I doubt anyone will see this but please people stop posting that terrible extra credits video about why the vita failed. It's straight up wrong. There is no universe where the vita was gonna get lots of exclusives from western devs, even the 3ds doesn't get that.

That video is way off base and incredibly wrong. Please don't post it anymore. His reasons are complete nonsense, and he ignores that of the games he shows to express how many games the 3ds has, 10 are nintendo and the other 5 are japanese. The vita was never getting nintendo games but you know what would have secured…

I know that iOS's userbase is huge, and that sony haven't made any serious attempts to reach a casual audience with the vita, and have done all they can to alienate them and make them feel like the playstation brand isn't for them, but this is still disappointing.

The thing is, and I don't mean this to sound harsh because good mobile games exist even if they'd be better on dedicated consoles, mobile appeals to kids and casual gamers, audiences that by definition don't really have enough experience to know better. If you've spent a lot of time playing different kinds of games,…

QUOTE | "Japan is still stuck in the old brick-and-mortar business in a digital age. We hope to change the game by giving designers a different option." - Kevin Lim, founder of newly formed Inflexion Point Capital, talking about why they aim to invest $15 million in Japanese mobile games.

QUOTE | "The PC is decimating console, just through price. Free-to-play has killed a hundred AAA studios." - Veteran Doom designer John Romero, on how the advance of free-to-play games has permanently changed the games business.

Not a good ad(not bad just not particularly good from my perspective)but glad they're advertising it somewhere. Also glad they're showing freedom wars and Oreshika 2.

No he said it was on their feature list. Which means it was on the list of things they planned to include, but it, likely along with some other things, got cut so they could put their focus on other aspects of the game.

When did they say she was another of Thor's human incarnations? Because if so, it wouldn't be Thor that's walking around unworthy, it'd be donald blake. They said it's a woman in Thor's life who picked up the hammer.

Yeah she doesn't get her own name? She has to be Thor as soon as she gets the hammer? She can't be a cool new character with a spot on a team? Weird.

No, not upset at all. And once again not saying an explanation could not exist, that's not my point. Like I said, human creativity knows no bounds there is an infinite number of explanations as to why she would be called Thor. I'm just saying that right now, with the information given, and with her supposedly being an…

They tend to change titles like Falcon becoming Captain America or Miles becoming Spider-Man. I'd be really surprised if Falcon started calling himself steve rogers. I know thor's name is different enough to not seem like a name, and they refer to him as that instead of the god of thunder, but it's a little weird and…

You're confused. I'm not looking for a possible explanation. I'm also not upset about the character. I know human creativity has no bounds, and they could come up with an explanation if need be, but currently, they've given none. I'm simply pointing out that in the absence of an explanation, it is weird. And it makes…

The power of Thor means the power of Thor, not actually becoming the son of Odin. Thor is a guy that will still be walking around with his name and a history, he just won't have the power of the god of thunder, but apparently, this woman isn't the new god of thunder, she's the new Thor?

Jesus christ that makes even less sense. Though at least he got his own name when Thor became Thor again, instead of having two Thors walking around? Because this Lady Thor will be Thor, while old Thor is still walking around. This is weird. I know comic fans have accepted comics are weird, but I think even they are…

What are you saying? I'm saying taking the NAME Thor isn't about being worthy of living up to the name. If she can lift the hammer she's worthy of possessing the power of Thor, that doesn't suddenly make her Thor Odinson, ESPECIALLY when Thor is still walking around some place.

Do people respond positively to retcons in your experience? How about double retcons? I mean Thor's an actual guy with a first and last name, a guy that is ALSO going to exist in addition to this new woman. So they aren't even bringing back the idea that the Hammer makes you Thor, because Thor still exists. So…

Yeah I've seen people mention that. Wiki says thor was sealed in Eric's mind though. He wasn't wandering around as "Thor, but not Thor". I'm just saying it's weird and I can see why people would be confused.

Comic nerds forgetting about it doesn't invalidate the initial reaction. Someone becoming Thor, but not actually being Thor, while Thor actually exists is confusing so being confused is an appropriate response. His name is Thor Odinson right? The whole point of his character is that he's actual mythology come to life?…

There's no limit to the explanations for a different person suddenly taking another's name. It just makes sense that people's initial reaction would be "????". Right now, with the information they've given, it doesn't make much sense.