Talk Show Host

But that is what I am saying. That is what it means for Nintendo to not be a competitor against Sony or Microsoft. They are playing a different game, so much so that there’s no point in comparing them because Nintendo’s target audience is way more mainstream than the other two. And one could argue they are in a much healthier position financially with a future that looks even more successful. As for people not knowing Nathan Drake, there are billions who don’t know who he is 😜. He’s not mainstream like Mario or Pokémon is.

I agree. It is weird when people use ‘Nintendo is not a competitor’ in a derogatory way, when it is the exact opposite. They are on such a different level brand wise that is almost impossible for Sony and Microsoft to get there. And they have done it by actually taking risks, innovating and sticking to their guns, making Zelda, Mario, Animal Crossing, Pokemon etc literally household names, as opposed to Kratos and Master Chief who are only talked about no further than at the fringes of the wider gaming circles. Uncharted was released as movie for example but its rare to meet a non gamer who knows who Nathan Drake is. It will be interesting to see what happens with the LoU, especially when it feels to be Sony's first true barrier breaker when it comes to a true mainstream audience. Nintendo do not give a serious business fuck about CoD. It would be if someone said Lego need Angry Birds to expand their audience to young kids. They make more money than anyone else (operating profits last year were double than Sony's gaming division) and sell the most copies than anyone else (while at the same time still selling their old games at high prices), in consoles which make a profit -arguably- the minute they hit the shelves. It almost defies belief that they are in this position before Switch 2, which has the potential to be the highest selling console ever in record time. So yeah, they would be fine with or without CoD. That is the Nintendo difference when it comes to competing with Sony or Microsoft: they are not a competitor because they are playing a different game.

Yes, that is my opinion as well. Which is why it makes Sony’s constant arguments about CoD nonsensical. They simply do not want GP to be strengthened because they know they can’t compete down the line, if, of course, Microsoft’s plan come into fruition. That is why they do not accept any CoD deal. Their main goal is to stop the acquisition which will strengthen GP, not argue about CoD. Sony has created a path for itself and chosen the top heavy AAA development/cross media as their main goal. Nintendo has also chosen a different path and now Microsoft is choosing its own path as well, which is GP. If Sony wanted to compete with GP they could very well start putting out their AAA output into their services day one. But they can’t do that because their business strategy is built differently. They need those 80 bucks per unit. There’s no real argument that this acquisition will put Sony out of business. If something does, it will be their betting on the wrong horse exactly when the market could very well be shifting.

You have a point?🤔

Yeah, I thought so. But there is no substantial arguments that can point to this. It is all speculative and highly, highly unlikely. Sony did this many years ago by creating a series of exclusive deals which totally trashed the competition and, through them, was able to dominate the market. And yet Sega and Nintendo still managed to compete. Sony is arguably the second strongest brand in the industry behind Nintendo, it is way stronger than Microsoft when it comes to gaming and already has exclusive deals which shift the balance in its favor, like the Final Fantasy one for example, and also a great starting point in cross media, plus the hottest VR headset, fully supported by internal studios and 3rd parties. I mean, Microsoft needs this to compete. The problem is Sony doesn't have an answer to GP, which is what they fear. But it is way off to say that this deal could destroy Sony. Maybe they should try to make their own GP and compete, business wise. That would be a great suggestion by the CMA, especially since Microsoft does not deny any games to other platforms with this deal for a substantial time. That statement above really seems to me like it is written by people who do not know a lot about the industry if I am honest.

But how would decrease the competition? Microsoft is doing this to be competitive.

But how do they justify it? That statement looks like fanboy drivel.

I think this quote takes the cake: These people are beyond indoctrinated. One day there will be a documentary about people escaping this, like so many managed to escape the clutches of real life cults.

I haven't bothered to check, but surely this is a random forum post and not an official CMA response?

Yeah, that is where I lost it, apologies. I was talking about NPCs in cities, like Whiterun comparing to Night City or Novigrad, not in the entire world. It is impossible to make a city with the crowds of Cyberpunk and having interaction with them or routines, etc. Until now at least.

