The Great CT - Community Thread

simplyTravis

Lamer Gamers Podcast Co-Host
What are your favorite sad / depressing songs

Was thinking if this today and only a few came to mind, at least for now

Ana's Song - Silverchair
A Rose for Emily - The Zombies
Hurt - Nine Inch Nails (or the cash cover)
Changes - Black Sabbath (or the soul cover)
The End - The Doors
Get Better by Frank Turner
The Next Storm by Frank Turner
The Big Sleep by Streetlight Manifesto or Toh Kay
Somewhere in The Between by Streetlight Manifesto or Toh Kay
Silver and Cold by AFI
Because of the Shame by Against Me!
Future 86 by Bomb The Music Industry
Good Things by The Menzingers
Where Have You Been? by Reel Big Fish
The Kids Will Be Alright, Eventually - Sledding with Tigers
The Shortest Pier by Tony Sly
59 Sound by The Gaslight Anthem


I'm sure there are more also. Some of these don't necessarily sound depressing on the surface but generally deal with a lot of depressing issues. The first two were my sort of personal anthems while dealing with my father going through and succumbing to cancer. They are hard to listen to (personally) but very motivating through the hardest of times.

The Big Sleep and Somewhere in the Between by Streetlight Manifesto (Toh Kay is the lead singers acoustic stuff) are dealing with suicide and death. Somewhere in the Between is probably one of the most epic songs I've ever witnessed live. The Big Sleep by (Toh Kay version) is probably one of the most beautifully somber songs I've heard.

Silver and Cold is like an abstract of sadness. Nothing terribly easy to grasp on to. It just fits all the sadness checkpoints.

Because of the Shame by Against Me! is just great. Dealing with various issues. A lot of Against Me songs are pretty sad in general. The lead singer went through transgender dysphoria and sang about this on some albums. There are a lot of mixed emotions in general and stories that are very intense.

Future 86 is a song by a dadaist ska/punk collective that is about settling down and giving up yourself overtime to find out you just are unhappy with that person you sacrificed for. Beware, the song gets loud at the end.

Good Things is amazing. Probably one of my favorite songs to sing. Just listen to it.

Where Have You Been? by RBF is the classic of a woman runs off with another guy but wants to come back. One of the depressing songs they sing that actually sounds depressing. Most of their music has ridiculously depressing music wrapped up in a saccharine ska coating sprinkled with trumpets.

The Kids Will Be Alright, Eventually is about personal failures. It's great. By a band nobody will know about. Their version of Sunshine is pretty great too.

The Shortest Pier is just sad. The lead singer was from No Use For A Name and most likely died from suicide from dealing with chronic back pain. You can hear the pain in his songs and solo work.

59 Sound is a song about a friend dying. It's very, very good. Neo-soul/blues punky stuff. It's great.
 

sjmartin79

White Phoenix of the Crown
So infinity war is fucking great, but I can imagine people not giving it the credit it deserves

consider the scope of the film, and yet it is still funny, emotional, action packed AND full of surprises

I don't think any movie has ever had to work with this many moving pieces, by all rights it should have been a cluster fuck, but it wasn't

That deserves some serious praise, so I hope the fickle take that into account

Also the fight between thanos and doctor strange is the most comic book thing I have ever seen on film
Saw it this weekend and loved it! And happy Belated Birthday!

After 17 years of having my cat Martini she was out to sleep today after having great difficulty to breath.

She was the best cat and I loved her so much. RIP Bean
I'm sorry for your loss, Matt.
 
wew, finally got some time in to catch up on some TV. I then proceeded to waste it by re-watching all of The Good Place again, such a great show.
But I did catch up on Silicon Valley, which is still great, also how lucky of them to write off T.J Miller when they did. One thing, I dont know who at Verizon thought hiring Richard as their spokesperson was a good idea. I guess the stats are in their favor, not a whole lot of the masses are watching the show, but for those that are Richard is pretty unlikable. Great character, but almost every step he takes makes you want to tear your hair out.

Also finished Bates Motel. I'm mixed on it. Some of the characters sucked but then they killed them off so cool. Then some of the cool characters began to suck and get stupid and they killed them off, so cool. It could be pretty boring but I found it compelling throughout. The last season especially, each episode had something going on, non-stop STUFF happening. But it was entirely predictable, even the twists on the original film, those were the most obvious. The ending was serviceable but disappointing. Doesnt help when you compare it to the ending of the original film, which is, decades later, still amazing.
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
wew, finally got some time in to catch up on some TV. I then proceeded to waste it by re-watching all of The Good Place again, such a great show.
But I did catch up on Silicon Valley, which is still great, also how lucky of them to write off T.J Miller when they did. One thing, I dont know who at Verizon thought hiring Richard as their spokesperson was a good idea. I guess the stats are in their favor, not a whole lot of the masses are watching the show, but for those that are Richard is pretty unlikable. Great character, but almost every step he takes makes you want to tear your hair out.

