The Video Game Critic

Posted: **June 17th, 2015, 8:19 pm**

ActRaiser wrote:hehe, let's agree to disagree!

The other reason my hunch is they're not announcing the NX this year is to avoid cannibalizing any Wii U consoles until the NX arrives. If they announced this year, well, there goes Wii U sales from now through Q4 of 2016.

If they announce the NX at e3 2016 or even earlier for a Q4 2016 release all they have to do is port Zelda to it and they have an immediate sell out for the console. Sure, they'll release a copy for the Wi U, say after the NX port. They've already done this strategy before.

The reason why I don't see them releasing in 2017 is frankly due to the fact that I find it unlikely for Nintendo to release a single game in 2016 for the Wii U in the 4th quarter. That's a lot of money left on the table that if they pulled in the release dates for the NX. They'd make a killing on hardware and be able to offer 3rd party publishers a 3rd option for porting their games to a system that's arguably going to be on par or better than its peers.

I definitely get that the timeline is tight but when you factor in that Nintendo's major development areas don't seem to be working on much (at least announced at e3) they have to be heads down on something else...something called NX. Star Fox was off loaded to Platinum games, right? So...what's Miyamoto working on? NX, why? They've moved on from the Wii U.

It's imposible to cut into Wii U sales anymore. It's already easily on pace for one of the worst selling consoles every with a full life cycle.

I just think Nintendo has paid it forward a bit much and was ready to pay the piper this time around to save it's fireworks for a real reveal. Otherwise they wouldn't have just not shown Zelda this year after they've shown it twice already. They could have shown a trailer for whatever is in early alpha stage or some CG teaser like Final Fantasy VII - but it would have just taken away from the real reveal a year down the line for NX.

I hope they use this strategy in the future though, show what they know for sure will be out that year or early following year. They've already taken the hit this year to get it straight so no reason to show off games a year plus down the line anymore.

Posted: **June 17th, 2015, 8:51 pm**

In the end to wrap up all the news at E3, I still think gaming is in transition. Sure theres some big releases this year, The Witcher 3 just came out, then Batman, then Fallout 4, Halo 5, and so on.

Nintendo looks like a company in flux trying to transition to the new console, but still keep money coming in with a lot of spinoffs and figurines. Microsoft seems to be looking to the past to get 360 gamers to transition to the new system and has big releases like Gears of War coming next year - and on the API side is trying to get DirectX12 to benefit the XBox One in the future. Sony has basically every big release coming next year and beyond.

I think it's safe to say there won't be much missed this year unless you're a Halo or Fallout fan. Maybe I'm just a jaded semi-retired gamer these days, but I think I'll just take an extended break from the gaming news cycle for a while.

Posted: **June 17th, 2015, 10:02 pm**

ActRaiser wrote:hehe, let's agree to disagree!

The other reason my hunch is they're not announcing the NX this year is to avoid cannibalizing any Wii U consoles until the NX arrives. If they announced this year, well, there goes Wii U sales from now through Q4 of 2016.

We can certainly agree to agree to disagree.

I'm with the other poster who mentioned that there are very few sales to cannibalize. You see this as proof for next year, I see it as the opposite. Nintendo would not rush up their best chance to stay profitable and relevant for the sake of the additional 2 million Wii Us they may, if they are very lucky, move this year. If they had to choose between finishing with 12 million Wii Us sold and 10 months to explain, market, manufacture, ship, and sell the most important system in their company's history, or finishing with 10 million Wii U sales and two years to properly work to save their relevance in gaming, I think they let the Wii U sink. I believe they showed no NX because they weren't ready to talk about it in 2015 because it's Spring/Summer 2017.

Posted: **June 19th, 2015, 4:22 pm**

One thing I forgot to mention that pissed me off about Sony's conference is all their console exclusive DLC BS, it's inherently anti-consumer and benefits no one except Sony. PS4 owners would've been just as happy if that Arkham Knight and Hitman exclusive DLC was available on all platforms(I also don't think it was necessary for Rise of the Tomb Raider to be a timed exclusive, as an Xbox One owner I would've been just as happy if it was coming out on all systems at the same time).

Posted: **June 19th, 2015, 6:47 pm**

Will have to disagree with you there Vexer.
I think a systems exclusives is what gives it personality. PS4 has got some great exclusives coming and Xbone also perhaps the consoles will now start getting their own personalities.

Thought the Starfox game looked interesting on Wii U but I've heard the controls might hamper the game. You have to aim with the game pad screen and keep having to refocus from the TV to the game pad.

Posted: **June 19th, 2015, 8:53 pm**

Vexer6 wrote:One thing I forgot to mention that pissed me off about Sony's conference is all their console exclusive DLC BS, it's inherently anti-consumer and benefits no one except Sony. PS4 owners would've been just as happy if that Arkham Knight and Hitman exclusive DLC was available on all platforms(I also don't think it was necessary for Rise of the Tomb Raider to be a timed exclusive, as an Xbox One owner I would've been just as happy if it was coming out on all systems at the same time).

