NX aka Nintendo switch revealed! (3rd party support revealed & backed by NVIDIA)

[Undead Wolf]

12 minutes ago, BillyHorrible said:

I knew it was a launch title but hadn't realised it would be retail... Should've seen that coming I guess. Anyways not my kind of game (I think... I have it from PS+ so I think I'll give it a try if the rest of my backlog is gone).

 

 

Thanks to the PS4 game station and the X1 media center put together, the reason to go Switch is already only if you're a Nintendo fan, and that's a Nintendo fan speaking. With both PS4 and X1 being able to handle better graphics, those are the game consoles unless you're going "fuck you lot, I just want Zelda and Mario and all that Nintendo goodness".

 

It's why this thread is not working between the yessers and no-ers, really. Those not into it complain about lack of games and an expensive second controller, while those into it (on this site) have a PS3 or PS4 to play next to the Switch and just want a few cool Nintendo games and couch multiplayer weekends to add to their gaming, and they see that that one extra controller ensures you can play many games with four people.

 

Also, with Wii and WiiU breaking the trend, all other Nintendo consoles always had just a bare few launch titles. Nintendo is just Nintendo, doin' their thang.

 

Edit: also, Nintendo never shows their whole hand in one event, there are a few aces left. Since the event, Snipperclips has been announced for March and a Fire Emblem game for 2018. Rumours are that there'll be at least a Mario Party or a Smash Bros before the end of the year as well, and that the Virtual Console will be insta-filled this time around.

 

But the whole "2nd console" thing didn't work out well for the Wii U, so I don't see how it'll be any different this time around. You can argue that people only buy Nintendo consoles for Nintendo games, but the Wii U proves that they don't. A console needs third party support to be successful, and so far, I'm certainly not seeing that. I mean you have EA, one of the biggest publishers in the world, saying they will bring FIFA to the Switch. That's it. Ubisoft are porting Rayman Legends over. That game released in 2013! From Bethesda you get Skyrim, not Skyrim Special Edition, but the regular old Skyrim released in 2011. Fantastic.  Low risk, low reward. This just shows they don't have any faith in this thing, so why should we?

 

Again, if Nintendo had anything of importance to reveal, they would have already shown it already. This year is looking very barren on the Switch in terms of releases. By the time these games come, it may be too late already. This reminds me a lot of the Wii U...

[Oobedoob S Benubi]

7 hours ago, Undead Wolf said:

 

But the whole "2nd console" thing didn't work out well for the Wii U, so I don't see how it'll be any different this time around. You can argue that people only buy Nintendo consoles for Nintendo games, but the Wii U proves that they don't. A console needs third party support to be successful, and so far, I'm certainly not seeing that. I mean you have EA, one of the biggest publishers in the world, saying they will bring FIFA to the Switch. That's it. Ubisoft are porting Rayman Legends over. That game released in 2013! From Bethesda you get Skyrim, not Skyrim Special Edition, but the regular old Skyrim released in 2011. Fantastic.  Low risk, low reward. This just shows they don't have any faith in this thing, so why should we?

 

Again, if Nintendo had anything of importance to reveal, they would have already shown it already. This year is looking very barren on the Switch in terms of releases. By the time these games come, it may be too late already. This reminds me a lot of the Wii U...

 

I'm only talking about Nintendo as the second console because, as said, everyone on this site will have either a PS3 or a PS4 (I'm going on a limb here and guess that nobody only has a Vita), naturally things are different for people who only buy Nintendo.

 

Actually, WiiU proves to me that Nintendo games are needed for people to buy Nintendo consoles. I can name a few WiiU games I would have liked to play but I never got a WiiU because it was missing an open world Mario game (and a Zelda, and until last year a Star Fox, and an F-Zero, but mainly the Mario), and all Nintendo buyers I know never bought a WiiU but are now excited for the Switch (except for two - one who caved and bought a WiiU a couple of months ago on a sale because he wanted to play the new Smash and one who buys all Nintendo and PlayStation consoles anyway).

 

I don't get why Switch getting Skyrim is a sign that Bethesda does not have faith in the Switch. If anything it shows that they didn't like the WiiU, because it was never released for that one. Now finally Nintendo players can have Skyrim as well, and you're complaining? Be glad that more people can experience that pinnacle of open world fantasy!

 

Again: no, NIntendo won't show their whole hand at once and you can expect a couple of surprises this year. And again, except for the Wii and WiiU, all of Nintendo's consoles were launched with just a few games, and all of those consoles were hits. And again, if the Switch reminds you of the WiiU then you're not looking right because 1) the WiiU had a weird gimmick that devs never got around to fully understanding because Nintendo downplayed the possibilities and 2) the WiiU never got a Zelda, an open world Mario, a Fire Emblem and a lot of other stuff.

 

The main problem I have here is that you're making a lot of general assumptions as to what other gamers want or need. I feel like the number of Switch pre-orders speaks for itself, the world is not as black and white as you try to make it out to be and while there's a bunch of people talking about the price tag, others think it's not that big a deal.

 

 

 

 

Adding to the general discussion: one of Nintendo's main directors (I think it was the US one) said that they're not looking to make a big hit at launch. They want to have stuff there for the hardcore fans, and then they want to maintain a steady stream of good titles. They think themselves that the main issue with the WiiU (next to the downplayed possibilities of the controller) was that the "want" titles were too few and far between. So Zelda's the big launch game, a month later comes Mario Kart (which is not just a better graphics version of the WiiU one by the way; they're adding new tracks and characters and they're fixing battle mode), in December comes Super Mario Odyssey, and a bunch of good stuff is expected to come in between like Xenoblade Chronicles 2, Yooka-Laylee (which comes for PS4 and X1 earlier as well but let's not kid ourselves, that game will do better with the Nintendo crowd), Splatoon 2, a No More Heroes sequel... And if the rumours are true, Pokémon Stars will be out before long, as well as at least a new Smash Bros or Mario Party this year.

[RedPage17]

According to the developer, "Stardew Valley will not be a launch title on Nintendo Switch, but I am still planning on bringing it to the platform later this year."

[Valyrious]

23 hours ago, Undead Wolf said:

Oh yeah, the "no games meme" is reserved for Vita of course, but unlike Switch, there are actually tons of games on that system. For Switch, it's less of a meme and more of a cold hard reality.  But hey, you've got Zelda! There's Zelda, guys! 

Since you're kind enough to compare the two, it's a foregone conclusion that the Switch will be more successful than the Vita. The biggest reason the Vita is actually alive at this point is that developers are constantly porting watered down PS4 versions onto them, and/or Jap studios see a PS Vita title as little work on their part.

Not something to be bragging about. Everyone that isn't part of the Vita cult religion knows the Vita is on life support.

But hey, you've got panty shot games!  There's panty shot games, guys!!

In before someone accuses me of being a Nintendo nerd. I'm not, that's the funniest part in all of this. 

People give me shit when I piss on Microsoft for being the incompetent piece of shit company that they are, and advise me not to make things about console wars. Then they do the same whenever possible when it comes to Nintendo and whatever god awful system they hold tight to their heart. 

I may be an asshole, but at least I'm consistent.

Edited January 20, 2017 by Valyrious

[Satoshi Ookami]

1 hour ago, Valyrious said:

it's a foregone conclusion that the Switch will be more successful than the Vita

Well, of course. Because there will be AAA ports

AAA crappy games == sold units, easy equation.

[Undead Wolf]

14 hours ago, BillyHorrible said:

I'm only talking about Nintendo as the second console because, as said, everyone on this site will have either a PS3 or a PS4 (I'm going on a limb here and guess that nobody only has a Vita), naturally things are different for people who only buy Nintendo.

 

Actually, WiiU proves to me that Nintendo games are needed for people to buy Nintendo consoles. I can name a few WiiU games I would have liked to play but I never got a WiiU because it was missing an open world Mario game (and a Zelda, and until last year a Star Fox, and an F-Zero, but mainly the Mario), and all Nintendo buyers I know never bought a WiiU but are now excited for the Switch (except for two - one who caved and bought a WiiU a couple of months ago on a sale because he wanted to play the new Smash and one who buys all Nintendo and PlayStation consoles anyway).

 

I don't get why Switch getting Skyrim is a sign that Bethesda does not have faith in the Switch. If anything it shows that they didn't like the WiiU, because it was never released for that one. Now finally Nintendo players can have Skyrim as well, and you're complaining? Be glad that more people can experience that pinnacle of open world fantasy!

 

Again: no, NIntendo won't show their whole hand at once and you can expect a couple of surprises this year. And again, except for the Wii and WiiU, all of Nintendo's consoles were launched with just a few games, and all of those consoles were hits. And again, if the Switch reminds you of the WiiU then you're not looking right because 1) the WiiU had a weird gimmick that devs never got around to fully understanding because Nintendo downplayed the possibilities and 2) the WiiU never got a Zelda, an open world Mario, a Fire Emblem and a lot of other stuff.

 

The main problem I have here is that you're making a lot of general assumptions as to what other gamers want or need. I feel like the number of Switch pre-orders speaks for itself, the world is not as black and white as you try to make it out to be and while there's a bunch of people talking about the price tag, others think it's not that big a deal.

 

 

 

 

Adding to the general discussion: one of Nintendo's main directors (I think it was the US one) said that they're not looking to make a big hit at launch. They want to have stuff there for the hardcore fans, and then they want to maintain a steady stream of good titles. They think themselves that the main issue with the WiiU (next to the downplayed possibilities of the controller) was that the "want" titles were too few and far between. So Zelda's the big launch game, a month later comes Mario Kart (which is not just a better graphics version of the WiiU one by the way; they're adding new tracks and characters and they're fixing battle mode), in December comes Super Mario Odyssey, and a bunch of good stuff is expected to come in between like Xenoblade Chronicles 2, Yooka-Laylee (which comes for PS4 and X1 earlier as well but let's not kid ourselves, that game will do better with the Nintendo crowd), Splatoon 2, a No More Heroes sequel... And if the rumours are true, Pokémon Stars will be out before long, as well as at least a new Smash Bros or Mario Party this year.

