Like with Xenoblade, both of Pandora's Tower and Last Story also get an alternative cover (Only until tomorrow the 15th of November!):
http://www.officialn…ower-cover-art/
I voted these:
I Voted this one for last story and the same as you for pandoras tower
I want those games…
y'know what... if NOA doesn't announce it after the holidays I will import it after I finish Skyward sword (I'll mod). I just can't wait any more :(
Guys. Guys.
Nintendo are Evil. According to PETA.
Apparently nobody showed PETA Mario 3 before, they've been blissfully ignorant of Mario's Fur-wearing, Tanooki-killing shenanigans for 20 years.
And now they've decided to take issue and pull their usual "Fur is Murder" BS. On Mario. The plumber who magically srouts the Tanooki suit when he gets a feather.
I'm laughing right now. Very. Very. Hard.
I saw that earlier.
Somehow, I was inspired by it to have a burger for dinner.
It was the most delicious burger I've eaten in a very long while.
Guys. Guys.
Nintendo are Evil. According to PETA.
Apparently nobody showed PETA Mario 3 before, they've been blissfully ignorant of Mario's Fur-wearing, Tanooki-killing shenanigans for 20 years.
And now they've decided to take issue and pull their usual "Fur is Murder" BS. On Mario. The plumber who magically srouts the Tanooki suit when he gets a feather.I'm laughing right now. Very. Very. Hard.
Thanks PETA, I never made the connection between Mario and animal killing for clothes. Thanks that you've enlightened me!
Another day, another stupid, embarrassing PETA move.
/me goes back to eating his burger.
Bastard Mario. Jumping on Turtles to kill them. CORRUPTING THE YOUTH!
Funny because Mario gets the tanooki suit from a frikkin leaf!
Like with Xenoblade, both of Pandora's Tower and Last Story also get an alternative cover (Only until tomorrow the 15th of November!):
http://www.officialn…ower-cover-art/I voted these:
Those were the best - thankfully they won. Pandora was looking quite close for a while.
Guys. Guys.
Nintendo are Evil. According to PETA.
Apparently nobody showed PETA Mario 3 before, they've been blissfully ignorant of Mario's Fur-wearing, Tanooki-killing shenanigans for 20 years.
And now they've decided to take issue and pull their usual "Fur is Murder" BS. On Mario. The plumber who magically srouts the Tanooki suit when he gets a feather.I'm laughing right now. Very. Very. Hard.
It's actually been almost thirty years since he started on his evil path
where were peta when he was caging animals
Also, the original 'Donkey Kong' was talking about Donkey Kong kidnapping Pauline after running away from his 'abusive' owner.
If they'd only gotten the popeye license
this nightmare of mistreatment of animals would never have come to pass.
Who's going to care about mistreating bluto
Got a 3DS today and Mario 3D Land to go with it. Haven't gotten the chance to really play it yet, but it's so nice to have access to the eshop and all those other cool new DS features and to finally have a replacement for my old beat-up DS lite.
I'm going nuts over here without an ETA for the November system update OR the Ambassador GBA games. I don't mind having to wait for these kinds of things, but not knowing how long to wait is killing me.
I'd hate to bring up PETA again,but this was just too damn funny…
Mario is evil but wearing nothing but a sign is fine? Why wasn't I informed of this earlier!?
I like the part where the topless chick gets popped in the face with a fireball.
Public nudity is another one of PETA's publicity tricks, no really it is.
The only reason we got the signs is because Korean news cartoons are too classy for that sort of thing.
http://ds.ign.com/articles/121/1212758p1.html
Looks like PETA was f**king with us. it was all a joke >.<
http://ds.ign.com/articles/121/1212758p1.html
Looks like PETA was f**king with us. it was all a joke >.<
Translation: After Nintendo fans gave them a huge backlash beyond what they usually get, PETA decided to back off and make up a story about it all being a joke.
Translation: After Nintendo fans gave them a huge backlash beyond what they usually get, PETA decided to back off and make up a story about it all being a joke.
Sounds about right
So Kirby's Adventure just showed up today on the eShop as the latest in the '3D Classics' line. Decided to give it a try. So good.
Translation: After Nintendo fans gave them a huge backlash beyond what they usually get, PETA decided to back off and make up a story about it all being a joke.
