Nintendo Switch and Durability

[TheMysteriousGX]

So I was running around YouTube today and randomly got recommended a video where this guy, JerryRigEverything, put the handheld console through it's paces with a durability test:


I got to say, with the internet exploding the way it always does about hardware failures, I figured this little guy would be much more fragile than's actually shown. Overall, I'm pretty impressed with the build quality. Not gonna put it in my pocket with my keys, but that's true about every other piece of electronics I've ever owned.

He's also got a tear-down/rebuild video that I've got liked in case I ever need to do some DIY repairs like I had to do on my PS4.

Spoiler: In case you don't want to watch the video:

The display screen in made out of plastic, so things like keys can scratch it, trade off being that it won't crack as easily as a phone screen. Getting a screen protector will fix 99% of the problems you could run into. Dunno what kind of display it actually has: Jerry usually holds a lighter to the screen to see how the display reacts, but the plastic is so thick it reached it's melting point before the flame could actually affect the display.

The rubber on the sticks and buttons is plenty thick and hard to remove, so those will last a good long time. Meanwhile, the labels(?) on the buttons are injected plastic, which he cut down quite a bit, so even if you wear down the buttons to nubs, it'll still have that X or A or whatever, they won't rub off.

The kickstand is flimsy and designed to come off easily. It is also designed to pop back on easily, which he did repeatedly.

He put a fair bit of effort into trying to snap the console in half and couldn't do it, at least without leveraging tools or such. Basically, it should be fine unless a heavy person sits on it at an angle or someone is deliberately and aggressively trying to break it. JoyCon rail system is similar. Had to put in quite a bit of effort to snap one off the console, and it wasn't the plastic bit on the Con or the metal rail on the console that broke, it was the places where the screws were. Aka, the screws stripped out or the holes where the screws were put popped out. Crucially, unless the ribbon strip at the bottom gets cut, the rail breaking off won't stop the JoyCons from charging.

The dock can scratch the screen of the console, but it shouldn't be a part where the display is showing if the console is being put in straight. And again, screen protector solves this problem.

If you're having heating issues, it might be worth if to open up the console and check the thermal paste. Easy fix if the paste is bad. At some point the console is hand assembled, as his had fingerprints on the inside when he opened it up.

The battery is actually a bit of a ***** to replace. It's glued into place, and because it's lithium-ion, you really don't want to use metal tools. A heat gun and some careful prodding is required to get it out of place.

TLDR: It's a robust little machine, and repairs should be relatively easy depending on the availability of replacement parts. Get a screen protector.

Can't wait to see when he'll get around to opening up those JoyCons.

 

[Saelune]

Nintendo knows durability. Nintendo consoles -always- out-durable the competition.

 

[Yoshi178]

This is Nintendo you're talking about. the same company that made a Game Boy that still works even after being in caught in an Atomic Bomb explosion.

think it's safe to say they know what they're doing when it comes to a consoles durability

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

Yeah, that's not unexpected. There's always going to be unlucky sods who get the runt of the litter. Or people who threat their electronics with amazing callousness and are then both surprised and appalled at them breaking.

But on average, Nintendo stuff has always been more reliably durable than its competitors. Unless the design philosophy for their hardware, especially portable devices, has changed considerably in the last years, I've yet to see enough evidence that the Switch is any different.

I have a fair number of gripes with Nintendo. Build quality has so far never been one of them.

 

[WeepingAngels]

I honestly can't believe how many people I have seen defend the dead pixel issue, a dead pixel on a brand new device is like a scratch on a brand new car and no one would defend the manufacturer saying 'that is normal, deal with it'.

I haven't seen anyone defend the 'dead pixel issue'. It's just not an issue exclusive to the Switch. It's no more and no less likely to occur on a Switch than any other screen.

The issue is the warranty, where there's a leeway of around 5 dead pixels. Even then this is a common factor for a few of companies who produce LCD screens. People need to at least be consistent in their complaints.

If you thought I was being inconsistent then I should clarify. I don't care which company refuses to see a dead pixel as a defect, it is a defect and they should fix it for free or replace it. My PSP had a dead pixel and you can bet your ass I took it back to Gamestop and got it replaced. Does that clarify things for you?

Is this thread missing posts, my entire post from earlier is gone even though part of it was quoted.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

I honestly can't believe how many people I have seen defend the dead pixel issue, a dead pixel on a brand new device is like a scratch on a brand new car and no one would defend the manufacturer saying 'that is normal, deal with it'.

I haven't seen anyone defend the 'dead pixel issue'. It's just not an issue exclusive to the Switch. It's no more and no less likely to occur on a Switch than any other screen.

The issue is the warranty, where there's a leeway of around 5 dead pixels. Even then this is a common factor for a few of companies who produce LCD screens. People need to at least be consistent in their complaints.

There's a huge difference between a 52" TV having a dead pixel or two versus the screen on a Nintendo Switch.

On a 52" TV you'll have a hard time spotting a single dead pixel because it's a huge screen and you're sitting several feet away from it. The Switch's screen is a tiny 6" and you hold it a foot away from your face. At that distance even the slightest defect is easily noticeable and can be incredibly distracting.

