RockyRan

Would you look at that. It WAS '99. We also got Donkey Kong 64 that same Xmas and it, too was released in 1999.

Perhaps if they hadn't canned the DLC they would've kept the game in people's hands (and off second hand shelves) for longer and made money on the extra content, but I guess they've just been too busy making... Ummmmm... Making....What exactly have they been doing? Didn't they can the DLC in favor of implementing Move support?

My bro and I got a yellow GBC for Christmas in '98 (don't ask me how I remember the year. I just do). We asked for Pokemon Yellow but my parents got Red, so that's what we played until we got back home (we always spent Xmas at my grandparents') and got an exchange. So normally we would've had Pikachu as our first Pokemon but it ended up being a Charmander I think. I still have my yellow GBC and it works perfectly fine (as do all GameBoys apparently ), but I've long since lost my Yellow cart. We moved houses and just completely disappeared. I'm still pissed about that > Though I do still have my Pokemon Gold from when we bought that, so it's not all bad.

Heavy Rain dev whines like a LEETLE BABEE MAN (Heavy voice) about used game sales: http://www.joystiq.com/2011/09/12/heavy-rain-developer-estimates-13m-loss-on-second-hand-sales/ Of course, he doesn't let crazy things like rentals and borrowed games get in his way of his genius logic. This here is the perfect example of a developer with a ridiculous sense of entitlement, thinking he is owed money simply because somebody somewhere played his game at some point in time.

Bah! I just remembered where I had heard the whole "you got paid to write this didn't you?" barrage of commenter quips before. It was at Ars Technica, where one of the writers there did a review of sorts of Internet Explorer 9. It was, much to the chagrin of IE haters (of which there are a lot, myself included ), not ripped a new one. In fact, the writer said it was very competitive to FireFox in features and performance. Haters immediately called into question whether or not it was a paid-for article by Microsoft. Dozens and dozens of people said the same thing in the comments. You know what the writer and mods did? Nothing. As they should have. They ignored the catcalls and took the high road by not throwing scat like brainless monkeys. In other words, they responded in a PROFESSIONAL manner. Something that Joel is completely and hopelessly incapable of doing. I remember that because when Jim from RPS began pretending like saying that kind of thing was a heresy and INCREDIBLY offensive, something in the back of my mind told me "bullshit, it's happened before and the editor in question ignored the outrage in a dignified and professional manner". I just didn't remember where I had seen it and now I remember. So yeah, that's how you handle those kinds of criticisms, by not yelling, insulting and banning users. The very fact that he did it only reinforced people's suspicions that he had something to hide. And pretending like being criticized in that manner after writing such a horrible article is extremely offensive to the poor ol' writer is just sad.

260% on a low number is still kind of a low number Joystiq puts the sales into perspective: http://www.joystiq.com/2011/09/09/3ds-sales-up-260-percent-after-price-cut/ Still well below DS sales for July of 07, 08, 09, and 10. There's also the fact to consider that price drops always, always have short-term price surges. It only truly matters if the sales permanently increase months after the price has dropped.

Not exactly sure what would cause this kind of commotion in R&D. I mean yeah, the Wii U's technology probably isn't anything trivial to implement, but having problems even when it's tethered to the console? Not ready to call it a flat out fake, but considering the report came from that one website that predicted both the Wii U itself and the 3DS second analog peripheral, there's some truth to it no doubt. It's just a matter of what's an exaggeration

Yoshi's Island is, by far, my favorite Mario platformer. It's so freaking different from every other Mario game yet so familiar at the same time. Plus, it introduced so many new mechanics it was mind-boggling. The eggs, the changing of the color of the eggs when hitting walls, the ground pound, red coins, the stars and star counter, using the counter/baby Mario as the health, the items, the different watermelons, the Transformer Yoshi powerups, the giant eggs, the boomerang eggs, the incredibly creative bosses, completely different movement physics from any other Mario game, the bonus mini-games, the sunflower roulette at the end of every level that leads up to said mini games, etc. etc. etc. etc. These days you'd be lucky to have one new mechanic in a Ninty game. Yoshi's Island had like 30.

EVER. PERIOD. It's just that he keeps making these wild fantasies about PC gaming fundamentally changing the way it works just to spite PC gamers. I'm like, dude, the world doesn't revolve around you, and there's just no fucking way it's going to converge into a "standardized" format just because you keep making these shitty articles insulting PC gamers whose hobby it is to tinker with their gaming PCs. He just won't let it go, and he's completely fucking wrong at that. I especially loved his "WAH WAH WAH PEOPLE SAID MEAN THINGS ABOUT MY OTHER EQUALLY SHITTY ARTICLE!!" tantrum paragraph he throws in there. I mean, dude, do you have ANY professional standards? Talk about petty, dragging his pissing contest between himself and his own readers into yet another editorial filled to the brim with the same exact petulant ignorance. You wrote a shitass article the first time, don't do another shitass article parroting the same thing just to stick it to the people who disagreed with you the first time. He's a complete manchild.

Done. http://kotaku.com/58...507816#comments I wrote it in a way such that I never called him a paid shill, nor did I insult him in any way directly. If he takes issue with it it's going to be extremely obvious to anyone reading. EDIT: Jesus, you're way too passive. That's right, I went there.

