Social NintenZone Social 6.0 - L'Arachel Edition, Apparently?

[PsychoIncarnate]

Yeah, what's next Sonic? Snake? Cloud?
....Oh wait.

I don't see how they are comparable

 

[Coricus]

Yeah, what's next Sonic? Snake? Cloud?
....Oh wait.

Sonic, Snake, and Cloud were actually surprises, though.

People are practically EXPECTING Crash and Spyro, so I'm thinking no.

 

[One winged Devil]

I don't see how they are comparable

3rd party characters that are popular.

Sonic, Snake, and Cloud were actually surprises, though.

People are practically EXPECTING Crash and Spyro, so I'm thinking no.

So people wanting them means that it's fake?

Eh you might need to rethink that post.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

3rd party characters that are popular.


So people wanting them means that it's fake?

Eh you might need to rethink that post.

Yeah, but Sonic and Snake have had games come out over the years, and FF games have also come out over the years.

Spyro and Crash had a big nothing, with their original series sales falling lower and lower until the franchise was dead and only recently revived with remakes.

Edit: Although I forgot Skylanders was supposedly a Spyro game, even though he wasn't really used that much passsed the initial release

 

[One winged Devil]

Yeah, but Sonic and Snake have had games come out over the years, and FF games have also come out over the years.

Spyro and Crash had a big nothing, with their original series sales falling lower and lower until the franchise was dead and only recently revived with remakes.

Eh sure recently revived, right whatever you say.

 

[Coricus]

3rd party characters that are popular.


So people wanting them means that it's fake?

Eh you might need to rethink that post.

Oh there's a ton of reasons why I'm 99.99% sure that leak is fake. I just have a gut feeling they're too predictable as well.

Seems like people ask for them more because they're "Sony" characters, the same way they asked for Shantae and Shovel Knight because they're "indie." Although I expect the latter two fared far better during the Ballot than the former two due to the aforementioned fad anyway. Ballot's probably gonna factor in hard due to Sakurai not having extra time pass from swapping out to make another game between Smash for Wii U/3DS and Smash Switch for more new IPs to exist.

 

[One winged Devil]

Oh there's a ton of reasons why I'm 99.99% sure that leak is fake. I just have a gut feeling they're too predictable as well.

Seems like people ask for them more because they're "Sony" characters, the same way they asked for Shantae and Shovel Knight because they're "indie." Although I expect the latter two fared far better during the Ballot than the former two due to the aforementioned fad anyway. Ballot's probably gonna factor in hard due to Sakurai not having extra time pass from swapping out to make another game between Smash for Wii U/3DS and Smash Switch for more new IPs to exist.

"Too predictable"

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

Eh sure recently revived, right whatever you say.

Crash: Mind over Mutant - October 7, 2008
N. Sane Trilogy - June 30, 2017

9 years between games

Spyro: Shadow Legacy- October 18, 2005
Spyro Reignite Trilogy - September 21, 2018

13 years between games (Wikipedia at least considers Skylanders not to be a Spyro game, but a game with Spyro's cameo)

Edit: Spyro was longer than I thought. Spyro hasn't had a game since I've been in highschool

 

[Chrono.]

Spyro and Crash are in a weird position (in general, not necessarily just Smash) of being iconic franchises of the 90s but also for having a reputation for falling from grace spectacularly after that.

Mostly Spyro anyway. Crash had some arguably decent outings with Wrath of Cortex and Twinsanity, but fell off the wagon after that (and I'd argue Crash of the Titans was at least better than WoC.) Spyro though... Jesus.

Not only was he already the less popular of the two, but Spyro's first PS2/GC/XB era game was Enter the Dragonfly, which is arguably one of the worst games out there period. Then we got the decent-ish A Hero's Tail... Then we got the second trilogy where they thought Spyro needed a deep plot and a gf for some reason.

On top of this, Sony had long moved on from these two as mascots by the end of the PS1 era. Jak, Rachet and Sly Cooper were the new boys in town, then in PS3 we got Nathan Drake.

Just for this alone I wouldn't really consider them huge iconic gaming franchises, just iconic characters of the PS1 era. And even then, Smash got two juggernauts from that very same era in Snake and Cloud.