Also finished Bates Motel. I'm mixed on it. Some of the characters sucked but then they killed them off so cool. Then some of the cool characters began to suck and get stupid and they killed them off, so cool. It could be pretty boring but I found it compelling throughout. The last season especially, each episode had something going on, non-stop STUFF happening. But it was entirely predictable, even the twists on the original film, those were the most obvious. The ending was serviceable but disappointing. Doesnt help when you compare it to the ending of the original film, which is, decades later, still amazing.
The good place is indeed great but I have no time to rewatch it...

For the podcast I have been watching Legion, Westworld, and lost in space... All good to varying degrees

Cobra Kai also came out on YouTube red, and it is SURPRISINGLY good...the first 2 episodes are free, but I subscribed for the rest (will cancel after a month)... They offer a free 1 month trial, but like a year ago I had a free 3 month promo trial, so I didn't qualify... But $10 for a month of no commercials on YouTube and the rest of Cobra Kai, as well as music streaming is worth it, but I won't keep it

Silicon Valley is still great, and Barry is too, I am falling behind on The Expanse and Ash Vs Evil Dead, even though they are both great as well... I haven't seen any of this season of the Americans, which is apparently the best season yet
 

Karkashan

Married to Chrom
About infinity war

I like how they're (the directors/producers) trying to be all like "no, we're totally killing off these characters. dead is dead guyz, srsly" and I'm just like "who the fuck do you think you're trying to fool"?
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
About infinity war

I like how they're (the directors/producers) trying to be all like "no, we're totally killing off these characters. dead is dead guyz, srsly" and I'm just like "who the fuck do you think you're trying to fool"?
My guess

everyone who died before the ash incident is dead, the ash people never died they just got sent to the soul realm... So the dead ones are like Loki, Heimdall, Gamora... Maybe Vision

For the next movie I think they will undo the ash thing, but in order to do so, 1 of them will have to make a sacrifice to the soul gem....most likely with a recently reconciled cap and Stark, with one of them dying for the other to get the soul gem
 
Last edited:

sjmartin79

White Phoenix of the Crown
My guess

everyone who died before the ash incident is dead, the ash people never died they just got sent to the soul realm... So the dead ones are like Loki, Heimdall, Gamora... Maybe Vision

For the next movie I think they will undo the ash thing, but in order to do so, 1 of them will have to make a sacrifice to the soul gem....most likely with a recently reconciled cap and Stark, with one of them dying for the other to get the soul gem
According to the director, Gamora is in the Soul Stone. So, not dead either.

But yeah, I think Heimdall is dead. As for Loki, I wouldn't count him out just yet. Could have been an illusion trick. As for Vision, that one I just don't know.
 

MANGANian

Megalomaniacal Robo-Zombie
It's kinda nice to see some appreciation for exclusives which doesn't boil down to business profits. I love exclusivity myself. It's too bad my wallet doesn't.

I'm grateful that Nintendo was finally regulating shovelware. And yeah, the amount of high quality games being released on the Switch at such a short notice is insane; I keep having to update my thread just to accommodate it and make sure good games get exposure.

What he doesn't realize is that every system with a ton of high quality games gets shovelware. The problem is that the Wii, Wii U, and 3DS had more shovelware than high quality titles...that or a good portion of high quality titles weren't released in the U.S., a particularly egregious case with the original DS and Wii. Not having enough string of high quality releases is what's known as a drought. For every No More Heroes you got once in a while, you got Party Babyz. However, for systems like the PS2, that wasn't the case. There were a boatload of high quality titles to compensate for shovelware, and I feel like that's the case with the Switch, although that's not to say Nintendo shouldn't ease up on regulations. The Switch is also setting new records for Nintendo: for instance, it's the first Nintendo console to get 50 M rated titles in just a year. Yeah, not a big deal to the average gamer, but every previous Nintendo console and handheld had much, much less in their entire lifetimes! I'm just worried that the traction might die down, especially if Wolfenstein II doesn't sell well.
I don't know about high quality titles, but the biggest advantage the PS2 had was outside of the apparent shovelware, some games where made to be just average but fun enough to be worth your time which helped a lot, if I'm explaining myself well enough.