Not like anything would've come of it anyway. I mean, this is Japan we're talking about.
They're, like, the Anti-PETA.
Wii U is screwed when it's competition comes out. Everyone who thinks otherwise is naive! Yes, Nintendo may sell a lot of hardware, but I highly doubt that after PS4/XBOX720 it's software from third parties will again die out, maybe I'm wrong, but looking at history, I'll be betting on the house.
I don't think so. I mean what's higher than HD? Honestly the graphical levels are not going to change that much next gen. At least, that's what I think.
I don't think so. I mean what's higher than HD? Honestly the graphical levels are not going to change that much next gen. At least, that's what I think.
Virtual reality. but we are probably lightyears away from that technology
Virtual reality. but we are probably lightyears away from that technology
Exactly! My point is. We're in a technological stump right now. Similar to NES–> SNES (kinda) there isn't going to be that big of a difference like from 2D-->3d so I think the wiiU will be okay :)
First of all, people who say graphics can't get much better are obviously console-only players. PC has some incredible shit going on, graphics-wise, but it never gets to flex those muscles because most games are developed with Consoles in mind. they limit themselves.
What I'm saying is, there's definitely a next generation of graphical advancements that you would be able to actually SEE the difference in. Especially coming from a Wii, dear god.
And with that said, while the WiiU might have "better than PS3" graphics, it isn't hard to have "better than 2006 technology" graphics these days. The PS4 and XBOX720 will have that next leap in graphics, leaving Nintendo behind in the dust again. That would mean multiplat releases would still be unlikely, because the WiiU version would have to be dumbed down so hard. We might get this years multiplats a year later, but once those other systems come out, goodbye 3rd parties.
Exactly! My point is. We're in a technological stump right now. Similar to NES–> SNES (kinda) there isn't going to be that big of a difference like from 2D-->3d so I think the wiiU will be okay :)
I agree 100% I as well believe the Wii U will be fine. If there is one thing that I notice over the years is that Nintendo thinks outside of the box.
Pinocchio and Hunchback levels in Kingdom Hearts 3DS
bout time they did Hunchback imo.
Public nudity is another one of PETA's publicity tricks, no really it is.
The only reason we got the signs is because Korean news cartoons are too classy for that sort of thing.
That was Chinese actually.
@~Nóva~:
Wii U is screwed when it's competition comes out. Everyone who thinks otherwise is naive! Yes, Nintendo may sell a lot of hardware, but I highly doubt that after PS4/XBOX720 it's software from third parties will again die out, maybe I'm wrong, but looking at history, I'll be betting on the house.
Was this needed? What is the point of coming in to just bash something a year away and against competition not even announced?
First as others said we are at a technical stand still. For a few reasons.
1. TV's have a restricted resolution, only 1080p, meanwhile computers go way higher easily
2. the jump between generation ps1 - ps2 - ps3 has gotten smaller EVERYTIME, only logical to expect ps3 the same
3. PRICES. You could give a developer a video game system 100 years from the futuer and still wouldn't mean the game would be that advanced. They still have to make each character down to every polygon, make every object, every car, every building, every piece of grass, every leaf, running water, fire, ect. Giving a developer an insane hardware doesn't give them those things. It takes insane time to do all that and time = money
And with that said, while the WiiU might have "better than PS3" graphics, it isn't hard to have "better than 2006 technology" graphics these days. The PS4 and XBOX720 will have that next leap in graphics, leaving Nintendo behind in the dust again. That would mean multiplat releases would still be unlikely, because the WiiU version would have to be dumbed down so hard. We might get this years multiplats a year later, but once those other systems come out, goodbye 3rd parties.
From a business perspective, it is getting possibly riskier to keep pushing the graphical power of their new machines because the cost of developing the games for them is becoming far more expensive, not to mention they might need more employees to make them, and possibly taking longer to develop them. To a significant degree, this can negatively affect how the creators even decide how to create their games. Of course, game developers have always been plagued by budget and time constraints, but the rising costs of game development is only making it harder.
