• 150 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#101 Posted by obcdexter (611 posts) -

Shin Megami Hentai

@hailinel said:

And what does SMH mean?

#102 Edited by WinterSnowblind (7617 posts) -

@darji said:

@wintersnowblind said:

@darji: That's a hell of a lot of conjecture. Disappointing performance isn't the same as poor sales. I'm not going to turn this into a list war or link to a million articles, but 3DS sales are strong in the west and have improved dramatically in the past few months. Considering how poorly it did at launch, there's no reason to believe the Wii U isn't going to improve as well.

I'll also remind you that the PS3 had a lot of hype behind it and ended up doing very badly at launch. It's now in a stronger position worldwide than the Xbox 360, which had a huge headstart.

3DS sales according to Nintendo themselves are not "satisfying" You can read it all in their financial report. And no Nintendo can be lucky if they could reach Gamecube numbers. The PS3 had a huge problem and that were shipping umbers in Japan and of course the huge price. This will not happen again. The Wii U does not even sell for 199 Euro in Europe. Hell even the Vita has better software sales than the Wii U. And that alone is an embarrassment.

Not satisfying doesn't = bad. Just that they want it to do even better. I'm not sure how else I can say this to convey that point. Sales of Tomb Raider were "not satisfying" and it sold nearly 4 million copies within a month.

#103 Edited by MAGZine (438 posts) -

@hailinel: the only reason this happens is because people forget that these people are just people and not a spokesman of the company.

So what if this guy is an SE at EA? He's a dude. Who writes software. Who happens to work at a gaming company. If people didn't make such a big deal about him being an engineer at EA, then I'd gander that nobody at the company would give a shit what he said.

What I'm trying to say is that people should be focusing on his words rather than the person himself. Who cares if he works a such-and-such game studio? it should hold no bearing on what he has to say.

I'm not saying that this is how things are, or ever will play out. I'm just pointing out that people are being really dumb if they think that everything an employee posts to his twitter feed is representative of his employer.

#104 Edited by tourgen (4515 posts) -

WiiU gfx capability and memory are good compared to PS3 and Xboxen360. It's CPU cores are worse in nearly every measurable way. Yeah, generally the WiiU is less powerful than a 360 in general computing terms. Not everything can be offloaded to the GPU. They cheaped out on the CPU while trying to push it as a 3rd party platform for 360 and PS3 games. Nintendo fucked up.

#105 Posted by Hailinel (24969 posts) -

@magzine said:

@hailinel: the only reason this happens is because people forget that these people are just people and not a spokesman of the company.

So what if this guy is an SE at EA? He's a dude. Who writes software. Who happens to work at a gaming company. If people didn't make such a big deal about him being an engineer at EA, then I'd gander that nobody at the company would give a shit what he said.

What I'm trying to say is that people should be focusing on his words rather than the person himself. Who cares if he works a such-and-such game studio? it should hold no bearing on what he has to say.

I'm not saying that this is how things are, or ever will play out. I'm just pointing out that people are being really dumb if they think that everything an employee posts to his twitter feed is representative of his employer.

He also, as an employee of EA, has an obligation to not make his employer look bad in the public eye. It doesn't matter that his position is not in Public Relations; by posting to Twitter, he is engaging with the public, and if anything he says paints EA in a poor light, then he's got trouble. And people are focusing on his words. Those are what are getting him in trouble.

#106 Edited by MAGZine (438 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@magzine said:

@hailinel: the only reason this happens is because people forget that these people are just people and not a spokesman of the company.

So what if this guy is an SE at EA? He's a dude. Who writes software. Who happens to work at a gaming company. If people didn't make such a big deal about him being an engineer at EA, then I'd gander that nobody at the company would give a shit what he said.

What I'm trying to say is that people should be focusing on his words rather than the person himself. Who cares if he works a such-and-such game studio? it should hold no bearing on what he has to say.

I'm not saying that this is how things are, or ever will play out. I'm just pointing out that people are being really dumb if they think that everything an employee posts to his twitter feed is representative of his employer.

