Again: Tetris 99 IS a killer app. If they support it with new modes and events it could be a big driver.
It will absolutely drive sales of Nintendo Switch Online.
I really wish Nintendo had just billed Nintendo Switch Online as NES ROMS + Free games like Tetris 99. As a $20/year retro games + extras subscription service it is absolutely worthwhile (and family sharing means I am not even paying that). Instead we got "now you have to pay to use online games, except none of our online games use servers its all p2p so you're paying twice for your internet connection". I don't want to be an eternal gripe factory but its really just UGH.
I love Tetris 99 a lot. It is a good game. It does one thing but it does that one thing really, really well.
Hopefully we'll see more stuff like this- like a Switch port of Pacman VS., or some other cool arcade-y style game that can't quite justify a stand-alone price tag these days.
Pacman 99; if you die you become a ghost and chase the remaining players
I'm honestly confused why Nintendo decided to make a pack-in bundle of a $35 credit instead of just a full year of Switch Online. It's cheaper for them, it gets people hooked into the online and it's kind of a better talking point.
I'm honestly confused why Nintendo decided to make a pack-in bundle of a $35 credit instead of just a full year of Switch Online. It's cheaper for them, it gets people hooked into the online and it's kind of a better talking point.
You need a game for your brand-new system more than you need online. But the amount is also conveniently under $40, the low end of Nintendo's retail game prices, meaning you have to some more money into the e-shop for any of those famous 1st party games. At that point they have your foot in the door with credit card in hand.
Again: Tetris 99 IS a killer app. If they support it with new modes and events it could be a big driver.
It will absolutely drive sales of Nintendo Switch Online.
I really wish Nintendo had just billed Nintendo Switch Online as NES ROMS + Free games like Tetris 99. As a $20/year retro games + extras subscription service it is absolutely worthwhile (and family sharing means I am not even paying that). Instead we got "now you have to pay to use online games, except none of our online games use servers its all p2p so you're paying twice for your internet connection". I don't want to be an eternal gripe factory but its really just UGH.
I love Tetris 99 a lot. It is a good game. It does one thing but it does that one thing really, really well.
Hopefully we'll see more stuff like this- like a Switch port of Pacman VS., or some other cool arcade-y style game that can't quite justify a stand-alone price tag these days.
Pacman 99; if you die you become a ghost and chase the remaining players
But then for the last player the game turns into Pacman CE-DX.
Again: Tetris 99 IS a killer app. If they support it with new modes and events it could be a big driver.
It will absolutely drive sales of Nintendo Switch Online.
I really wish Nintendo had just billed Nintendo Switch Online as NES ROMS + Free games like Tetris 99. As a $20/year retro games + extras subscription service it is absolutely worthwhile (and family sharing means I am not even paying that). Instead we got "now you have to pay to use online games, except none of our online games use servers its all p2p so you're paying twice for your internet connection". I don't want to be an eternal gripe factory but its really just UGH.
I love Tetris 99 a lot. It is a good game. It does one thing but it does that one thing really, really well.
Hopefully we'll see more stuff like this- like a Switch port of Pacman VS., or some other cool arcade-y style game that can't quite justify a stand-alone price tag these days.
How does that mean you're paying twice for your Internet connection?
And P2P games still need Nintendo server infrastructure to facilitate. It's not the setup they'd need for dedicated servers, obviously, but it's not "zero cost" to keep the online games going, by any means.
Pay my internet provider, and pay Nintendo, but its (almost entirely) running on my connection. I'm paying twice for one connection. I understand that there are costs and servers that Nintendo has to maintain in this arrangement still, but when it was free on the Wii, WiiU, DS, 3DS, and for many many PC games, its kind of a ridiculous argument that they can't make it work, financially. And by putting up a paywall that is a barrier to entry for a lot of players. Imagine being a Splatoon2 player, a mostly online game, playing online for free for a year, and then having the game effectively shut off for you through no change on your part? It's ridiculous. I enjoy the various services Nintendo Online brings to the table and I think it's actually a very good value for what you are getting, but that doesn't mean I can't criticize aspects of it.