What are your favorite sad / depressing songs

Was thinking if this today and only a few came to mind, at least for now

Ana's Song - Silverchair
A Rose for Emily - The Zombies
Hurt - Nine Inch Nails (or the cash cover)
Changes - Black Sabbath (or the soul cover)
The End - The Doors
One of the few songs I don't experience song fatigue from. Also had a weird obsession with the title during my teenage years.

 

Karkashan

Married to Chrom
yeesh at all these people complaining about the online price of Switch multiplayer, calling it a "sheep tax" or something completely stupid or asinine like that (and oftentimes singing Sony's praises).

Thing is, is that Nintendo's online service has most of the important shit that others do as well: Online gaming, discounts, 'free' games, cloud saves. Other than system wide party groups (which are cancer and not worth anyone's time) they've got pretty much the same shit the others do.

It's 20 fucking bucks a year, people. That's less than 2 bucks a fucking month.
 

Juegos

All mods go to heaven.
Moderator
yeesh at all these people complaining about the online price of Switch multiplayer, calling it a "sheep tax" or something completely stupid or asinine like that (and oftentimes singing Sony's praises).

Thing is, is that Nintendo's online service has most of the important shit that others do as well: Online gaming, discounts, 'free' games, cloud saves. Other than system wide party groups (which are cancer and not worth anyone's time) they've got pretty much the same shit the others do.

It's 20 fucking bucks a year, people. That's less than 2 bucks a fucking month.
That's less than a bag of Big Time Crunch per month. If you've had Big Time Crunch, you'd know that's not an easy choice.

 
Alright, throwing out an open proposal to pool together Nintendo Switch accounts and split the cost of a yearly family subscription.

Should there be minimal restrictions, the $35 can be split up to 8 ways, essentially making it 4-5 bucks a year for each person. Massive. We'll see how it works but if it's possible I just wanna get this idea in your heads.
 

MANGANian

Megalomaniacal Robo-Zombie
Absolutely detest having to pay the full game to use the Playstation Network for a year. I don't care how many bargain sales I'm getting, it's just expensive and inconvenient as faqk!

I'd take Nintendo's paid online service over PSPlus in a heartbeat.
 

EvilTw1n

Even my henchmen think I'm crazy.
Moderator
Wanted to backtrack for a sec, just to address these, in case there was a misunderstanding.
Actually, it might be time to close that thread down. I created it as a way to keep the poison from the elections from infecting the CT and elsewhere. So, it may be time to lance that boil of a thread and move on without it. I'm completely ok with that.
And I absolutely understand that. The best laid plans, y'know? I most certainly don't question your intentions in making it.
We have our disagreements there, no doubt about it, but I still find it interesting to hear different perspectives. Just earlier this week (this is more made for the politics thread, but since we are on the subject), my GF and I went and saw a man named Dennis Prager, who you might have heard of. We went there because she was curious on what he had to say, given his conservative views, and as centrists ourselves, I owe it to hear different perspectives of others, and where certain folks stand.
There's hearing different perspectives, and then there's interacting with them. The former is easy, the latter is hard. Especially so when, in a discussion, you're relying on "principles" or a closely-held ideology. It becomes extraordinarily difficult to argue in good faith when you're operating from beliefs in such close proximity to a part of your sense of self; it becomes easier to just state a maxim (take your pick), say "eh that person disagrees," and then argue in a different direction. But nothing is solved there, which is why that thread comes to resemble a Politico comments section instead of what the TNE forums usually offer. Maybe that's a healthy thing, overall, but I don't think it's terribly representative of the forum, or even the good nature of the people who post in it. Politics, religion, and the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown.

Now, onto gaming things, where I'mma put my cranky old-person hat on.


yeesh at all these people complaining about the online price of Switch multiplayer, calling it a "sheep tax" or something completely stupid or asinine like that (and oftentimes singing Sony's praises).

Thing is, is that Nintendo's online service has most of the important shit that others do as well: Online gaming, discounts, 'free' games, cloud saves. Other than system wide party groups (which are cancer and not worth anyone's time) they've got pretty much the same shit the others do.

It's 20 fucking bucks a year, people. That's less than 2 bucks a fucking month.
Calling people names for saying they'd buy a subscription service is absolutely stupid, yeah. Doing it while virtue-signaling to another business entity that's doing the same thing, but more expensive, borders on a level of dolt-hood that could only make sense for the type of Cheetos-encrusted, knuckle-dragging bro fanboy you read about in google news, after they end up in jail after SWAT-ing a grandmother.