He also, as an employee of EA, has an obligation to not make his employer look bad in the public eye. It doesn't matter that his position is not in Public Relations; by posting to Twitter, he is engaging with the public, and if anything he says paints EA in a poor light, then he's got trouble. And people are focusing on his words. Those are what are getting him in trouble.

You completely missed the point I made.

#107 Posted by Hailinel (24969 posts) -

@magzine said:

@hailinel said:

@magzine said:

@hailinel: the only reason this happens is because people forget that these people are just people and not a spokesman of the company.

So what if this guy is an SE at EA? He's a dude. Who writes software. Who happens to work at a gaming company. If people didn't make such a big deal about him being an engineer at EA, then I'd gander that nobody at the company would give a shit what he said.

What I'm trying to say is that people should be focusing on his words rather than the person himself. Who cares if he works a such-and-such game studio? it should hold no bearing on what he has to say.

I'm not saying that this is how things are, or ever will play out. I'm just pointing out that people are being really dumb if they think that everything an employee posts to his twitter feed is representative of his employer.

He also, as an employee of EA, has an obligation to not make his employer look bad in the public eye. It doesn't matter that his position is not in Public Relations; by posting to Twitter, he is engaging with the public, and if anything he says paints EA in a poor light, then he's got trouble. And people are focusing on his words. Those are what are getting him in trouble.

You completely missed the point I made.

Your point is discussing a hypothetical to get around the fact that he fucked himself.

#108 Posted by Darji (5294 posts) -

@darji said:

@wintersnowblind said:

@darji: That's a hell of a lot of conjecture. Disappointing performance isn't the same as poor sales. I'm not going to turn this into a list war or link to a million articles, but 3DS sales are strong in the west and have improved dramatically in the past few months. Considering how poorly it did at launch, there's no reason to believe the Wii U isn't going to improve as well.

I'll also remind you that the PS3 had a lot of hype behind it and ended up doing very badly at launch. It's now in a stronger position worldwide than the Xbox 360, which had a huge headstart.

3DS sales according to Nintendo themselves are not "satisfying" You can read it all in their financial report. And no Nintendo can be lucky if they could reach Gamecube numbers. The PS3 had a huge problem and that were shipping umbers in Japan and of course the huge price. This will not happen again. The Wii U does not even sell for 199 Euro in Europe. Hell even the Vita has better software sales than the Wii U. And that alone is an embarrassment.

Not satisfying doesn't = bad. Just that they want it to do even better. I'm not sure how else I can say this to convey that point. Sales of Tomb Raider were "not satisfying" and it sold nearly 4 million copies within a month.

No not satisfying means not satisfying which is not good and not bad. Not satisfying means under expectations and under expectations is always not good.

#109 Posted by jakob187 (21676 posts) -

This guy speaks truth. I like him.

#110 Posted by Hailinel (24969 posts) -

@darji said:

@wintersnowblind said:

@darji said:

@wintersnowblind said:

@darji: That's a hell of a lot of conjecture. Disappointing performance isn't the same as poor sales. I'm not going to turn this into a list war or link to a million articles, but 3DS sales are strong in the west and have improved dramatically in the past few months. Considering how poorly it did at launch, there's no reason to believe the Wii U isn't going to improve as well.

I'll also remind you that the PS3 had a lot of hype behind it and ended up doing very badly at launch. It's now in a stronger position worldwide than the Xbox 360, which had a huge headstart.

3DS sales according to Nintendo themselves are not "satisfying" You can read it all in their financial report. And no Nintendo can be lucky if they could reach Gamecube numbers. The PS3 had a huge problem and that were shipping umbers in Japan and of course the huge price. This will not happen again. The Wii U does not even sell for 199 Euro in Europe. Hell even the Vita has better software sales than the Wii U. And that alone is an embarrassment.

Not satisfying doesn't = bad. Just that they want it to do even better. I'm not sure how else I can say this to convey that point. Sales of Tomb Raider were "not satisfying" and it sold nearly 4 million copies within a month.