You know, I haven't commented a single time since I announced my departure the day the redesign went live, but I just need to let off some steam at this dumbass who keeps writing garbage articles. Nothing big, not a rant or anything. Just a small "you're a dumbass" will do for me. brb

Anything can happen during testing. You might be five minutes away from release when you realize there's a bug that you really do need to fix, only find out that fixing that bug leads to something else being broken, fixing that means breaking something else still, and fixing that last one requires rewriting 5-6 different mechanics entirely just to accommodate that one. Gaming studios know how to avoid this issue, but Mojang appears to still struggle with it. I wonder how they'll change things (IF they change things) once it gets out of beta.

See, the worse thing is that the update is obviously going to be hopelessly broken for two-three days, so you need to add two-three days to their release date to get the PROPER release date. Honestly, I don't see them cranking out a playable version of the update until the end of the month. And I wouldn't be surprised to see them say "we're releasing this as is. We're cutting out even more features and putting them off because they were so buggy" like they did withe Halloween update (which, BTW, still hasn't been fully completed IIRC).

Another one of the strong speculations (the same one, in fact, that foretold of the second analog add-on) is that Ninty plans on releasing a redesign with the stick built-in.

Apparently, the rumored "second joystick" attachment is real. http://blog.esuteru.com/archives/4734766.html Wut.

They don't cover it all, but then again, EA isn't the only one trying to cash in on this silly "Online Pass" crap. There's also the more obvious fact that 95% of console games have only multiplayer using peer-to-peer matchmaking, which doesn't require nearly as much as companies charging for these playpasses like to say.

Especially because the most common excuse for online passes ("Servers cost money, they need to be maintained, but used buyers are getting a free ride") makes absolutely no sense. These "freeloaders" are still paying for online maintenance, in the form of paying for an XBL subscription, which is supposed to pay for EXACTLY those servers costing money.

I think they're silly too tl;dr version custom-made just for Faiblesse: I personally think internet boycotts are silly due to one simple factor: they're rarely, if ever, serious about it. The vast majority of the time boycott groups are founded and populated by people driven by knee-jerk reactionary impulses or people who simply hold a grudge over a product/company and never would've bought the game in the first place. The vast majority of the time people care about a game enough to "boycott" it, but we all know that as the release date approaches their desire for the game simply outweighs their consumer-rights crusade. Plus, considering how most people join "boycotts" in an act of swift rage, much like temper tantrums these go away as fast as they came. By the time the game releases they've most likely already coped with whatever it was that made them angry in the first place. The people who hold a grudge and thus "boycott" are a group that makes even less of an impact than the group of concerned gamers, because they're not in the market for that game at all. Economically, they're completely inconsequential to a business because a person who never has and never will buy their products simply doesn't "exist" in the eyes of the business. To a business there's no difference between a subway-dwelling hobo and a contemptuous gamer loudly proclaiming he/she will never buy their game under any circumstance. All a business sees is two people who aren't in the market for their game, regardless of whether one isn't buying their game on principle or simply because he smells like urine and has two and a half cents to his name. Most of the time these haughty gamers simply want to bring drama to what is otherwise a simple case of consumer preference. See, I don't have a Ferrari because I can't afford one, and even if I could afford one I'd much rather use the money on many other things in addition to the fact that I'd probably take horrible care of it (couldn't afford any maintenance on it, that's for sure). Just more of a hassle than it's worth for me. But instead of simply saying "I'd prefer to not have one", if I could say, for instance "I'm boycotting Ferrari's because they're the embodiment of today's rotten, materialistic outlook in life!!!", then all of a sudden my simple act of preference has turned into this dignified crusade. That's exactly what it looks like to me when some people are a little too eager to express their disdain to certain companies that haven't even done anything terribly bad. It's just their attempt at turning a simple consumer choice into a "protest", and it's completely silly. At any rate, I'm still an advocate for consumers exercising their opinions and voting with their wallet. I always have, and I always will. I choose not to support any Ubisoft titles any more because they treat the PC consumer like a second-class denizen at best and a filthy pirate in hiding at worst. Their attitude is simply hostile. However, what I'm doing is simply exercising my viewpoint. I'm not calling it a "boycott", even a personal one, because I view a "boycott" as a massive, organized protest that makes its objective clear and communicates it with the entity they're protesting against. Simply saying "I choose not to support this publisher" isn't a boycott, that's just consumer preference. I don't think avoiding publishers because they have draconian DRM or similar things is "silly" at all. That's just an exercise in consumer rights as they simply disagree with it. I don't think it being a luxury item negates it from any form of criticism or consumer preference against it. But at the same time I really don't think any of the above constitutes a "boycott", because a "boycott" is far more organized and coherent than that. Simply saying "I'm boycotting such-and-such" is, in my opinion, a cheap way of trying to romanticize and glorify the act of not buying something. I don't think anybody is really in any position to say that they're partaking in a "protest" simply by consumer inaction. That's what I find incredibly silly. I could just as well say that anything I don't buy at the grocery store I'm "boycotting", and come up with excuses as to why. Of course it sounds so dignified and ambitious, but it's just...silly.

I can think of 3 good ones right now: 1. Mirror's Edge. I freaking love it, and it's great that it's of a nice length. Not too long, not too short, just right. I boot it up and play for a few hours at least once a year. 2. Super Buster Bros. An old SNES game that was a port of an older series on the arcade, more widely known as Pang. I absolutely love its simplicity mixed with its complexity. It's my absolute favorite "time waster" game. 3. Beat Hazard. Less of a "time waster" game since it's so freaking addicting. I always play for about an hour longer than I intended, but it's a game that NEVER gets old, especially now with the Ultra update.