Thrik

Maybe it got improved but when I got it at launch performance was horrible, and I recall it was one of the first games to use a console FOV and provide no way of changing it. On top of that, high-DPI mice had all sorts of weird acceleration and sensitivity issues that made aiming feel weird at best, and 2D sections (menus, hacking) almost impossible.

I hope the PC version is better this time around. Coming from a previously PC-centric developer, I was surprised at how bad the original BioShock port was. Although performance was just about acceptable (on a machine that could handle Crysis on high settings), the issues with mouse acceleration were unforgivable and made it borderline unplayable at times.

No music? Fuckin' 'ell, mon.

I was pretty annoyed that as few weeks ago, just before I had a random urge to replay them, all the DKC games had been removed from the Wii store.

Hahaha. Splendid.

Why do you keep putting arguments into my mouth that I'm not even making? I was and am saying that I don't think having a Blu-ray or HD-DVD player has ever been a particularly significant factor in terms of how well a console sells. That's the point I made right in the first place: Yes, the HD-DVD enjoyed some sales. And yes, some people like yourself clearly were influenced by the inclusion of Blu-ray. But you aren't the only people in the world, and I think that overall whether HD movie capabilities are included or not is a borderline negligible point. If it were, wouldn't there be a greater margin between the console that has it (PS3) and the one that doesn't (360)? In actual fact their worldwide sales are practically equal. Suddenly coming out with a Blu-ray player isn't going to make any worthwhile difference to Microsoft's bottom line, and it probably wouldn't have done a few years ago either. Didn't this whole conversation arise because you were surprised Microsoft isn't now releasing a Blu-ray add-on for the 360 now that it turns out they're including one in its successor? What happened years ago is kind of water under the bridge. It would have been nice for 360 owners if a Blu-ray add-on existed years ago I'm sure, but it probably wasn't deemed financially worthwhile by Microsoft and in all honesty it wouldn't have been that great for 360 owners anyway — it'd still be an extra box sat on your TV stand, just like their HD-DVD player. Might as well just get a cheap dedicated Blu-ray player than mess around with that plus the inevitable new remote you'd need to buy, and if Microsoft's video UI was anything to go by at the time I don't think I'd have wanted to use it even if the option were there.

We're getting distracted. The takeaway point is that the 360's HD-DVD player didn't sell that many units, and thus didn't sell relatively well — my argument was that after such dismal performance with their first optical add-on, Microsoft probably wasn't feeling particularly inclined to bother trying a second time. The fact that it apparently sold almost as many units as other equally unsuccessful HD-DVD players doesn't really have any bearing on that. I still think just waiting for the next generation is probably the right move for Microsoft, and I'm guessing they've done plenty of number crunching to reach the same conclusion. There's just not enough to gain from going through the whole Blu-ray rigmarole with a console that's on its way out, considering that it'd only really be used for movies/TV, and we're living in a time where most people who want a Blu-ray player for that have one already and/or can get hold of one for less than £50.

Wind Waker HD. Jesus fucking Christ.

That's because Microsoft was pretty much the main proponent of HD-DVD as a format though, no? I can't remember even seeing any alternative players back then. My impression was that overall HD-DVD sold really badly, enough to sink the format within a very short period of time. I think the above figure of less than 400k units sold during its prime period indicates it did pretty badly overall, if anything that should convince Microsoft that releasing a second optical add-on is a bad idea. Anyone who wants Blu-ray enough to buy an add-on drive at this point (or even a couple of years ago) almost certainly has a player already. It wouldn't have been if it didn't have Blu-ray support. Like I said, it was a bonus. I wouldn't have been particularly bothered if it didn't include it, in fact with the format wars occurring and discs being so expensive I didn't have any interest in either Blu-ray or HD-DVD really. By the time I cared cheaper players were available.

It'd be interesting to see some kind of data regarding how much of an impact Blu-ray actually made on PS3 sales, although I can't imagine how it'd be gathered. I personally have always been guided first and foremost by the specific games I want to play when buying consoles, and so as people above said the Blu-ray was a bonus for me — I'd have just bought the cheapest standalone player possible otherwise. I'm leaning towards it not actually being that big a factor for a lot of people, indeed most people I know couldn't have cared less and just went with the 360 anyway, and those that did get a PS3 did so for other reasons. I'm sure it had some effect, but not anything particularly huge. If there were ginormous gains to be had from releasing a Blu-ray player for the 360 I'm fairly certain Microsoft would have done it.