And I'm sure the companies have noticed that the winner of the last two generations were machines that were the least powerful graphically, even though they reached their milestones for very different reasons. With that being said, Microsoft and Sony may not try to push the envelope too much on the graphics power of their next generation consoles. They could take a page out of what Nintendo is doing with the WiiU, and simply update it enough to push them decently past the WiiU, but not as much as if they really wanted, and not enough to leave it in the dust. You may think that leaving the competition in the dust is a good thing, but not necessarily. The WiiU is going to be the first one on the market, leaving it ample time to set the tone for the next generation. For example, in a best case scenario for Nintendo, if the WiiU is decently successful among the hard core gamers, the casual gamers, and the people who fluctuate between them, the third party developers will be faced with an important decision when the next generations of consoles come out: do we concentrate more on a console that is still HD, very popular, and cheaper to develop games? Or, do we switch gears to more expensive consoles that do not have guaranteed success?
Imo, if the WiiU gets left in the dust during the next generation in terms of sales, it won't be because of a lack of graphics power. The Wii name is now potentially a brand name for Nintendo, a name that they will understandably milk for all its worth. The failure of the WiiU will fall on other more significant factors. Three important factors for the WiiU will be the launch price, their gathering of third party support, and the time-span between their console and the competition. Also, there is no telling how Sony and Microsoft will handle the launch of their systems. Sony or Microsoft could make several mistakes like they did this generation, which could work in Nintendo's favor. Of course, Nintendo could make serious mistakes as well.
With all that being said, there are so many possibilities of what can happen that I wouldn't count Nintendo out.
From a business perspective, it is getting possibly riskier to keep pushing the graphical power of their new machines because the cost of developing the games for them is becoming far more expensive, not to mention they might need more employees to make them, and possibly taking longer to develop them. To a significant degree, this can negatively affect how the creators even decide how to create their games. Of course, game developers have always been plagued by budget and time constraints, but the rising costs of game development is only making it harder.
And I'm sure the companies have noticed that the winner of the last two generations were machines that were the least powerful graphically, even though they reached their milestones for very different reasons. With that being said, Microsoft and Sony may not try to push the envelope too much on the graphics power of their next generation consoles. They could take a page out of what Nintendo is doing with the WiiU, and simply update it enough to push them decently past the WiiU, but not as much as if they really wanted, and not enough to leave it in the dust. You may think that leaving the competition in the dust is a good thing, but not necessarily. The WiiU is going to be the first one on the market, leaving it ample time to set the tone for the next generation. For example, in a best case scenario for Nintendo, if the WiiU is decently successful among the hard core gamers, the casual gamers, and the people who fluctuate between them, the third party developers will be faced with an important decision when the next generations of consoles come out: do we concentrate more on a console that is still HD, very popular, and cheaper to develop games? Or, do we switch gears to more expensive consoles that do not have guaranteed success?
Imo, if the WiiU gets left in the dust during the next generation in terms of sales, it won't be because of a lack of graphics power. The Wii name is now potentially a brand name for Nintendo, a name that they will understandably milk for all its worth. The failure of the WiiU will fall on other more significant factors. Three important factors for the WiiU will be the launch price, their gathering of third party support, and the time-span between their console and the competition. Also, there is no telling how Sony and Microsoft will handle the launch of their systems. Sony or Microsoft could make several mistakes like they did this generation, which could work in Nintendo's favor. Of course, Nintendo could make serious mistakes as well.
With all that being said, there are so many possibilities of what can happen that I wouldn't count Nintendo out.
perfect response. I agree with most of your points; I was playing devil's advocate.
I also think a controller with more actual face buttons will make ports of games more likely. Street Fighter would be a complete assfest to play on the wiimote, because your punches and kicks would be all over the goddamn place. Sure, Classic Controllers exist, and fight sticks, but there's a reason Tatsunoko vs Capcom is the only (true) fighter on the Wii. Lack of demand also goes into it.
But with this pad, there will be a giant-ass screen, sure, but you at least have those 4 face buttons and 4 shoulder buttons. so developers might feel more comfortable porting their games over, without butchering the control scheme.
I think with the WiiU, ESPECIALLY for Smash Bros, they should release a controller that's JUST controller. No Screen.
Less of a Price and there can be 4 of them at a time.
I think with the WiiU, ESPECIALLY for Smash Bros, they should release a controller that's JUST controller. No Screen.
Less of a Price and there can be 4 of them at a time.
