It’s kinda crazy that we’re going to know far more about 1 game than their new system that they’ll expect people to pay hundreds of dollars for.

Heck, you can just watch it on a Twitch vod later and have missed absolutely nothing.

Have they only been working on one game or something? Either this is an admission that they have nothing complete enough to bring to the table, or this is the best Zelda game ever to be made.

“Can’t do anything with WW2"

Vietnam seems to be relatively taboo in the US. Sorta like how CoD’s WW2 games were completely and utterly not okay in Germany, but on a more limited level.

I’m sure they’ll make it available for everyone to buy a few months after the initial hype train for Infinite Warfare dies down. Although you could argue that this is intentional to goad people into buying a game they wouldn’t otherwise have, and find themselves playing it simply because they bought the damn thing.

Speaking of which, I wouldn’t be too upset by another CoD WW2 game. I didn’t particularly enjoy the modern stuff they put out.

Even if they did a new Kotor, they would probably end up doing what they did to Mass Effect / Dragon Age / Kotor where the later games were functionally different from the first ones.

They probably don’t want to wait for all 3 movies in order to capitalize on profits and hype.

Eh, if they make good games then I don’t really care who they are.

This is a pretty swell change. I forget the game, but at the time of buying it most of the reviews were complaining that it was 30fps locked and had no graphics options.

A legal, sustainable ivory trade might help, but the supply from a legal trade would be nowhere near what the illegal market demands, because if a sustainable market existed, it would be a legal industry and we wouldn’t have these issues.

Would you rather they sell it and give people the idea that it’s acceptable to trade in ivory?

It’s worked to make international awareness of the problem before, and it helps remind people who forget that it’s bad to buy ivory that it’s actually a bad thing to do.

In fairness, the republican party chooses to elect people that enact laws over this and represent themselves as discriminatory jerks. They don’t have to continuously support leaders that put forth bullshit openly and knowingly, but the republican party does.

They probably are still figuring out the fine line of providing for content producers and respecting major companies. Pissing off major companies is a good way to lose a bunch of money if they decide to not work with Google anymore, but content creators are the people that actually make youtube a success by itself.

It’s a slight improvement over the original system in which someone who claims your content would unconditionally receive video revenue until you’ve proven that they’re wrong. Basically, content ID runs on a guilty until proven innocent justice system, and that’s abusable.

I’ve often wondered about that. I have some limited knowledge on music theory, and an absolute shitton of works of music share small bits and pieces, which can easily exceed the time limit for being marked. Or at at least similar enough to potentially be confused.

“win-win for Google” is basically their entire company history.

Region lock the copyright claims. Japanese law doesn’t apply to me, as a US citizen, unless I’m in Japan or their judicial system manages to get the US one to arrest me for them, and send me there.