Shindig

I don't see why Nintendo has to bend to anything. Their output is narrow enough to be controlled on their own terms. They are dipping into streaming but they'd need to make serious connections with a streaming service to make it work. Hell, Amazon, Google, etc could just land apps on Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony's platforms to get the best of both worlds.

I've never been south of Birmingham so can't offer much. Edinburgh is nice. As is Newcastle / Gateshead. I have to represent. Every time I mention London to the guys I know who live there, they tell me to steer clear.

basicallyolly marked this as the best answer

I mean, Playstation are in the hat in a small way with PSNow. They must have plans to make that more prominent whilst trying to sell us one more box. Google have the money and raw server power but Sony have a legacy and decades of titles they can point towards. It's bizarre, though. If this catches on, the web infrastructure has to move with it. Google themselves have shown have difficult that can be with their youtube algorithms acting poorly as moderation for their service.

As a consumer, this is exciting. The idea that the money I could spend on a PC upgrade can go to a subscription instead would be a nice alternative. Assuming it runs at a level I'm okay with.

From a developer standpoint, what does this do to costs? Designing to a set spec like they do today might at least help put a cap on development spend. If there is no ceiling, what does this do to an already fragile development space? Do we get developers aiming for unreachable goals and then having to make it back by sales numbers they can't hit? What even is a sale when it's tied to a service?

What the fuck?

I like the look of that remake. I remember playing the demo so many years ago and don't think I can bring myself to play the original in full. It gets the atmosphere right.

I haven't seen a driver run away with a race like that in a long time. MotoGP started last weekend. It was tight and I'm glad it's back.

I just look at Konami as a test for how Activision might go. They've got such a narrow output at the moment. The key difference between the two is how Activision don't really have any fingers in other pies. Activision might become more of a publisher but they have so many studios under their wing that need projects to work on. Konami have diversified in a way that we only see in Japan.

If Activision's output doesn't bring it in any more, they could find themselves looking to publishing more.

Blade Runner's stupid unicorn.

Tying stuff to a service is the reason I'm reluctant to get the Switch Online stuff for the NES games. I'll have them until they decide to bring a new box out. Just open up a rom site and be cool, please.

Yeah but ... there's silly and then there's stopping the bad guys who cured cancer and achieved world peace (MGS4), the peace loving schoolgirl who goes, "FUCK PEACE!" when she learns the death cult have a nuclear equipped robot (Peace Walker) and then the powerful psychic child who can rip viruses out of your neck without you even noticing (MGSV).

I'm getting old, man. It's harder to overlook. Even knowing what Kojima did with the keys to Konami, him courting del Toro, Reedus, Mikkelsen and Wagner makes me wonder how much this is going to cost Sony to front. As an aside, I'm playing Revengeance for the first time. I wonder just how much Konami is in that because, boy, this is good Platinum.

Would it? The fiction peaked in 3 and he spent a decade spinning his wheels trying to retcon everything.