But it doesn't change the underlying principle - we're paying for something that used to be baked into the cost of developing a game (and honestly still is). Online is being put behind a paywall, when we aren't even getting dedicated servers (just rented server space routinely moved around for "server maintenance" that acts as a ping "listen" to find a player to actually host the P2P match). It is one part of a greater wholesale changing of the gaming landscape into a "service" industry (like, for instance, when people talk up "continued support" for a game like Splatoon...when it launches with fewer maps and features than games routinely did in years prior, which is evidence of slow-walking the release of the full retail game, not giving "free" DLC; we have allowed this in games, but would be far less sanguine if we bought a movie but only got to see the last 1/4 of it two months later, or purchased a book and got the end-chapters at the discretion of the publishing company). We will pay for the "service" of playing the online game we bought, and will get the added "service" of playing classic games that we've already paid for 3-4 times, but now without ever owning anything. I can't blame people for balking, and saying "I could play online for free on PC and use the subscription money for a Rasberry Pi to play the games I've already bought - with the added bonus of those games not disappearing if my subscription lapses." Hell, at some point, I'll probably do that myself.

On the pricing front, I know it's cheap. But...I just went through tax season, and had to find $6 Bennies to pay the feds (which I acknowledge was due to not changing some withholding I should have done last year when I moved jobs). I have juuuuust enough money to pay rent this month. But subtract $20, and I wouldn't. People are blase on cash as small as this online fee, and I understand why. It seems like a trivial sum. But sometimes it honestly makes a difference.

Subscriptions are the way things are now, I concede. XBL was patient zero for the prion disease that has infected us all, and there's probably no going back after so much consumer agency has been parlayed into convenient business. I hope the VC service is a nice surprise.

Which is all a roundabout way of being way too effing serious on a hobby where I hunt giant dinosaurs in my underwear.
Alright, throwing out an open proposal to pool together Nintendo Switch accounts and split the cost of a yearly family subscription.

Should there be minimal restrictions, the $35 can be split up to 8 ways, essentially making it 4-5 bucks a year for each person. Massive. We'll see how it works but if it's possible I just wanna get this idea in your heads.
I'd do it. But...as I said in Discord, I dunno...the FAQ makes it seem unlikely.

Q: If someone buys an individual membership, can other users on the same Nintendo Switch system use that Nintendo Switch Online membership?
A: Individual memberships can only be used by the Nintendo Account holder who purchased the membership. However, you can share the Nintendo Switch Online features across all the Nintendo Accounts in a family group by purchasing a family membership.

It sounds more like a way for multiple accounts on one system to access online, not not multiple accounts on many systems (single accounts on many systems, yes, though).
Speaking of discussion

I want to do a nintendo podcast tonight at 7pm pst

The topic is the online service

Will is already in

Anyone else available?
If I could ever get a damn mic working on something besides Android Discord, I would. Alas.
 

Karkashan

Married to Chrom
While yes, it used to be free, and yes, dev costs of online games were baked into the initial dev costs of the game as a whole, these matchmaking servers do cost money to run and do cost money to maintain. Also the amount of people playing online now is far higher than when they were playing then.

Think about this (though I might end up wrong): Nintendo shut down online for the Wii years ago. Yet the 360 still has online up and running, and it came out before the Wii. (yes, I'm aware that this argument is foolproof ie they shut down OG xbox live and PS3 didn't have to pay for online) (however PS+ was a thing before the PS4 came out and it being a thing now no doubt helps cover the costs associated with the S3's servers and whatnot). So this might me than Nintendo Switch online service could potentially last longer because of this than previous consoles.

Now, I understand that having to pay for something you used to get for free is annoying. Be that as it may, Nintendo is providing a service (albeit limited. Yet at the same time at a fraction of the price competitor's charge for so not having the same suite of features makes sense when you're not paying as much) and services have value if you have to pay for them (not literally, I'm just saying that's how peoples' minds work).

You did not buy the online interactions when you bought the game. You bought the game that could be played without these, and it just so happens that you can get an additional feature for a small service fee. Legally speaking, that is. Do devs/pubs advertise their games as if you're buying online multiplayer? Yes, yes they do. But that's salesmanship.

Quick addition : Could Nintendo get away with charging less for this stuff? Absolutely. But they're a company and companies don't sell you shit for what it's worth.
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
Wanted to backtrack for a sec, just to address these, in case there was a misunderstanding.

And I absolutely understand that. The best laid plans, y'know? I most certainly don't question your intentions in making it.