Hopefully there’s a DLC coming.

So, you are saying that Skyrim has more NPCs than Cyberpunk?

You know there's an entire franchise which has sold hundreds of millions based on that , right? 😅

Yes. I am not saying that. I am saying that Skyrim has way less NPCs than other open games in general because you can interact with them. That is why you can interact with them, because their number is way less than the ones we find at Cyberpunk. How are you not getting this?

It was just a way of saying there are few NPCs because you can talk to all of them. I didn't mean they are actually five, ffs! 😅

What are you not getting?

I get it about the pre-release hype, but you have to judge a game by its merits. As a first entry, its combination of GTA-DeusEX-Sandbox-Story Choices combination is unheard of. The result is clumsy and even if it was released in a better state it would still not deliver. But it will in the future. This reminds me a lot of Witcher 2 as a stepping stone and its design premise is still one of the best things to be excited about this gen, apart from the next Elder scrolls game and W4 of course imo.

My Skyrim comment was meant to show that if you want to have NPCs you can talk to, they have to be really few compared to other open world games. And Skyrim, compared to other open world games, has "five" NPCs all in all.

I still don’t understand some of the criticisms this game gets. It still has issues, for sure, but it gets accused of problems all open worlds suffer from, and it’s so weird to point them out here while dismissing them elsewhere. “Your presence has no impact in the open world”, “you can’t talk to NPCs”, “the world has no depth”. Which open world offers all of the above? You can argue that RDR2 has a great simulation of a natural world, but you can’t really affect anything. You can argue that GTAV has an actual police system, but nothing has depth and the NPCs are empty vessels going back and forth with no way to interact with them. Skyrim has people you can talk to, but they are, like, five in total. Night City is the best realized city ever, and it has the bad traits of most open world games. Sure, it lacks sophistication in some areas compared to other open worlds, but let’s not pretend that the other open worlds are these deep, immersive playgrounds of super intelligent NPCs and emergent gameplay and interactions. You can’t even cross the mission “shooting” boundaries of RDR2 ffs without getting a game over.

Are you using potions? Are you studying your enemies weaknesses in the journal before fighting them? Are you using the right sword? Are you utilizing your signs properly? Invest in Quen in the beginning and Ard, its a great combination for giving you space until you master movement, parrying and dodging. I remember playing in the hardest difficulty and when I mastered all these moves it was really like a lethal ballet. Very, very satisfying. Also, if you explore everything in White Orchard you will leave with some good equipment. Still, if something is too difficult, just move on for now.

People who talk about this having shit combat are quite wrong imo. The combat is good enough to support the game for 100+ hours and it becomes quite tactical in the higher difficulties. Are there really many other modern RPGs out with better combat? And no, Elder Ring is not a fair answer - or God of War. Isi t great or even really really good? No, ok. But It is certainly much more enjoyable than Skyrim's, if we are talking about all time classics. Anyways, starting a new game on Series X and the quality difference is so evident. The vegetation, the textures, shadows and RTX really make such a huge difference to the world, bringing so much weight and atmosphere. I really want to fully replay this but I am not sure I have the time anymore. I have already played it three times, the last one fully modded on PC. But man, some minutes back and it draws you in. It is one of the best games ever made.

You don’t need to hope. The release of P6 is a certainty after the huge sales of P5. If not I will infiltrate their palace and change their heart, for all our sake. 😛

I am playing Royal now (I haven’t played it so it’s a great Xmas feeling after finishing the game when it came out, hehe) and I can confirm you are right. You only need Maruki up before a certain date to get to the new semester. You need three more things to get to the new true good ending though (two confidant ranks up and a specific choice).

Sorry for my confusion, but I thought the new semester only needed Kasumi’s rank up. OP says it needs two more, Akechi,s and Maruki’s?

Did the console versions get any updates? It was pretty bad on Series X on RTX mode.