manyquestions

@neocloud61

You're right, you will be downvoted, but not for expressing the legitimate opinion that you preferred TP over WW. Rather, you're being downvoted for equating cel shading to "kiddy games".

@Daverator

Because it's not the government's place to make that decision. They can do it with alcohol because there's a proven health effect that goes with its consumption and minors aren't ready to make that decision for themselves, but the effects of video games on "mental health" are entirely up in the air, and in many cases doubtful.

It's not just about parents being more responsible, it's that regardless of how responsible parents are, the government doesn't get to say what's ok for your kid /as a policy decision/. The people saying parents need to be more responsible are simply acknowledging what would have to step up to fill the gap if government is to be confined to the role it is meant to play.

@GuardianLegend

Yeah, imagine that, the people who made and own a format wanting some say over what's done with it? Crazy huh?

The difference is that console makers ... /made/ their consoles. They sunk huge amounts of time and money into them, they own the legal rights to them, they have every right to say what they can be used for. The government doesn't own that intellectual property and can't just say what it wants to happen with it.

Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft never said you couldn't play sexually explicit games; they just said they don't want you using their stuff to do it. It happens that that covers all three major consoles, but too bad, you can't dictate what they do with their property. If you desperately need a sex game, go find one online, buy some underground console, or start your own console company if you think there's such a market for it. It's not the Big 3's problem.

@Drybones5
In that situation, Nintendo would have to either find a new system that beats the freemium model, join the freemium model, make new games that have something nothing else does that makes it worth the $50, or become a niche developer for people who like the current system. If they didn't do at least one of those things, they'd go out of business, obviously not having anything to offer that people are willing to buy.

The question is whether or not that will actually happen, and obviously Nintendo is betting it won't, at least not any time soon. The types of games that are sold one-off are generally different from the types that succeed as freemiums. I imagine it'd be difficult to make a lot of people want to buy new skins in a free-to-play Metroid game unless you make it an online multiplayer thing, in which case it's no longer really a Metroid game. And if you made the mandatory items paid-only...well I don't imagine that would go over well with anyone. That would be like making airplane tickets free, but you have to pay for chairs...or something.

I don't have any real problem with ads in phone games, or some online PC games. The same with pay-for-extras, that actually seems like a fairly logical system, as long as the game isn't stacked in such a way as to make "extras" necessities by another name. Such non-scam design is admittedly rare, but it does happen. There are some legitimate uses of this model. For instance, a card game that's free-to-play, but requires you to purchase cards (y'know, like an actual card game), or quick, single-image ads displayed in between matches like some of my Android games do.

However, I do understand some of where this is coming from. A full console game is a much more in-depth experience, and the above-mentioned examples wouldn't work for open-world games or anything story-intensive without being a serious intrusion. I just think some of these comments are taking it a tad too far, as there are a few good "freemium" games.

I won a free 3DS recently, but have no games, so I'll be trying to get over the fact that apparently I can't use existing Nintendo points to make a downloadable purchase.

In the mean time I never did finish Rogue Leader on the GCN. . .hmmm. . . .

So, is the South not allowed to have a big games show?

@Vidikron

I think those games are still running on the box hardware, just using the controller as the main screen.

@manyquestions
Derp. That should've been a reply to tendoboy1984.

But with a handheld you don't have a controller with a screen that's separate from the main screen. Now you can actually move the controller screen independently, and have it be tracked to reveal other parts of the game world. The reasons why it seems so while suited to those things in your last paragraph are because it's exactly such an innovation...

It's that second window that has me most excited. I really want to sue this as a scanner or something in a scifi game.