There's hearing different perspectives, and then there's interacting with them. The former is easy, the latter is hard. Especially so when, in a discussion, you're relying on "principles" or a closely-held ideology. It becomes extraordinarily difficult to argue in good faith when you're operating from beliefs in such close proximity to a part of your sense of self; it becomes easier to just state a maxim (take your pick), say "eh that person disagrees," and then argue in a different direction. But nothing is solved there, which is why that thread comes to resemble a Politico comments section instead of what the TNE forums usually offer. Maybe that's a healthy thing, overall, but I don't think it's terribly representative of the forum, or even the good nature of the people who post in it. Politics, religion, and the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown.

Now, onto gaming things, where I'mma put my cranky old-person hat on.



Calling people names for saying they'd buy a subscription service is absolutely stupid, yeah. Doing it while virtue-signaling to another business entity that's doing the same thing, but more expensive, borders on a level of dolt-hood that could only make sense for the type of Cheetos-encrusted, knuckle-dragging bro fanboy you read about in google news, after they end up in jail after SWAT-ing a grandmother.

But it doesn't change the underlying principle - we're paying for something that used to be baked into the cost of developing a game (and honestly still is). Online is being put behind a paywall, when we aren't even getting dedicated servers (just rented server space routinely moved around for "server maintenance" that acts as a ping "listen" to find a player to actually host the P2P match). It is one part of a greater wholesale changing of the gaming landscape into a "service" industry (like, for instance, when people talk up "continued support" for a game like Splatoon...when it launches with fewer maps and features than games routinely did in years prior, which is evidence of slow-walking the release of the full retail game, not giving "free" DLC; we have allowed this in games, but would be far less sanguine if we bought a movie but only got to see the last 1/4 of it two months later, or purchased a book and got the end-chapters at the discretion of the publishing company). We will pay for the "service" of playing the online game we bought, and will get the added "service" of playing classic games that we've already paid for 3-4 times, but now without ever owning anything. I can't blame people for balking, and saying "I could play online for free on PC and use the subscription money for a Rasberry Pi to play the games I've already bought - with the added bonus of those games not disappearing if my subscription lapses." Hell, at some point, I'll probably do that myself.

On the pricing front, I know it's cheap. But...I just went through tax season, and had to find $6 Bennies to pay the feds (which I acknowledge was due to not changing some withholding I should have done last year when I moved jobs). I have juuuuust enough money to pay rent this month. But subtract $20, and I wouldn't. People are blase on cash as small as this online fee, and I understand why. It seems like a trivial sum. But sometimes it honestly makes a difference.

Subscriptions are the way things are now, I concede. XBL was patient zero for the prion disease that has infected us all, and there's probably no going back after so much consumer agency has been parlayed into convenient business. I hope the VC service is a nice surprise.

Which is all a roundabout way of being way too effing serious on a hobby where I hunt giant dinosaurs in my underwear.

I'd do it. But...as I said in Discord, I dunno...the FAQ makes it seem unlikely.

Q: If someone buys an individual membership, can other users on the same Nintendo Switch system use that Nintendo Switch Online membership?
A: Individual memberships can only be used by the Nintendo Account holder who purchased the membership. However, you can share the Nintendo Switch Online features across all the Nintendo Accounts in a family group by purchasing a family membership.

It sounds more like a way for multiple accounts on one system to access online, not not multiple accounts on many systems (single accounts on many systems, yes, though).

If I could ever get a damn mic working on something besides Android Discord, I would. Alas.
You should be able to open up a hangouts on air link on a phone, have you tried that before? If not, I can test it with you before hand... You just probably want to use ear buds, the kind with a mic included that come with most phones
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
Google is just so far ahead of everyone else in AI


I mean some of that stuff, just holy shit

You need to skip to like just over an hour in to get the actual show
 

Odo

Well-Known Member
Calling people names for saying they'd buy a subscription service is absolutely stupid, yeah. Doing it while virtue-signaling to another business entity that's doing the same thing, but more expensive, borders on a level of dolt-hood that could only make sense for the type of Cheetos-encrusted, knuckle-dragging bro fanboy you read about in google news, after they end up in jail after SWAT-ing a grandmother.

But it doesn't change the underlying principle - we're paying for something that used to be baked into the cost of developing a game (and honestly still is). Online is being put behind a paywall, when we aren't even getting dedicated servers (just rented server space routinely moved around for "server maintenance" that acts as a ping "listen" to find a player to actually host the P2P match). It is one part of a greater wholesale changing of the gaming landscape into a "service" industry (like, for instance, when people talk up "continued support" for a game like Splatoon...when it launches with fewer maps and features than games routinely did in years prior, which is evidence of slow-walking the release of the full retail game, not giving "free" DLC; we have allowed this in games, but would be far less sanguine if we bought a movie but only got to see the last 1/4 of it two months later, or purchased a book and got the end-chapters at the discretion of the publishing company). We will pay for the "service" of playing the online game we bought, and will get the added "service" of playing classic games that we've already paid for 3-4 times, but now without ever owning anything. I can't blame people for balking, and saying "I could play online for free on PC and use the subscription money for a Rasberry Pi to play the games I've already bought - with the added bonus of those games not disappearing if my subscription lapses." Hell, at some point, I'll probably do that myself.