No not satisfying means not satisfying which is not good and not bad. Not satisfying means under expectations and under expectations is always not good.

Not always. You can be under expectations and still come out positive. If your parents expected you to get an A+ on a test and you came home with an A-, you still did well.

#111 Edited by MAGZine (438 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@magzine said:

@hailinel said:

@magzine said:

@hailinel: the only reason this happens is because people forget that these people are just people and not a spokesman of the company.

So what if this guy is an SE at EA? He's a dude. Who writes software. Who happens to work at a gaming company. If people didn't make such a big deal about him being an engineer at EA, then I'd gander that nobody at the company would give a shit what he said.

What I'm trying to say is that people should be focusing on his words rather than the person himself. Who cares if he works a such-and-such game studio? it should hold no bearing on what he has to say.

I'm not saying that this is how things are, or ever will play out. I'm just pointing out that people are being really dumb if they think that everything an employee posts to his twitter feed is representative of his employer.

He also, as an employee of EA, has an obligation to not make his employer look bad in the public eye. It doesn't matter that his position is not in Public Relations; by posting to Twitter, he is engaging with the public, and if anything he says paints EA in a poor light, then he's got trouble. And people are focusing on his words. Those are what are getting him in trouble.

You completely missed the point I made.

Your point is discussing a hypothetical to get around the fact that he fucked himself.

Actually, my point boils down to attacking a person's opinion, and not the person's person, which is increasingly a problem on the internet.

But thanks for putting a different spin on it, and confirming that you did indeed miss the point I was making.

#112 Posted by Hailinel (24969 posts) -

@magzine said:

@hailinel said:

@magzine said:

@hailinel said:

@magzine said:

@hailinel: the only reason this happens is because people forget that these people are just people and not a spokesman of the company.

So what if this guy is an SE at EA? He's a dude. Who writes software. Who happens to work at a gaming company. If people didn't make such a big deal about him being an engineer at EA, then I'd gander that nobody at the company would give a shit what he said.

What I'm trying to say is that people should be focusing on his words rather than the person himself. Who cares if he works a such-and-such game studio? it should hold no bearing on what he has to say.

I'm not saying that this is how things are, or ever will play out. I'm just pointing out that people are being really dumb if they think that everything an employee posts to his twitter feed is representative of his employer.

He also, as an employee of EA, has an obligation to not make his employer look bad in the public eye. It doesn't matter that his position is not in Public Relations; by posting to Twitter, he is engaging with the public, and if anything he says paints EA in a poor light, then he's got trouble. And people are focusing on his words. Those are what are getting him in trouble.

You completely missed the point I made.

Your point is discussing a hypothetical to get around the fact that he fucked himself.

Actually, my point boils down to attacking a person's opinion, and not the person's person, which is increasingly a problem on the internet.

But thanks for putting a different spin on it, and confirming that you did indeed miss the point I was making.

In what way is "This guy is going to be yelled at by his bosses" an attack on his opinion? Do you actually understand how employment works?

#113 Edited by Darji (5294 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@darji said:

@wintersnowblind said:

@darji said:

@wintersnowblind said:

@darji: That's a hell of a lot of conjecture. Disappointing performance isn't the same as poor sales. I'm not going to turn this into a list war or link to a million articles, but 3DS sales are strong in the west and have improved dramatically in the past few months. Considering how poorly it did at launch, there's no reason to believe the Wii U isn't going to improve as well.

I'll also remind you that the PS3 had a lot of hype behind it and ended up doing very badly at launch. It's now in a stronger position worldwide than the Xbox 360, which had a huge headstart.

3DS sales according to Nintendo themselves are not "satisfying" You can read it all in their financial report. And no Nintendo can be lucky if they could reach Gamecube numbers. The PS3 had a huge problem and that were shipping umbers in Japan and of course the huge price. This will not happen again. The Wii U does not even sell for 199 Euro in Europe. Hell even the Vita has better software sales than the Wii U. And that alone is an embarrassment.

Not satisfying doesn't = bad. Just that they want it to do even better. I'm not sure how else I can say this to convey that point. Sales of Tomb Raider were "not satisfying" and it sold nearly 4 million copies within a month.

