Home
Twitter
RSS
Newsletter
PS3
 
360
 
Wii
 
PC
 
DS
 
3DS
 
PSP
 
Mobile
 
Retro
LoginForumsGame ExchangeBargains
Latest Content
Googol's Profile
PALGN Casual
PALGN Casual

Contact Information
Email address:  
Private Message: Send private message
MSN Messenger:  
Yahoo Messenger:
AIM Address:  
ICQ Number:  
Username:  Googol
Joined:  24 Jun 2005
$poons:  6.20
Total posts:  208 [Show all]
[0.03% of total / 0.07 posts per day]
Post Score:  16  ( 16 / 0) [Show all]
Total votes:  1 [Show all]
Location:  On the other side of the Möbius strip.
Website:   
Occupation:  Musician
Interests: Zelda, Video Gaming, Emulation, Music, Pixel Art
 
Referrals
Googol  has not made any referals.
Buddies
People with Googol as their buddy: none
Googol's buddies: none
[Add Googol to your buddy list]
Biography
Nothing much to say.
Googol's Recent Forum Posts
^ Reggie confirmed it doesn't upscale Wii games. It's possible you could play some of them on the small screen somehow, which would probably make them easier on the eyes. Not sure if it really matters to you, though.
To give third party titles a chance to sell. It sucks for third parties when all people buy are the single big Nintendo title at launch. It breaks the trend of having 1 must-have Ninty game and a whole bunch of third party games nobody buys (in comparison).

Basically, Nintendo's making third parties the priority this time around, by staggering their first-party titles out this time. Will it work? Maybe. I guess we'll see whether it's better in the long term.
PALGN wrote
Amidst the launch titles, Nintendogs showed that it was definitely up to the task,
Nintendogs definitely wasn't a launch title in any country.

Actually, the Nintendo DS had a terrible launch selection, and the 3DS has a lot of decent software by comparison - it just doesn't have a single 'must-have' title like almost every other launch, which was actually intentional.
How did you get that from that? The graph said "Cumulative Operating Income" of the videogame division which has nothing to do with being hardware only. I was posting those articles because I didn't have the original source of the graph - so I searched for related articles instead. Sony definitely lost way more than it gained this gen in its gaming division, not just with hardware. It's not a shady fact, it's pretty much everywhere you look.

Look, man, I'm not trying to be the devil's advocate, I'm just putting out the facts. A lot of money has gone down the tube this generation, and Sony and Microsoft's way of making it back is with a much longer shelf life on their consoles. All three companies are in a precarious place at the moment, and while the industry won't collapse just yet the way things have worked before has got to change.
I couldn't find the exact data it used (adding up each year's profits and losses for each company and graphing it) but here are a few links that support it.

Also note that the graph ends at Mar 2010, so the PS3 actually turning a profit hadn't come into play (that happened in April-May 2010):
http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/playstation-3-finally-turning-a-profit-on-each-console-sold/?news=123

So the graph now would look pretty much the same but with a tiny kick upwards at the end on Sony's side. Obviously, not enough to account for the whole lifespan's losses but in the right direction. of course, they lost an awful lot of money, almost all the profits from their glory days in fact:

http://www.joystiq.com/2008/08/19/the-sony-reciprocal-ps3-losses-surpass-ps2-profits/

As far as Microsoft is concerned, they've been making profit on the Entertainment and Games division for the first time this generation, and started back in '08 according to this chart:

http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-microsoft-entertainment-and-gaming-2011-1

Obviously, a quick eyeball of the chart shows that the profits don't exceed the losses, not even accounting for losses before '05. Just like Sony, they'll want to drag out this gen for as long as they can to try and get it into the black for the first time.

I don't think anyone doubts Nintendo's graph. They haven't done as well yearly as the others sometimes, but they've never lost money, making their cumulative graph look relatively higher than its standing. It has been losing quite a lot of profit at times, but they've always been MAKING a profit, meaning this doesn't show on a cumulative graph. They're obviously not in dire straits though.