I agree with this only because I don't know what they would use the screen for in SSB4 anyway (besides playing and watching TV at the same time lol)
What I find funny is how it seems 100% of people talk about the NEED for four controllers whenever a Nintendo system is talked about, yet when talking about the other systems they say that they only need 1 controller.
How come its that nintendo games are so damn fun offline with friends in the same room. Personally I find that is true with all games, I hate playing COD or other games online. I like being with the person I'm playing with or against, but that seems the minority these days. Well unless its Nintendo, then there has to be four controllers and everyone there.
But I guarantee that if Sony or Microsoft came out with this exact same controller (Nintendo never showed it) that everyone would not even question multiple controllers. THey would just go "I only play online anyway, so everyone will have their own controller in their own house"
perfect response. I agree with most of your points; I was playing devil's advocate.
I also think a controller with more actual face buttons will make ports of games more likely. Street Fighter would be a complete assfest to play on the wiimote, because your punches and kicks would be all over the goddamn place. Sure, Classic Controllers exist, and fight sticks, but there's a reason Tatsunoko vs Capcom is the only (true) fighter on the Wii. Lack of demand also goes into it.
But with this pad, there will be a giant-ass screen, sure, but you at least have those 4 face buttons and 4 shoulder buttons. so developers might feel more comfortable porting their games over, without butchering the control scheme.
Fortunately for me, I don't really play fighting games. (Mainly because I suck at them.:P) But yes, with the WiiU's controller having a somewhat more traditional control scheme, the developers probably won't feel as alienated in trying to adapt their gameplay to fit an entirely different controller like the Wiimote. Ultimately, I'm not sure how to feel about the WiiU controller. Though it does seem interesting enough to have unique game experiences, I'm rather ambivalent toward it right now. Of course, I won't make any judgments about it until I actually get to use it myself.
What I find funny is how it seems 100% of people talk about the NEED for four controllers whenever a Nintendo system is talked about, yet when talking about the other systems they say that they only need 1 controller.
How come its that nintendo games are so damn fun offline with friends in the same room. Personally I find that is true with all games, I hate playing COD or other games online. I like being with the person I'm playing with or against, but that seems the minority these days. Well unless its Nintendo, then there has to be four controllers and everyone there.
But I guarantee that if Sony or Microsoft came out with this exact same controller (Nintendo never showed it) that everyone would not even question multiple controllers. THey would just go "I only play online anyway, so everyone will have their own controller in their own house"
Ninty fanboy much?
I'm almost 100% certain that if MS or Sony did that, they would get the same response.
First you try to defend the wiiU for only having 1 controller.
The next sentence you admit you like playing with your friends in the same room..
Which isn't possible with one controller, unless all games are wiiremote compatible.
I'm not a ninty fanboy, just stating how I see it. I have every system and a good computer. I have four controllers for the wii and and only 1 for both 360 and ps3. The same can be said about all of the people I know that own any of thsoe systems. At most they have 2 controllers for the ps3 or 360. Those systems just don't have the type of games that people sit and play all together in the same room. They may have multiple guitars or even full guitar hero/rock band sets and many other periphials, but they have only 1 or 2 normal controllers.
But just go and look at boards anyhwhere else and you see constantly people talk about how they play nintendo systems with friends offline, but NEVER the other systems, they are always online only. They say they don't care that none of the games these days come with no split screen or local multiplayer because they never play that way. THere is no fanboyism in that statement.
Its as simple as looking at the best games of each system that are not single player. Most of all games on Nintendo systems have four player local multiplayer, while the other games at best have split screen local campaign. Whats teh point of having four controllers if most of your games don't even support them?
I'm not a ninty fanboy, just stating how I see it. I have every system and a good computer. I have four controllers for the wii and and only 1 for both 360 and ps3. The same can be said about all of the people I know that own any of thsoe systems. At most they have 2 controllers for the ps3 or 360. Those systems just don't have the type of games that people sit and play all together in the same room. They may have multiple guitars or even full guitar hero/rock band sets and many other periphials, but they have only 1 or 2 normal controllers.
But just go and look at boards anyhwhere else and you see constantly people talk about how they play nintendo systems with friends offline, but NEVER the other systems, they are always online only. They say they don't care that none of the games these days come with no split screen or local multiplayer because they never play that way. THere is no fanboyism in that statement.