No not satisfying means not satisfying which is not good and not bad. Not satisfying means under expectations and under expectations is always not good.

Not always. You can be under expectations and still come out positive. If your parents expected you to get an A+ on a test and you came home with an A-, you still did well.

No that is doing well... 'Not satisfying is not satisfying how hard can this be to understand.

#114 Posted by MAGZine (438 posts) -
#115 Posted by Hailinel (24969 posts) -

@darji said:

@hailinel said:

@darji said:

@wintersnowblind said:

@darji said:

@wintersnowblind said:

@darji: That's a hell of a lot of conjecture. Disappointing performance isn't the same as poor sales. I'm not going to turn this into a list war or link to a million articles, but 3DS sales are strong in the west and have improved dramatically in the past few months. Considering how poorly it did at launch, there's no reason to believe the Wii U isn't going to improve as well.

I'll also remind you that the PS3 had a lot of hype behind it and ended up doing very badly at launch. It's now in a stronger position worldwide than the Xbox 360, which had a huge headstart.

3DS sales according to Nintendo themselves are not "satisfying" You can read it all in their financial report. And no Nintendo can be lucky if they could reach Gamecube numbers. The PS3 had a huge problem and that were shipping umbers in Japan and of course the huge price. This will not happen again. The Wii U does not even sell for 199 Euro in Europe. Hell even the Vita has better software sales than the Wii U. And that alone is an embarrassment.

Not satisfying doesn't = bad. Just that they want it to do even better. I'm not sure how else I can say this to convey that point. Sales of Tomb Raider were "not satisfying" and it sold nearly 4 million copies within a month.

No not satisfying means not satisfying which is not good and not bad. Not satisfying means under expectations and under expectations is always not good.

Not always. You can be under expectations and still come out positive. If your parents expected you to get an A+ on a test and you came home with an A-, you still did well.

No that is doing well... 'Not satisfying is not satisfying how hard can this be to understand.

No, it's doing well, but not satisfying your parents. If you set your expectations too high, you're setting yourself up for disappointment no matter how good the results are.

#116 Edited by Darji (5294 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@darji said:

@hailinel said:

@darji said:

@wintersnowblind said:

@darji said:

@wintersnowblind said:

@darji: That's a hell of a lot of conjecture. Disappointing performance isn't the same as poor sales. I'm not going to turn this into a list war or link to a million articles, but 3DS sales are strong in the west and have improved dramatically in the past few months. Considering how poorly it did at launch, there's no reason to believe the Wii U isn't going to improve as well.

I'll also remind you that the PS3 had a lot of hype behind it and ended up doing very badly at launch. It's now in a stronger position worldwide than the Xbox 360, which had a huge headstart.

3DS sales according to Nintendo themselves are not "satisfying" You can read it all in their financial report. And no Nintendo can be lucky if they could reach Gamecube numbers. The PS3 had a huge problem and that were shipping umbers in Japan and of course the huge price. This will not happen again. The Wii U does not even sell for 199 Euro in Europe. Hell even the Vita has better software sales than the Wii U. And that alone is an embarrassment.

Not satisfying doesn't = bad. Just that they want it to do even better. I'm not sure how else I can say this to convey that point. Sales of Tomb Raider were "not satisfying" and it sold nearly 4 million copies within a month.

No not satisfying means not satisfying which is not good and not bad. Not satisfying means under expectations and under expectations is always not good.

Not always. You can be under expectations and still come out positive. If your parents expected you to get an A+ on a test and you came home with an A-, you still did well.

No that is doing well... 'Not satisfying is not satisfying how hard can this be to understand.

No, it's doing well, but not satisfying your parents. If you set your expectations too high, you're setting yourself up for disappointment no matter how good the results are.

It is negative all the way around stop trying to spin this. And Nintendo did not set their expectations to high in fact they toned down their expectations for 3DS sales a few times and it was still not satisfying.