Bit concerning that some of the basics Double Fine usually gets so right are supposedly lacking, like, uh... animation. Hopefully these are twat-ups that'll be patched.

I don't think anyone can not see that digital distribution will ultimately reign supreme, but right now connectivity is so universally shit it's just not going to happen, and I honestly think it'll be the next next generation (ie: 10 years) before if does. Digital distribution has been a thing for the last 10 years since Steam debuted and we're still in a pretty shit position internet-wise. Even with the current generation it's a tall order to expect people to download 4–6GB games. It takes fucking ages for many people. But the 30–100GB games the next generation could bring? Piss right off. It'd be quicker to do what many people are already doing (and this is a large part of where your PC retail is going by the way): order online, have it delivered within a day or so. Still faster than it'd take to download even a current-gen game and it's patches on a shitty line.

At this point if consoles went download-only that'd pretty much end my gaming hobby right there. Despite being literally right in the middle of a major UK city in 2013, my connectivity is barely adequate to cover even game patches in a timely fashion — and I'm far from an uncommon story. On Saturday I really wanted to play BioShock. Then I realised I could have literally gotten it from the shop after work on Monday and STILL been playing it faster than if I'd tried to get it off Xbox LIVE. Absolute gash, mon. So yeah, while shitty broadband and relatively harsh caps exist in at least this country — the most amusing being Virgin who give you 60mb/s fibre but cut your speed right down if you download more than a few GB in the evening — we aren't going to be downloading 50GB Blu-ray games any time soon. Concerning the whole retail thing: game-only vendors are going down the toilet, but that's more because other retailers like supermarkets, department stores, and electronics shops are selling the same games and often for cheaper. If people really want a wider, older catalogue there'll always be little second-hand shops like CeX. Rumours of brick-and-mortar game outlets disappearing are greatly exaggerated, genuinely sad as it is (my local GAME that I frequented as a child with my dad was gutting).

I don't agree with this. I consider the Blu-ray remote essential, but if you have one it really couldn't be simpler: but a disc in and it'll play, then you use the controller like any other TV remote. Unless you've disabled disc auto-play, which is kind of your own fault although it's not much harder to go to 'Video' then click the golden disc. The scene selection and in-film menus are just fine too. My dad, pre-teen siblings, and girlfriend haven't had any trouble with it anyway.

Yeah that's true. At this point it'd seem kind of retarded to use anything but Blu-ray. Unless you're Nintendo of course, who seem to be content with just not even trying to use any kind of standard (although the Wii U's 25GB discs are suspiciously reminiscent of Blu-ray).

Oh I understand your argument about providing a player for things like films, I wasn't really thinking about it in terms of non-gaming media at all. I was referring specifically to the data kind of Blu-ray; there'd be no point having a Blu-ray add-on for the 360 in a gaming context because no games would currently use it and I can't see developers starting to use that extra 40GB-ish capacity and requiring the peripheral. Plus, the main benefits of having so much extra space (textures, audio) can't be taken full advantage of by the 360's hardware. It's the kind of thing where waiting for the next generation is simply sensible.

Yeah I don't follow either. That's a bit like asking why they didn't release a DVD add-on for the PS1 when they announced that the PS2 would have a DVD drive. It's fairly normal to move to the latest optical standard with a new generation isn't it? Unless you're Nintendo of course, in which case you use an almost-but-not-quite version of the latest standard. Anyway, it's good that the Durango Blu-ray drive will support 6x. That's three times the speed of the PS3's, which as we all know is so slow you often need to install games onto the HD to get acceptable performance. It's clearly dual-layer too, hence 50GB instead of 25GB. Wonder if the optical drive is potentially geared up to support quad-layer (100GB!), seems like they'd be crazy to not at least put the possibility in place. Of course that's all kinds of pain for any digital distribution plans, but the capacity being there is exciting.

That is literally one of the most retarded things I have ever heard.

The last photo is great, James — good separation of the bird and the background. Seems a bit over-blue, though!

I suppose I'd better join in with the posting snow photos too.

Few more from over Christmas. Was my first opportunity to try and get to grips with my new cam, could have done better (had some retarded shooting options set) but that's part of the fun I guess!

That is such a splendid photo. Looks cold as knackers. Here is a cat:

I concur.

lmao