The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent
vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums
here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules
document is now in effect.
[Industry] Everything is awesome and everyone is doomed.
Posts
None of this addresses the perceived problems with the Vita.
Never ever underestimate how much the general public love simple, mindless fun.
PLEASE STAND BY
First translation on gaf:
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
>Tokyo Keizai
I'd just like to point out that no such newspaper exists.
Honestly, I could swallow $250 for the Vita. But the reality is the system is closer to what.. $330 once the memory card is factored in?
A simple price cut on the hardware still makes it a bitter pill.
https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197970666737/
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
Because improving your product is stupid, got it.
Steam: adamjnet
Actually one of the biggest problems with the Vita is that it requires a memory card to run most of the games and those games won't even load without a memory card. Having built in storage again (as it was originally intended to have) would enable most people who are on the fence about having to pay an extra $50+ for a worthwhile memory card could still purchase the machine and use the software.
A redesign like when most companies re-release or redesign a product enables them to either use cheaper parts/ lower initial costs or have a new marketing campaign focused on its new features/uses. Which would make some headway to address that severe lack of advertising and marketing on the system. Also if developers and publishers are aware of a re-design and new marketing campaign will also help bring more games and exclusives to the platform.
Welcome to the game industry thread. We hate ourselves.
Steam: adamjnet
What he's saying is that the alleged improvements won't do a damn thing to help it sell more. The biggest problem by far is the price, and blowing up the screen won't do a thing to help that.
Pretty much, yup. Their best hope for making this work is if this new model debuts at the $249 point, but the regular Vita gets dropped to $199. Or ideally even $150, because I don't think even $199 could be enough.
But again, this is Sony. 10 to 1 that if they do this, all the cheap regular Vita's mysteriously vanish, leaving only the premium version. They need to do as Nintendo does, where the regular and XL 3DS's exist side by side.
If I were him I would indicate I'm at Gamescom explicitly if I'm not there.
The rumor says nothing about adding internal memory. How could they even do that without confusing every piece of software released for the system so far? The interfaces weren't built for selecting internal memory as an option.
I guess they could say "every game developed from now on will support it, but previous games still require external memory..."
Exactly. Aside from the price of the 3DS, screen size and battery life were two the biggest complaints about it. So when it came time to put out the XL, those things got addressed. But it all came at times when it was in demand.
Nobody has spent the last two years squawking about the Vita's screen. It has always been the price and library. Upgrading the hardware solves neither of those things.
It doesn't have to act like that, if you look at the original specifications the software required access to memory that was intended to be internal. The inclusion of the memory cards in the final release was a bit of a quick fix cost cutting measure that cause problems with software not working without one. If a new model included some internal memory I bet you the access to this internal memory from the software builds still exists in the final retail release and its just searching for any memory access.
Anyway I know the rumours state that its just a 6.3" though I bet if its true will actually be a 6.4" screen as other Sony devices are being made with these panels in mind to save costs. I can't think of many devices from Sony that use the 5" OLED screen anymore. If the Vita has a natural scaler in the system I can easily see Sony using its Triluminous display tech possibly even having a 1080p capable display. So having these changes does make sense and would cut production costs if they could hot swap parts from other products.
Its an Ubisoft game yes
Note: Being serious and not sarcastic.
Uh. Well. I've got nothing.
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
I'm not trying to deny the success of the game. But in all the internet communities I'm in, there's more not-LoL players (whether it be a different LOMA or none of them) than there are LoL players.
Well, seeing how no one who actually plays these games calls them "LOMAs", your anecdote aint worth much.
"LOMA" is what I call "MOBA"s because "Lords Management" is more accurate than "Multiplayer Online Battle Arena."
That's the one thing I think they really have to stick to their guns on no matter what the backlash. They can find ways to make the bundle cheaper over time but they absolutely can not release a fucking XBox One with no bundled Kinect just three months after the goddamn thing launches.
I don't even care about price, sure it'd be nice if the One was cheaper, but I want actual DIFFERENCES in my 3 consoles since I'll eventually own them all.
If they wanted a bigger number they could always go with total players in a month or even so far.
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
I don't think this Call of Duty game is as big as everyone says it is. I talk to a lot of people who play gun stomach simulators and none of them are into COD.
I think it might become sort of a self fulfilling prophecy at this point. Rumors cause potential buyers start holding off on buying the system on the hope that a cheaper sku is coming later, thus making it likelier that such a sku will be released.
I... the name difference is just a dumb gag I run with as an Idle Thumbs listener and has shit all to do with being a part of the actual argument at hand. Settle down man. O_o
the multiple accounts thing is always what raises my eyebrows whenever discussing an F2P game
Well people do that for paid games too.
I don't think people can really two box Mobas. Maybe I'm wrong.
Even if there is a reason for multiple accounts, how would that affect concurrent players?
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
Agreed, when they finally caved on it needing to be plugged in in order for the XBone to function, they attracted a lot of customers who were holding out on getting one. Now those same new potential customers are expecting one without the kinect and many will hold off their purchase until that becomes an option.
And the Kinect 2.0 wouldn't be going anywhere except to a separate box with a separate price tag. Want it? Buy it. But thinking the Kinect 2.0 is going to make any difference at all for 95% of the games on the system is pure fantasy; people just don't generally care that much, and publishers/developers aren't going to be willing to spend time and effort jamming Kinect-specific features into a game they're going to sell on 1-5 other platforms (at least initially), none of which will have Kinect 2.0. Splitting it off into a separate purchase means the rest of us will be spared the sort of detestable, clunky, half-functioning interfacing we want none of in our games, while the people who still want it are completely free to purchase it and all the games it has. If it's not strong enough to survive on its own, then it's just not a viable idea, end of story; compromising the success of the entire system for the sake of a peripheral is not a smart call.
That being said, the ultimate decider here is whether Microsoft thinks it will gain more at launch by pulling the Kinect for a console-only bundle or if it would earn to much bad will from the publishers currently making games with the Kinect in mind. The only problem I'm seeing with that is that I've yet to see somebody posting info about Company X getting mad that Microsoft is risking the success of their game by courting the idea of pulling the Kinect; that would imply to me that, so far, publishers and developers aren't even very interested in the Kinect. And why would they be? For somewhat more than the cost of one good Kinect game, they could make a good game that would sell across several systems instead of just one.
There's simply no way that preserving the Kinect 2.0 as a pack-in is good for the system and good for the consumers and good for Microsoft and will be heavily-used by developers, and I just don't see Microsoft willingly and knowingly shooting themselves in the foot for the sake of the handful of people who think a Kinect pack-in is what the system really needs.
I'm sure someone out there is multi-boxing LoL, but you don't get the same sort of benefit as you would in an MMO (for example - it's an edge case which wouldn't have any real impact on the stats.
What is worth noting is that LoL has a client which players log into, from where they can buy items, talk with people, and queue in lobbies. You need to log into this client before you can actually get into a game, and it's not a big deal to idle there for hours. I wouldn't be surprised if the 5 million number was for players concurrently logged into the client, rather than players actually playing.
edit: To explain further, in WoW if you're inactive for 15 minutes you get logged off. Another 15 minutes and you're disconnected from the login server (I might be off on those numbers). In LoL I don't know if you're ever kicked off from the external client for idling. I know I've left it running in the background for several hours at a time without realising.
Still big bickies though.
That sounds like the argument made with the WiiU controller, for whatever conclusions you want to draw from that
I do because that handful currently includes the higher ups at MS, which is all that really matters.