They pretty much always play coy when it comes to announcing whether or not there will be a PC version of major AAA title like GTA. It's all about seeing how many people they can sucker into buying a new system just to play that one game. Honestly I don't really care what you play your games on, Xbox, Playstation, Nintendo, PC, an abacus, I really don't give a fuck. I think people are just tired of being jerked around by manipulative assholes and being treated like chumps, that's where a lot of the anger comes from.
There are also certain games I don't find fun on a console, like FPS games, you can make the worlds most awesome FPS ever and if it can only be played with a control pad then I will not touch it, ever.

Also, it restricting used games isn't rumour anymore. You have to install games and then that disc is locked to your account. If you buy a used game, you have to pay MS, i think they said $10, to be able to then lock it to a different account. To be honest, that's not so bad, it's not like Nintendo where it's locked to a fucking console instead of an account, and you can change it. I just wonder if the publishers get the money or if MS hogs it all.

The worst news is that they will not be supporting Indie devs beyond what they do with the 360. Typical short sighted move by MS. If PS4 supports indies like Steam and Apple does, there's a massive potential there!

Your Nintendo's a gay taquito.

Oh yeah, still definitely is. I meant when they were touting motion controls for the first time, like this is jokingly doing, except Nintendo were serious.

Motion controls will always suck because simply put, there's zero feedback in what you're doing, and there is no precision at all. Anything that requires precision and timing, it's utterly worthless.

At a previous studio I worked at, we made a Wii exclusive game and had jump as shake on the wiimote, after attempts to try and flick in the specific direction you wanted to jump in. What a disaster that was. Then there was flick up, that didn't work either so in the end we went with random shake and even then it was pretty clear, pretty quickly that even this was annoying, but we left it in. In the sequel we had the option to use A as jump (by default), it was much kinder on the wrist.

I waiting to see what Valve's media PC/console will look like. Its interesting that they consider their main rivals in the contest for the living room to be Apple and not Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo.

The problem is that consoles these days don't have anything really new to offer except for more processing power which people really don't give a shit about as much anymore. The Wii proved that you can make a ton of money without having the best GPU/CPU.

You also had this phenomenon of consoles becoming more popular than PCs. But wait, they achieved this because the console added all these extra features...in other words, Consoles started to beat PCs....by becoming more PC-like. Wait a minute...that's not exactly beating PCs then is it?

Especially since I can still do more with a PC than I can do with a Console and I don't have to be restricted by what MS/Sony/Nintendo lock me into.

With the advent of Media PCs...the need for consoles have been lessened unless you specifically want to play a game that is an exclusive for a console.

What people really want is convergence, which is exactly what console makers don't want. I think people are sick of having to buy multiple consoles to play the games they want. When in reality, a PC can do it all and not be limited by these artificial restrictions.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I'm very interested. This could very well be the next big thing. What I don't get is why it is that a little Kick-started start-up can make this work but Nintendo couldn't with the Virtua boy - nor could Sony or other companies with their goggly video glass things.

Didn't realize the CD Rom thing happened in 1989...thought that happened during the period when Nintendo was looking into the Super NES's successor, many years later.

In the Mario Kart segment you had Mario racing Bowser so having the last boss music from Super Mario World is not a far leap. Using so much from the Super Nintendo age of Mario and not including Yoshi is a travesty..Travesty!

I have one of these for my cats and there are two that LOVE this thing. I call it Kitty Nintendo because it will keep them busy for a while.

I bet this guy never gets Nintendo Thumb.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'zelda, cross, christian, griwing boobies, 1992, bastards, link, peahat, nintendo' to 'zelda, cross, christian, growing boobies, 1992, bastards, link, peahat, nintendo' - edited by xxovercastxx

>> ^shuac:

Very true. And while all technology products are derivative of earlier products to some degree, I think Microsoft does more bandwagon-jumping than most. Let's look at the evidence.
Java, made by Sun. "Reimagined" by Microsoft.
Console gaming, made by Atari, Nintendo, Sega, Sony, et al. Microsoft gives us Xbox.
Online Music, pioneered by Napster, made legitimate by Apple. Microsoft gives us MSN Music.
MP3 player, pioneered by Rio, made super popular by Apple. Microsoft gives us Zune.
Internet search, pioneered by Archie in 1990, made insanely profitable by Google. Microsoft gives us MSN. And Live Search. And Bing.
Far as tablet computing goes, Microsoft actually has a much bigger history than Apple. I remember MS peddling tablets back in 2001 with XP. Trouble is, XP was never designed as a touch interface. Even as recent as 2008, Microsoft tried this strategy with the Origami.
The innovation Apple made is to take its smartphone OS (whose design is based on touch) and pull it up to the tablet rather than take a full-blown desktop OS and push it down. This is the idea Microsoft is copying with Surface and Windows 8.
Other than Kinect, which is an innovative product since it is more than merely a response to the Wii, I'm not sure Microsoft invented anything. Even its flagship Office suite is based on earlier software (WordStar, WordPerfect, dBase, Lotus 1-2-3). In fact, when Microsoft first licensed MS-DOS to IBM for a huge profit back in 1981, it was essentially QDOS, which they purchased outright from some guy for $50,000. Deal of the century.
You may say, "Well Apple didn't invent the MP3 player. Why aren't they guilty of copying too?"
They are. But Microsoft's history is rife with this sort of "me-too" thing in a way no other company's is. Let me distil my point into one sentence: How many companies are copying Microsoft's products?
To sum up: Microsoft is slim on innovation, fat on looking over the shoulders of the smart kids in class...>> ^Sarzy:
>> ^mtadd:
Microsoft never fails to innovate their name on someone else's product.

Yes, because the iPad was, of course, the first tablet ever.



Cool story bro.

No, seriously though, you do raise some interesting arguments. The only point I was trying to make is that it seems a bit reductionist to dismiss the Surface as merely an iPad clone, when it seems like Microsoft is legitimately trying to do some interesting things with it and Windows 8, rather than just jumping on the iPad bandwagon.

Very true. And while all technology products are derivative of earlier products to some degree, I think Microsoft does more bandwagon-jumping than most. Let's look at the evidence.

* Java, made by Sun. "Reimagined" by Microsoft.
* Console gaming, made by Atari, Nintendo, Sega, Sony, et al. Microsoft gives us Xbox.
* Online Music, pioneered by Napster, made legitimate by Apple. Microsoft gives us MSN Music.
* MP3 player, pioneered by Rio, made super popular by Apple. Microsoft gives us Zune.
* Internet search, pioneered by Archie in 1990, made insanely profitable by Google. Microsoft gives us MSN. And Live Search. And Bing.

Far as tablet computing goes, Microsoft actually has a much bigger history than Apple. I remember MS peddling tablets back in 2001 with XP. Trouble is, XP was never designed as a touch interface. Even as recent as 2008, Microsoft tried this strategy with the Origami.

The innovation Apple made is to take its smartphone OS (whose design is based on touch) and pull it up to the tablet rather than take a full-blown desktop OS and push it down. This is the idea Microsoft is copying with Surface and Windows 8.

Other than Kinect, which is an innovative product since it is more than merely a response to the Wii, I'm not sure Microsoft invented anything. Even its flagship Office suite is based on earlier software (WordStar, WordPerfect, dBase, Lotus 1-2-3). In fact, when Microsoft first licensed MS-DOS to IBM for a huge profit back in 1981, it was essentially QDOS, which they purchased outright from some guy for $50,000. Deal of the century.

You may say, "Well Apple didn't invent the MP3 player. Why aren't they guilty of copying too?"

They are. But Microsoft's history is rife with this sort of "me-too" thing in a way no other company's is. Let me distil my point into one sentence: How many companies are copying Microsoft's products?

To sum up: Microsoft is slim on innovation, fat on looking over the shoulders of the smart kids in class...>> ^Sarzy:

>> ^mtadd:
Microsoft never fails to innovate their name on someone else's product.

Yes, because the iPad was, of course, the first tablet ever.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'NES, Google Maps, quest, Nintendo, Famicom' to 'NES, Google Maps, quest, Nintendo, Famicom, april fools day' - edited by xxovercastxx