Why does that piss you off specifically regarding Sony's conference? Microsoft had the rights to Call of Duty's DLC for the entire last generation. And really, Activision is just jumping on the more popular console's bandwagon. I'm sure if the XB1 wasn't getting outsold by the PS4 they'd still be with Microsoft.

The Tomb Raider situation is actually worse, since Microsoft didn't buy DLC exclusivity, but an entire game's exclusivity for what could be a very significant amount of time. And the Tomb Raider is a brand strongly associated with Playstation.

Posted: **June 19th, 2015, 9:02 pm**

Sut wrote:I think a systems exclusives is what gives it personality...Thought the Starfox game looked interesting on Wii U but I've heard the controls might hamper the game. You have to aim with the game pad screen and keep having to refocus from the TV to the game pad.

Refocus from the TV to the game pad while doing a barrel roll. Shudder.

I agree that its exclusives that give a console its personality, as much or more than its specs or controllers. If they are both the same, then we basically have a monoculture of consoles without having real competition promote innovation. Which, is kinda what we have. Sure, both PS4 and the Xb1 are better than their predecessors, but not really very different.

As for exclusives, these are good ideas all around. One console company makes money if people buy a multiplatform 3rd party game on their platform, but nothing if its bought on Brand Other Console. Of course there are going to be timed exclusives, exclusive DLC, etc to give a console an edge. On the flip side, the publisher eventually gets their product out to a wide multiplatform audience, but in the short term has one of the console manufacturers helping to hype the game up for them which is vital, and probably monies up front too. The gamer on the promoting system also gets an option on DLC that might not even exist otherwise. Even the gamer on the other system will get the option on the game later, and the knowledge their system has its share of first bites on the apples.

Posted: **June 19th, 2015, 10:49 pm**

scotland wrote:
Refocus from the TV to the game pad while doing a barrel roll. Shudder.

Agreed. However, they did mention a feature they're working to include that I really like the sound of: 2 player mode. One player will fly the Arwing using a wiimote or pro controller and the other will play a first person gunner. I couldn't understand why that appealed to me so much. Then I remembered that's how defense and flying work on the Millennium Falcon. I can't wait to tell my kid he did a great job but not to get cocky.

Posted: **June 19th, 2015, 10:58 pm**

Just to be clear i'm talking about console exclusive DLC, NOT console exclusive GAMES, the latter i'm fine with(though I do think it's a dirty move for Capcom to make Street Fighter V PS4 exclusive, even though I don't personally care about that franchise)

I'm not saying it was right for Microsoft to do console exclusive DLC either, it certainly wasn't, but two wrongs do not make a right(It just never really impacted since I never played COD for multiplayer, so one console getting map packs before another did not impact me in any way) so that doesn't automatically make it A-OK for Sony to pull the same crap.

TotalBiscuit said it best in his video on the Sony conference-exclusive games are all well and good, but exclusive DLC benefits no one except Sony and should not be celebrated as it is inherently anti-consumer in the worst way, and that those mocking people who don't get the exclusive DLC are childish. PS4 owners would be just as happy if the DLC was availible on all systems, them being the only to have it won't make them any more happy (unless they're elitist jerks).

I don't know if I would call what MS is doing worse, it's still not good, but at least we know it'll come out on other consoles eventually, unlike SFV, which will never come out on the Xbox(they explicitly said so at the conference).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSraJ0mrzAA

Posted: **June 20th, 2015, 2:10 pm**

Vexer6 wrote:...It just never really impacted since I never played COD for multiplayer, so one console getting map packs before another did not impact me in any way...

Sigh. Aren't we all in together? You play that game, I play this, but we're both gamers and we should stand up in solidarity with each other whether a particular issue is about your gaming habits or mine. Are we not all gamers? I do not play COD at all, but am I not fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a COD player is? If you prick me, do I not bleed the same pixels?

Vexer6 wrote:......exclusive DLC benefits no one except Sony and should not be celebrated as it is inherently anti-consumer in the worst way, and that those mocking people who don't get the exclusive DLC are childish. PS4 owners would be just as happy if the DLC was availible on all systems, them being the only to have it won't make them any more happy (unless they're elitist jerks).

There is nothing wrong with a company doing something that benefits them! That's called basic business 101. I think you missed the whole point of capitalism.

Also, an elitist is a person that says he or she is better that someone else not for any demonstrable reason, but for intrinsic reasons the other person can do nothing about, like parentage or ethnic origin. That is not the case here at all. If Sony has exclusive DLC that Microsoft does not its not elitist to say so because its a demonstrable feature. A person is not a jerk for saying so, only if they do something like mockingly singsong "Needer Needer, I got something you do not". And yes, it does make PS4 owners happy to have exclusive DLC that MS owners don't have, as its one of the driving forces of consumerism to have something your neighbor covets.

The Video Game Critic

E3 time!

Re: E3 time!

Re: E3 time!

Re: E3 time!

Re: E3 time!

Re: E3 time!

Re: E3 time!

Re: E3 time!

Re: E3 time!

Re: E3 time!

Re: E3 time!