Crank out a slew of new properties, see what sticks.
Rethink their approach to hardware. Either provide performance consistent with the competition and price, or compete so savagely on price that performance/third party support doesn't matter and everyone who plays games can pick up your system without having to think about the value proposition. Either way, "off the shelf" components are bound to be cheaper than crafting bespoke hardware with a bunch of back-compat redundancies, a fresh start would not hurt.
This is what I would have said. I understand that their casual franchises make them a ton of money, but they're losing more and more traction with the enthusiast crowd with each new system (outside of handhelds). The casual audience isn't a sure enough bet to rely on (as they're learning with the Wii U), so they need to start providing something to the core audience. I honestly don't understand Nintendo. They are probably the best and most creative game developers in the world and have a huge catalog of some of the most loved games in history, and yet they subsist on just rehashing a small handful of franchises.
It's the same policy as now, but it will be interesting to see how multiplatform publishers deal with it. On the one hand, you can imagine a company like EA wanting consistency in how people can access and acquire their games. But on the other hand, being responsible for setting up that system for the PS4 on your own (instead of Microsoft having it in place) could be a big headache/cost (not to mention getting significant ill will from the user base). Unless they just went straight up old-school one-time use PC codes across the board and called it a day.
I really don't understand why people are so upset about it this, what was the last amazing star wars game? KoToR, which is easily 10 years old at this point. I personally liked Force unleashed 1, but that's easily 5 years ago. It's not like licensing games out to different companies was yielding great results every time, for every star wars lego you had 2-3 Kinect Star Wars. Someone was going to snatch this up and they had to be big, so that's who? EA, Activision, Ubisoft? There's not a lot of other companies with the money to support this franchise. So I'll chalk the reactions I'm seeing under generic internet rage.
Yeah I don't get it either. Of the realistic possibilities, EA is the one who has the studios (between Visceral, DICE and Bioware) that seem like they could best realize the different types of Star Wars games most people would want.
It's a syringe. Glycosylated hemoglobin. It's not wishing good luck and batmans.
Glycosylated hemoglobin wouldn't be IN syringes. Well, it could be, but not in the context of injecting yourself with it.
Assuming the devs wouldn't just go "oh yeah its Glycosylated hemoglobin" without knowing that it is something you test for in the diagnosis of diabetes, not something you would inject yourself with. Unless i am missing context and the syringe isnt something you inject yourself with, i haven't played it yet.
Someone said in the Quick Look comments that the GlHb was Glycosylated Hemoglobin...but I just think they Googled "GlHb" and figured that's what it was. It's way out of context and not something that would ever have the remotest possibility of being in a syringe intended for injection.
Yea, glycosylated hemoglobin doesn't make sense. HbA1c is the right/accepted/used acronym anyway.
I don't subscribe right now but I do watch Prime instant video on Amazon. Not much content but it does have Sherlock and Dr. Who. I just finished watching my Fullmetal Alchemist DVDs (great show) and i'm thinking about joining Netflix again to watch the movie, but I can't check to see if its on streaming. Actually, can someone check for me if Fullmetal Alchemist the Movie: Conqueror of Shamballa in streaming in HD on Netflix?
I just checked for you and I couldn't find it.
I got a half year trial of the streaming service as a present, and I use it a lot. Mostly because I don't have cable, so it's easy access to a lot of shows/movies.