 

You'd be hard pressed to find someone gaming exclusively on Nintendo consoles these days. I don't know if I'd even call them gamers anymore since they probably spend more time waiting for games to arrive than actually playing them.  Oh, and no matter how bad Vita sales are, it's safe to assume the Wii U did worse, so yeah...

 

Oh please, the Wii U had a lot of Nintendo's "big hitters". You can't honestly believe an open world Mario game would have turned that system around. Nothing was gonna save that trainwreck.

 

Because if Bethesda actually had faith in the system, they would create a new game for it. A port of a 5 year old game is about as low risk as you can get. If the Switch bombs, it won't even affect them because they didn't invest any money into it. Smart move on their part. Ubisoft got burned for supporting the Wii U with new games, and look, they've learned their lesson now too. 

 

This isn't the 1980's anymore. Nintendo are no longer top dogs and the competition is destroying them. They can't afford to put up such a poor showing anymore. Also, I'd like to remind you that with the exception of the Wii, all of Nintendo's consoles have been declining in sales since the NES. The Gamecube was considered a failure back in the day and that sold almost twice as many Wii U's. It really puts things into perspective...

 

If I remember correctly, the Wii U did fairly well at launch too before sales just fell off a cliff. It wouldn't surprise me if this was the case with the Switch as well. Oh, and it's not an assumption. PS4 sales = 53 million. Wii U sales = 13 million. It speaks for itself really.

 

So basically there's Zelda at launch, some remasters of Wii U games coming later in the year, a few games available on other systems, and Mario at the end of the year (maybe). Sounds great!  Everything else you mentioned are either rumours or don't have concrete release dates yet. Who knows when/if those will happen?

Edited January 20, 2017 by Undead Wolf

[ThiophenSJ]

Much Nintendo-hate going on here.  I don't know why some people are insisting on telling everyone that "Nintendo is doomed!". Nintendo was doomed during Gamecube days, Nintendo was doomed when the Wii was announced, then Nintendo made a lot of money and wasn't doomed shortly, then the Wii was shit again, then Nintendo was doomed during the WiiU generation and now when the Switch isn't even out Nintendo is doomed yet again - at least, according to the internet.  It's fun for how long Nintendo seems to be doomed, and yet they are still here, still producing games and consoles, and many many people still talk very favorable of Nintendo when they talk of Zelda, Mario and co.  

 

Another part I wanna say: While the WiiU had very low sales, it even is Nintendo's worst-selling console, Nintendo still has the 3DS, which has very good sales of around 60M units. And this is where the Switch comes in - Nintendo's strategy is combine their handheld and home console divisions and thus bringing their many handheld buyers over to the Switch. Time will tell if it'll work out, and even if it doesn't, I don't see Nintendo being doomed that soon.  

Edited January 20, 2017 by ShadowStefan

[Oobedoob S Benubi]

3 hours ago, Undead Wolf said:

 

You'd be hard pressed to find someone gaming exclusively on Nintendo consoles these days. I don't know if I'd even call them gamers anymore since they probably spend more time waiting for games to arrive than actually playing them.  Oh, and no matter how bad Vita sales are, it's safe to assume the Wii U did worse, so yeah...

 

3 hours ago, Undead Wolf said:

PS4 sales = 53 million. Wii U sales = 13 million. It speaks for itself really.

 

HAHAHAHAHA!

 

WiiU: about 13.36 million sold

Xbox1: just over 10 million sold

Vita: just over 4 million sold

 

I can't even take you serious in this discussion any more. Go ahead, keep living in your own little fantasy where the Vita was more successful than the WiiU. For someone talking about perspective, you sure seem to lack insight in any perspective but your own. If you're getting so immature that you call Nintendo fans non-gamers (because PlayStation gamers totally did not just wait seven years for The Last Guardian), then I'm not going to bother replying to your little bundles of ignorant hating. I stand by everything I said in my last post. Buh-bye.

[SnowxSakura]

14 minutes ago, BillyHorrible said:

 

 

HAHAHAHAHA!

 

WiiU: about 13.36 million sold

Xbox1: just over 10 million sold

Vita: just over 4 million sold

 

I can't even take you serious in this discussion any more. Go ahead, keep living in your own little fantasy where the Vita was more successful than the WiiU. For someone talking about perspective, you sure seem to lack insight in any perspective but your own. If you're getting so immature that you call Nintendo fans non-gamers (because PlayStation gamers totally did not just wait seven years for The Last Guardian), then I'm not going to bother replying to your little bundles of ignorant hating. I stand by everything I said in my last post. Buh-bye.

Are you only including japanese sales of the vita? As of 2016 it is estimated the vita has sold over 10 million units, still not as much as the wii u though. Xbox one is estimated at 26 million units sold http://www.vgchartz.com/analysis/platform_totals/

I know they're not completely accurate, but EEDAR also has the vita at over 10 million

http://gamingbolt.com/xbox-one-sales-at-20-million-ps4-nearly-40-million-according-to-eedar-study

for the xbox one as well

 

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/xbox-one-sales-reach-26-million-report/1100-6447023/

Edited January 21, 2017 by SnowxSakura

[Undead Wolf]

19 minutes ago, BillyHorrible said:

WiiU: about 13.36 million sold

Xbox1: just over 10 million sold

Vita: just over 4 million sold

 

That isn't accurate.  The last time Microsoft divulged Xbox One sales was in 2014. Sony stopped divulging Vita sales sometime in 2013. That's years out of date, my friend. 

 

Of course VGChartz isn't 100% accurate, but it's damn well closer than what you were suggesting. They estimate as of November 2016, Wii U has sold 13.6 million, Xbox One has sold 25.5 million, and Vita has sold 14.7 million.

 

http://www.vgchartz.com/analysis/platform_totals/

 

EDIT: Snow Ninja'd me. 

 

19 minutes ago, BillyHorrible said:

I can't even take you serious in this discussion any more. Go ahead, keep living in your own little fantasy where the Vita was more successful than the WiiU. For someone talking about perspective, you sure seem to lack insight in any perspective but your own. If you're getting so immature that you call Nintendo fans non-gamers (because PlayStation gamers totally did not just wait seven years for The Last Guardian), then I'm not going to bother replying to your little bundles of ignorant hating. I stand by everything I said in my last post. Buh-bye.

 

Who's living in a fantasy now?  The whole "Nintendo fans are non-gamers" thing was an obvious jab in response to your jab at the Vita. Don't take things so seriously. 

Edited January 21, 2017 by Undead Wolf

[Oobedoob S Benubi]

6 minutes ago, SnowxSakura said:

Are you only including japanese sales of the vita? As of 2016 it is estimated the vita has sold over 10 million units, still not as much as the wii u though. Xbox one is estimated at 26 million units sold http://www.vgchartz.com/analysis/platform_totals/

I know they're not completely accurate, but EEDAR also has the vita at over 10 million

http://gamingbolt.com/xbox-one-sales-at-20-million-ps4-nearly-40-million-according-to-eedar-study

for the xbox one as well

 

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/xbox-one-sales-reach-26-million-report/1100-6447023/

 

I was using Google, which apparently was using some old Wikipedia page for the tables they showed, my bad. Shows me for trusting them to come up with correct information.

[Satoshi Ookami]

7 hours ago, BillyHorrible said:

 

I was using Google, which apparently was using some old Wikipedia page for the tables they showed, my bad. Shows me for trusting them to come up with correct information.

You couldn't possibly believe Vita would sell only 4M worldwide  

Excluding 3DS (which is a cheater :awesome:), it's the most successful 8th gen console in the glorious Nippon

Japan would never allow Vita-tan to phail!

[Cynthia-Roses]

As a long time Nintendo fan (I even have the SNES controller buttons on my stomach to prove it), the Switch is vastly disappointing me. Nintendo is trying to do the handheld/console hybrid thing, but failing on both aspects. They should have focused on one or the other, but now they've sort of sunk themselves and it seems like the diehards are covering their ears and ignoring the warning signs that this might be a terrible move for Nintendo.