You're not paying for the connection, you're paying for the servers running the game. Game servers cost money to run. Nintendo's earlier consoles might have been free, but there were also a lot fewer players/games that had online (and people criticized them for having such anemic online capabilities). PC games often have free public servers, but it's usually only temporary as long as the game is profitable, once it's not, they are shut down. Consoles are charging for online so as to spread around the costs and risks for the different games. Considering that every other console has charged for online long ago, and Nintendo announced before the console even launched that online would be free only temporarily, I think calling it ridiculous is kind of overkill. Paying for online is much more reasonable than expecting game publishers to pay themselves for an unpredictable load, and also results in a better experience for the players since there's more of a direct money flow to it.
Buy Tetris 99 for $20/year and get unlimited online play, cloud saves, and access to 30+ NES games. There may also be additional free games released through the year! Stay tuned!
Need a voice actor? Hire me at bengrayVO.com
Legends of Runeterra: MNCdover #moc
Switch ID: MNC Dover SW-1154-3107-1051 Steam ID Twitch Page
Again: Tetris 99 IS a killer app. If they support it with new modes and events it could be a big driver.
It will absolutely drive sales of Nintendo Switch Online.
I really wish Nintendo had just billed Nintendo Switch Online as NES ROMS + Free games like Tetris 99. As a $20/year retro games + extras subscription service it is absolutely worthwhile (and family sharing means I am not even paying that). Instead we got "now you have to pay to use online games, except none of our online games use servers its all p2p so you're paying twice for your internet connection". I don't want to be an eternal gripe factory but its really just UGH.
I love Tetris 99 a lot. It is a good game. It does one thing but it does that one thing really, really well.
Hopefully we'll see more stuff like this- like a Switch port of Pacman VS., or some other cool arcade-y style game that can't quite justify a stand-alone price tag these days.
How does that mean you're paying twice for your Internet connection?
And P2P games still need Nintendo server infrastructure to facilitate. It's not the setup they'd need for dedicated servers, obviously, but it's not "zero cost" to keep the online games going, by any means.
Pay my internet provider, and pay Nintendo, but its (almost entirely) running on my connection. I'm paying twice for one connection. I understand that there are costs and servers that Nintendo has to maintain in this arrangement still, but when it was free on the Wii, WiiU, DS, 3DS, and for many many PC games, its kind of a ridiculous argument that they can't make it work, financially. And by putting up a paywall that is a barrier to entry for a lot of players. Imagine being a Splatoon2 player, a mostly online game, playing online for free for a year, and then having the game effectively shut off for you through no change on your part? It's ridiculous. I enjoy the various services Nintendo Online brings to the table and I think it's actually a very good value for what you are getting, but that doesn't mean I can't criticize aspects of it.
You're not paying for the connection, you're paying for the servers running the game. Game servers cost money to run. Nintendo's earlier consoles might have been free, but there were also a lot fewer players/games that had online (and people criticized them for having such anemic online capabilities). PC games often have free public servers, but it's usually only temporary as long as the game is profitable, once it's not, they are shut down. Consoles are charging for online so as to spread around the costs and risks for the different games. Considering that every other console has charged for online long ago, and Nintendo announced before the console even launched that online would be free only temporarily, I think calling it ridiculous is kind of overkill. Paying for online is much more reasonable than expecting game publishers to pay themselves for an unpredictable load, and also results in a better experience for the players since there's more of a direct money flow to it.
Nintendo just shut down their entire store for older consoles. Paying them will not keep the servers up. In fact, Nintendo's legacy online service has been the worst out of the core 3, with a huge amount of their online games going offline because of the whole Gamespy thing.
It's going to be really weird if those rumored plans of a bot mode and a single player mode of Tetris 99 are true. I was initially befuddled as to why the game was free for subscribers (and also instantly had the thought of how fuckin' full of MTX it would be). Then it made perfect sense, because it's basically an always online game. If they add in these single player options, and ideally go one step further and don't require you to be online to play them?
Well, it would change their entire pitch to essentially be "Subscribe to Nintendo Online, get a free version of Tetris!".
And that would apparently fucking work too, is the crazy part.
"The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
NSO can definitely be differentiated by these kinds of offers. Low-cost, bite-sized yet addictive multiplayer games for subscribers. The reason Tetris 99 works is because it encourages the 'one more round' mentality through smooth transitions from one match to the next and fast, painless matchmaking (probably the fastest there is for any Nintendo game; take that as you will). Puzzle games in general are probably the best fit because they are smaller downloads and appeal to a wide audience.
Of course, service improvements would be nice too. Won't argue that. I hope they'll add value in that area as well.
Again: Tetris 99 IS a killer app. If they support it with new modes and events it could be a big driver.