#117 Edited by Hailinel (24969 posts) -

@darji said:

@hailinel said:

@darji said:

@hailinel said:

@darji said:

@wintersnowblind said:

@darji said:

@wintersnowblind said:

@darji: That's a hell of a lot of conjecture. Disappointing performance isn't the same as poor sales. I'm not going to turn this into a list war or link to a million articles, but 3DS sales are strong in the west and have improved dramatically in the past few months. Considering how poorly it did at launch, there's no reason to believe the Wii U isn't going to improve as well.

I'll also remind you that the PS3 had a lot of hype behind it and ended up doing very badly at launch. It's now in a stronger position worldwide than the Xbox 360, which had a huge headstart.

3DS sales according to Nintendo themselves are not "satisfying" You can read it all in their financial report. And no Nintendo can be lucky if they could reach Gamecube numbers. The PS3 had a huge problem and that were shipping umbers in Japan and of course the huge price. This will not happen again. The Wii U does not even sell for 199 Euro in Europe. Hell even the Vita has better software sales than the Wii U. And that alone is an embarrassment.

Not satisfying doesn't = bad. Just that they want it to do even better. I'm not sure how else I can say this to convey that point. Sales of Tomb Raider were "not satisfying" and it sold nearly 4 million copies within a month.

No not satisfying means not satisfying which is not good and not bad. Not satisfying means under expectations and under expectations is always not good.

Not always. You can be under expectations and still come out positive. If your parents expected you to get an A+ on a test and you came home with an A-, you still did well.

No that is doing well... 'Not satisfying is not satisfying how hard can this be to understand.

No, it's doing well, but not satisfying your parents. If you set your expectations too high, you're setting yourself up for disappointment no matter how good the results are.

It is negative all the way around stop trying to spin this. And Nintendo did not set their expectations to high in fact they toned down their expectations for 3DS sales a few times and it was still not satisfying.

I have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. My entire argument was thus:

  1. You said that not satisfying = always not good.
  2. I presented a scenario in which you can do good and not satisfy expectations. (i.e.: Holding expectations that are too high or unrealistic.)
  3. You chewed me out for presenting this scenario.

I wasn't trying to spin anything.

#118 Posted by baldgye (756 posts) -

I like this guy

#119 Edited by MonkeyKing1969 (2812 posts) -

I really cannot build up a good argument for why any of this matters. The Wii U will not sell, and it certainly won't see 3rd party games even if it does. Its a failed systems that will continue to fail because even astronimcal system sales won't stimulate much software development.

Three years ago Nintendo showed off Wii U at e3, they promised it would be substantially more powerful and current generation (hinting that it would not be quite up to next generation) and that they would actively pursue 3rd party games and have day & date releases of ports of their system. Very exciting words and that probably pre-sold a lot of systems...but it was BullSh_t.

Guess what? Wii U being more powerful is a bit misleading, because getting that power on the screen is not easy with the GPU pushing asynchronous video and data streams to a Wii U pad and a HDTV. So, yeah Wii U is powerful, but since the premise of the system is two screen often showing different images the system is ALWAYS handicapped. A weak man is worse at carrying a 50 lb rock up a hill, but even a strong man finds that hard when his task is to juggle two 50lb rocks while walking up the same hill.

Nintendo would gladly would have come through with it promises, but its promises were not possible. (The real question is who knew and when?) Somewhere deep in a basement at Nintendo during e3 2011 an engineer was screaming "It ain't gonna work Mr. Iwata!" He knew what should have been obvious -- you can't just slightly overshoot the power of current systems and then ask your system to output twices as much data yet have the games look the same! He probably even knew current generation game engines were not made to output asynchronous video and game data to TWO screens without tweaking. You don't have quick & easy ports when is is neither quick nor easy to make a one screen game into a two screen game.

Want quick ports? That will happen when Nintendo tell the developers, "Forget about the Wii U pad, just make games that ONLY use the Pro Controller." Which will never happen because the whole premise of the system is two screens and too few peopel who own a Wii U own a Pro Controller. The solution to Wii U is not going to be selling systems, because no matter how many units are in the channel developers don't have the tools, desire, or backing to make 'asynchronous video output' games using tools not meant to make such games.