 

• No trophy/achievement system announced. In today's age, this is kind of an expected feature that virtually all of Nintendo's competitors have and have had for close to 10 years now. Trophy/achievement hunters are a type of gamer that exists now and the lack of this feature alone will drive them away from the Switch.
• No Multi-media/Netflix support. Regardless of people saying "I buy game consoles to play games!" no one can deny that if you shop around you can find a PS4 for $250-300 that has a large game library, and does multi-media... And even comes with a game a lot of the time. Nintendo wants the same price for less.
• Expensive accessories, some of which are essentially non-optional if you want to use this as your "main" console. With 32GB of storage, no doubt an SD card will be mandatory if you buy digital games. Flashbacks for Fatal Frame 5 being digital only in the US on the Wii U come to me. That was 10GB game, so that easily burned up a good 10GB of your available 32. Considering I Am Setsuna is coming out on it and that was a digital only game and that took up a good 1.5GB on the PS4, we can safely assume that if you are interested in these games, you'll need an SD.
• Full $60 games that have already been proven to look lesser than their PS4 counterparts. And for people defending that you are paying for portability, what about when Vita versions of PS4 games get released for cheaper. Clearly you shouldn't have to pay more for portability, especially when you are sacrificing a lot of graphics.
• Underpowered hardware that can't even stack up to the base model PS4, when we have a PS4 Pro already on the market capable of even more than that.
• Reliance on a smartphone app for voice chat creates ANOTHER thing you need to get full functionality out of the system. It more or less cuts the audience of people who can't afford smartphones out of the picture.
• Possibility of needing the smartphone app to even play online.
• Paid online service without justifying the costs.
• Poor "free monthly" game plan that only appeals to retro gamers, and doesn't even give you game indefinitely like their competitors at Sony and Microsoft are doing. Seriously they basically give you a free 1 month rental of ROMs that most people can get on the internet with ease. Then they expect you to buy them.
• Small launch library with the only real game of value being a Zelda game that is available on their current console. Blatantly making the whole releasing in March to "prevent not having games at the launch like the Wii U" thing totally invalid. It literally is launching with LESS games than the Wii U.
• Lots speculation that Nintendo is understocking the system.
• Most of the third party devs came forward and admitted that they didn't have any actual plans for the Switch at the moment, just that they were "interested" in it.
• 3 hour battery life for games like Breath of the Wild.
• Nintendo refusing to tell us the ACTUAL hardware in the system.
• Announcing third party support through old games that everyone has had for years now such as Skyrim and I Am Setsuna.
• The fact that console experiences on the go simply don't sell.
• No games included with the system at all.
• Nintendo admitting that even their first party game can't be optimized to run at 1080p, which gives you an idea of how third party will be if a FIRST party game can't even run at 1080p.
• Flat out lying that this thing was meant to replace the Wii U.

This to me looks like Nintendo trying to make the Wii U 2.0. The only thing that can save this now is if Nintendo somehow gets an amazing line up of exclusives, which I doubt is going to happen. It's going to be the Wii U all over again, lot of third party interest in the first few months, followed by first party being the only games that matter. No day one buy for me, and I probably won't buy until I see some exclusives that matter to me. I can't get behind buying another "Zelda Box".

 

Nintendo has not given me reason to have faith in them with this thing, as it comes off as more gimmicks rather than substance. Nintendo should have focused on one or the other, but trying to appeal both to handheld and console means they are putting only half the effort into both.

[Satoshi Ookami]

15 minutes ago, Cynthia-Roses said:

Full $60 games that have already been proven to look lesser than their PS4 counterparts.

Ouch, damn... Switch version looks much better :/ 

[Cynthia-Roses]

Just now, Satoshi Ookami said:

Ouch, damn... Switch version looks much better :/ 

How so?

 

The Switch version lacks any and all lighting, particle effects, lower polygon count. It's not a matter of comparing Xbox One and PS4 to see small differences, it's NOTICEABLY worse.

 

 

PS4 ^

 

 

^ Switch. Notice the lack of lighting, the lack of particles, the textures on the floor being far less detailed. This isn't even a graphically intensive game! I can only imagine what like Dark Souls would look like in comparison.

[Satoshi Ookami]

1 hour ago, Cynthia-Roses said:

^ Switch. Notice the lack of lighting, the lack of particles, the textures on the floor being far less detailed. This isn't even a graphically intensive game! I can only imagine what like Dark Souls would look like in comparison.

Yea, exactly. This looks much better. Nice PS2-like graphics which fits the game more

And I'm saying this even though I'm highly disappointed in Switch

[Wavergray]

RThe Switch is looking pretty good for what it is, but right now some of Nintendo decisions when it comes to what games will be ready at launch is really frustrating to me.

1. Were are the Wii U ports? The WiiU had some really strong games so why not just port some of those games over and have them ready at launch? If ports of games like Bayonetta 2,Super Mario 3D World, Paper Mario: Color Splash, The Wonderful 101, Pokkén Tournament, Paper Mario: Color Splash, Xenoblade Chronicles X, Super Mario Maker, Hyrule Warriors, Tokyo Mirage Sessions #FE, Smash 4, Splatoon and Donkey Kong: Tropical Freeze were ready at launch to go with Breath of the Wild, the Switch would be a day one buy for me since I don't have a Wii U.

2. Were are the 3DS remakes/upscaled ports? The 3DS had some really strong games, why not have couple of those games remade for the Switch and ready for launch? If a remake/upscaled port of Pokemon, Fire Emblem, Monster Hunter, and Phoenix Wright were ready at launch the Switch would be a great buy for people like me who skipped out on the last few Nintendo consoles.

3. Why are they launching in march when most of their games will not be ready until summer? It feels like the only reason they are launching in march is so they can dodge the PS4 and XBone E3 hype. Which is really weird since I remember someone from Nintendo saying something along the lines of "they are aiming at a different market and don't really care what the other systems do."

Outside of those problems, everything else about the switch is fine. Most of the other stuff people are rightfully complaining about don't seem that bad to me.

 

 

On 1/21/2017 at 4:27 AM, Cynthia-Roses said:

No trophy/achievement system announced. In today's age, this is kind of an expected feature that virtually all of Nintendo's competitors have and have had for close to 10 years now. Trophy/achievement hunters are a type of gamer that exists now and the lack of this feature alone will drive them away from the Switch.

Trophy/Achievement hunting should never stop you from playing games you want to play. The hardcore Trophy hunters you are talking about make up a very small minority on gamers. Yes it does suck that Nintendo hasn't announced trophy/achievement system yet, but I don't think those gamers would care if the Switch had a trophy/achievement system at launch since I would think most of those gamer tend to stick to one system for their Trophy/Achievement hunting.

 

On 1/21/2017 at 4:27 AM, Cynthia-Roses said:

Expensive accessories, some of which are essentially non-optional if you want to use this as your "main" console. With 32GB of storage, no doubt an SD card will be mandatory if you buy digital games. Flashbacks for Fatal Frame 5 being digital only in the US on the Wii U come to me. That was 10GB game, so that easily burned up a good 10GB of your available 32. Considering I Am Setsuna is coming out on it and that was a digital only game and that took up a good 1.5GB on the PS4, we can safely assume that if you are interested in these games, you'll need an SD.

I don't think the accessories are too expensive: 

• The Pro Controller costs $70 which is around the same price as buying a Wiimote and Nunchuk.
• The JoyCons are $80 which makes sense because they are basically two Wiimote with the new HD rumble. 
• Charging Grip is $30, I'm not sure if a lot of people will need more than one of these.
• The Charging Dock is $90, once again I'm not sure if a lot of people will need more than one of these, with every other system if you want to play it on another TV you either move the whole system to that TV or you buy a whole new system. Paying 1/3 of the system price to move it around is cheaper then buying a whole new system.
• The Joy-Con Wheel is $15 I'm pretty sure that's the same price as the Wii Wheel.
• You can get a 128GB SD card for around $40 which isn't too bad. This will really come down to how big most Switch games will be.

On 1/21/2017 at 4:27 AM, Cynthia-Roses said:

Full $60 games that have already been proven to look lesser than their PS4 counterparts. And for people defending that you are paying for portability, what about when Vita versions of PS4 games get released for cheaper. Clearly you shouldn't have to pay more for portability, especially when you are sacrificing a lot of graphics.

That's an unfair comparison on many levels and it has nothing to do with portability. Using Dragon Quest Heroes as an example, The Switch version will have both games for $60 while the PS4 version of Dragon Quest Heroes 1 is around $30 and Dragon Quest Heroes 2 will be $60 when it comes out. As for the lighting and stuff, have you ever compared a PS4/Wii U warriors game to their PSV/3DS counterparts? In order to make sure the game runs smooth they have to lower the lighting and stuff to a much lower level on top of lowering the number of enemies on screen and lowering the draw distance all with longer load times. We still have not seen how the Switch version of the game plays in a non boss battle. Judging things based on screenshots between two systems that you know have vastly different hardware is unfair. Unless you are saying the 3DS version of Hyrule Warriors or Xenoblade Chronicles should look the same as the Wii U/Wii versions, even though the 3DS is much weaker than the Wii U or the Wii. 

 

On 1/21/2017 at 4:27 AM, Cynthia-Roses said:

Underpowered hardware that can't even stack up to the base model PS4, when we have a PS4 Pro already on the market capable of even more than that.

Nintendo has said in the past that they are aiming at a different market and don't really care what the other systems do. So in Nintendo eyes there is no need to compare the switch to any version of the PS4/XBone

 

On 1/21/2017 at 4:27 AM, Cynthia-Roses said:

Paid online service without justifying the costs.

Poor "free monthly" game plan that only appeals to retro gamers, and doesn't even give you game indefinitely like their competitors at Sony and Microsoft are doing. Seriously they basically give you a free 1 month rental of ROMs that most people can get on the internet with ease. Then they expect you to buy them.

Based on who you ask, Sony and Microsoft have yet to truly justify the cost of their online service. Also we do not know the price of the online service yet, for all we know it could be $30 a year, when compared to $60 for PS+ and Live Gold. Just so we are clear downloading ROMs off of the internet is illegal and a type of theft. I've seen this argument a lot and it doesn't make sense. When people use this argument they are saying something along the lines of "why should I pay for X item at the store when I can just steal it?" I know everyone on the internet like to ignore this fact about ROMs and emulators, but trying to use an illegal act as a reason to be upset about something is ..... 

 

On 1/21/2017 at 4:27 AM, Cynthia-Roses said:

Lots speculation that Nintendo is understocking the system.

Never let rumors upset or affect you. If something comes out that proves this to be true, that would be the time to be upset. Like all first runs of a console, they may not have enough supply to meet the demand.

 

On 1/21/2017 at 4:27 AM, Cynthia-Roses said:

3 hour battery life for games like Breath of the Wild.

That's actually pretty good. Think about it, how long can you play a game at on a gaming laptop battery? How long can you play most games on a Phone or Tablet?

On average you are promised around 3-4 hours. This is why portable chargers are so popular. The real question is how hot will the Switch  get during those 3 hours? Because most gaming laptops can get pretty hot while playing a game. And some phones can get so hot that they shut down.