On the pricing front, I know it's cheap. But...I just went through tax season, and had to find $6 Bennies to pay the feds (which I acknowledge was due to not changing some withholding I should have done last year when I moved jobs). I have juuuuust enough money to pay rent this month. But subtract $20, and I wouldn't. People are blase on cash as small as this online fee, and I understand why. It seems like a trivial sum. But sometimes it honestly makes a difference.

Subscriptions are the way things are now, I concede. XBL was patient zero for the prion disease that has infected us all, and there's probably no going back after so much consumer agency has been parlayed into convenient business. I hope the VC service is a nice surprise.

Which is all a roundabout way of being way too effing serious on a hobby where I hunt giant dinosaurs in my underwear.

I'd do it. But...as I said in Discord, I dunno...the FAQ makes it seem unlikely.

Q: If someone buys an individual membership, can other users on the same Nintendo Switch system use that Nintendo Switch Online membership?
A: Individual memberships can only be used by the Nintendo Account holder who purchased the membership. However, you can share the Nintendo Switch Online features across all the Nintendo Accounts in a family group by purchasing a family membership.

It sounds more like a way for multiple accounts on one system to access online, not not multiple accounts on many systems (single accounts on many systems, yes, though).

If I could ever get a damn mic working on something besides Android Discord, I would. Alas.

 

EvilTw1n

Even my henchmen think I'm crazy.
Moderator
Man, I am trying with I Am Setsuna. I want to see the credits roll; I think Tokyo RPG Factory has a bright future; I think it's an admirable undertaking to try to update a classic JRPG style instead of re-releasing FF VI again.

But it's frustrating, because it's only half-way there.
While yes, it used to be free, and yes, dev costs of online games were baked into the initial dev costs of the game as a whole, these matchmaking servers do cost money to run and do cost money to maintain. Also the amount of people playing online now is far higher than when they were playing then.

Think about this (though I might end up wrong): Nintendo shut down online for the Wii years ago. Yet the 360 still has online up and running, and it came out before the Wii. (yes, I'm aware that this argument is foolproof ie they shut down OG xbox live and PS3 didn't have to pay for online) (however PS+ was a thing before the PS4 came out and it being a thing now no doubt helps cover the costs associated with the S3's servers and whatnot). So this might me than Nintendo Switch online service could potentially last longer because of this than previous consoles.

Now, I understand that having to pay for something you used to get for free is annoying. Be that as it may, Nintendo is providing a service (albeit limited. Yet at the same time at a fraction of the price competitor's charge for so not having the same suite of features makes sense when you're not paying as much) and services have value if you have to pay for them (not literally, I'm just saying that's how peoples' minds work).

You did not buy the online interactions when you bought the game. You bought the game that could be played without these, and it just so happens that you can get an additional feature for a small service fee. Legally speaking, that is. Do devs/pubs advertise their games as if you're buying online multiplayer? Yes, yes they do. But that's salesmanship.

Quick addition : Could Nintendo get away with charging less for this stuff? Absolutely. But they're a company and companies don't sell you shit for what it's worth.
There's more people playing than ever, and there ain't no free lunch, but we're fundamentally paying for the server to ping a client and hand off hosting to the player (and probably tag the next two to three potential hosts if a host migration is required; not exactly computationally taxing or time consuming, although handling and predicting enough bandwidth for traffic is the important part). We're assuming it's a bespoke server farm, and not a commercial farm rented at a block rate (which would be cheaper, as it only would need to connect traffic instead of host the game environment as a dedicated server does). And we're assuming it's, y'know, Nintendo or Microsoft or Sony even doing it all. If you're playing Rocket League, for instance, that isn't the case - Psyonix runs all of the servers. So we'll be...paying $20 for the right for our Nintendo account to connect to Psyonix's matchmaking, and then for one of us to host a game.

On buying the online interactions? Well, we used to. That's the rub. You once upon a time bought an online game* with the understanding that it...worked online. Just like you would buy a computer program like MS Office for your small business and expect Outlook to connect to the internet, not require a separate Outlook subscription so that you could actually connect to the internet to use the service.
[*And I mean a game in which the consumer is primarily concerned with playing online. I know the Jim Sterlings of the world actually like COD's 6-hour long stories, but there's a reason Activision launches a dozen maps and modes to keep you busy for hundreds of hours instead of pressing X again to pay your respects.]