Its as simple as looking at the best games of each system that are not single player. Most of all games on Nintendo systems have four player local multiplayer, while the other games at best have split screen local campaign. Whats teh point of having four controllers if most of your games don't even support them?
The ps3 and 360 don't have good games you can play together in the same room?
Maybe you should checkout the library of those consoles and you could find out there are plenty.
And i know alot boards (mostly dutch) and people IRL that actually play on the other (ps3 and 360) consoles together.
It's just that the online of those other consoles is just that much better, there's no denying that.
So people probably talk about that more, which may make it seem that it isn't the case.
And i wasn't even talking about 4 controllers, but about 2.
Games that are fun to play splitscreen on Xbox: Halo, FIFA, NBA. Tbh that's all I can think of. There's more though.
There's nothing wrong with playing online. It's the future, whether you like it or not. Nintendo has been criticized harshly throughout the current gen. for not keeping up with technology and staying in the past. While their games are some of the best, I have to admit that they can be a bit stubborn when it comes to things such as online infrastructures and what not.
They're going in the right direction technologically speaking with the Wii-U, and this might prove to be an effective strategy financially speaking what with Sony and MS possibly going the Wii-route next generation and rely more on motion-control and gimmicks and all that shit.
Has it ever occurred to you that sometimes one just wants to get away from it all and wants to play by himself either against complete and total strangers or party up with a bunch of friends online and play against/with them?
Splitscreen's fun, definitely, it's even more fun than online IMO, but it takes more effort to plan a gathering or gaming session with friends in one house and check times than to just go online, find a friend of yours and invite him to a game or party.
My friends and I always play Halo together in split screen and linking the consoles. It's just as crazy fun as Smash Bros.
Games that are fun to play splitscreen on Xbox: Halo, FIFA, NBA. Tbh that's all I can think of. There's more though.
There's nothing wrong with playing online. It's the future, whether you like it or not. Nintendo has been criticized harshly throughout the current gen. for not keeping up with technology and staying in the past. While their games are some of the best, I have to admit that they can be a bit stubborn when it comes to things such as online infrastructures and what not.
They're going in the right direction technologically speaking with the Wii-U, and this might prove to be an effective strategy financially speaking what with Sony and MS possibly going the Wii-route next generation and rely more on motion-control and gimmicks and all that shit.
Has it ever occurred to you that sometimes one just wants to get away from it all and wants to play by himself either against complete and total strangers or party up with a bunch of friends online and play against/with them?
Splitscreen's fun, definitely, it's even more fun than online IMO, but it takes more effort to plan a gathering or gaming session with friends in one house and check times than to just go online, find a friend of yours and invite him to a game or party.
I have nothing against online, I have something against the lack of an option of local play.
Too many games these days have limited local play, and or restrict you to only letting one person go online at a time. In order to play with others you need to have them also have a game, tv and system. Thats what I'm against, the lack of options.
If games have multiplayer it should have offline and online multiplayer. If it has online multiplayer then you should be able to have mutiple people play on that same console go online. Like in Halo, you can have four people play in the same room on the same console ONLINE. If it has co-op online, it should have co-op offline.
The thing I hate is how games are loosing features. If games on the 64 could have 4 player multiplayer or 4 player co-op, how come 12 years later the same type of games can't? If games could have someone play online with 3 guests in the past, why can they not now? What happened to Lan play? Why is that gone now in so many games?
Take two games, Call of Duty Modern Warfare and Halo 3. I liked MW better, the levels better, guns better, ect for multiplayer. YET I played Halo 3 like 100x more. Reason, I could play with my friends and or roomates. We could all go online and play while on the same screen and console. We did not have four 360's hooked up to tv's and have four halo 3 games or MW games. Thus if we played Halo we could ALL play, if we played MW we had to sit and take turns playing online. How bullshit is that, to have to sit there and watch another play online, and wait for your turn. That is bullshit, thus why Halo 3 was a trillion times better game.
Ok, 3DS or an Android phone of around 200$?
Wait till Black Friday and see if you can get a Free or severely reduced phone price.
I got mine on Black Friday last year and it cost me literally 1 cent and it's a Sony Android Smartphone.
If that ends up happening for you, get both!