 

On 1/21/2017 at 4:27 AM, Cynthia-Roses said:

Nintendo refusing to tell us the ACTUAL hardware in the system.

This is most likely to keep how the HD rumble works a secret for as long as possible. Because we all know, as soon as Sony and Microsoft can copy it they will.

 

On 1/21/2017 at 4:27 AM, Cynthia-Roses said:

Announcing third party support through old games that everyone has had for years now such as Skyrim and I Am Setsuna.

There will always be someone that has never played those old games. I for one, have never played Skyrim or I Am Setsuna. I know people who would love to play Skyrim during a plane/bus ride, during their lunch break, or while on the toilet.     

 

On 1/21/2017 at 4:27 AM, Cynthia-Roses said:

The fact that console experiences on the go simply don't sell.

That not true, if it was the 3DS and gamingel laptops wouldn't be so popular. Whether or not any system sells well is based on what games are on the system. The vita failed in the US because the games that were made for it appeal more to the Japanese/Anime market instead of the Shooter/Sports market of the US.

 

On 1/21/2017 at 4:27 AM, Cynthia-Roses said:

No games included with the system at all.

The PS4 and XBone did not have any pack in games either. In fact most system don't have pack in games at launch. It used to be the store you bought the system from had a launch bundle that came with games.

 

Also @Cynthia-Roses I know it may seem like I picking on you for your opinions, but I'm not. It's just that you have a very convenient list of complaints I've seen all over the internet. I do see your points and I understand why you have them, I just have different opinions on some of these points. I completely agree with you about the smartphone stuff, the 1080p stuff, Multi-media/Netflix stuff, and about the switch being the Wii U 2.0.

Edited January 23, 2017 by soultaker655
Spelling and grammar

[Oobedoob S Benubi]

2 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

The Switch is looking pretty good for what it is, but right now some of Nintendo decisions when it comes to what games will be ready at launch is really frustrating to me.

1. Were are the Wii U ports? The WiiU had some really strong games so why not just port some of those games over and have them ready at launch? If ports of games like Bayonetta 2,Super Mario 3D World, Paper Mario: Color Splash, The Wonderful 101, Pokkén Tournament, Paper Mario: Color Splash, Xenoblade Chronicles X, Super Mario Maker, Hyrule Warriors, Tokyo Mirage Sessions #FE, Smash 4, Splatoon and Donkey Kong: Tropical Freeze were ready at launch to go with Breath of the Wild, the Switch would be a day one buy for me since I don't have a Wii U.

2. Were are the 3DS remakes/upscaled ports? The 3DS had some really strong games, why not have couple of those games remade for the Switch and ready for launch? If a remake/upscaled port of Pokemon, Fire Emblem, Monster Hunter, and Phoenix Wright were ready at launch the Switch would be a great buy for people like me who skipped out on the last few Nintendo consoles.

3. Why are they launching in march when most of their games will not be ready until summer? It feels like the only reason they are launching in march is so they can dodge the PS4 and XBone E3 hype. Which is really weird since I remember someone from Nintendo saying something along the lines of "they are aiming at a different market and don't really care what the other systems do."

Outside of those problems, everything else about the switch is fine. Most of the other stuff people are rightfully complaining about don't seem that bad to me.

 

Sure, people complain ab9out the PS4 having too many PS3 ports so why not complain when Nintendo doesn't get many WiiU ports

Seriously though: all three of your points have to do with the same point that Nintendo made - they feel that part of the reason why the WiiU failed was that while there were good games coming out for it, those release dates were too far between. They want to continuously have big games coming out for the Switch, which can't be done if they release all of their high profile games at once. While the Switch sales will be less high at the beginning and more of a steady stream, this will also do wonders for the sales of individual games (Breath Of The Wild will probably be the fastest selling Zelda ever for that reason). This possibly also means more long-term Switch sales.

 

I too never bought a WiiU and there are some WiiU games I'd definitely get if they would release for the Switch, like Super Mario 3D World and Yoshi's Woolly World. Most of the titles you mention probably won't get released for the Switch, however. Splatoon won't come because the sequel is already close to being finished, and stuff like Donkey Kong Country or Smash Bros or Paper Mario has never gotten a remaster for a new system but only a new iteration.

 

Personally, I still think that the Switch will release with a full Virtual Console. With so many great SNES/N64 games, having only a few new launch games becomes less of an issue.

 

I agree with the rest of your post but wanted to add some stuff:

 

2 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

Trophy/Achievement hunting should never stop you from playing games you want to play. The hardcore Trophy hunters you are talking about make up a very small minority on gamers. Yes it does suck that Nintendo hasn't announced trophy/achievement system yet, but I don't think those gamers would care if the Switch had a trophy/achievement system at launch since I would think most of those gamer tend to stick to one system for their Trophy/Achievement hunting.

 

I just came off of a weekend of A Link To The Past on the SNES and I have to say that playing without trophies is very refreshing.

 

The only point that can be made about a trophy/achievement system is that Nintendo seems to want to break into the gaming tournaments, seeing as they're going for a better online service now, and how better to appeal to those gamers than to allow streaming and have a trophy system?

 

2 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

I don't think the accessories are too expensive: 

• The Pro Controller costs $70 which is around the same price as buying a Wiimote and Nunchuk.
• The JoyCons are $80 which makes sense because they are basically two Wiimote with the new HD rumble. 
• Charging Grip is $30, I'm not sure if a lot of people will need more than one of these.
• The Charging Dock is $90, once again I'm not sure if a lot of people will need more than one of these, with every other system if you want to play it on another TV you either move the whole system to that TV or you buy a whole new system. Paying 1/3 of the system price to move it around is cheaper then buying a whole new system.
• The Joy-Con Wheel is $15 I'm pretty sure that's the same price as the Wii Wheel.
• You can get a 128GB SD card for around $40 which isn't too bad. This will really come down to how big most Switch games will be.

 

True.

 

People are quick to forget that you already have two half-controllers and you only need one pair more to be able to play stuff like Mario Kart with four people.

Charging: not everybody will take the Switch on the go and not supplying this will keep the Switch main price lower.

Wheel: over here it's actually €15 for a pair of wheels, so you get two Switch wheels for the price of one Wii wheel.

Memory: not everybody will want to download games, this goes double for your regular Nintendo gamer. Not putting a lot of memory in the Switch keeps the cost down, it's like the X360 Arcade only now it's the main console instead of a later iteration.

 

People constanly compare the price of the Switch to the PS4 and X1, while those consoles have been out for years now. The Switch is a lot cheaper than both were when they were released (and the X1 is only super cheap now because nobody is buying it).

 

Personally, I've ordered one extra pair of joycons with grip, and a 2TB memory card since I plan on buying a lot of Virtual Console N64 games as well as at least one digital game (Snipperclips), probably more. The rest I will figure out once I have the console and I can see what I actually need.

 

 

2 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

That's an unfair comparison on many levels and it has nothing to do with portability. Using Dragon Quest Heroes as an example, The Switch version will have both games for $60 while the PS4 version of Dragon Quest Heroes 1 is around $30 and Dragon Quest Heroes 2 will be $60 when it comes out. As for the lighting and stuff, have you ever compared a PS4/Wii U warriors game to their PSV/3DS counterparts? In order to make sure the game runs smooth they have to lower the lighting and stuff to a much lower level on top of lowering the number of enemies on screen and lowering the draw distance all with longer load times. We still have not seen how the Switch version of the game plays in a non boss battle. Judging things based on screenshots between two systems that you know have vastly different hardware is unfair. Unless you are saying the 3DS version of Hyrule Warriors or Xenoblade Chronicles should look the same as the Wii U/Wii versions, even though the 3DS is much weaker than the Wii U or the Wii. 

 

Nintendo has said in the past that they are aiming at a different market and don't really care what the other systems do. So in Nintendo eyes there is no need to compare the switch to any version of the PS4/XBone

 

Based on who you ask, Sony and Microsoft have yet to truly justify the cost of their online service. Also we do not know the price of the online service yet, for all we know it could be $30 a year, when compared to $60 for PS+ and Live Gold. Just so we are clear downloading ROMs off of the internet is illegal and a type of theft. I've seen this argument a lot and it doesn't make sense. When people use this argument they are saying something along the lines of "why should I pay for X item at the store when I can just steal it?" I know everyone on the internet like to ignore this fact about ROMs and emulators, but trying to use an illegal act as a reason to be upset about something is ..... 

 

Never let rumors upset or affect you. If something comes out that proves this to be true, that would be the time to be upset. Like all first runs of a console, they may not have enough supply to meet the demand.

 

All good replies in response to stuff that is either a wrongful comparison or just plain hearsay (Nintendo is actually putting a LOT of Switch consoles out there to try to supply the demand).

 

I'd like to add that people are quick to judge Nintendo for getting a paid online system while the price has not been announced yet, early adopters can try it out FOR FREE for about half a year (try getting that deal from Sony or Microsoft), and many Nintendo gamers either play solo or with friends at home - same as not adding a charger that many people won't use or memory that many people don't need, by making it a paid extra Nintendo can ensure top quality all across the line, while keeping the price of the Switch down.

 

2 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

 

That's actually pretty good. Think about it, how long can you play a game at on a game laptop battery? How long can you play most games on a Phone or Tablet?

On average you are promised around 3-4 hours. This is why portable chargers are so popular. The real question is how hot will the Switch during those 3 hours? Because most game laptops can get pretty hot while playing game. And some phones can get so hot that the phone shuts down.

 

Having three hours of battery life while playing Zelda is nothing short of amazing. A game like Snipperclips or a SNES emulation likely doubles that time, especially if you darken the screen a little bit.

