I think we all knew this was coming when Nintendo discontinued being able to purchase 3DS and Wii U games on the eShop, but it is still very sad to hear.
Many 3DS and Wii U games have been ported to the Switch over the years, but there will be several games that will likely never get ported because they were incremental series games. Why would they port Super Smash Bros Wii U when they already released Super Smash Bros Ultimate?
A lot of people will probably not care much being on the newest console, with the newest games, but it is truly sad to know that you will never be able to revisit these games again in a few years when you're feeling nostalgic, or if you just like the old version better.
I can only hope that homebrewers figure out how to spoof their own servers to keep online functionally for these old games.
The trick is to make sure you've checked everything else off on your list before getting to that one
I suspect it's because they left the tech sector alone for too long and now major damage control is needed.
It seems like laws and politicians are always a little late to the game with regulations on new technology because they don't fully understand a new technology or its implications until it's been on the market for a while.
Unfortunately, that means by the time the technology's implications have been determined, a lot of damage can have already been done.
I think, similarly, politicians were not examining the tech sector closely when it came to acquisitions; but they realize, now, that they let it fester a little too long.
Hopefully the FTC continues to break up any monopoly it can identify (tech or otherwise), but there's certainly a lot of work to be done.
The interesting thing about this to me is it sounds like HYENAS was already very far along (being in an open beta quite recently).
I wonder if SEGA is giving it the Batgirl treatment, where they cancel it just for a tax write-off; or if it had serious structural issues that would have actually been very costly to rectify.
I'm certainly always excited for more Nathan Fielder, but I have to say I find his casting perplexing.
While Nathan Fielder is not considered an actor, I do wonder how much of his performances in Nathan for You and The Rehearsal are an act. Maybe he will have stronger acting chops than expected.
That's a fair point. It really feels like nothing is protected in perpetuity. It seems like everything is only protected for the time being. It honestly makes everything feel a little less stable, and I wish some protections could be codified to make them a little more robust.
Fingers crossed that we get Net Neutrality back. If I'm being honest, I'm less than optimistic; but I would certainly be thrilled if this went through.
It seems like The Venery of Samantha Bird was an unfortunate casualty of the studios refusing to negotiate with unions in good faith, but it still shocks me that studios can just scrap a show that is so far into production.
At some point, it seems like the studios already payed most of the money, how much are they really saving by preventing anyone from seeing it? It's an alarming trend that I've recently noticed, and I'm hoping it does not continue on (though I'm not exactly optimistic on it).
I've heard that it's also very bad for the cast and crew when a show/ movie gets scrapped like that, because it functionally creates a huge hole on your resume where you can't show what you worked on.
Every time there's a cancellation like that, I hope that it gets leaked, just so the cast and crew's hard work doesn't go to waste.
This move seems absolutely wild, and I think Match knows it; which is why it's only available to such a small segment of users.
If too many users have this feature (and who knows how many that would be?) it''s going to scare away all the regular users. What's the point in swiping no if that user can just veto your decision anyways?
This move reminds me a lot of what I've heard about mobile gaming. The 500USD/month users are whales, but the whales need regular people to play with or they'll get bored and leave.
Right now, keeping the number of whales to a minimum is important to keep the regular users happy, but I wouldn't be surprised if in the future some cost/benefit analysis shows that they can take the hit on regular users to squeeze out a few more whales.
It also seems like a bonkers move to pay 500 dollars to talk to someone who doesn't want to talk to you, too. (But that's a different issue.)
I'm glad to see SAG is standing up to the video game industry, which is notorious for mistreating its workers.
Hopefully, after seeing the damage from the WGA/ SAG Hollywood strike, the video game studios will take this threat seriously and negotiate in good faith enough to not warrant another strike.
I also hope that SAG standing up for themselves may inspire other game development employees to unionize and stand up for themselves as well.
@UrLogicFails
@beehaw.org