Of course this isn't crazy hard data, it's a bunch of internet articles, but the paint the same picture as the now defunct graph above.
Sorry, I scabbed it off somewhere else that didn't give a source. I don't have any reason to believe it isn't accurate, but I'll search for other data to correlate its authenticity.
Benza wrote
@GoogolWow. I did not realise MS were doing that badly.
They're actually not, it's just easy to forget that they lost a lot of money on the XBOX 1 in the old days, and didn't care a whole bunch since that was their then-groundbreaking strategy at the time. You'll notice that they consistently gain profit 2007 onwards, but haven't made their money back yet, so it looks bad when they don't have a previous success story and dip below the line (unlike Sony).

So they're actually doing very well indeed, and should they keep making a profit are set well for the long term. It's kind of like the opposite to Sony, actually.

EDIT: Actually, they're not doing THAT well looking at the chart again. They just actually "made" money this gen instead of losing it like before. In the current market, that's actually atypical, and it's scary.
Nietzsche, I don't think you really understand how much money Sony lost. They're making "profits", but they actually don't have a net gain this generation yet - in fact, they've lost most of the profits from their phenomenal success of the PS1-PS2 era.

Here's what I'm talking about: http://www.sharingsys.com/life/z8/65249ed93bee23784d0b995dd88c1e8a.png
You can get a Metroid Helmet for your Mii. That alone makes it worth your time.

And a Kirby hat, man. A Kirby hat.
Re: Rango Review (2 years ago)
Benza wrote
Wasn't the Scott pilgrim game based on the comic not the movie?
It was called Scott Pilgrim vs. The World like the movie and came out around the same time like a movie tie-in, but it was indeed based more heavily on the graphic novels than the movie.
theory wrote
People see a console and go "Is that a Playstation?"
It wasn't always like that, though. Until a few years into the PS2 era, most people saw a console and said "is that a Nintendo?". And until the DS/PSP era, most people called every handheld a Gameboy. Admittedly, the Gameboy was pretty much the only thing you could get, but still.

And I'm not sure about the new successor thing as of yet. It's been enough time, but game sites get a little overexcited about rumours sometimes. I think it's possible, but there's a few first party Wii games on the horizon yet, even if less big third party titles are coming out.
There's also StreetPass Quest, which is a simple RPG (kind of) dungeon crawler (kind of) where you attack ghosts with Miis gathered from StreetPass or hired with play coins. It's not really deep or anything, but it's fun to chip away at your enemies and progress a little bit each day.
I'm pretty sure it's the Megadrive Sonic. He doesn't have the green eyes or the new squarish shoes with the buckle, plus he's just smaller and brighter. It could be a junior version, but I'm guessing he'd still have the green eyes if that were the case.
Well, there's also californiahomesbyowner.com and westernescapes.com, which both suggest California or the West Coast in general. Given some past rumours as well it seems like a game set on the West Coast is more likely than Vice City.
PALGN wrote
This means you can access settings such as brightness in-game without having to reset the console (whether there is another shortcut for brightness is unknown at this stage)
Just as an aside, you can change brightness on the DSi in game by holding down Select and Start at the same time and pressing the volume keys. I'd assume since the 3DS is largely based on the DSi that it'd be very similar.

I got the Dick Smith pre-order deal last month, so I'm all set already. The games are perfectly fine for a launch - I don't know why people are complaining so much, pretty much every launch game line-up is even or worse than this.
Jarrod wrote
If true, it means that much like the GCN release the cart will contain both the original Ocarina of Time and the Master Quest run. Both will be in 3D of course.
Alternatively, it could be a super awesome 2nd Quest, LoZ1 and Wind Waker style.
Well, you've got a point, but they've never made a new 3D Mario game on a handheld before. It's always been side-scrolling, with Mario 64 DS being the only exception.
rufati wrote
What's surprising is that it isn't a launch title.
How is that surprising? Games take a LONG TIME to develop. Other Nintendo launch titles on handhelds have been ports, and the last Nintendo launch title on a console was a port too, so it's more surprising that Zelda OoT 3D wasn't a launch title than this.

Edit: ^ holy hell, I didn't notice the small Mario. If that's the case, then that's awesome, because I've always wanted small/big Mario in a 3D Mario game.
Well, I'll expect a redesign at some point, just nowhere near as soon as the DSLite from DS Phat. It's just that the current hardware's only real downside is that some people don't like the design and the battery life is lower than what people were hoping for, so it doesn't need an upgrade so soon. I could be wrong, too, though, so feel free to rub it in my face when the 3DS Premium comes out in year or whatever.
There ain't gonna be a 3DSLite, but a 3DSXL might be on the cards. It's basically as small as a DSi anyway, you can't make it smaller.
I'm not sure why people aren't more surprised, to be honest. The idea of a new Mario game isn't surprising, but the idea of it being a new 3D Mario in the style of Super Mario Galaxy should be more interesting. That said, it fits the 3DS's capability much more than a 2.5D Mario would.
They are similar, mainly because they haven't changed most of the scenery models and world geometry. Will they change them? Probably not, although I'd expect more scenery models to be upgraded in the final. Change it too much, and the feel of the game changes.