It will absolutely drive sales of Nintendo Switch Online.
I really wish Nintendo had just billed Nintendo Switch Online as NES ROMS + Free games like Tetris 99. As a $20/year retro games + extras subscription service it is absolutely worthwhile (and family sharing means I am not even paying that). Instead we got "now you have to pay to use online games, except none of our online games use servers its all p2p so you're paying twice for your internet connection". I don't want to be an eternal gripe factory but its really just UGH.
I love Tetris 99 a lot. It is a good game. It does one thing but it does that one thing really, really well.
Hopefully we'll see more stuff like this- like a Switch port of Pacman VS., or some other cool arcade-y style game that can't quite justify a stand-alone price tag these days.
Pacman 99; if you die you become a ghost and chase the remaining players
Alright, but how does the first Pac-Man die? I suppose the game could start out with CPU-controlled ghosts, but frankly that would go against the entire spirit of the genre.
Again: Tetris 99 IS a killer app. If they support it with new modes and events it could be a big driver.
It will absolutely drive sales of Nintendo Switch Online.
I really wish Nintendo had just billed Nintendo Switch Online as NES ROMS + Free games like Tetris 99. As a $20/year retro games + extras subscription service it is absolutely worthwhile (and family sharing means I am not even paying that). Instead we got "now you have to pay to use online games, except none of our online games use servers its all p2p so you're paying twice for your internet connection". I don't want to be an eternal gripe factory but its really just UGH.
I love Tetris 99 a lot. It is a good game. It does one thing but it does that one thing really, really well.
Hopefully we'll see more stuff like this- like a Switch port of Pacman VS., or some other cool arcade-y style game that can't quite justify a stand-alone price tag these days.
Pacman 99; if you die you become a ghost and chase the remaining players
Alright, but how does the first Pac-Man die? I suppose the game could start out with CPU-controlled ghosts, but frankly that would go against the entire spirit of the genre.
99 Pac-Men, one ghost. A "patient zero," if you will.
Like Mega Man Legends? Then check out my story, Legends of the Halcyon Era - An Adventure in the World of Mega Man Legends on TMMN and AO3!
Again: Tetris 99 IS a killer app. If they support it with new modes and events it could be a big driver.
It will absolutely drive sales of Nintendo Switch Online.
I really wish Nintendo had just billed Nintendo Switch Online as NES ROMS + Free games like Tetris 99. As a $20/year retro games + extras subscription service it is absolutely worthwhile (and family sharing means I am not even paying that). Instead we got "now you have to pay to use online games, except none of our online games use servers its all p2p so you're paying twice for your internet connection". I don't want to be an eternal gripe factory but its really just UGH.
I love Tetris 99 a lot. It is a good game. It does one thing but it does that one thing really, really well.
Hopefully we'll see more stuff like this- like a Switch port of Pacman VS., or some other cool arcade-y style game that can't quite justify a stand-alone price tag these days.
How does that mean you're paying twice for your Internet connection?
And P2P games still need Nintendo server infrastructure to facilitate. It's not the setup they'd need for dedicated servers, obviously, but it's not "zero cost" to keep the online games going, by any means.
Pay my internet provider, and pay Nintendo, but its (almost entirely) running on my connection. I'm paying twice for one connection. I understand that there are costs and servers that Nintendo has to maintain in this arrangement still, but when it was free on the Wii, WiiU, DS, 3DS, and for many many PC games, its kind of a ridiculous argument that they can't make it work, financially. And by putting up a paywall that is a barrier to entry for a lot of players. Imagine being a Splatoon2 player, a mostly online game, playing online for free for a year, and then having the game effectively shut off for you through no change on your part? It's ridiculous. I enjoy the various services Nintendo Online brings to the table and I think it's actually a very good value for what you are getting, but that doesn't mean I can't criticize aspects of it.
You're not paying for the connection, you're paying for the servers running the game. Game servers cost money to run. Nintendo's earlier consoles might have been free, but there were also a lot fewer players/games that had online (and people criticized them for having such anemic online capabilities). PC games often have free public servers, but it's usually only temporary as long as the game is profitable, once it's not, they are shut down. Consoles are charging for online so as to spread around the costs and risks for the different games. Considering that every other console has charged for online long ago, and Nintendo announced before the console even launched that online would be free only temporarily, I think calling it ridiculous is kind of overkill. Paying for online is much more reasonable than expecting game publishers to pay themselves for an unpredictable load, and also results in a better experience for the players since there's more of a direct money flow to it.
