Which 3rd party exclusives are they sitting on except Bayonetta 2/3? I can’t remember that many.
Nintendo has the same dumb practices, but they do it with their own IPs, which is a little less annyoing. Also they aren’t the main player like Sony has been for the last two decades. They just own the Mario-and-Zelda-tablet.
In the 80s and 90s, third party exclusives were a necessity because you were making games for sets of hardware that were capable of dramatically different things.
They were capable of dramatically different things. Perhaps they also had those contracts, but Genesis couldn’t do mode 7, and the sounds that came out of the SNES were dramatically different. There were cases where a game would come out on each system under the same name but developed by two different companies with two completely different designs, because their capabilities were so different.
There were plenty of games that took advantage of one console over the other due to the very different architectures and it was a wonderful and neat thing. That said this is not really the point being made.
It was stated earlier that Sony set “the market rules” when this is untrue. Nintendo in the 80s was incredibly anti-competitive and had a very closed off ecosystem and a tight grip over developers. It wasnt even a matter of whether the game worked on one console vs another it was a matter of nintendo dominating the market and retaliating against 3rd parties that tried to work with other developers. 3rd party exclusives and first and 2nd party devs focusing on one console is somethin thats been baked into the console market since nintendo came into power in the mid 80s.
It’s awesome how user friendly Mint is. If you like it you might check out the Debian version of it (LMDE). In general it’s similar but doesn’t rely on Ubuntu which is maintained by a company, Canonical, that upsets linux people with some proprietary stuff. Ubuntu is just a derivative of Debian, so you just can go with the original.
I tried Fedora briefly before switching back to Ubuntu. It seemed like it was still forcing updates in a Microsoft-esque way that Ubuntu does not. On Ubuntu, most updates can be applied without a restart, but Fedora seemed to bundle a bunch of updates together without really telling me what was in them, and I believe it had an install step during shutdown or startup? Which is another thing I hated about Windows. Some of this could be false, as I have an atrocious memory, and some of it could have been user error, but the first foot that it put forward reminded me too much of Windows. On Ubuntu, I just disable snaps.
It doesn’t have to be done that way. From my understanding, fedora does it that way as a safety environment or something (could be wrong). But you can absolutely just do a dnf upgrade and keep on going. It’s the software center that invokes that reboot to install the updates.
But I use the same software center in Kubuntu without those restrictions. If it’s easy to toggle that off, I could have Fedora in my back pocket as an alternative for some day where Ubuntu gets too egregious with their Snaps, but so far, it’s easier to just stick to Kubuntu.
Consoles are walled-gardens altogether. Also poor Sony set the markt rules with their 3rd-party exclusives for how many generations now?
If you want to keep gaming as far away from enshittificarion as possible, then set up a linux gaming pc. It’s not bad anymore.
This is Nintendo erasure.
Which 3rd party exclusives are they sitting on except Bayonetta 2/3? I can’t remember that many.
Nintendo has the same dumb practices, but they do it with their own IPs, which is a little less annyoing. Also they aren’t the main player like Sony has been for the last two decades. They just own the Mario-and-Zelda-tablet.
Few today, but who set the market rules? They were set in the late 80s.
In the 80s and 90s, third party exclusives were a necessity because you were making games for sets of hardware that were capable of dramatically different things.
No no they were not and in addition to that nintendo had contracts that outright forbade developers from working on other systems period.
They were capable of dramatically different things. Perhaps they also had those contracts, but Genesis couldn’t do mode 7, and the sounds that came out of the SNES were dramatically different. There were cases where a game would come out on each system under the same name but developed by two different companies with two completely different designs, because their capabilities were so different.
There were plenty of games that took advantage of one console over the other due to the very different architectures and it was a wonderful and neat thing. That said this is not really the point being made.
It was stated earlier that Sony set “the market rules” when this is untrue. Nintendo in the 80s was incredibly anti-competitive and had a very closed off ecosystem and a tight grip over developers. It wasnt even a matter of whether the game worked on one console vs another it was a matter of nintendo dominating the market and retaliating against 3rd parties that tried to work with other developers. 3rd party exclusives and first and 2nd party devs focusing on one console is somethin thats been baked into the console market since nintendo came into power in the mid 80s.
How do you come up with this shit?
Where did I lose you? Have you never played a game on a console from the 80s or 90s?
I’ve been looking into Linux Mint. Lemmy folks are so helpful here!
It’s awesome how user friendly Mint is. If you like it you might check out the Debian version of it (LMDE). In general it’s similar but doesn’t rely on Ubuntu which is maintained by a company, Canonical, that upsets linux people with some proprietary stuff. Ubuntu is just a derivative of Debian, so you just can go with the original.
Yeah I heard that whole SNAP thing is a sloppy slope for proprietary bullshit plans in the future
Don’t sleep on fedora either. Combined with flatpak, you’ll have a more up to date system.
I tried Fedora briefly before switching back to Ubuntu. It seemed like it was still forcing updates in a Microsoft-esque way that Ubuntu does not. On Ubuntu, most updates can be applied without a restart, but Fedora seemed to bundle a bunch of updates together without really telling me what was in them, and I believe it had an install step during shutdown or startup? Which is another thing I hated about Windows. Some of this could be false, as I have an atrocious memory, and some of it could have been user error, but the first foot that it put forward reminded me too much of Windows. On Ubuntu, I just disable snaps.
deleted by creator
I mean…I’ve never had a problem with a botched update on Ubuntu/Kubuntu before, so that’s a solution for a problem I don’t have.
It doesn’t have to be done that way. From my understanding, fedora does it that way as a safety environment or something (could be wrong). But you can absolutely just do a dnf upgrade and keep on going. It’s the software center that invokes that reboot to install the updates.
But I use the same software center in Kubuntu without those restrictions. If it’s easy to toggle that off, I could have Fedora in my back pocket as an alternative for some day where Ubuntu gets too egregious with their Snaps, but so far, it’s easier to just stick to Kubuntu.