I do like the new Link model, though. It feels the same, but with major poly upgrades.
Jarrod wrote
We dont have Pilotwings for launch. The US has Pilotwings and Steel Diver, EU has one of those two, and Aus has neither.
Whoops, you're right. Well, another one bites the dust I guess.

And el, yeah I guess it slows down when you get a Snorlax, but I seriously don't notice slowdown with the game in general. Maybe I just have a high tolerance for that sort of thing?
el_supraman wrote
The n64 smash had A LOT of slow down and with a small screen a ds smash would not have been great.
The N64 Smash didn't have any slowdown at all, in fact it had pared-down models just to make it go flawlessly. The GAMEPLAY was much slower and strategic, but there wasn't any slowdown there, so the DS could have easily handled a Smash game.

As to the line-up, it's no worse than any other launch line-up. If anything, it has at least three guaranteed 'good' games - Pilotwings, people - Nintendogs is good and Street Fighter is a good port, as well as Samurai Warriors and Ridge Racer. They might not be the games YOU'RE interested in, but I wouldn't call all of them crap either.
Esposch wrote
But they don't. An iPhone 4 has a higher resolution than the 17" monitor that I'm using to type this message.
Look, you've made a fair point to a certain extent. The 3DS has a bigger top screen than the iPhone 4 with a lower resolution. But a higher resolution just doesn't work with the 3DS - it has two screens for one thing, doubling the cost of manufacture with the magical extra pixels. The hardware doesn't need the strain of the extra resolution - stuff like the lower battery life has shown this already.

I guess my (unnecessary) point is that it's just not feasible to have the extra resolution on the 3DS, a luxury (like extra RAM) that you don't really need in a handheld gaming system. I'd better let it rest, now.

Also, your 17in monitor displays at less than 960x640? That shit's whack, dawg.
Esposch wrote
Yes, thank you for confirming that the resolution only needs to be as high as the resolution. :/
Really, it's confirming small screens have small resolutions, and it doesn't affect image quality a lot. Don't act like a dick.

Yeah, the resolution helps, but not THAT much. Not enough to justify the price it would add to the components - it's costing a lot as it is.
light487 wrote
PALGN wrote
You can't customize any of the cars apart from changing the colour
Whaaa...??
Well, this was never supposed to be a customizable car-racing thing. In fact, it's the opposite - a throwback of the non-street racing Need For Speeds of yore, with arcade controls, a simple cops v. criminals approach, and bright 'exotic' graphics.

Actually, I'm not sure why I'm commenting; I'm never going to buy this game. It's good that they've taken the series back to its roots, and I hope Criterion get rewarded for it.
Esposch wrote
Mind you, the 3DS's resolution is ****; so even if the PSP2 is 2D it will likely look a lot better.
I don't think resolution comes into play much when it comes to portable devices, you only really need a resolution equal to the number of pixels on your screen, which isn't a lot in small devices.

OLED is pretty insane, mind you. This generation of handhelds is looking mighty expensive now, though. I guess the advent of smartphones have come into play there, (unfortunately) people expect some pretty unnecessary stuff in their portable devices these days.
I'd also like to add that the game is being developed by Square-Enix like Mario Hoops 3-on-3, if anyone's interested in that. This means they'll probably be some Square-related characters included, if the previous title is anything to go by.
Re: NBA Jam Review (2 years ago)
I disagree greatly, they don't deserve higher scores if the depth and originality doesn't add to the gameplay. If it were done differently, many fans would comment that if they just kept the same fun gameplay it would be much better, and vice versa. A deep and original game is not any better a game than a game that is just fun as all hell.

The score's fine, but to suggest that a deeper experience deserves a higher score says that we're heading into dangerous territory here - where games being fun isn't good enough to make them good games in the eyes of the gaming community.