13zero
This far exceeded my expectations:
- Super Mario Bros. Wonder looks like it could be the best 2D Mario in 25+ years
- The “remake of an SNES classic” rumor turned out to be Super Mario RPG and not Chrono Trigger
- Another new WarioWare on Switch was a surprise
- Pikmin 4 looks solid
- Pikmin 1 and 2 ports are out
But the bad news:
- Pikmin 1/2 more-or-less confirms my suspicion that Nintendo is going to sell emulated or remade GameCube games instead of adding them to Switch Online
- No Tears of the Kingdom DLC yet
- No Metroid Prime 4 updates
The trailer oozes creativity. This should be refreshing after ~15 years of New Super Mario Bros.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this gives Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze a run for its money.
Utopia is a must-have.
Leviathan and Distant Stars are good for their prices.
Beyond that, get what sounds interesting. If you want to play as robots, get Synthetic Dawn. If you want planet-destroying weapons, get Apocalypse. If you like playing diplomatically, get Federations.
The Switch is turning Nintendo franchises into sales machines.
The top selling Zelda games are Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom. Nothing else comes close. The Link’s Awakening remake and Skyward Sword remaster also outsold the originals.
Animal Crossing New Horizons outsold the rest of the series by a factor of 3.
Luigi’s Mansion 3 sold more copies than the previous two combined.
Metroid Dread is the best-selling Metroid game of all-time.
Kirby and the Forgotten Land is the best-selling Kirby game, and Kirby Star Allies is #3.
Fire Emblem Three Houses is the best-selling Fire Emblem game.
It’s not unreasonable to think that Pikmin 4 could be a breakout for the franchise.
A lot of the third-party compilations for Switch include one game and allow you to download the rest (Assassin’s Creed is one).
On the plus side, Nintendo is good about releasing revision cartridges with updates. I think that new copies of Breath of the Wild and Mario Odyssey have been fully patched for years.
It’s also against the spirit of the GPL if not the letter. Red Hat isn’t just required to release source code to its customers upon request; that source code comes with GPL rights and restrictions attached (including the right to distribute).
Is it legal for Red Hat to require customers to waive their GPL rights? I don’t think it should be, but I don’t think courts are particularly friendly to copyleft holders.