It is over. It was over before the first Wii U unit shipped.

#121 Edited by GooieGreen (454 posts) -

@oscar__explosion: Yes, to some degree, but that tactic doesn't do well with time, especially in a down economy. So it makes perfect sense for EA and others to not invest in a system that doesn't support third party developers.

I considered buying a 3DS and a WiiU a few times but remembered that I'd only have a few Mario games and that was it. For consumers, that might be good for some but not good for others. They are limiting their audience time and time again and by making a platform that is harder to put good software on, they are not only shrinking the amount of Wii U games that people will own but also limiting the justification of buying that system. Limited functionality and a smaller library of games, no matter how appealing they may be, doesn't do it for me anymore.

#122 Posted by KaneRobot (1639 posts) -

Secondly, who was the first to include shoulder buttons on a console? Nintendo. Who was the first to have an analog stick? Four controller inputs? Nintendo. Rumble? Nintendo. VR Headset? Nintendo. Wireless? Nintendo. Motion? Nintendo. Tablet? Nintendo. They're the most innovative hardware makers out there in the console space.

Wow. No. At best, they are on equal par with others. AT BEST. It seems like every time the industry moves forward, Nintendo has to be dragged along, kicking and screaming

Disc-based games? Not Nintendo. Hard drives? Not Nintendo. Downloadable games? Not Nintendo. Steam and/or XBL-style internet service? Not Nintendo. Heck, any kind of online play AT ALL? Not Nintendo. Those are more important in the modern age than anything you listed, barring maybe shoulder buttons and wireless - although the first wireless controllers were NES pads developed by a third party, not Nintendo.

There were four ports on the Atari 5200. The 5200 controller had an analog stick as well. If you're going to argue that the N64 was the more "modern" first analog stick, I'll point you to the Playstation being the first to have an analog stick that had an influence that resonates to this day. Certainly more than the awkward N64 one.

VR headsets? I guess. I don't see how that has remained significant to consoles at all, though. It's like saying the Dreamcast was the first console to use a proprietary disc format (GD-ROM). It's a fact (I think?), but kind of an irrelevant one.

Xbox Smartglass was available before the Wii U. I'll grant you (and I'm assuming) the Wii U was probably in development first. The Wii U certainly does a much better job interfacing with the console, but if you're going to cite the N64 analog stick for being first despite its inferiority, well, there you go. Frankly, I don't count either Smartglass or the Wii U pad as proven to be significant yet. Still have years to go before that is decided.

I'll give you motion, for sure. Nintendo took that and made the most of it. It's just unfortunate that that has led to a metric ton of godawful games (both on Nintendo platforms and others) and only a handful of truly great stuff. So, thanks Nintendo. I think?

Nintendo has done a pretty damn nice job when it comes to handhelds. But pretending they are some incredible trailblazing & innovative leader on consoles is just flat out wrong.

#123 Edited by Karkarov (3133 posts) -

@hailinel:

I would stop trying dude, they don't get it. Long story short though... if you work for a company that means you represent that company. It doesn't matter what your position is or if you are PR or not. You may not be responsible for your company because you are only one dude.... but your company IS responsible for you. If this guy is still working at EA I have to wonder who they have in charge of this because I would have fired him in a New York minute. Hell I once worked for a company that made us sign an agreement that said if we even used our companies name on Twitter or other social media, at all, we would be fired right there no warning. We weren't even allowed to have other company employees as facebook friends etc.

People just don't get it. The only safe social media site is the one you never use to begin with.

@monkeyking1969:

Thank god, someone posted a reason the Wii U was likely to fail no matter what and it was lucid, intelligent, made sense, and did it all without trolling. Also, you are right, the Wii U concept is even less third party friendly than the Wii was and trying to port a game to it is just not likely to be a profitable venture. The only games that will do well on Wii U are system exclusives and the combined install base of PS whatever, Xbox (insert name here), and PC when compared to the install base of Wii U alone will be like the Empire State Building with an Ant crawling beside it. The only Wii U exclusives are going to be first party, and first party alone is not enough anymore. Nintendo does make great, stable, and innovative hardware ... the problem is console wars are no longer won by hardware they are won by software. Software is where Nintendo fails.