 

2 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

 

This is most likely to keep how the HD rumble works a secret as long as possible. Because we all know as soon as Sony and Microsoft can copy it they will.

 

"Nintendo refuses to show us the actual hardware" is such a weird argument. How many gamers actually care for stuff like that? Like there was rioting in the nineties, "WE DEMAND TO KNOW THE SNES SPECS!" - I am much more pleased with hearing a couple of devs already say how converting their gmae to the Switch went very well, seeing as Nintendo had some tough to use hardware in the past.

 

2 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

There will always be someone that has never played those old games. I for one have never played Skyrim or I Am Setsuna. I know people who would love to play Skyrim doing a plane/bus ride, during their lunch break, or while on the toilet.    

 

True. It's weird that three months ago the game re-released for the PS4 and people were excited to play it on a new console instead of the old one, but now it's just "an old game". And before someone mentions the mods - again, most gamers don't care. I AM Setsuna was released less than a year ago, by the way. And we'll probably see many more "old" games simply because the devs port them to every new system - Super Meat Boy, Runner2, Another World... But on here this translates to "yay more trophies" when it's on PS4 and "booh old games" when it's on the Switch.

 

2 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

That not true, if it was the 3DS and game laptops wouldn't be so popular. Whether or not any system sells well is based on what games are on the system. The vita failed in the US because that games that were made for it appeal more to the Japanese/Anime market instead of the Shooter/Sports market of the US.

 

The Vita had loads of problems but being a portable console was not one of them. Uneasy grip and lack of games exclusive to the system were though.

[Cynthia-Roses]

3 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

Were are the Wii U ports? The WiiU had some really strong games so why not just port some of those games over and have them ready at launch? If ports of games like Bayonetta 2,Super Mario 3D World, Paper Mario: Color Splash, The Wonderful 101, Pokkén Tournament, Paper Mario: Color Splash, Xenoblade Chronicles X, Super Mario Maker, Hyrule Warriors, Tokyo Mirage Sessions #FE, Smash 4, Splatoon and Donkey Kong: Tropical Freeze were ready at launch to go with Breath of the Wild, the Switch would be a day one buy for me since I don't have a Wii U.

Nintendo opted to try and get you to buy Splatoon and Mario Kart 8 all over again. Which kind of blows.

 

3 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

Why are they launching in march when most of their games will not be ready until summer? It feels like the only reason they are launching in march is so they can dodge the PS4 and XBone E3 hype. Which is really weird since I remember someone from Nintendo saying something along the lines of "they are aiming at a different market and don't really care what the other systems do."

Which is bad, it means they are NOT competing. They NEED to compete and stop acting like the Wii is the example they should base their future on. They need to acknowledge that the Wii was a happy accident.

 

3 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

Trophy/Achievement hunting should never stop you from playing games you want to play. The hardcore Trophy hunters you are talking about make up a very small minority on gamers. Yes it does suck that Nintendo hasn't announced trophy/achievement system yet, but I don't think those gamers would care if the Switch had a trophy/achievement system at launch since I would think most of those gamer tend to stick to one system for their Trophy/Achievement hunting.

 

That's another type of gamer that Nintendo isn't appealing to though. They can't afford to cut people out.

 

3 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

I don't think the accessories are too expensive: 

Extra controllers are higher than their competitors, and with Breath of the Wild confirmed for 13GB+ it's safe to say that if you plan on going digital at all, you will NEED a big SD card. And if you get a cheapo SD card you may suffer slowdowns due to lower read/write speed.

 

3 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

That's an unfair comparison on many levels and it has nothing to do with portability. Using Dragon Quest Heroes as an example, The Switch version will have both games for $60 while the PS4 version of Dragon Quest Heroes 1 is around $30 and Dragon Quest Heroes 2 will be $60 when it comes out. As for the lighting and stuff, have you ever compared a PS4/Wii U warriors game to their PSV/3DS counterparts? In order to make sure the game runs smooth they have to lower the lighting and stuff to a much lower level on top of lowering the number of enemies on screen and lowering the draw distance all with longer load times. We still have not seen how the Switch version of the game plays in a non boss battle. Judging things based on screenshots between two systems that you know have vastly different hardware is unfair. Unless you are saying the 3DS version of Hyrule Warriors or Xenoblade Chronicles should look the same as the Wii U/Wii versions, even though the 3DS is much weaker than the Wii U or the Wii. 

 

 

That wasn't my point. Nintendo already confirmed that they will continue to charge $60 for new titles even though their system is going to run them  at inferior settings.

 

3 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

Nintendo has said in the past that they are aiming at a different market and don't really care what the other systems do. So in Nintendo eyes there is no need to compare the switch to any version of the PS4/XBone

 

Except those ARE their competitors whether they like it or not. Just because Nintendo is in denial doesn't make it magically happen that the Switch isn't in the scene with the PS4 and Xbox One. Nintendo HAS to compete, or they are not going to succeed.

 

3 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

Based on who you ask, Sony and Microsoft have yet to truly justify the cost of their online service. Also we do not know the price of the online service yet, for all we know it could be $30 a year, when compared to $60 for PS+ and Live Gold. Just so we are clear downloading ROMs off of the internet is illegal and a type of theft. I've seen this argument a lot and it doesn't make sense. When people use this argument they are saying something along the lines of "why should I pay for X item at the store when I can just steal it?" I know everyone on the internet like to ignore this fact about ROMs and emulators, but trying to use an illegal act as a reason to be upset about something is ..... 

 

The problem is that Sony gives away 6 games a month and they are YOURS for as long as you're a subscriber and many of them are current games. Nintendo's service will only appeal to retro gamers, and they don't even let you KEEP the games. I bring up ROMS because Gabe Newell said it best "The issue with piracy is a problem with service, the solution, offer a better service". When ROMs and emulators are an easier, more convenient and more accessible service, why would people choose to pay? You have to make the deal sweeter. My point is you are not going to entice CUSTOMERS to want to come on board with this offer, because these people accepted ROMs and emulators a long time ago whether you like it or not. This is a matter of business.

 

3 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

Never let rumors upset or affect you. If something comes out that proves this to be true, that would be the time to be upset. Like all first runs of a console, they may not have enough supply to meet the demand.

 

Except every time people predicted Nintendo would understock in the past it has been true.

 

3 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

There will always be someone that has never played those old games. I for one, have never played Skyrim or I Am Setsuna. I know people who would love to play Skyrim during a plane/bus ride, during their lunch break, or while on the toilet.     

 

Except there are many who have and what Nintendo needs is NEW customers.

 

3 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

That not true, if it was the 3DS and gamingel laptops wouldn't be so popular.

The 3DS does not target console experiences, it targets handheld experiences while throwing a few console experiences into the mix. Otherwise it'd be a powerhouse with amazing graphics. Also gaming laptops are because so many people are in college or have limited office space and laptops are easier to fit/move. A lot of people I know with Gaming laptops aren't really on a train playing Starcraft 2.

 

3 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

Also @Cynthia-Roses I know it may seem like I picking on you for your opinions, but I'm not. It's just that you have a very convenient list of complaints I've seen all over the internet. I do see your points and I understand why you have them, I just have different opinions on some of these points. I completely agree with you about the smartphone stuff, the 1080p stuff, Multi-media/Netflix stuff, and about the switch being the Wii U 2.0.

 

That's fine. You're welcome to disagree, but I see some terrible trends Nintendo is following and I can't ignore them.

 

 

[Valyrious]

On 21/01/2017 at 4:27 AM, Cynthia-Roses said:

As a long time Nintendo fan (I even have the SNES controller buttons on my stomach to prove it), the Switch is vastly disappointing me. Nintendo is trying to do the handheld/console hybrid thing, but failing on both aspects. They should have focused on one or the other, but now they've sort of sunk themselves and it seems like the diehards are covering their ears and ignoring the warning signs that this might be a terrible move for Nintendo.

 

• No trophy/achievement system announced. In today's age, this is kind of an expected feature that virtually all of Nintendo's competitors have and have had for close to 10 years now. Trophy/achievement hunters are a type of gamer that exists now and the lack of this feature alone will drive them away from the Switch.
• No Multi-media/Netflix support. Regardless of people saying "I buy game consoles to play games!" no one can deny that if you shop around you can find a PS4 for $250-300 that has a large game library, and does multi-media... And even comes with a game a lot of the time. Nintendo wants the same price for less.
• Expensive accessories, some of which are essentially non-optional if you want to use this as your "main" console. With 32GB of storage, no doubt an SD card will be mandatory if you buy digital games. Flashbacks for Fatal Frame 5 being digital only in the US on the Wii U come to me. That was 10GB game, so that easily burned up a good 10GB of your available 32. Considering I Am Setsuna is coming out on it and that was a digital only game and that took up a good 1.5GB on the PS4, we can safely assume that if you are interested in these games, you'll need an SD.
• Full $60 games that have already been proven to look lesser than their PS4 counterparts. And for people defending that you are paying for portability, what about when Vita versions of PS4 games get released for cheaper. Clearly you shouldn't have to pay more for portability, especially when you are sacrificing a lot of graphics.
• Underpowered hardware that can't even stack up to the base model PS4, when we have a PS4 Pro already on the market capable of even more than that.
• Reliance on a smartphone app for voice chat creates ANOTHER thing you need to get full functionality out of the system. It more or less cuts the audience of people who can't afford smartphones out of the picture.
• Possibility of needing the smartphone app to even play online.
• Paid online service without justifying the costs.
• Poor "free monthly" game plan that only appeals to retro gamers, and doesn't even give you game indefinitely like their competitors at Sony and Microsoft are doing. Seriously they basically give you a free 1 month rental of ROMs that most people can get on the internet with ease. Then they expect you to buy them.
• Small launch library with the only real game of value being a Zelda game that is available on their current console. Blatantly making the whole releasing in March to "prevent not having games at the launch like the Wii U" thing totally invalid. It literally is launching with LESS games than the Wii U.
• Lots speculation that Nintendo is understocking the system.
• Most of the third party devs came forward and admitted that they didn't have any actual plans for the Switch at the moment, just that they were "interested" in it.
• 3 hour battery life for games like Breath of the Wild.
• Nintendo refusing to tell us the ACTUAL hardware in the system.
• Announcing third party support through old games that everyone has had for years now such as Skyrim and I Am Setsuna.
• The fact that console experiences on the go simply don't sell.
• No games included with the system at all.
• Nintendo admitting that even their first party game can't be optimized to run at 1080p, which gives you an idea of how third party will be if a FIRST party game can't even run at 1080p.
• Flat out lying that this thing was meant to replace the Wii U.

