|...but boy does the nostalgia feel good.|
I guess I can understand why Nintendo is having such a hard time deciding how to handle their Online service as a value prospect for players who only will use it occasionally. The options that are available to the average person for experiencing retro classics are staggering, and it was impressive that Nintendo was able to make a dent at all with their "Classic" systems.
Anyone banking on the N64 Classic? I'm genuinely curious. It's not the most friendly of systems to emulate, given the way games were coded for it, support even with the best of emulators is spotty, and the games are magnitudes larger than modest SNES and NES carts. How many N64 games could you fit on... say... 4GB of flash memory?
Not many, though quite a few more than PSX games.
All of this comes to mind with my recent review of Bomberman for NES, which is something of a return to form for me, since I'm having to pace myself on the way back to full functionality. I've got a ways to go yet... and I gotta say I'm grateful to be able to flex the ol' brain muscle in this way.
Thinking about the games that gave you the skills you utilize now, particularly with regard to the games you play, and the ones you review, does moderate my attitude somewhat toward the later titles I cited as being "hand holders". I've never appreciated games that talk down to their players, regardless of their targeted demographic.
It's worse when a game goes "monkey flip the switch" when you're an adult - as a kid you might not notice that until you're older, but that depends on you as a kid. I grew up in an era largely without those sort of training wheels, so to speak. Even now I gravitate toward games that treat me like a human being... not so hard to understand, but at what point does the in game tutorial become a babysitter?
Anyway, I'll end this by saying something about Google's prospective console: Cool your crap down. Seriously. Dollars to donuts this will be a streaming/digital download centric machine that outpaces everything on the market, but soon to be overshadowed by Sony and Microsoft's next offering. Going digital only just makes sense now, but somehow I get the feeling the Big G will foul it up somehow... can you imagine anything that resembles Google Play on a system like the PS4 or Xbox?
Well, we'll see.
|Most recent blog posts from Simon Woodington...|
|honestgamer - March 14, 2019 (10:01 PM)
I don't expect much of anything good from Google's rumored streaming console. The best we might see is Google paying a few developers to produce exclusive titles of note for the hardware, and even that seems... semi-unlikely. We already have Android boxes like the Nvidia SHIELD TV, and that failed to set the world on fire, so I'm not sure a console has much chance of being more than another misfire for Google. As for me, I have VERY limited interest in a digital-only future, and will probably retreat to whatever collection of physical games I've amassed by that point, rarely to be seen again as an active consumer.
|hastypixels - March 15, 2019 (08:47 AM)
The gaming industry has been veering toward games as a service for over a decade now, heedlessly, and I don't see that changing. Like you, I'm not optimistic about another console in an already flooded market. A quick tally has us with three mainstream consoles, a plethora of phones - the dedicated gaming handheld market is finally giving up the ghost - and then multi-purpose TV bound android boxes... there's too much.
Google isn't going to be able to claw anything away from their competitors, at worst they'll conflate what is already a confusing mess. As for the digital-only future, I find it interesting that Sony is holding their tongue about that move. If I had to guess they're not in a rush to beat Microsoft to market with that, even though they've had a great deal of success.
They've done a better job of delivering games, to be sure, up until the advent of the Switch.
|honestgamer - March 15, 2019 (02:14 PM)
I know the industry has been headed in that direction for a long while, but that doesn't mean I have to like it and can't do my part to fight against it. "Games as service" stuff tends to be multiplayer, too, which I also don't like, so my energy to resist that stuff comes from a very deep well. I also like owning physical copies of the games I "buy," so Google's reported plans for a streaming console do little right now but inspire my disdain. ;-)
|hastypixels - March 16, 2019 (07:15 PM)
Good gravy, "Honest", you're not alone. I have my own way of fighting the industry... though I do recognize some of the benefits of digital storefronts. That said I draw the line at subscription aka Pay-to-Win games and the flotsam and jetsam we call DLC endlessly washing up on our collective shores. I was a late adopter of Steam, and it's been a curse and a blessing.
I mean over 700 games. Really? I will never play most of them and a waste of money is still a waste. At least Nintendo's storefront is actually selling games for their value (most of the time). I really don't want to see them going down the road of deeper discounts, even though that means I have fewer games on my Switch. There's nothing wrong with more deeply pondered purchasing decisions... money unmanaged manages us.
|Masters - March 18, 2019 (07:21 AM)
I'm right there with you, Venter.
Also: remember the Ouya?
|hastypixels - March 18, 2019 (08:56 PM)
Masters: Do I have to?