#124 Posted by rebgav (1429 posts) -

@monkeyking1969: IZ peepole like dat goes to show that gamers today err fackin poosee.

you say "oh no pretty grahfics becuz im poosee." you juz jealous becuz i fack u up when i find you.

image

#125 Posted by thedj93 (1237 posts) -

im calling bs, the 360 can't output at 1080p

#126 Posted by believer258 (11949 posts) -

Why does it matter how powerful the system itself is? You don't need top of the line graphical capabilities in order to make fantastic games.

True, but if Epic Mickey and other ports are any indication, the Wii U is either hard to port to or just not as powerful as the 360. Keep in mind that developers are pushing the 360 to some really harsh limits, and in some cases it really shows (Far Cry 3, most notably), and stretching that technology even thinner just can't cut it anymore.

On top of that, a system's power does more than allow for better textures and graphical effects. A system's power is what allows for more things to be possible at once. Animations, friendly and enemy AI, number of NPC's, what an NPC can do - how many times have you thought "man, that shopkeeper never really does anything?" Or, how awesome would it be if the big, sprawling cities of Skyrim were actually big sprawling cities? Another example - the usable surface area of a Minecraft world on PC is, according to this, 2.62144 × 1017 blocks big. On 360, it's 864 by 864 blocks. That's what more power allows for.

#127 Edited by natedawg_kz (234 posts) -

He is so true, Nintendo are walking dead at this point.

#129 Posted by PillClinton (3291 posts) -

@monkeyking1969: IZ peepole like dat goes to show that gamers today err fackin poosee.

you say "oh no pretty grahfics becuz im poosee." you juz jealous becuz i fack u up when i find you.

amazing.

#130 Edited by yakov456 (1908 posts) -

True, not true, doesn't matter. This guy is a dope. I know if I posted something that brought negative attention to my workplace and they knew about it I'd probably be out of a job. And his avatar is him presumably holding his young kid. Worry more about providing for him and less about creating a shit storm.

#131 Posted by Encephalon (1267 posts) -

And so Twitter claims another career.

#132 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@oscar__explosion said:

Why does it matter how powerful the system itself is? You don't need top of the line graphical capabilities in order to make fantastic games.

The fallacy in your statement is that you assume that all we want from the games industry are merely fantastic games. It's not. I can play fantastic games on an original gameboy. From the consumers to the game creators themselves, to be into videogames is to be into progress. Nintendo, at this point, stands for technical stagnation - at least on the processing power side of things. The Wii U is not what the market at large wants.

The vocabulary of videogame creation is still rapidly evolving and growing. More processing power unlocks more potential for creators to express themselves. Nintendo limits creators to the same tired vocabulary of current generation hardware, if that. Of course the touchscreen interface does add to that vocabulary too, but it alone is not enough - and it's certainly not what game creators need. Nintendo failed to unshackle their creativity with the Wii U, and that's how you're dead wrong with your assessement.

Assuming the Wii U won't catch on with the broader public as phenomenally as the Wii did (spoiler warning: it won't), Nintendo's marketshare will be very weak. It will already take a whole lot of fantastic first party games to get the Wii U off the ground enough to be anything but a collossal failure.

P.S. Aside from the tone, the EA employee in question just expressed his opinion on the Wii U. There's nothing wrong with that. I guess a public apology to Nintendo is in order however, because *Politics*.

#133 Edited by ArtelinaRose (1855 posts) -

I don't see what's so bad about stating facts. It IS less powerful than the 360, third party games ARE NOT a large part of Nintendo system's revenue, EA's PC market IS much smaller than their console one...

#134 Posted by BestUsernameEver (4825 posts) -

@nictel said:

Bob Summerwill, former employee of EA.

Yep, do they seriously think they can spout off this incendiary nonsense and not get fired? Maybe he knew he was going to be laid off or something, or is just straight up dumb.