But on the other hand they just got huge revivals that might just put them on the map again. Especially if we get new games after them.

 

[One winged Devil]

Crash: Mind over Mutant - October 7, 2008
N. Sane Trilogy - June 30, 2017

9 years between games

Spyro: A Hero's Tail - November 9, 2004
Spyro Reignite Trilogy - September 21, 2018

14 years between games (Wikipedia at least considers Skylanders not to be a Spyro game, but a game with Spyro's cameo)

Edit: Spyro was longer than I thought. A Hero's tail was the last game and it came out in 2004 or a DS game in 2005.

Spyro hasn't had a game since I've been in highschool

That's a hiatus, compelety different, so Skylanders does count.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

That's a hiatus, compelety different, so Skylanders does count.

It's a cameo appearance. It's not a Spyro series game in the Spyro universe or canonical to the Spyro lore.

Is Skylanders also a Donkey Kong game?

Edit: And it's not like the two are releasing "New" games, they are releasing remakes.

 

[Jojalole]

I really don't believe that leak at all, it's already showing inconsistencies and normally when they are so extent and detailed they are fake (though the Switch presentation leak was pretty extensive and nailed everything). And even though some of the things said on that leak would be really hype for me (Crash in Smash would be dream come true), I still hope is fake because "lustrous daybreak" hahaha.




Speaking of FE, guess I'll give my initial thoughts on the FE4 banner. I only played up to chapter 6 of Genealogy, so I don't have any personal attachment to second gen characters, but I think it's really cool they are giving FE4 more love (and also not giving us alts). Onto each unit:

-Ares is Eldigan's son, so I'm guessing he's going to be powercreep Eldigan and call it a day. Dark Misilteinn looks really good, and it's great to have brazen attack/defense in the normal pool. The funny thing will be when Owain joins the game because we will have three different Misilteinns hahaha.

-Lyn dancer I mean, Lene is Sylvia's daughter right? It's a really cool touch that they gave her the defense sword in form of the safeguard. Speaking of the safeguard+, it reminds me of an exchange I had with @Shishœ .

Remember when I said Vidofnir wasn't anything special and needed a refinement too? Well, this new safeguard+ seals the deal, since it has powercrept a legendary weapon. +7 Def is the same that Vidofnir gives, but it gives the defense against bows and daggers too, unlike Vidofnir, and I'm banking on the fact that it will be refinable, meaning you can get +4 extra defense with it. Safeguard+ is actually nuts if it can be refined. +7 defense when enemy attacks, +4 defense when refined, add steady breath and close defense to the unit, and you have a whopping 21 extra defense on enemy phase. This weapon is going to change so many builds.

As for Lene herself, just another dancer, don't think she will be much different from Olivia, but the more dancers the merrier (hoping they demote her actually).

-Ishtar is a really popular character, and she looks pretty good. Killer legendary tome with built in Darting Blow and swift sparrow looks sick. And the C skill is also nuts, definitely tempted to go for her. Another cool thing about the C skill is that it reminds me of beast unit skills from fates, where depending on the turn, you would get or not a buff in combat. Maybe one day we can get those beast units in the game.

-And last, Julius... For my understanding, he uses Loptyr, so I'm guessing he's going to be a red unit. Hopefully they do something different from Saias and Arvis, and not make him a ploy master. Still, always happy to receive free units.

Overall, pretty good banner I'd say. I won't be pulling either way because I rather wait until they reveal the units for the next banner, which is probably going to be another bride banner. I'll just summon the first batch and call it a day, but if one of those units come home, I won't complain. I'm looking forward to the new update and the new story chapter, definitely want to know what happens when Fjorm sneezes on Surtr, and what kind of alola form was shown on the trailer.

Lastly, the new chapter of the manga:

Kiran is F2P and also a noob because nobody ever uses shove. After all, smite is where the good stuff is.

 

[One winged Devil]

It's a cameo appearance. It's not a Spyro series game in the Spyro universe or canonical to the Spyro lore.

Is Skylanders also a Donkey Kong game?

Edit: And it's not like the two are releasing "New" games, they are releasing remakes.

Eh sure if you want to think like then sure.

 

[redfeatherraven]

Oh there's a ton of reasons why I'm 99.99% sure that leak is fake. I just have a gut feeling they're too predictable as well.

