-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Rumor: Fortnite, Dragon Ball Fighter Z, Paladins and Overcooked 2 leaked for Switch
- Thread starter Wander_
- Start date
Never underestimate the ability of people and publishers to be bone-jarringly stupid when Nintendo is successful.
I'm sure all experiences are better with a group of friends... But ya can't always get the gang together so I can settle for some online Overcooked.
The main problem is that the slightest of lag correction would completely desroy the timing of the stage and be the difference between 3 stars and 2.
So it is either pauses when lag and have lots of people complaining about it online or no online
I don't think that's true.
I think the Overcooked devs if they don't implement it just don't have the money or maybe time to invest in it.
Which lag correction would you use in Overcooked?
tell me one and i will explain how it would fuck up the timing of a stage
Couldn't that statement be made for anything?
Like why are you arguing against online for overcooked?
Why is it bad to have the option as opposed to strictly local play?
I'm not familiar with online IP/TCP stuff for games but I know there have been plenty of demanding games that have done online so really it comes down to time and money investment to achieve it. And I completely understand if the devs can't do that to achieve any kind of decent online.... Which is why I'll pass.
No. Most fps have pretty good lag compensation because you can't see exactly where the opponent is aiming so all you need to do is give player X damage if he is inside player Y aim in player Y's PC. Don't matter if Y is a few seconds behind.
Overcooked is 4 players getting the timing of the stage right and the timing of each other right. One player that lags without a huge pause and the machine is completely destroyed. And huge pauses kill the urgency.
Rollback mechanics can make objects dissapear from your hand because another player already grabbed before so all the ingredients you went to tap are not on the plate anymore.
Online in overcooked (the first one at least) would be more rage than fun
Something tells me Activision has some ideas of how to run a successful business.
ZERO blizzard games on the DS and Wii, the most successful consoles in history. And the wiimote pointer was PERFECT for every single blizzard game that existed at the time
Yea, the game got ridiculous in latter stages especially in the dlc. It's why it needs online coop, I loved playing it couch coop but more people would only make it more fun.
Lots of things that companies could do, they don't, because they want to spend their resources in the most efficient way possible. They were probably focused on catering to their PC audience rather than low-powered home consoles.
I don't know what their reasoning was, just speculating - point being, the CEO of a giant corporation may have a little more insight into a situation than some dude sitting at home playing video games.
Every time I see these rumor threads for the Switch bumped a part of me hopes that the update will say something involving the Mother 3 rumors from Emily and Eurogamer. It is very cool that DB Fighter Z is coming to the Switch but I still hope Nintendo has a few more surprises in store for us next week.
As much as I'd like to see a Blizzard game like Overwatch come onto the Switch or even Hearthstone which makes a lot of sense playing a card game on the go, I think its safe to say blizzard has zero plans to put their products on a Nintendo Platform ever again. Even if the Switch is on fire, Blizzard probably doesn't see the console as something for their software to make a profit off of.
Diablo 3 is obviously coming to the Switch eventually.
Blizzard may not want to launch a 30 FPS Overwatch for Switch which is a fine decision for them to make.
Oh, nevermind. Well we'll see what Diablo 3 looks like if it gets revealed at E3 (or sometime this year).
Here we go again for the Stealth's hate here lol. Stealth is not an "insider", he do not say he's one. Sometimes, he heard things from friends, and then he says it. For instance, he was the only one litteraly saying at which hour would drop the january direct. In this exact forum, no hour was hinted by anybody, everyone was wondering when it would drop. But Stealth said the exact hour it would be like 12 hours before the direct.
Another one. When Smash Switch was announced (so, in March) he said "expect almost no cut, most likely any, from Smash Switch", and a few weeks ago Emily (so, late may) said the exact same thing on Discord.
He's not like Marcus, tweeting every shit that will most likely happen and shit that random people told him.
Stealth barely "hint" at anything. Most of the time he's just a chilling dude talking about Nintendo's games, predicting stuff, talking about his hope and all. But sometimes (which is very rare) he says "this will happen, I heard this from someone I trust". That's it.
One more thing. Stealth is followed on Twitter by Emily, Jordan Amaro (french level designer at Nintendo EPD), Krysta Yang (Nintendo of America, Nintendo Minute), Tom Phillips (Eurogamer), Peer Schneider (IGN), and a lot of other gaming journalists from Game Informer, GameSpot... So he's definitely not a random liar like Marcus.
An "appeal to authority" argument doesn't hold much water, IMO. Business schools have numerous examples of CEOs making bad business-destroying decisions.
They could make the timing more forgiving for online compared to how strict it is in local.
I really don't understand how both Stealth and Marcus got lumped into the same group in the first place.
Putting aside the fact that Blizzard did not make a business-destroying decision by not developing games for DS - it's silly for someone who has presumably zero authority to tell a person with a wildly successful track record that they're bone-jarringly stupid. I can understand if the zero-knowledge person sincerely questions the CEO, but outright claiming they know better than them is clearly laughable. I'm not saying successful people are invincible, I'm saying they know more than the average consumer.
And I'm merely saying that game developers and players have repeatedly shown the inability to behave rationally when it comes to an ascendant Nintendo (Exhibit A: Capcom).
I personally do not lump Activision or Blizzard into that camp, and I think their Switch support will surprise a lot of people. Not because they're infallible geniuses but merely because they like money.
Maybe online competition between local multiplayer teams? Like two groups of three-player teams competing against each other to finish a level with the highest score? And special moves to throw obstacles at the opposing teams ("Combo! Kitchen fire started!")...