#135 Edited by BestUsernameEver (4825 posts) -
#136 Edited by Hailinel (24969 posts) -
#137 Edited by TheManiacsGnome (270 posts) -

Condemned looked like shit and had a shitty framerate, sure it comes at a different time but I have no desire to write off a console this early in the game.

I would also like to point out EA's own Need for Speed: Most Wanted U (I didn't buy it, I had already bought it on the 360) the technical analysis all points to a superior Wii U version. I'm not going sit here and tell you everything is perfect, but to paint such a bleak picture this early is doing everyone a disservice. We don't know how people are going to react to the PS4 or new Xbox within the first year, we don't know how the software is going to sell and we don't know how the effects of Tablets and a resurgent PC gaming side is going to effect things.

Expecting the Wii U to sell like the Wii was always foolish, even if it was named Wii 2 we weren't going to see the same levels of interest. We weren't going to see it showing up in nursing homes, and we weren't going to see it create the same level of interest outside gaming circles. The thing is, you're deluded if you think interest for the PS4/New Xbox extends outside the enthusiast market at this stage.

#138 Posted by Alexander (1721 posts) -

The only party known to be screwed in all this is Nintendo.

#139 Posted by eskimo (477 posts) -
#140 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4368 posts) -

Dude is right on some things and I can see where he's coming from but he also has no idea of personal restraint. He's going to regret talking that candidly.

#141 Posted by Zelnox (390 posts) -

How many EA engineers like this guy does it take to build a Wii U game? How many of them will it require to develop for PS4/next Xbox?

If already mid-size publishers are falling by the wayside in the PS3/Xbox 360 generation, what will be left? I only assume it will cost even more in terms of art assets generation. It sounds kind of precarious for the industry if a publisher will only fund games that appeals to everyone in order to make money. Cue the last Bombcast or the one before that.

#142 Edited by Darji (5294 posts) -

@zelnox said:

How many EA engineers like this guy does it take to build a Wii U game? How many of them will it require to develop for PS4/next Xbox?

If already mid-size publishers are falling by the wayside in the PS3/Xbox 360 generation, what will be left? I only assume it will cost even more in terms of art assets generation. It sounds kind of precarious for the industry if a publisher will only fund games that appeals to everyone in order to make money. Cue the last Bombcast or the one before that.

I think you do not understand that people normally create assets in a much much higher and better quality and resolution you will ever see. They just tone it so much down that it will run on the sytstem. Stuff like textures, lightning or better AA will not cost more money..... For example Naughtydog creates Charactermodels with over 1.5 million Polygons alone.

#143 Posted by Illuminosopher (329 posts) -

isn't EA considered the worst company in gaming right now? who cares what they say.

for the the record I'M not saying EA is the worst, that just seemed to be the consensus of the masses not to long ago.

In the end it doesn't matter how powerful a Nintendo console is if you want Nintendo games you need a Nintendo console, 3rd party's are just along for the ride.

#144 Posted by LikeaSsur (1537 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@bestusernameever said:

@obcdexter said:

Shin Megami Hentai

@hailinel said:

And what does SMH mean?

Swirling my hips.

Seriously?

It's "Shaking My Head," but that's archaic. It could have changed for all I know.

#145 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

No tweets since his comments and removal of them.. Removed info about working for EA.

#146 Posted by BestUsernameEver (4825 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@bestusernameever said:

@obcdexter said:

Shin Megami Hentai

@hailinel said:

And what does SMH mean?

Swirling my hips.

Seriously?

It's "Shaking My Head," but that's archaic. It could have changed for all I know.

Yeah it's shaking my head, just wanted to see if anyone would believe my version.

#147 Edited by Clonedzero (4200 posts) -

I didnt need some drunk EA guy to tell me the WiiU sucks. I already knew that.

#149 Edited by ArtelinaRose (1855 posts) -

@artemesia: Facks? itz opinuons you stupid sheet. err you fackin stupid? Tell me wear you live so I can fack you up.

1234 Sesame ST

bring it buttlord