laxbro19

I honestly think you'll be much better off investing that money into a switch. There are some great games on Wii U, but Switch is getting some pretty cool stuff coming up that would be worth your while. Also, the switch does have added utility and portability that the Wii U doesn't have. If this were myself, I would spend the extra money on the Switch and Zelda. Also, I would venture a strong guess that the Wii U's games library will come over in some form in the future. So, in short, spend that money on something that will net you the most utility now and in the future. Also, reselling can be a hassle and you already seem pretty sure you'll net a loss so it kinda seems like not a great option for you right now to get a Wii U for one game and then try to sell it when your done.

I understand that it's an issue with Indie games as a whole, but there was way too much pixel art, faux retro stuff, going on. I'm sure it'll be fine for people who want that but some of that stuff wasn't doing it for me. I did like Yooka Laylee, and that cooking game. Personally, I think Snipper Clips is a really cool launch game that makes a good case for the hybridized controls and the table-top mode and I'm surprised that it wasn't stressed that it was launching with the Switch along with Zelda and 1,2,Switch.

With out a doubt, Drew had been my favorite personality on this site. With all the shake ups in the last 4 years of the site, he really stepped up his game. Metal Gear Scanlon might be my favorite video series so far. But, the real MVP was Alt+F1.

I really hope he does something cool and I can't wait to see what he does next. He already said that the F1 podcast will continue. I can only hope that we see more of his videos on the internet and that he continues to do podcasts as well.

Drew.zone.f1.cool here we come!

One of the things that has me hopeful for the Switch is the idea that there will be some games that have Switch and New 3DS releases as we saw with the Fire Emblem Warriors announcement. There is also past precident for this when Super Smash Bros. was released on Wii U and 3DS. While I wouldn't argue that the versions of those games had any kind of parity. But having a more unified library would be a great boon to consumers like me who didn't get 3DS's and Wii U's but like the game sthat came out on them.

Do you think that Nintendo will do more to have library crossover? What do you think comes crosses over first? My bet is on Pokemon within the calender year. Sun and Moon did outstanding this year and Eurogamer has all but confirmed a Switch version.

@chobobot: I personally think that this is about the best that Nintendo could do. There are several things going for and against it in some ways.

Chiefly, assuming the dates hold up for these games, the first year of this console on a 1st party basis is quite good. People are expecting a Mario game, Zelda, a great version of Mario Kart 8, a game that was well liked and maybe more people will play on this system than the Wii U. Splatoon looks great and I hope that the much greater interest in the Switch than Wii U will get people to play that game. I understand that it isn't completely confirmed, but Euro Gamer put out a story about a corssover Pokemon game for Switch. If that is to be believed, it starts a precedent that the Fire Emblem Nintendo Direct showed, of having a 3DS and Switch version of the same game. Making good on that will definitely help people like me who like the 3DS and having a home console, bridge that library gap in a way that makes me excited.

There are also signs of life on 3rd party, while Skyrim is an older game, it being on the Switch is a great get and shows that maybe other games of that ilk will come to the system in 2018 as well. I wouldn't be shocked to see a version of Fallout 4 end up on Switch. There were also other games announced on that system from 3rd parties that looked great as well and many more devs haven't announced games, which means that there is still interest on that thing.

While I agree 1, 2, Switch should be a pack, no question about it. Having the Switch have some of that motion functionality like the Wii and Wii U is important. While it's much clearer this time around that motion is taking more of a back seat this time around, having that functionality is important because it still leaves the possibility for Nintendo to put out things like Wii Sports, and Wii Play on the Switch. Games like 1, 2, Switch and Wii Sports can really bring people together who don't play games. While I understand and see why 1, 2, Switch and Wii Sports are viewed as "gimmick" games, they are in some respects, having that motion stuff are what get people like my Parents and grand parents in the door with this stuff. Back when the Wii came out, Wii Sports was that thing that got them to start sharing in that hobby of playing games together. So considering how Nintendo is making the hardware more suited traditional input and motion control stuff, It's starting to look like I can get my family more involved and still have great games to play that aren't motion games.

All these things stated above are great things that the Switch can do for me personally, but there are also factors that are working against it.

First and foremost, the cost on these things is very high for what they are. I think the system as is is priced accordingly, but everything around it is not. A set of Joy Con should not be $80, the same can and should be said for the Pro controllers and the other accessories. Seeing as how many games like ARMS use multiple Joy Con, it will be a big ask to have people buy a new set just for games like that. But, hopefully the system sells well and people have there own set of Joy Con to play with.

