Zero Punctuation: E3 2013

[Vergilthenew]

Or Deadpool?

Didn't that game just come out yesterday? Just saying...

Which makes it more surprising that none of the reviewers I count on haven't reviewed it yet. Most reviewers get early copies (Not sure about Yahtzee though).

True, but he has stated numerous times that comics aren't his favorite thing in the world so why would he review it first thing then when there are other titles out there that have been out for longer? Granted this video isn't exactly about one game in particular but the point still stands. Even if he did get an early copy it probably won't be played for quite some time. I would be interested in his opinion on the game, but I feel like he might say deadpool annoyed him. Don't quote me on that unless it turns out I'm right of course

Or Deadpool?

Didn't that game just come out yesterday? Just saying...

Yeah, but still.

Yeah, but still what? It came out the day before this video and Yahtzee is particularly going to jump at the chance to play a game about a comic book character.

But I still wanted him to do it, even though he probably couldn't.

 

[Demonio Penguino]

Actually, the Wii Fit Trainer was put in there because absolutely no one asked for it. She's pretty much a big middle finger to everyone sending in requests for characters in Smash Bros.

 

[The Enquirer]

Or Deadpool?

Didn't that game just come out yesterday? Just saying...

Which makes it more surprising that none of the reviewers I count on haven't reviewed it yet. Most reviewers get early copies (Not sure about Yahtzee though).

True, but he has stated numerous times that comics aren't his favorite thing in the world so why would he review it first thing then when there are other titles out there that have been out for longer? Granted this video isn't exactly about one game in particular but the point still stands. Even if he did get an early copy it probably won't be played for quite some time. I would be interested in his opinion on the game, but I feel like he might say deadpool annoyed him. Don't quote me on that unless it turns out I'm right of course

Or Deadpool?

Didn't that game just come out yesterday? Just saying...

We figured that out based on the first comment you made which you received a warning for. I was expecting there to be more of a reason behind it.

Yeah, but still.

Yeah, but still what? It came out the day before this video and Yahtzee is particularly going to jump at the chance to play a game about a comic book character.

But I still wanted him to do it, even though he probably couldn't.

 

[Vergilthenew]

Or Deadpool?

Didn't that game just come out yesterday? Just saying...

Which makes it more surprising that none of the reviewers I count on haven't reviewed it yet. Most reviewers get early copies (Not sure about Yahtzee though).

True, but he has stated numerous times that comics aren't his favorite thing in the world so why would he review it first thing then when there are other titles out there that have been out for longer? Granted this video isn't exactly about one game in particular but the point still stands. Even if he did get an early copy it probably won't be played for quite some time. I would be interested in his opinion on the game, but I feel like he might say deadpool annoyed him. Don't quote me on that unless it turns out I'm right of course

Or Deadpool?

Didn't that game just come out yesterday? Just saying...

We figured that out based on the first comment you made which you received a warning for. I was expecting there to be more of a reason behind it.

Yeah, but still.

Yeah, but still what? It came out the day before this video and Yahtzee is particularly going to jump at the chance to play a game about a comic book character.

But I still wanted him to do it, even though he probably couldn't.

Did you forget to write something? There's nothing more here than what's already been written.

 

[TheNarrator]

-snip

While I can see your point, would you extend that opinion to games made by devs the console owner owns? I just can't get my head around making games for the competition. When it's third party stuff, I completely agree though.

It's a tough question, I've already been thinking about it and I don't really have a solid answer.

I think the the reason this question is so tough is that software products aren't really products in the traditional sense: you don't really own them the way you own, say, the plumbing in your house. If you buy a house, and you want to modify the plumbing, you can, because it's your property. Even if you don't know the first thing about it, no one has the right to stop you. This isn't the case with software: you only get a binary executable. Because you don't get the source code, modifying the program becomes virtually impossible. Furthermore, the license agreement often explicitly forbids reverse-engineering or modifying the program, so even if you would be intelligent, patient, and insane enough to modify the binary, you wouldn't be allowed to.

I think it's perfectly logical that a first party developer does not spend time and money on helping the competition by porting it to other consoles or PC, but because you don't really own the product, you also can't do it yourself, or have it done by a third party. In a better world you would actually have access to the source code, and you would get the right to modify it, and you would be able to share your modifications with anyone who bought a license to the software (if necessary only via the developer of the original software, for security reasons). And then none of this would be a problem, because you wouldn't be utterly dependent on the original developer for ports. Of course, it's not going to happen because software developers want you to be utterly dependent on them; in the case of games, most of them wouldn't want people to basically create and share content for free that they could have charged you for.