This to me looks like Nintendo trying to make the Wii U 2.0. The only thing that can save this now is if Nintendo somehow gets an amazing line up of exclusives, which I doubt is going to happen. It's going to be the Wii U all over again, lot of third party interest in the first few months, followed by first party being the only games that matter. No day one buy for me, and I probably won't buy until I see some exclusives that matter to me. I can't get behind buying another "Zelda Box".

 

Nintendo has not given me reason to have faith in them with this thing, as it comes off as more gimmicks rather than substance. Nintendo should have focused on one or the other, but trying to appeal both to handheld and console means they are putting only half the effort into both.

Good post. I like how people just chalk it up as regurgitating, but everything nowadays is fucking regurgitated. If you are spewing tech specs, you learned it from another source on the internet and are thus regurgitating what they've said. If you're talking about the exclusives that you're excited for, you're regurgitating to a specific company's successful advertising. If you're talking about reasons why you're excited for the Switch, there's a huge chance that you're regurgitating from your favourite YouTuber, who definitely doesn't have Nintendo in their channel name or banner or are affiliated with Nintendo in any conceivable facet. 

I don't understand how ANYBODY can be excited for the Switch. Unless you are a parent, and you want to teach your child the basics of Mario or Zelda. Yes, I get that. That is TOTALLY worth the money. Nintendo is a fantastic introduction to gaming for children. But they have never evolved beyond that barrier. I don't give a crap if you think there are games that adults can enjoy. They're still for the most part catered to children. The exceptions, like Monster Hunter, and Bayonetta 2, are EXTREMELY few and far between to even begin to make a cohesive argument.

 

You know what you get with Nintendo. You get Pokemon. You get Mario. You get Zelda. You get your occasional wacky Splatoons or your Luigi's Ghost Bullshit, or some other gimmick that people love. And if you like that gimmick, well, Nintendo doesn't have to work very hard to win you over, do they? That's the problem. They're set in that time warp of 1990, where they can do what they want and people will come to them. Well, excuse me, but if you don't interest me, I'm not going to bother with you. That goes for relationships, job opportunities, food, people in general, and just about anything in this damn universe. Nintendo is complacent keeping you, the person they don't need to advertise to at all, and not at all worried about winning over new people that have other consoles or a gaming rig.

 

Nintendo is like the Vita in the way that only the hardcore support it religiously. Neither are known for their power or for being the best at anything. They just excel at getting by doing some sort of gimmick. Which is primarily... handheld gaming. And yes, it kind of is a gimmick when you can only get between 2-5 hours of play on your Switch screen while on the go. Say goodbye to portability since you're lugging your charge cable with you at all times.

 

Maybe I'm too old (I am in my late twenties, so we can let you, the reader, decide), and maybe I'm not fond of handheld gaming like I was when I was a kid, but these things just aren't part of my life anymore. When I'm playing my Vita, which I haven't turned on to play a game in months, it is when I am at home and want to try out something different. I will NEVER choose my Vita over my other consoles, because simply put, it just isn't better than they are. And the Switch, to me, isn't better than it's competition. It doesn't do anything different, except let you enjoy the games you've already played, for the last 20 years. Enjoy nostalgia. Be careful, it's a hell of a drug.

Nintendo... I want you to evolve. I want you to become something great again. When Mario came out, it was a pinnacle of gaming. Now Mario is a fucking cash cow. I want you to be innovative again. Making a new Mario set in a New York kind of city isn't innovative. You're just recycling the old with what your audience can be fooled into believing is new. Fact of the matter is, there will never be a Nintendo exclusive game that has the impact of Mario, when it first came out. The sooner you accept that... well, who gives a shit. Do what you want.

Sony keeps evolving, though. They've been in the gaming industry almost as long as Nintendo has been. They have a colossal library of games through its history. Like I need to convince anybody reading this that. We're on a goddamn Sony platform website..In 2013, one of Sony's first party studios created a game that many people believe is one of the greatest games in gaming, ever.  They're always raising the bar with innovation, and never afraid to do new things. They're always evolving. 

And here we have Nintendo stuck as a fucking Magikarp, splashing around as everybody else that isn't a Magikarp fanatic, laughing at it. Seeing them as the laughing stock that they are. Nintendo just doesn't have it in them to become Gyarados anymore. Shame.

[Neputyunu]

On 20.1.2017 at 7:58 AM, BillyHorrible said:

I'm going on a limb here and guess that nobody only has a Vita

 

Yo, @Nelson_Otaku-niichan. How do you see that?  

 

On 20.1.2017 at 7:58 AM, BillyHorrible said:

I never got a WiiU because it was missing an open world Mario game (and a Zelda

 

It has Wind Waker HD and Twillight Princess HD... Oh and Breath of the Wild. And Virtual Console.  

 

On 20.1.2017 at 7:58 AM, BillyHorrible said:

The main problem I have here is that you're making a lot of general assumptions as to what other gamers want or need.

 

He really has a problem with accepting other peoples opinions, and then he's making fun about them.

 

On 20.1.2017 at 7:38 PM, Valyrious said:

But hey, you've got panty shot games!  There's panty shot games, guys!!

 

I want names, and I want them now!  

 

On 20.1.2017 at 9:55 PM, Undead Wolf said:

You'd be hard pressed to find someone gaming exclusively on Nintendo consoles these days. I don't know if I'd even call them gamers anymore since they probably spend more time waiting for games to arrive than actually playing them. 

 

There are people that have 500 hours in Mario Kart and Smash Bros each. Well, why not, there also people who have 1000 hours in League of Legends or Diablo 3 on PC, or in FIFA on PS4. Yeah, I really know a 42yo dood that has a PS4 only for Fifa... It's his way. You need to accept that. Simple.

I only had 150 hours in Pokemon Alpha Sapphire, but, you see where this is going to, right?

 

On 20.1.2017 at 9:55 PM, Undead Wolf said:

Oh please, the Wii U had a lot of Nintendo's "big hitters"

 

No. It had no OpenWorld Mario and it had no Pokemon like them:

 

 

=> Much of Wii U potential wasted. Ah, and it had no original Zelda, because Windwaker was from GameCube (still best Nintendo console...) and Twilligt Princess from Wii iirc.

 

On 20.1.2017 at 9:55 PM, Undead Wolf said:

This isn't the 1980's anymore. Nintendo are no longer top dogs and the competition is destroying them.

 

Nobody wants them to compete with anyone or to destroy anyone... You just have no idea about why people like Nintendo. You said for yourself that you never played Pokemon, and made a joke like "It's a kids game "

 

On 20.1.2017 at 9:55 PM, Undead Wolf said:

PS4 sales = 53 million. Wii U sales = 13 million. It speaks for itself really.

 

True. It speaks for itself. Really. Have you considered how many people are hopping between PS and XBox, just because this time the PS is a lot stronger than XBox? And then it does roll from itself, because "I bought a PS because all of my friends have one!" or "I have a Mac, but I wanted to play something and everyone I know has a PS". Also, people are simple and superficial. The PS has better graphics than the Wii U. So, what else, than PC, would people pick?

 

12 hours ago, BillyHorrible said:

I too never bought a WiiU and there are some WiiU games I'd definitely get if they would release for the Switch, like Super Mario 3D World and Yoshi's Woolly World.

 

Woolly World is coming to 3DS.  

But, I don't know yet how it got crippled... Would also prefer to buy a Switch version of it.

I'm not happy with eg Mario Maker for 3DS. You can't share maps, which was the main feature of that game imo.

 

12 hours ago, BillyHorrible said:

"Nintendo refuses to show us the actual hardware" is such a weird argument. How many gamers actually care for stuff like that? Like there was rioting in the nineties, "WE DEMAND TO KNOW THE SNES SPECS!"

 

Yeah. Exactly. And even when I would know the speccs, what would change? I know now that the PS3 CPU had 230GFLOPS, and that this is the reason why PS4 isn't backwards compatible, because it's just technical impossible for the PS4 (XBox360 CPU had 77!! GFLOPS ...Also, much ressources get lost alone because the fact it's an emulation. It's not "native".). And? What am I doing with this knowledge? I can't tell everyone who's raging around why it is impossible. And even when, who would care about that? I guess many people do simple not understand what it does mean. My mother eg called me for help because her webbrowser was asking her about being default browser. ...And she wasn't even reading what the window said. She was just like "This message isn't letting me do anything else!" ...meh.

Edited January 23, 2017 by Neputyunu

[SnowxSakura]

Although even in the 90s people argued over the specs between the genesis and the super nintendo, so nothing has really changed

[crimsonidol38]

19 minutes ago, Neputyunu said:

Woolly World is coming to 3DS.  

But, I don't know yet how it got crippled... Would also prefer to buy a Switch version of it.

I'm not happy with eg Mario Maker for 3DS. You can't share maps, which was the main feature of that game imo.