Nintendo just shut down their entire store for older consoles. Paying them will not keep the servers up. In fact, Nintendo's legacy online service has been the worst out of the core 3, with a huge amount of their online games going offline because of the whole Gamespy thing.
How do you know paying them won't keep the servers up? We haven't had to pay before. And if you're complaining that their legacy service has been the worst of the three, then you should be championing this change, because it brings Nintendo more in line with the other 2 consoles, actually prioritizing online as a product.
Again: Tetris 99 IS a killer app. If they support it with new modes and events it could be a big driver.
It will absolutely drive sales of Nintendo Switch Online.
I really wish Nintendo had just billed Nintendo Switch Online as NES ROMS + Free games like Tetris 99. As a $20/year retro games + extras subscription service it is absolutely worthwhile (and family sharing means I am not even paying that). Instead we got "now you have to pay to use online games, except none of our online games use servers its all p2p so you're paying twice for your internet connection". I don't want to be an eternal gripe factory but its really just UGH.
I love Tetris 99 a lot. It is a good game. It does one thing but it does that one thing really, really well.
Hopefully we'll see more stuff like this- like a Switch port of Pacman VS., or some other cool arcade-y style game that can't quite justify a stand-alone price tag these days.
How does that mean you're paying twice for your Internet connection?
And P2P games still need Nintendo server infrastructure to facilitate. It's not the setup they'd need for dedicated servers, obviously, but it's not "zero cost" to keep the online games going, by any means.
Pay my internet provider, and pay Nintendo, but its (almost entirely) running on my connection. I'm paying twice for one connection. I understand that there are costs and servers that Nintendo has to maintain in this arrangement still, but when it was free on the Wii, WiiU, DS, 3DS, and for many many PC games, its kind of a ridiculous argument that they can't make it work, financially. And by putting up a paywall that is a barrier to entry for a lot of players. Imagine being a Splatoon2 player, a mostly online game, playing online for free for a year, and then having the game effectively shut off for you through no change on your part? It's ridiculous. I enjoy the various services Nintendo Online brings to the table and I think it's actually a very good value for what you are getting, but that doesn't mean I can't criticize aspects of it.
You're not paying for the connection, you're paying for the servers running the game. Game servers cost money to run. Nintendo's earlier consoles might have been free, but there were also a lot fewer players/games that had online (and people criticized them for having such anemic online capabilities). PC games often have free public servers, but it's usually only temporary as long as the game is profitable, once it's not, they are shut down. Consoles are charging for online so as to spread around the costs and risks for the different games. Considering that every other console has charged for online long ago, and Nintendo announced before the console even launched that online would be free only temporarily, I think calling it ridiculous is kind of overkill. Paying for online is much more reasonable than expecting game publishers to pay themselves for an unpredictable load, and also results in a better experience for the players since there's more of a direct money flow to it.
Nintendo just shut down their entire store for older consoles. Paying them will not keep the servers up. In fact, Nintendo's legacy online service has been the worst out of the core 3, with a huge amount of their online games going offline because of the whole Gamespy thing.
How do you know paying them won't keep the servers up? We haven't had to pay before. And if you're complaining that their legacy service has been the worst of the three, then you should be championing this change, because it brings Nintendo more in line with the other 2 consoles, actually prioritizing online as a product.
Obviously they will stop selling NSO a year before shutdown.
Yes I’m being a little fascetious but I don’t see why paying for X years would even suggest that they keep the service going forever. At some point there aren’t enough subs left to justify the costs, lack of use is the main reason these services get shut down in the first place, and a paywall for an obselete system is what will absolutely tank usage and matchmaking if anything.
I just tried a few Tetris games docked for the first time, and I’m way worse than in handheld mode. It feels like I can’t keep everything in view at the same time. Maybe I’ll get used to it.
Beat me on Wii U: Raybies
Beat me on 360: Raybies666
I remember when I had time to be good at games.
+6
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
came in 7th in my first game of tetris 99. need to learn who I should target at the start and how I affect them/how that works... and I also don't know what hold is
came in 7th in my first game of tetris 99. need to learn who I should target at the start and how I affect them/how that works... and I also don't know what hold is
Hold is exactly what it sounds like - you can hold a tetrimino for future use.