I have to admit that I'm not sure about how to go about this in the current system. I'm leaning towards saying that first party exclusives are also wrong. It's a bit like a printer manufacturer building his printers so that only cartridges of his own company fit into them, but the other way around: in case of software, it's the "cartridge" that's designed not to fit in other "printers" (consoles). I always found that one corporation manufacturing both the printers and the ink isn't a good situation, it would be better for the consumer if the manufacturer of the printers had nothing to do with ink production, and let free competition of third parties provide the ink.

So I guess that's my answer: ideally, console manufacturers wouldn't be involved in video game development; they should provide a platform where free competition takes care of game production. I am aware though that no one can reasonably expect this of a corporation. In fact, even though I may have sounded a bit judgemental in my previous post, I don't even blame Sony or Microsoft for commissioning third party exclusives: if they want to stand a chance in the console market they have to do that to be competitive. In the end, their behaviour is just a symptom of a much larger disease, and that disease is that our laws against anticompetitive behaviour are pathetically weak and people don't care about business ethics, even if they themselves get burned in the long run.

I try to do my part by refusing to sway for exclusives: I pick a gaming platform based on its technical specifications and its potential for internal competition between distribution channels, game developers etc (so basically only PC is a reasonable option for me, in fact my computer runs Linux only now). Also, I complain on the internet. Which I'm sure will change the world for better forever

 

[taltamir]

... Is it just me or has half of what Yahtzee says go straight over our heads?

When I hear a line like "the elitist self preserved powers that be of the gaming industry of highly funded and endorsed gaming industries with juxtaposition that contemplates the existence of a lawyer on speed".

It just kind of... flies right over my head. I can't keep up.

Is Yahtzee talking faster or am I getting slower?

But the jokes are at a slow enough pace that I can laugh. So I shouldn't complain.

He is talking slower AND running out of breath more. Back in the day you had to REALLY put in the effort to make out what he said.

 

[Dragonbums]

How is it anti-competitive? Doesn't it encourage console manufacturers to make systems game devs actually want to make games for, and doesn't it imply that having good devs make good games would make more people buy your console?

Because if your competitor makes a better console but you have more cash, you can just pay developers to ignore the other system, which goes against the "better products thrive" principle at the heart of free-market capitalism.

The hypocrisy in that statement is that it tends to be in favor of their system of choice.

"I like Halo, but I'm not going to buy an Xbox 360 for one game! Bungie should go multiplatform so I can play shooters on my Wii!"

"I like Zelda, but I don't want to waste my money on two games! All Nintendo IP's shouldn't be exclusive, they should go multiplatform so I can play all of their IP's on my PS3."

That is literally the entire reasoning behind this argument.
Any sugar coating like "they would be so much better off financially (especially in Nintendo's case)" is a load of bullshit to cover up what is basically the pinnacle of self entitlement.

 

[The Pink Pansy]

The problem with emulating the XBox 360 and PS3 is that it requires way too much computing power. Even the most powerful desktop PC doesn't have the power necessary to emulate the current gen consoles, the PS4 and Xbone certainly don't have the necessary processing power to do software emulation of the PS3 or 360. The only way to do backwards compatibility would be with a hardware solution, basically stick a 360 or PS3 into the new consoles to make the old games work, and that would jack up the cost significantly. This is simply what happens when the console makers decide they want to change CPU architecture every god damn generation.

Absolute nonsense. [http://xbox360emulator.net/system-requirements.html]

You can just about run it on hardware from 2006 onwards, with a few graphical tweaks. Heck, any mid-range computer made in the last 3 years or so should manage it fine. The next gen consoles (with an 8-core jaguar APU, 8GB of RAM and a modified HD 7850) should have no trouble whatsoever.

Just to add to this guy's point, here's a few games I tend to run quite often:

- Command & Conquer Red Alert 2: Yuri's Revenge
- Giants: Citizen Kabuto
- Sacrifice
- Total Annihilation
- Rise of Legends

And they run perfectly fine - with a ten month old gaming machine that's a low - mid level machine that can run most modern games at a steady clip. Even for some that do not, nine times out of ten there are community patches and fixes around to make them work.

So yes. Nonsense.

No, not nonsense. Those games work on your computer because you're running versions of those games made to run on a PC. Your computer could not run a 360/PS3 version of these games (even assuming you had a perfect emulator) because the process of emulation requires an order of magnitude more processing power than the system you are trying to emulate.

You cannot expect a computer that has enough processing power to run a game to be able to run that same game while (on a software level) pretending to be another machine entirely.

 

[mjcabooseblu]

The Metal Gear trailer thing felt like complaining for the sake of complaining. They didn't fastforward because that stuff was BORING, the did it because it wasn't trailer-worthy. It's like a TF2 match recap video--lots of cool things happening, and everything else is cut. They don't cut it because those parts of the match were boring, they cut it to compress the most interesting stuff into as short a video as possible.

 

[Gone Rampant]

Anyone know where I can make a GIF of Microsoft shivving itself? Thinking of changing my avatar.