 

 

On normal 3DS (and the 2DS) it runs with 30fps whereas it runs with 60fps on Wii U and the New 3DS. Best thing:
You can test the demo (which released last Thursday) to check the performance difference.

 

About content changes:

AFAIK it will get some new levels and a so-called Mellow Mode which helps to find some of the collectibles. Oh, and it gets some videos with Yoshi and Poochy showing their daily lives:

Spoiler

 

 

Edited January 23, 2017 by Crimson Idol

[Parker]

13 hours ago, BillyHorrible said:

Sure, people complain ab9out the PS4 having too many PS3 ports so why not complain when Nintendo doesn't get many WiiU ports

Seriously though: all three of your points have to do with the same point that Nintendo made - they feel that part of the reason why the WiiU failed was that while there were good games coming out for it, those release dates were too far between. They want to continuously have big games coming out for the Switch, which can't be done if they release all of their high profile games at once. While the Switch sales will be less high at the beginning and more of a steady stream, this will also do wonders for the sales of individual games (Breath Of The Wild will probably be the fastest selling Zelda ever for that reason). This possibly also means more long-term Switch sales.

 

I too never bought a WiiU and there are some WiiU games I'd definitely get if they would release for the Switch, like Super Mario 3D World and Yoshi's Woolly World. Most of the titles you mention probably won't get released for the Switch, however. Splatoon won't come because the sequel is already close to being finished, and stuff like Donkey Kong Country or Smash Bros or Paper Mario has never gotten a remaster for a new system but only a new iteration.

 

Personally, I still think that the Switch will release with a full Virtual Console. With so many great SNES/N64 games, having only a few new launch games becomes less of an issue.

 

 

Complaining about ports is pointless. I could understand it if the developers were spending time on ports instead of developing a new game but that is rarely, if ever the case. More often than not a completely separate development team is in charge of the remaster, and if you don't like remasters, don't buy them.  

 

I understand Nintendo's point about having a steady stream of good games coming out and it makes perfect sense. But this is where third party support comes in, if Nintendo didn't constantly make gimmicky and underpowered systems then there would be plenty of great games to play in between the big Nintendo releases. Every time a new Nintendo system releases there are tons of third party developers claiming they'll support the system, it rarely happens though, and if it does the game is a very watered down version of the Sony/Microsoft versions. Hopefully this doesn't happen with the Switch because I genuinely want it to be a successful system. 

 

I think a lot more people would be happy with the launch line up if Nintendo did port Super Mario 3D World and Yoshi's Woolly World and had them ready to release. They wouldn't be new titles but at least we'd have a Mario game to play, and for those that skipped the Wii U, they would be "new."

 

13 hours ago, BillyHorrible said:

All good replies in response to stuff that is either a wrongful comparison or just plain hearsay (Nintendo is actually putting a LOT of Switch consoles out there to try to supply the demand).

 

I'd like to add that people are quick to judge Nintendo for getting a paid online system while the price has not been announced yet, early adopters can try it out FOR FREE for about half a year (try getting that deal from Sony or Microsoft), and many Nintendo gamers either play solo or with friends at home - same as not adding a charger that many people won't use or memory that many people don't need, by making it a paid extra Nintendo can ensure top quality all across the line, while keeping the price of the Switch down.

 

 

It has been proven that Nintendo intentionally ships fewer units than the demand to create hype for their systems. It happened with the Wii, Wii U, 3DS and NES Classic. I sincerely hope that they've learned their lesson and don't do it with the Switch (because all people who buy one from a scalper aren't giving their money to Nintendo) but it is definitely a valid point to bring up.

 

We have got that deal from Sony, the entire last generation of PSN was free. Microsoft also fairly regularly have free weekends of XBL Gold. Nintendo's online services so far have been pretty bad, the servers themselves are okay (although with the amount of people they have online that should definitely be the case) but the service itself doesn't really compare with everything you get with PSN and XBL. Hopefully that changes with the Switch and we get a service comparable to PSN and XBL, if not then it should definitely be cheaper. I have absolutely no problem with paying for PSN and XBL because I think the services are worth the money, if the Switch online service is comparable then I'll have no problem paying for that one as well. Comparing the Wii U service to the PS3/PS4 though, Nintendo has a long way to go. But again, I hope they can do it or price it accordingly. 

 

13 hours ago, BillyHorrible said:

"Nintendo refuses to show us the actual hardware" is such a weird argument. How many gamers actually care for stuff like that? Like there was rioting in the nineties, "WE DEMAND TO KNOW THE SNES SPECS!" - I am much more pleased with hearing a couple of devs already say how converting their gmae to the Switch went very well, seeing as Nintendo had some tough to use hardware in the past.

 

 

It really isn't a weird argument at all. A lot of gamers want to know how powerful a system is so they can know what they can roughly expect from third party games. If the Switch was more powerful than the PS4/Xbone then they could expect better looking, or at least games on par with the other systems. If the system is vastly underpowered then gamers can expect another generation of little to no third party support. Of course that could be wrong and even with an underpowered system there could be tons of third party support, but it is better to expect the worst and get the best rather than expect the best and get the worst. 

 

13 hours ago, BillyHorrible said:

True. It's weird that three months ago the game re-released for the PS4 and people were excited to play it on a new console instead of the old one, but now it's just "an old game". And before someone mentions the mods - again, most gamers don't care. I AM Setsuna was released less than a year ago, by the way. And we'll probably see many more "old" games simply because the devs port them to every new system - Super Meat Boy, Runner2, Another World... But on here this translates to "yay more trophies" when it's on PS4 and "booh old games" when it's on the Switch.

 

 

If the Switch version of Skyrim was the Remaster I'm sure a ton of people would be very excited for it. However that doesn't seem to be the case, it seems to be a port of the original version of Skyrim which released in 2011, so yes, it is a very old game. It has nothing to do with mods, it has to do with the huge upgrade from Skyrim to the Skyrim Special Edition in 2016. But beyond that, I hope the Switch continues to get more games like Super Meat Boy and I Am Setsuna, the more games to play on a gaming console the better. 

 

Like I already said, I pre-ordered the Switch and will be getting it day one. I'm a big Nintendo fan and I have every single one of their home consoles and handhelds but for the past few generations they've been focusing on gimmicks instead of the actual gaming experience. I hope the Switch is a great console and it marks the return to form for Nintendo, they make some genuinely great games and it would be an absolute shame for them to stop making consoles. However, a lot of the criticism for the Switch so far has been valid (in my opinion) and Nintendo needs to earn back the trust from a lot of their old fans and those fans have been screaming since the Wii to just make a good console with no gimmicks. So far it looks like the Switch is relatively gimmick free (I don't consider being able to make it a portable console a gimmick) but I hope Nintendo focus on earning third party support and making proper games that don't rely on motion controls or silly things with the joy cons, I want a proper experience with the Pro controller. 

 

Breath of the Wild looks fucking fantastic, though. Wind Waker is probably my favorite LoZ game and this looks like an evolution of that game, graphically. Art direction can make up for a lack of power and that is something that Nintendo excels at.

 

 

Parker 

[Oobedoob S Benubi]

2 hours ago, Neputyunu said:

 

Yo, @Nelson_Otaku-niichan. How do you see that?  

 

Wait, there really is at least one person who has a Vita without having a PS3 and/or PS4?

 

Though you adding "-niichan" kind of goes straight towards proving the other point, that the Vita is only successful among Japanesr and Japanophiles

 

Quote

It has Wind Waker HD and Twillight Princess HD... Oh and Breath of the Wild. And Virtual Console.  

 

I'm not sure if you're sarcastic or not (I have a problem reading that sometimes) so I'm just going to pretend it's not sarcastic and state the obvious: none of those are new for the console (except for Breath Of The Wild, which is also coming to a certain other console along with an open world Mario). I played both Wind Waker and Twilight Princess on the Game Cube already and until recently I also had the Wind Waker extra disc with Ocarina and Majora on it.

 

Quote

He really has a problem with accepting other peoples opinions, and then he's making fun about them.

 

Spoiler

 

"It's easier to be an asshole to words than to people", indeed.

 

Quote

There are people that have 500 hours in Mario Kart and Smash Bros each. Well, why not, there also people who have 1000 hours in League of Legends or Diablo 3 on PC, or in FIFA on PS4. Yeah, I really know a 42yo dood that has a PS4 only for Fifa... It's his way. You need to accept that. Simple.

I only had 150 hours in Pokemon Alpha Sapphire, but, you see where this is going to, right?

 

The whole "Nintendo fans are only waiting for games instead of playing them" was a weird one already. Next to my previost post on it (mentioning The Last Guardian), from the top of my head there's also Alan Wake, Duke Nukem Forever, No Man's Sky, Yooka-Laylee, Half-Life 2 Episode 3, a third Monkey Island game by Tim Schafer... Delays and cancellations all across the realm but somehow Nintendo fans are the dumb ones. Problem is, only game with Nintendo I can really think of where this happens is Zelda and that's because they announce a new one each time just after finishing the previous one, and they're not working at the speed of "one iteration every year" Ubisoft/EA. In fact, it feels like most of the time when Nintendo announces one of their own games, they're pretty close to finishing it.

 

Quote

No. It had no OpenWorld Mario and it had no Pokemon like them:

 

 

=> Much of Wii U potential wasted. Ah, and it had no original Zelda, because Windwaker was from GameCube (still best Nintendo console...) and Twilligt Princess from Wii iirc.

 

Yeah, now towards the end of the WiiU's life there are a fair number of games on it that I would not mind playing but there is still no system seller for me.

 

I feel like the SNES was the best Nintendo console though, but I'm also calling that the best console ever.