I mean, I fully acknowledge that I'm a crank here. I'm bitching, but I know why Nintendo is doing it. Because this:

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-04-28-sonys-psn-is-making-more-money-than-all-of-nintendo

When PSN, via subscriptions and online-store royalties (I'm guessing 20-30% per transactions), makes more revenue than your whole company does in 2016, then you pretty much have to follow the leader. It would be stupid of Nintendo not to. They're watching other companies fundamentally pocket a revenue stream that, while incurring some server expenses, generates revenue equal to another Nintendo (albeit pre-Switch era). Just for selling games online and charging people for the right to play them there.

I can say that's obviously profitable business. But I'm a consumer, and after lining Nintendo's pockets by buying a Switch, then spending equal to the amount of the console on Nintendo games, I get just a little salty when I'm asked for still more.

It's $20 that will give me a connection to people here that I value, so I'll do it. For now, at least.
 

GaemzDood

Well-Known Member
Man, I am trying with I Am Setsuna. I want to see the credits roll; I think Tokyo RPG Factory has a bright future; I think it's an admirable undertaking to try to update a classic JRPG style instead of re-releasing FF VI again.

But it's frustrating, because it's only half-way there.

There's more people playing than ever, and there ain't no free lunch, but we're fundamentally paying for the server to ping a client and hand off hosting to the player (and probably tag the next two to three potential hosts if a host migration is required; not exactly computationally taxing or time consuming, although handling and predicting enough bandwidth for traffic is the important part). We're assuming it's a bespoke server farm, and not a commercial farm rented at a block rate (which would be cheaper, as it only would need to connect traffic instead of host the game environment as a dedicated server does). And we're assuming it's, y'know, Nintendo or Microsoft or Sony even doing it all. If you're playing Rocket League, for instance, that isn't the case - Psyonix runs all of the servers. So we'll be...paying $20 for the right for our Nintendo account to connect to Psyonix's matchmaking, and then for one of us to host a game.

On buying the online interactions? Well, we used to. That's the rub. You once upon a time bought an online game* with the understanding that it...worked online. Just like you would buy a computer program like MS Office for your small business and expect Outlook to connect to the internet, not require a separate Outlook subscription so that you could actually connect to the internet to use the service.
[*And I mean a game in which the consumer is primarily concerned with playing online. I know the Jim Sterlings of the world actually like COD's 6-hour long stories, but there's a reason Activision launches a dozen maps and modes to keep you busy for hundreds of hours instead of pressing X again to pay your respects.]

I mean, I fully acknowledge that I'm a crank here. I'm bitching, but I know why Nintendo is doing it. Because this:

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-04-28-sonys-psn-is-making-more-money-than-all-of-nintendo

When PSN, via subscriptions and online-store royalties (I'm guessing 20-30% per transactions), makes more revenue than your whole company does in 2016, then you pretty much have to follow the leader. It would be stupid of Nintendo not to. They're watching other companies fundamentally pocket a revenue stream that, while incurring some server expenses, generates revenue equal to another Nintendo (albeit pre-Switch era). Just for selling games online and charging people for the right to play them there.

I can say that's obviously profitable business. But I'm a consumer, and after lining Nintendo's pockets by buying a Switch, then spending equal to the amount of the console on Nintendo games, I get just a little salty when I'm asked for still more.

It's $20 that will give me a connection to people here that I value, so I'll do it. For now, at least.
Hopefully they reach the same standard of features as PSN and XBL since they're charging now.

Also, Advanced Warfare actually was a really good campaign. I highly recommend you try it.
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
Man, I am trying with I Am Setsuna. I want to see the credits roll; I think Tokyo RPG Factory has a bright future; I think it's an admirable undertaking to try to update a classic JRPG style instead of re-releasing FF VI again.

But it's frustrating, because it's only half-way there.
I loathed the game, from its generic art direction, to its uninteresting characters, to its lackluster plot, and vomit inducing repetitive music

They tried to remake the classic rpg style by ignoring EVERYTHING that made those games classics, and instead just revisited battle systems we used to like, but did them with 0 flavor which actually made them boring

Just the demo alone of octopath traveler was more exciting interesting, and inspiring than Setsuna could ever hope to be...

Their next game lost sphere seems to have done very little to step up, they added more things we like, such as pilotable mecha, but AGAIN did it in the most generic and flavorless way... They augmented the annoying repetitive piano score with additional instruments, but they are just in the background so the score is still just as vomit inducing .. They did away with the singular snowy setting for something more versatile, but the art direction is still SUPER generic and boring...