Seems like people ask for them more because they're "Sony" characters, the same way they asked for Shantae and Shovel Knight because they're "indie." Although I expect the latter two fared far better during the Ballot than the former two due to the aforementioned fad anyway. Ballot's probably gonna factor in hard due to Sakurai not having extra time pass from swapping out to make another game between Smash for Wii U/3DS and Smash Switch for more new IPs to exist.

Don't know if I would call the indie bits a fad per se.

Shantae's always had flash-in-the-pan press - which honestly is kind of bull****, her games are good. Meanwhile Shovel Knight's kind of fallen off the plateau since King Knight doesn't seem to be generating the kind of hype that Plague and Specter did. And it's been a few years for either of them, which in internet hype time is basically forever.

But they've each got pretty respectable cult followings, both for their own games and for Smash. Hard to rule em out.

I'm biased as **** there though.

Anyway I wouldn't discount Crash and Spyro per se either, but if they get in, I expect they'd be DLC. While their re-releases were likely in the works around the same time as Smash, there was no indication of how the Switch would do (prompting Activision to want in on it), nor any indication how the Crash and Spyro remake trilogies would do (confirming whether they'd need to plan for long-term support of the franchises), in any kind of timeframe that would have got Activision and Nintendo talking about a base-roster inclusion.

By the time all those cards had flipped, Smash's roster was probably finalized and off for polish, and however big Activision is, they ain't "interrupt Nintendo's QA process" big. But - especially if the Switch port of Crash Trilogy goes well - I feel like there's gonna be a have-your-people-call-my-people moment about it and we might see some really interesting DLC.

 

[Wario Bros.]

Getting that first bit of info right from that GameFAQ leak is impressive so far.

I'm not believing it 100% but I'll keep it one my radar.


Also, here's new Octo Expansion footage (with a small bit of Octoling's voice!)

Nintendo seems to be much more creative with the missions in this unlike the base game campaign

 

[Wolfie557]

Wait I heard the social is closing??

Wtf

 

[Chrono.]

I remember this.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

That video went around so much (and it was very well made, won't deny that), but it was pretentious af.

Which is unfortunately a trend I see with the older Sonic fans.

 

[ChikoLad]

Spyro and Crash are in a weird position (in general, not necessarily just Smash) of being iconic franchises of the 90s but also for having a reputation for falling from grace spectacularly after that.

Mostly Spyro anyway. Crash had some arguably decent outings with Wrath of Cortex and Twinsanity, but fell off the wagon after that (and I'd argue Crash of the Titans was at least better than WoC.) Spyro though... Jesus.

Not only was he already the less popular of the two, but Spyro's first PS2/GC/XB era game was Enter the Dragonfly, which is arguably one of the worst games out there period. Then we got the decent-ish A Hero's Tail... Then we got the second trilogy where they thought Spyro needed a deep plot and a gf for some reason.

On top of this, Sony had long moved on from these two as mascots by the end of the PS1 era. Jak, Rachet and Sly Cooper were the new boys in town, then in PS3 we got Nathan Drake.

Just for this alone I wouldn't really consider them huge iconic gaming franchises, just iconic characters of the PS1 era. And even then, Smash got two juggernauts from that very same era in Snake and Cloud.

But on the other hand they just got huge revivals that might just put them on the map again. Especially if we get new games after them.

The Legend of Spyro Trilogy and the GBA Spyro games are actually well-liked.

I personally like the Legend trilogy almost as much as the Classic trilogy.

 

[Deleted member]

Okay.

Can I just say?

This Switch online service is really bad.

The only two positives are cloud saves and the low price of 20 bucks.

But we still need to use the app, the main incentive is NES games which aren't worth much in this day and age and there's a blatant lack of features that people really want.

I REALLY hope they change it, because as it stands, its only going to tick people off.

Wow, NES games. Those are something people totally don't play or own anymore. And with online play! What a great incentive.

I'll pay for it ironically just to play only four games online, but that's it. You heard that right. Only four games. Smash Bros. when it comes out, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, ARMS, and Splatoon 2. That sounds too funny to be true, but it's real! Can't wait to pay just to play those four.