 

Are you still into Pokémon, by chance? I've taken a look at the Alola Pokédex to see what my roster would be like if Pokémon Stars actually comes to the Switch.

 

Quote

Nobody wants them to compete with anyone or to destroy anyone... You just have no idea about why people like Nintendo. You said for yourself that you never played Pokemon, and made a joke like "It's a kids game "

 

I've had this feeling for years now and I still think it rings true: the console wars are like a hot summer day, Sony and Microsoft are in a fistfight yelling "COCA-COLA!" and "PEPSI!" and Nintendo just sits to the side selling home-made lemonade like a good little kid.

 

There is no need for Nintendo to be a third fighter in Sony and Microsoft's comparison war. Nintendo just needs to be itself.

 

Quote

True. It speaks for itself. Really. Have you considered how many people are hopping between PS and XBox, just because this time the PS is a lot stronger than XBox? And then it does roll from itself, because "I bought a PS because all of my friends have one!" or "I have a Mac, but I wanted to play something and everyone I know has a PS". Also, people are simple and superficial. The PS has better graphics than the Wii U. So, what else, than PC, would people pick?

 

True. I only got an X360 next to my Wii because it was cheaper than the PS3 and I got a PS4 because it was cheaper/stronger than the X1 and I did not feel like getting a media center. I'm now going back to Nintendo with the Switch because other than the WiiU, the Switch actually has exclusives I would regret not playing.

 

Quote

Woolly World is coming to 3DS.  

But, I don't know yet how it got crippled... Would also prefer to buy a Switch version of it.

I'm not happy with eg Mario Maker for 3DS. You can't share maps, which was the main feature of that game imo.

 

I'm not a fan of the Maker idea but I'd really like some other WiiU games to find their way onto the Switch. I sold my 3DS because I was never playing on it

 

Quote

Yeah. Exactly. And even when I would know the speccs, what would change? I know now that the PS3 CPU had 230GFLOPS, and that this is the reason why PS4 isn't backwards compatible, because it's just technical impossible for the PS4 (XBox360 CPU had 77!! GFLOPS ...Also, much ressources get lost alone because the fact it's an emulation. It's not "native".). And? What am I doing with this knowledge? I can't tell everyone who's raging around why it is impossible. And even when, who would care about that? I guess many people do simple not understand what it does mean. My mother eg called me for help because her webbrowser was asking her about being default browser. ...And she wasn't even reading what the window said. She was just like "This message isn't letting me do anything else!" ...meh.

 

Going to continue this on Parker's respons but I'm on my phone now and can't move quotes around.

 

1 hour ago, Parker said:

Complaining about ports is pointless. I could understand it if the developers were spending time on ports instead of developing a new game but that is rarely, if ever the case. More often than not a completely separate development team is in charge of the remaster, and if you don't like remasters, don't buy them.  

 

So true. There's also new gamers with every console who missed previous generwtions. I was very glad to get The Last Of Us on PS4 because I never owned a PS3 (at that point).

 

Quote

I understand Nintendo's point about having a steady stream of good games coming out and it makes perfect sense. But this is where third party support comes in, if Nintendo didn't constantly make gimmicky and underpowered systems then there would be plenty of great games to play in between the big Nintendo releases. Every time a new Nintendo system releases there are tons of third party developers claiming they'll support the system, it rarely happens though, and if it does the game is a very watered down version of the Sony/Microsoft versions. Hopefully this doesn't happen with the Switch because I genuinely want it to be a successful system. 

 

I feel like the Switch is less gimmicky though than usual. Nintendo never had the most powerful console but only the Wii and WiiU had gimmicks, and Nintendo consoles always thrived on their own exclusive titles.

 

Also, it seems like the Switch is the gimmick done right. It's the same motion controls as the Wii but this time it's optional. It's the same gamepad idea that the WiiU had but this time it's actually portable. All stuff you can ignore this time around, you can use it as just a normal console (or handheld). This is what makes the Switch strong in my eyes, I think all Nintendo has to do now is keep those good exclusives coming.

 

Quote

I think a lot more people would be happy with the launch line up if Nintendo did port Super Mario 3D World and Yoshi's Woolly World and had them ready to release. They wouldn't be new titles but at least we'd have a Mario game to play, and for those that skipped the Wii U, they would be "new."

 

I'm not saying I'm super satisfied with the launch line-up but I understand their "steady stream of content" idea and I do feel like Zelda and Snipperclips will keep me busy long enough. If the Virtual Console is filled with the titles it had on the WiiU right away, then I am completely satisfied.

 

Quote

It has been proven that Nintendo intentionally ships fewer units than the demand to create hype for their systems. It happened with the Wii, Wii U, 3DS and NES Classic. I sincerely hope that they've learned their lesson and don't do it with the Switch (because all people who buy one from a scalper aren't giving their money to Nintendo) but it is definitely a valid point to bring up.

 

Past and present are two different things though, I'm not going to check if it's actually been "proven" that they did so in the past but I do know that Nintendo is trying their best to supply the Switch in big numbers. The big game store chain over here was amazed by how many consoles they were getting come release, at any rate. They have all been pre-ordered by now, but the number is much bigger than with the previous Nintendo consoles (number of pre-orders is a lot bigger as well, but still).

 

Quote

 

We have got that deal from Sony, the entire last generation of PSN was free. Microsoft also fairly regularly have free weekends of XBL Gold. Nintendo's online services so far have been pretty bad, the servers themselves are okay (although with the amount of people they have online that should definitely be the case) but the service itself doesn't really compare with everything you get with PSN and XBL. Hopefully that changes with the Switch and we get a service comparable to PSN and XBL, if not then it should definitely be cheaper. I have absolutely no problem with paying for PSN and XBL because I think the services are worth the money, if the Switch online service is comparable then I'll have no problem paying for that one as well. Comparing the Wii U service to the PS3/PS4 though, Nintendo has a long way to go. But again, I hope they can do it or price it accordingly. 

 

You had free online from Sony but the previous Nintendo consoles had this as well, I was talking about getting those monthly games to boot. I think we can both agree that wheter or not we're annoyed all depends on what price they are going to set for the service.

 

I should add that I have zero issues with the online app chat thing. I think it's a good idea, actually.

 

Quote

It really isn't a weird argument at all. A lot of gamers want to know how powerful a system is so they can know what they can roughly expect from third party games. If the Switch was more powerful than the PS4/Xbone then they could expect better looking, or at least games on par with the other systems. If the system is vastly underpowered then gamers can expect another generation of little to no third party support. Of course that could be wrong and even with an underpowered system there could be tons of third party support, but it is better to expect the worst and get the best rather than expect the best and get the worst. 

 

How many gamers really know the difference between all that stuff though? Personally I wouldn't know what to do with the info and I'm willing to bet that there are more people complaining about not having the Switch specs public than there are people with knowledge about what those specs actually mean. For most gamers (in general, but casual gamers especially) seeing in-game graphics is enough to estimate how well a console could do. I'd say that it is enough to know that the Switch is using a normal programming language, the Nintendo being hard to program is what caused trouble with third party support for a few older consoles.

 

Quote

If the Switch version of Skyrim was the Remaster I'm sure a ton of people would be very excited for it. However that doesn't seem to be the case, it seems to be a port of the original version of Skyrim which released in 2011, so yes, it is a very old game. It has nothing to do with mods, it has to do with the huge upgrade from Skyrim to the Skyrim Special Edition in 2016. But beyond that, I hope the Switch continues to get more games like Super Meat Boy and I Am Setsuna, the more games to play on a gaming console the better. 

 

Aren't both the Switch and the PS4 versions just ports of the original with graphics to fit the system though, and mods for the PS4 version?

 

Quote

Like I already said, I pre-ordered the Switch and will be getting it day one. I'm a big Nintendo fan and I have every single one of their home consoles and handhelds but for the past few generations they've been focusing on gimmicks instead of the actual gaming experience. I hope the Switch is a great console and it marks the return to form for Nintendo, they make some genuinely great games and it would be an absolute shame for them to stop making consoles. However, a lot of the criticism for the Switch so far has been valid (in my opinion) and Nintendo needs to earn back the trust from a lot of their old fans and those fans have been screaming since the Wii to just make a good console with no gimmicks. So far it looks like the Switch is relatively gimmick free (I don't consider being able to make it a portable console a gimmick) but I hope Nintendo focus on earning third party support and making proper games that don't rely on motion controls or silly things with the joy cons, I want a proper experience with the Pro controller.

 

As said above, I agree with the Switch being relatively gimmick-free. It's a good thing that the motion controls are completely optional this time around, it promises flexibility that the Wii and WiiU did not have.

 

Since starting on gaming with the SNES, the WiiU is the only one I skipped and I feel glad that the Switch is getting me excited again. Personally, I think that a lit of the criticisms towards the Switch, while often having a kernel of truth, have been big on the over-exaggeration. The main one, lack of launch games, is still moving - we don't know about the Virtual Console yet and in just one week the initial list of five games has been expanded to seven.

 

Quote

Breath of the Wild looks fucking fantastic, though. Wind Waker is probably my favorite LoZ game and this looks like an evolution of that game, graphically. Art direction can make up for a lack of power and that is something that Nintendo excels at.

 

It certainly looks good, I hope there won't be lots of empty grounds though like I saw in the Fallon video. Wind Waker is not my favourite Zelda by far (both Link To The Past and Ocarina Of Time are miles ahead) but I did appreciate the graphics style and I don't mind seeing its natural evolution.

 

Your last line pretty much defines what the line is for liking and disliking Nintendo. You need to look elsewhere for power and top of the line realistic graphics but Nintendo has always had a great and unique style.

 

 

 

 

Wow, look at the time... Did I write that much? Sorry if there's spelling/grammar errors in there, as said before I have been writing on my phone.