On the games front, no pack in is a big mistake. 1, 2, Switch is the poster child for this console, and it not being the pack-in is criminal from a business perspective. Also on the games front, the lack of quantity of games at launch is concerning. However, I would argue, that there is certainly a lot of quality on display. Also, there aren't the big tent pulls out that you would like to see, COD, Battlefield, and other franchises haven't been announced yet so that is a little concerning for potential owners. However, I think that Nintendo has a lot of Directs, and other platforms to get games out there certainly this year and 2018. I would be shocked if the release calendar for this system across 1st and 3rd party was not bigger by the time we look back at this year.

My final quibble is that I'm a little scared that the graphical hardware gets left behind too early. The chip in that console is a great chip for what is being done, but what I don't know is how it will stack up over time. Hopefully the chasm can be traversed and games can still be supported more easily across all 3 consoles. It is worth noting that the Switch is supporting unity and unreal engine, amongst other engines, that the Wii U and certainly the Wii didn't support nearly as well. So maybe the multiplatform situation will be quite different.

Overall, there are some concerns over the Switch. But I think there is very real potential in the Switch. The promise of console, DS, and 3DS games on one machine is excellent, even if not every game is supported in this way. Also, it looks like big games on Switch from companies like Bethesda and Activision are going to be a thing now. While not everything will come out on Switch, I think it will be much different to the Wii U in the way that it will get support for the Fallout's, Madden's, and COD of the world, maybe not now, but in the future it will more than likely happen. Listed qualms aside, I'm looking at the Switch as an investment in several key areas. And while launch is looking soft, I've never played Zelda, so that will be a good thing to start with.

-Started middle school.

-played all kinds of sports.

-Went to High School, also played sports.

-got into programming.

-went to a community college for 1 year and transferred, found that computer science isn't for me

-Got into Virginia Tech, in the Pamplin BIT program. Much happyness was had.

-Ran my first triathlon with VT club team, very fun. Still is fun.

-Video games happened throughout.

-dating still eludes me.

Doom seems like the easy pick, Uncharted 4 is also a solid choice. But I think a real strong dark horse candidate is Hitman. Doom feels like the game to beat, everybody on staff who played it loved it, but they made so many videos for Hitman and I feel like the staff overall are playing more Hitman than they are Doom. With that said this year is going ot be super interesting for GOTY, so many really neat games came out from a lot of big names and small names. The fight for the top 10 will be brutal this year. I can't wait for that podcast.

I think the better question is what YOU consider to be $20 worth of fun and enjoyment. Everyone's valuation of time and money is different. I think you'll find your answer if you go back and look at other $20 games you've played, read a review of Recore and see if that jives with YOUR personnal expectations of a game sold at that price point.

for example, a game like DOOM or COD Infinite Warfare may not be worth it at $60 in my opinion, considering the campaigns are on the short side and the campaign is what most people consider to be the best parts of those games. However, at $30 or below, that becomes a much more appealing proposition to me. Another example I had recently was that I waited to buy The Witness because I knew I'd get maybe 1 play-through out of it by virtue of it being a puzzle game and $40 dollars seemed a little steep for a game that would take 15 hours and I'd only play through once. So I waited and got it on sale for $25. That was a much better dollar to hour ratio for me.

However, I'm a college student with lots of hobbies, so I'm not going out and getting every big game at the full $60 price. In that way, I'm more price sensetive to games and the percieved amount of hours of fun I get for my money. But, there are also people who have lots of money and time, so the dollar to game length ratio means very little too them and they just play whatever, whenever.

As an American, and someone who completed the game, WWI seems to have been handled with the right amount of gravitas that should be observed. I think respecting a conflict goes a long way to making a good game, but to say that WWI is a war too ghastly to even depict is a step too far. Depictions are what allow us to move on as a society from the heinous shit that we've done to each other. It's not like chemical warfare hasn't been used in games before, and the way mustard gas is used is fairly accurate to how it was described in primary sources. If anything, BF1 is an extremely relevant tool in teaching the general public about a conflict that does have significant fallout even to this day. As Brad and others have pointed out, many historians now believe that WWII was just a continuation of WWI. Hitler and others stated as such in the speeches they gave prior to and during the fighting. But that's a different conversation.

As a game, BF1 has many human moments that don't try to make the war out to be some cartoon of what it is. The opening of the campaign is a great lesson in the futility of war as well as the seeming expend-ability of human life given the right circumstances. However, I don't think that the twitter stuff is really that bad. From what DICE have said about the making of this game since it's reveal, they seem to really understand that a real conflict requires some boundaries that they clearly set in terms of tone and story in the game. But given that boundary, it means nothing if you can't explore beyond it every once in a while. And on some level I think DICE also understand that poking fun is ok in limited capacity. Stuff like the tweet OP posted is the kind of stuff that should be laughed at and not just immediately trashed. The contrast between serious and the occasionally goofy are what allow us to make the whole conversation of tough issues like these go down a little better for most people and help to keep the serious topics grounded.

No, it isn't safe. But then again, life isn't safe.