I personally don't care about the NES games. The idea of the NES games sounds cool, but the whole idea of paying for online just clouded that out for me. I don't care much about voice chat either but I know plenty of people do. Using the application to voice chat is stupid indeed. Cloud saves are okay as they're something everyone wanted, but why the need to have them behind the paywall? I'd personally prefer to have local backups via microSD myself. Special offers and deals-- ha ha, sure. It'll be fun to see great deals for Nintendo's games. Oh wait. Those don't exist.

But I acknowledge I'm not entitled. I think it's not about being entitled. Instead, it's being upset for paying for something that is as simple as taking a dump. They won't fix anything with the money we give them. The games will still be P2P (peer-to-peer) and won't use any dedicated servers. Why bother going through all the trouble to pay for it if anything won't change? The initial announcement in January last year left a big sour taste in my mouth and certainly affected my perception of the system itself personally speaking.

In short, this entire online service can go **** itself, and I'm also against Microsoft and Sony's own versions of this trash practice, so I'm not being one-sided. I didn't pay for Gold when I had my 360 7 years ago. I don't care if the service is good or not because the practice in itself is absurd. Watch them jack the price up to $60 for Switch's successor's online service. I know they will. Corporations do things like this all the time.

 

[Aurane]

D-did I just witnessed a sarcastic, miffed @Flight?

What a way to start the day.

 

[ChikoLad]

Wow, NES games. Those are something people totally don't play or own anymore. And with online play! What a great incentive.

I'll pay for it ironically just to play only four games online, but that's it. You heard that right. Only four games. Smash Bros. when it comes out, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, ARMS, and Splatoon 2. That sounds too funny to be true, but it's real! Can't wait to pay just to play those four.

I personally don't care about the NES games. The idea of the NES games sounds cool, but the whole idea of paying for online just clouded that out for me. I don't care much about voice chat either but I know plenty of people do. Using the application to voice chat is stupid indeed. Cloud saves are okay as they're something everyone wanted, but why the need to have them behind the paywall? I'd personally prefer to have local backups via microSD myself. Special offers and deals-- ha ha, sure. It'll be fun to see great deals for Nintendo's games. Oh wait. Those don't exist.

This entire online service can go **** itself, and I'm also against Microsoft and Sony's own versions of this trash practice, so I'm not being one-sided. I didn't pay for Gold when I had my 360 7 years ago. I don't care if the service is good or not because the practice in itself is absurd. Watch them jack the price up to $60 for Switch's successor's online service. I know they will. Corporations do things like this all the time.

They don't charge for online services just to be greedy. The fact is, if you want good quality online infrastructure, it needs to be maintained. Which does cost money.

Getting free online is really a privilege to be honest. Granted, I think Nintendo made a mistake letting Switch online be free for so long (people are too used to having it for free, hence the uproar), and like you said they do not have a lot of games that would support it. But if Nintendo play their cards right, it could lead to an overall better online experience.

That said, they can't afford to have Smash Bros.' online be anything less than silky smooth. It can't be a repeat of Wii U and 3DS's online. I'm not too confident it will be better myself, though.

 

[Deleted member]

They don't charge for online services just to be greedy. The fact is, if you want good quality online infrastructure, it needs to be maintained. Which does cost money.

Getting free online is really a privilege to be honest. Granted, I think Nintendo made a mistake letting Switch online be free for so long (people are too used to having it for free, hence the uproar), and like you said they do not have a lot of games that would support it. But if Nintendo play their cards right, it could lead to an overall better online experience.

That said, they can't afford to have Smash Bros.' online be anything less than silky smooth. It can't be a repeat of Wii U and 3DS's online. I'm not too confident it will be better myself, though.

I mean, sure, I get your point. It costs money for dedicated servers. I personally don't care for that as justification because it's such a simple function even a toaster can do, but I acknowledge it costs money. But as it stands right now, you'll be paying for peer-to-peer for Switch's online-heavy multiplayer games. The same type you had on Wii U and on 3DS. If you want to at least make it a bit promising, one'd think they would to significantly upgrade the way the service works to have dedicated servers instead of having your system be the server host and the other systems that are connected serving as guests. That's why it's so bad in games like Splatoon and Smash Bros., where you suffer from lots of connection errors.

I really feel they settled on a low price like $20 to save their faces/reputation.