Say you have an L-shaped piece coming down. It won't fit cleanly anywhere. Press L1 to hold it. It will be in a little box in the top left corner of the screen. When you're ready to use it, press L1 again... that piece will now be coming down, and the piece that was coming down will now be held.
In other news, the surveys for the Daemon X Machina demo are being sent out. Finished mine a few minutes ago. Looks like they're considering some form of multiplayer, and at least one mech part that auto shoots at enemies in range.
For god's sake switch off of random at the start of the match!
They try to balance the game a little by making it so that the better you've been performing in recent matches, the more other players start off targeting you "randomly."
But that means you're targeting a player who is probably really good, and if they choose to send junk to attackers, you're sunk.
Sending junk to attackers is the only way to target multiple people at once, and a really good player can screw over all the people who are "randomly" targeting them from the start. So switch off if you don't want to possibly get creamed.
I had several good games in a row, and started one with like 6 people targeting me. As usual I switched to target attackers, and I picked up so many KOs early on, got a few badges out of it.
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
It took me a few games to realize there is a hold button and what it does.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
You know, there is something heartwarming about Nintendo forming these close partnerships with studios that don't churn out the insane hits the AAA industry's ravenous investors demand. There aren't a lot of studios willing to invest in loss leaders for their platforms anymore. The only other one I can think of is Sony just shoveling money into Team Ico all through the PS3 generation for more or less nothing in return.
If Nintendo scavenges Scalebound, and it's actually good, it'll be a coup for them.
Well, on Nintendo they're also not loss leaders as Nintendo holds price for a long time and has a large install base. This is what being comfortable with your product and long term plans looks like.
Nintendo reviving that dead game sounds awesome. Having never heard of it, I watched a video and good lord do I hate everything about it. Glad to see that people that would like it have a chance at getting to play it though.
Need a voice actor? Hire me at bengrayVO.com
Legends of Runeterra: MNCdover #moc
Switch ID: MNC Dover SW-1154-3107-1051 Steam ID Twitch Page
Note that Scalebound went through development hell, and Microsoft likely had too much of a hand in it, which affected how it ended up looking and playing.
I figure a revived Scalebound would be closer to the original vision.
Note that Scalebound went through development hell, and Microsoft likely had too much of a hand in it, which affected how it ended up looking and playing.
I figure a revived Scalebound would be closer to the original vision.
I remember reading the post-mortem on Lionhead, and it was depressing how much Microsoft demanded they achieve certain arbitrary milestones, then decided the milestone they demanded was a stupid idea and punished Lionhead for it. Repeat for 2 years until they shuttered the studio.
Lately Microsoft has been on a buying spree in barely concealed anticipation of their next XBox and having a deep roster of first party exclusives. But unless they've learned to manage with a lighter touch, they'll probably just run all their acquisitions into the ground again.
I know Nintendo doesn't use a light touch either. But their partners have rather consistently said it's been a positive experience with Nintendo just trying to get them to be better. The same can not be said of Microsoft.
Posts
I didn’t mean to take a video of the end of the match, because infini-spinning on that L block is kind of embarrassing, but I still won damnit!
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
On topic: Slowly trying to convince my wife to play Tetris 99. She routinely schools me in Poyo Poyo Tetris. I believe she can be a contender.
Pacman 99; if you die you become a ghost and chase the remaining players
You need a game for your brand-new system more than you need online. But the amount is also conveniently under $40, the low end of Nintendo's retail game prices, meaning you have to some more money into the e-shop for any of those famous 1st party games. At that point they have your foot in the door with credit card in hand.
But then for the last player the game turns into Pacman CE-DX.
You're not paying for the connection, you're paying for the servers running the game. Game servers cost money to run. Nintendo's earlier consoles might have been free, but there were also a lot fewer players/games that had online (and people criticized them for having such anemic online capabilities). PC games often have free public servers, but it's usually only temporary as long as the game is profitable, once it's not, they are shut down. Consoles are charging for online so as to spread around the costs and risks for the different games. Considering that every other console has charged for online long ago, and Nintendo announced before the console even launched that online would be free only temporarily, I think calling it ridiculous is kind of overkill. Paying for online is much more reasonable than expecting game publishers to pay themselves for an unpredictable load, and also results in a better experience for the players since there's more of a direct money flow to it.
Buy Tetris 99 for $20/year and get unlimited online play, cloud saves, and access to 30+ NES games. There may also be additional free games released through the year! Stay tuned!