I give them no credit

The studios name is apt... Because a factory is exactly what it feels like made these games

Completely soulless
 

EvilTw1n

Even my henchmen think I'm crazy.
Moderator
I loathed the game, from its generic art direction, to its uninteresting characters, to its lackluster plot, and vomit inducing repetitive music

They tried to remake the classic rpg style by ignoring EVERYTHING that made those games classics, and instead just revisited battle systems we used to like, but did them with 0 flavor which actually made them boring

Just the demo alone of octopath traveler was more exciting interesting, and inspiring than Setsuna could ever hope to be...

Their next game lost sphere seems to have done very little to step up, they added more things we like, such as pilotable mecha, but AGAIN did it in the most generic and flavorless way... They augmented the annoying repetitive piano score with additional instruments, but they are just in the background so the score is still just as vomit inducing .. They did away with the singular snowy setting for something more versatile, but the art direction is still SUPER generic and boring...

I give them no credit

The studios name is apt... Because a factory is exactly what it feels like made these games

Completely soulless
Well, I wouldn't be that harsh. I'll write more on it in the @Karkashan game completion thread soon, but I do agree on the music and the setting. I even dig the composition of some of the tunes, but it ends up sounding pretty crappy in the end (they seem to have EQ-ed the music so that it's all highs, very little richness in the midrange or bass, which makes it sound "icy" indeed, but that's not a good thing when it's all you're ever hearing). The environments needed way more variety; it's easily possible to have a snowy area that isn't plain and boring, but they whiffed here.

I couldn't sleep last night, so I took a gaming day today, and I'll probably beat it tonight. I think there's potential here, but if the comments on Lost Sphear are anything to go by, they haven't done the proper editing to realize it yet.
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
Well, I wouldn't be that harsh. I'll write more on it in the @Karkashan game completion thread soon, but I do agree on the music and the setting. I even dig the composition of some of the tunes, but it ends up sounding pretty crappy in the end (they seem to have EQ-ed the music so that it's all highs, very little richness in the midrange or bass, which makes it sound "icy" indeed, but that's not a good thing when it's all you're ever hearing). The environments needed way more variety; it's easily possible to have a snowy area that isn't plain and boring, but they whiffed here.

I couldn't sleep last night, so I took a gaming day today, and I'll probably beat it tonight. I think there's potential here, but if the comments on Lost Sphear are anything to go by, they haven't done the proper editing to realize it yet.
I feel I am not being harsh enough

For modern classic rpgs try the trails in the sky series (on pc, low spec requirements) ... Great characters an interesting world great battle system, music, everything

Let's not forget that Tokyo rpg factory is no indy dev, and their games aren't budget priced for what you get, they are a subsidiary of square Enix, a different subsidiary of the company made octopath traveler, and that team had previously been a handheld only developer.
 

GaemzDood

Well-Known Member
Also, Pillars of Eternity II is coming to Switch. So, uh, if you like games with enough text to surpass The Republic, tons of world building, D&D inspired combat, and C&C, then get it. If you have any ADD that would put you off that, then pop some Adderall.
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
Also, Pillars of Eternity II is coming to Switch. So, uh, if you like games with enough text to surpass The Republic, tons of world building, D&D inspired combat, and C&C, then get it. If you have any ADD that would put you off that, then pop some Adderall.
What does this even mean, ADD doesn't make you unintelligent or incapable of understanding complex things, it makes you more susceptible to distractions, typically when you are bored. Adderall, like most stimulants had a reverse effect on people with ADD then it dies with others... Kind of like how a kid with ADD can calm down for sleep by drinking soda.

People with ADD tend to like complex things because they keep them engaged
 

EvilTw1n

Even my henchmen think I'm crazy.
Moderator
I feel I am not being harsh enough

For modern classic rpgs try the trails in the sky series (on pc, low spec requirements) ... Great characters an interesting world great battle system, music, everything

Let's not forget that Tokyo rpg factory is no indy dev, and their games aren't budget priced for what you get, they are a subsidiary of square Enix, a different subsidiary of the company made octopath traveler, and that team had previously been a handheld only developer.
That's fair enough, man. Diff'rent strokes and all that. But just because they're not an indie dev doesn't mean there won't be growing pains; the director of the studio worked on art and multiplayer modes, but never made an SNES-style JPRG before (it shows that this game was a first draft). I do see about half of a very good game here.

That said, every time - and I do mean every single time - I think this game has found its groove, it creates new and different ways to trip over its dick. It's absolutely maddening.
 
Top