 

[Deleted member]

I still don't like paid online services and I most certainly won't be paying for the Switch's one.

@ FEH
Meh, another banner I can pass. Safeguard is interesting but my Sword units prefer their default Prfs

 

[ChikoLad]

I mean, sure, I get your point. It costs money for dedicated servers. But as it stands right now, you'll be paying for peer-to-peer. The same type you had on Wii U and on 3DS. If you want to at least make it a bit promising, one'd think they would to significantly upgrade the way the service works to have dedicated servers instead of having your system be the server host and the other systems that are connected serving as guests. That's why it's so bad in games like Splatoon and Smash Bros., where you suffer from lots of connection errors.

I really feel they settled on a low price like $20 to save their faces/reputation.

Yeah I know, that's exactly why I said I don't have confidence Nintendo will have a good service.

My point was more that its short-sighted to generalise all companies as being greedy for charging for online. Its legitimately necessary to have an optimal service.

Back on the PS3/Xbox 360 era, Xbox Live was always considered the way better service despite having to pay for it. It had the funds to maintain and better itself. Now PS4 generally has great online infrastructure since becoming a premium service.

Then you have MMOs like FFXIV that have to charge a subscription specifically for that game. And because of this, FFXIV has grown to be one of the best online games out there.

 

[Deleted member]

I have a delayed opening, so I can stick around a bit longer.

 

[Strider_Bond00J]

I don't comment much on this Social forum anymore - but personally I'm inclined to believe the leak is fake. As for preference if I wanted either of the former PlayStation stars in Smash, I'd probably pick Crash thanks to his legacy as one of the biggest rivals Mario had in the 90s console wars alongside Sonic.

As for the Nintendo Online Service, I'll wait and see what it's like when it finally drops. At the very least - being cheaper than it's competitors is one benefit it has; but Nintendo better start making sure that they can strengthen their servers or online platforms to deal with the countless new consumers that may come when the service launches in September.

And now it's time for me to go back to homework.

Also might spruce up the avi here - we're way past Valentines by now.

 

[Aurane]

Nintendo's online is about as good as a fox in a chicken coop. Its like buying a half eaten tomato- you wanna buy the tomato? Go ahead, I'll stick with the basics, or play with IRL friends. Splatoon? Smash Bros? Fun stuff, if I can actually play it, and I have a gut feeling I won't be able to without being disconnected every time I try to play.

Also I'd rather save my money for groceries. :V

 

[Deleted member]

https://kotaku.com/virtual-console-is-not-coming-to-switch-nintendo-says-1825848253

What a bummer.
Good thing I kept my Wii U.

 

[ChikoLad]

Wow there's just no stopping Fortnite.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

 

[Deleted member]

Wow there's just no stopping Fortnite.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

First they got the kids in my school to worship it, they copied Genji, and now they have a "crossover" that was already stated in this thread.

 

[redfeatherraven]

Also might spruce up the avi here - we're way past Valentines by now.

But it's not a Valentine's avi.

He's just here to fight.

[EDIT]: Too late.

 

[Strider_Bond00J]

If there's one thing I gotta give credit to Fortnite for - it's the fact that it was free and wasn't a half-incomplete and glitchy scam like PUBG was. This crossover only gives me 5% desire to play it again. Once again, at least it's free and plays decently enough.

And now I gotta go back to homework properly.

 

[Deleted member]

Okay.

Can I just say?

This Switch online service is really bad.

The only two positives are cloud saves and the low price of 20 bucks.

But we still need to use the app, the main incentive is NES games which aren't worth much in this day and age and there's a blatant lack of features that people really want.

I REALLY hope they change it, because as it stands, its only going to tick people off.

What is sad is I have to pay to play For Glory in Smash Bros. Switch basically. :/
So we basically pay twenty dollars a month to be able to play online on games in the Switch. I have members in my family who are fans of Splatoon 2, so we will probably use the service.

If there's one thing I gotta give credit to Fortnite for - it's the fact that it was free and wasn't a half-incomplete and glitchy scam like PUBG was. This crossover only gives me 5% desire to play it again. Once again, at least it's free and plays decently enough.

And now I gotta go back to homework properly.

I could not care less about Fornite and PUBG, whatever.