Legends of Runeterra: MNCdover #moc
Switch ID: MNC Dover SW-1154-3107-1051
Steam ID
Twitch Page
Nintendo just shut down their entire store for older consoles. Paying them will not keep the servers up. In fact, Nintendo's legacy online service has been the worst out of the core 3, with a huge amount of their online games going offline because of the whole Gamespy thing.
Well, it would change their entire pitch to essentially be "Subscribe to Nintendo Online, get a free version of Tetris!".
And that would apparently fucking work too, is the crazy part.
Of course, service improvements would be nice too. Won't argue that. I hope they'll add value in that area as well.
Alright, but how does the first Pac-Man die? I suppose the game could start out with CPU-controlled ghosts, but frankly that would go against the entire spirit of the genre.
Still loving Tetris.
Let's Plays of Japanese Games
99 Pac-Men, one ghost. A "patient zero," if you will.
Like Mega Man Legends? Then check out my story, Legends of the Halcyon Era - An Adventure in the World of Mega Man Legends on TMMN and AO3!
How do you know paying them won't keep the servers up? We haven't had to pay before. And if you're complaining that their legacy service has been the worst of the three, then you should be championing this change, because it brings Nintendo more in line with the other 2 consoles, actually prioritizing online as a product.
Obviously they will stop selling NSO a year before shutdown.
Yes I’m being a little fascetious but I don’t see why paying for X years would even suggest that they keep the service going forever. At some point there aren’t enough subs left to justify the costs, lack of use is the main reason these services get shut down in the first place, and a paywall for an obselete system is what will absolutely tank usage and matchmaking if anything.
This is why if I'm playing any game that is better played with the D-pad, I use the 8bitdo SNES30 pro.
Goomba only levels for me.
Were you listening to Queen?
Edit: God fucking dammit! Too slow reading the thread!
Beat me on 360: Raybies666
I remember when I had time to be good at games.
His name was Brian McGee.
Homer Simpson's name on his fake id, to buy his first six pack.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BA7p5VwAXk0
Beat me on 360: Raybies666
I remember when I had time to be good at games.
Hold is exactly what it sounds like - you can hold a tetrimino for future use.
Say you have an L-shaped piece coming down. It won't fit cleanly anywhere. Press L1 to hold it. It will be in a little box in the top left corner of the screen. When you're ready to use it, press L1 again... that piece will now be coming down, and the piece that was coming down will now be held.
For god's sake switch off of random at the start of the match!
They try to balance the game a little by making it so that the better you've been performing in recent matches, the more other players start off targeting you "randomly."
But that means you're targeting a player who is probably really good, and if they choose to send junk to attackers, you're sunk.
Sending junk to attackers is the only way to target multiple people at once, and a really good player can screw over all the people who are "randomly" targeting them from the start. So switch off if you don't want to possibly get creamed.
I had several good games in a row, and started one with like 6 people targeting me. As usual I switched to target attackers, and I picked up so many KOs early on, got a few badges out of it.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Possibly connected to this rumor that Nintendo might be reviving a cancelled game
https://nintendoeverything.com/rumor-nintendo-reviving-dead-and-buried-game-kingdom-hearts-switch-talk/
If Nintendo scavenges Scalebound, and it's actually good, it'll be a coup for them.
...oh yeah.
I assume they had some sort of contract with Microsoft where if the game is cancelled/doesn't come out, they get the rights back for it.
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
Nintendo reviving that dead game sounds awesome. Having never heard of it, I watched a video and good lord do I hate everything about it. Glad to see that people that would like it have a chance at getting to play it though.
Legends of Runeterra: MNCdover #moc
Switch ID: MNC Dover SW-1154-3107-1051
Steam ID
Twitch Page
I figure a revived Scalebound would be closer to the original vision.
Yep. The thing that I’m terrible at. Figures.
I remember reading the post-mortem on Lionhead, and it was depressing how much Microsoft demanded they achieve certain arbitrary milestones, then decided the milestone they demanded was a stupid idea and punished Lionhead for it. Repeat for 2 years until they shuttered the studio.
Lately Microsoft has been on a buying spree in barely concealed anticipation of their next XBox and having a deep roster of first party exclusives. But unless they've learned to manage with a lighter touch, they'll probably just run all their acquisitions into the ground again.
I know Nintendo doesn't use a light touch either. But their partners have rather consistently said it's been a positive experience with Nintendo just trying to get them to be better. The same can not be said of Microsoft.