After more than a year, Nintendo revealed it will not continue development of its fitness-minded sleep monitoring device. Announced by former company president Satoru Iwata in October, 2014, the wireless sleep sensor was part of a proposed “quality of life” initiative at Nintendo, intended to build on the success of the Wii Fit and Wii U Fit balance boards. Earlier this week, Nintendo CEO Tatsumi Kimishima told investors the company no longer considered the sensor a viable product in a meeting following the company’s recent quarterly earnings report.“In regards to the Quality of Life [device], which was not mentioned in any of today’s questions, we do not have the conviction that the sleep-and-fatigue-themed [device] can enter the phase of actually becoming a product,” Kimishima said, according to a translation from Wired. On the other hand, we still believe there are things we can do in the general category of Quality of Life, and we will continue to study the possibility of expanding into this field.”
Based on an early diagram, users would have placed the sensor on a nightstand or nearby table, allowing it to monitor and analyze users’ breathing, heartbeat, body movement during sleep using “non-contact sensor measurement technology and sleep condition estimation technology.” The device would also provide feedback aimed at improving the user’s lifestyle. Though the device was not connected to any console, Iwata did suggest Nintendo would incorporate its understanding of game design to make the experience of using a fitness tracker into “something fun.”Related: Nintendo’s first mobile app will debut in March, alongside a new user account system“Fatigue and sleep are themes that are rather hard to visualize in more objective ways,” Iwata told investors during an October, 2014, presentation. “At Nintendo, we believe that if we could visualize them, there would be great potential for many people regardless of age, gender, language or culture.”Also watch: Nintendo eShop Updates with a Double-Dose of Final FantasyPlease enable Javascript to watch this video
The blocks look safe, but they're probably programmed to give Mario radiation poisoning or something. Sivert Fjeldstad Madsen: Since you've made every game... Did you actually beat Battletoads? Lord of Games: I assume you mean that tunnel level with the hoverbike. I, er... well, of course I beat it. It's not as if I or anyone else would release a game that couldn't be finished with standard human reaction times. There are times in video games where, instead of a becoming infamous for being frustrating and/or difficult, a level does. It could be that it is infested with or , is and , is home to , is home to (or at least one with a ), has you trying to outrun an or , , has a in play (often from a level-specific , such as a or ), or is level. If you experience frustration and anger at a level that may have one or more of these symptoms, congratulations: you're playing That One Level. Sometimes That One Level polarizes the playerbase—a portion of players find it infuriatingly hard while others don't have much of a problem with it.
This can be a matter of general skill, familiarity with a particular control scheme or just plain luck, depending on the level. Game forums are literally packed with examples of this, which often results in discussions about said levels turning into flame wars. Although it isn't a necessary requirement, it should be noted that many That One Levels are hard on all difficulty settings. If a level is difficult on the highest difficult setting, it's to be expected. Chances are That One Level is almost as infuriating on easy as it is on . , , and -esque stages tend be more receptive to becoming That One Level. For an optional level that is intentionally difficult, see . Please note that there is an emphasis on the "One" in "That One Level"; do not simply list "Every level in (game)". If every, or at least most levels in the game are difficult, then you have . The level has to stand out in difficulty compared to the other ones in the game to qualify as an example. If anything, easy games are more suspicable to this trope;
while hard levels in hard games are to be expected, it can be a shock to go through a game that feels easy for the most part and then actually require some degree of effort for one particular level. See also: and . Often contains the . Remember those old Lego sets you have tucked away in the loft? It might be time to get them out and have a look. Some rare Lego sets are currently on sale for as much as £3,800 a time – with an army of enthusiasts lining up to snap up the popular toys. And it’s not only the rare pieces – even old bags of unsorted bricks are changing for hard cash. The bigger, rarer sets tend to be worth the most - but with Lego frequently refreshing its range that means any old set that’s large enough could be worth upwards of £1,000. These are some of the most valuable sets at the moment on offer via Amazon : 5. £1,278 - Taj Mahal (2008). Price when new: £199.99 4. £1,898 - Imperial Star Destroyer (2002). Price when new: £249.99 3. £3,400 - Death Star II (2005).
2. £2,148 - Cafe Corner (2007). Price when new: £89.99 1. £4,500 - Ultimate Collector’s Millennium Falcon (2007). Price when new: £342.49 Below: Amazing video as Lego statue takes days to build... toddler destroys it in seconds So it’s as simple as that? To get the best prices for your Lego, it needs to be “mint in box” - which means not opened since it was bought and still factory sealed. The best performers in both cases are sets that are no longer in production. The easiest Lego sets to sell are Star Wars themed, with Millennium Falcons, Death Stars and X-Wings all selling well – and some prices in the thousands. How are you best to sell it? Most sales take place on eBay , with BrickPicker providing lists of the top selling and biggest rising prices – as well as a tool letting you compare the price of sets. It comes with seller fees and shipping costs too – and Lego is bulky and could cost quite a bit to ship. And don’t count your profits before you sell – the price of a set can drop fast if Lego re-introduces it while prices can rise as well as fall in line with demand too.