 

[Aetheri]

What is sad is I have to pay to play For Glory in Smash Bros. Switch basically. :/
So we basically pay twenty dollars a month to be able to play online on games in the Switch. I have members in my family who are fans of Splatoon 2, so we will probably use the service.

I could not care less about Fornite and PUBG, whatever.

$20 a year not a month....

That's a ridiculous price to pay per month...

 

[The Stoopid Unikorn]

But here's the thing, it isn't just the banking on nostalgia, it's trying to sell the same **** they're always selling and giving, it's only selling point is the online added and even then, that's ultimately not worth it if you ask me

I mean, yeah, the games aren't exactly the best bonus ever. They could've improved on that a little bit, and I'm hoping they do.

But on the other hand, it's not that stupid. Wii Shop Channel is gonna get shut down and no one owns a Wii U, so the only other way to get those NES games would be the 3DS or already owning them on Wii. And some those NES games are gonna have some online play, iirc, which is not only a first for those games, but also allows you to play them in a whole new way.

While I did say it offered more than Sony's online, that was mostly me being blinded by fanatism, because Sony does offer quite a bit with PS Plus, with monthly free games, exclusive discounts and the fact that the PS4 already had cloud saves.

Nintendo's online is clearly not of the same level, but for the low price of 20 bucks? They're giving out quite a bit of stuff.

Not all of that stuff is good, I'll concede that, but it's still a decent service, all things considered. It just needs a bit more...

Okay.

Can I just say?

This Switch online service is really bad.

The only two positives are cloud saves and the low price of 20 bucks.

But we still need to use the app, the main incentive is NES games which aren't worth much in this day and age and there's a blatant lack of features that people really want.

I REALLY hope they change it, because as it stands, its only going to tick people off.

Yeah, it probably will. Which is why I like to think that Nintendo is just playing it safe for now. Perhaps a bit too safe.

It's their first attempt at paid online play, so they might not be 100% sure of what to do.

Call it blind, hopeless fanatism (especially since I'm usually more of a pessimist), but I feel like they're just getting started.

What stuff does it need?

From the angry mob that is ResetERA, I'm guessing an actual way to message and interact with people on your friends list. An ability to set up parties as well.

More games and consoles beyond the NES would be nice. I hope that's more a matter of when not if.

Wait I heard the social is closing??

Wtf

Liking those ideas.

Would also add discounts on select games every now and then, like Sony does.

good on ya uni!

YAY~

and a cougar when mad hunting us, and by that i mean he hated praline, every single animal we pissed off always seem to go after praline, why do animals hate you praline?

Didn't they attack me before?

 

[Deleted member]

$20 a year not a month....

That's a ridiculous price to pay per month...

Oh. Thanks.
That is not bad, actually.

 

[The Stoopid Unikorn]

What is sad is I have to pay to play For Glory in Smash Bros. Switch basically. :/
So we basically pay twenty dollars a month to be able to play online on games in the Switch. I have members in my family who are fans of Splatoon 2, so we will probably use the service.

Like Aetheri said, it's not a montly price lmao

It's the price per year.

If you play online a lot, that low price and cloud saves alone are more than enough to make the purchase worth it, even if you give no **** about the NES games.

 

[Chrono.]

I'm pretty meh on the online Switch service. But It's 20 bones for a year so I ain't gonna get my knockers in a twist over it.

I'm also pretty lazy when it comes to subs. I still don't have PS+ even with all the fighting games I play. I'm so lonely though, there's only so much training mode labbing I can take before I finally crack. Why does this keep happening to me.

The Legend of Spyro Trilogy and the GBA Spyro games are actually well-liked.

I personally like the Legend trilogy almost as much as the Classic trilogy.

I know the GBA games were received alright but I usually see nothing but negativity for the Legend trilogy (whether it's Youtubers or random average joes online.)

But I started seeing it more after the Reignited Trilogy got revealed.

 

[The Stoopid Unikorn]

-Lyn dancer

You're wrong, Polly.

This is Dancer Tiki :V

 

[Deleted member]

Like Aetheri said, it's not a montly price lmao

It's the price per year.

If you play online a lot, that low price and cloud saves alone are more than enough to make the purchase worth it, even if you give no **** about the NES games.

I can handle 20 per year.