So yes, while dead pixels are a normal part of making LCD screens, and yes, there are companies that refuse to replace them (shit companies whose products I wouldn't buy), this issue is much more noticeable and therefore much worse on the Switch because of how small the screen is and how close to your face you hold it.

That's also one of the reasons that the issue of the dock scratching the screen is entirely unacceptable and should be a huge embarrassment to Nintendo.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

I honestly can't believe how many people I have seen defend the dead pixel issue, a dead pixel on a brand new device is like a scratch on a brand new car and no one would defend the manufacturer saying 'that is normal, deal with it'.

I haven't seen anyone defend the 'dead pixel issue'. It's just not an issue exclusive to the Switch. It's no more and no less likely to occur on a Switch than any other screen.

The issue is the warranty, where there's a leeway of around 5 dead pixels. Even then this is a common factor for a few of companies who produce LCD screens. People need to at least be consistent in their complaints.

The otherside of the dead pixel issue, I haven't heard of many (if any at all) Switches actually having dead pixels. I feel like if Ninty hadn't mentioned the issue in the first place, bringing to light a manufacturing/industry standard, no one would be talking about it.
And being absolutely fair, if one is going to go to town on Ninty for following the industry, one should take the entirety of pixel-based hardware to task as well for making this a standard.

 

[BarkBarker]

I do hope the BUTTONS and general input methods are sturdier than before, Megaman and Mario Kart annihilated my L button on the DS and my 3DS circle pad rubber came off real easy after Smash bros and Monster Hunter. Not the BIGGEST deal but if you know a buttons going to be the go to "accelerate" or "jump" button, make sure its prepared to handle it.

 

[WeepingAngels]

I honestly can't believe how many people I have seen defend the dead pixel issue, a dead pixel on a brand new device is like a scratch on a brand new car and no one would defend the manufacturer saying 'that is normal, deal with it'.

I haven't seen anyone defend the 'dead pixel issue'. It's just not an issue exclusive to the Switch. It's no more and no less likely to occur on a Switch than any other screen.

The issue is the warranty, where there's a leeway of around 5 dead pixels. Even then this is a common factor for a few of companies who produce LCD screens. People need to at least be consistent in their complaints.

The otherside of the dead pixel issue, I haven't heard of many (if any at all) Switches actually having dead pixels. I feel like if Ninty hadn't mentioned the issue in the first place, bringing to light a manufacturing/industry standard, no one would be talking about it.
And being absolutely fair, if one is going to go to town on Ninty for following the industry, one should take the entirety of pixel-based hardware to task as well for making this a standard.

It wrong when everyone commits murder but it's ok to concentrate on one murderer when discussing his/her story.

 

[WeepingAngels]

I do hope the BUTTONS and general input methods are sturdier than before, Megaman and Mario Kart annihilated my L button on the DS and my 3DS circle pad rubber came off real easy after Smash bros and Monster Hunter. Not the BIGGEST deal but if you know a buttons going to be the go to "accelerate" or "jump" button, make sure its prepared to handle it.

I have always been happy that my handhelds have superior buttons to my controllers. I have never had a sticky buttons on a handheld but I do have a sticky button on most of my PS2 and Gamecube controllers and now I even have one on my Wii U Pro Controller.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

It wrong when everyone commits murder but it's ok to concentrate on one murderer when discussing his/her story.

Likening an industry standard to murder is a pretty piss poor comparison, my friend. The biggest issue I've heard on why the standard is in place is the cost of replacing the under x-amount of dead pixel screens would actually increase customer cost in the long run.
Personally speaking, aside from the original PSP run, I've never had a pixel-based screen have dead pixels in all the years I've owned them or set them up for customers, nor have I any secondhand/thirdhand anecdotes of such to go on, so the issue is not exactly one that I find to be worthy of massive backlash. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I am saying that it never was an issue until Nintendo stated they were complying with an industry standard... so, yeah.
There are plenty of common issues with the Switch to take issue with, and again as far as I'm aware, dead pixels is in the rare to super-rare column, making it a non-issue for a majority of the owners.
I just find it odd that this standard is not new at all, and yet only now is becoming a vocalized outcry simply because Nintendo said something about it upfront rather than bury it in the back-end of their warranty.
I'm not defending it necessarily, I'm just finding the outcry vs. commonality of issue inequal.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

I honestly can't believe how many people I have seen defend the dead pixel issue, a dead pixel on a brand new device is like a scratch on a brand new car and no one would defend the manufacturer saying 'that is normal, deal with it'.

I haven't seen anyone defend the 'dead pixel issue'. It's just not an issue exclusive to the Switch. It's no more and no less likely to occur on a Switch than any other screen.

The issue is the warranty, where there's a leeway of around 5 dead pixels. Even then this is a common factor for a few of companies who produce LCD screens. People need to at least be consistent in their complaints.

If you thought I was being inconsistent then I should clarify. I don't care which company refuses to see a dead pixel as a defect, it is a defect and they should fix it for free or replace it. My PSP had a dead pixel and you can bet your ass I took it back to Gamestop and got it replaced. Does that clarify things for you?

Is this thread missing posts, my entire post from earlier is gone even though part of it was quoted.

If you're within the return window, that works for Switch's as well. Well, as long as you're willing to sit on store credit until they get some more in.

 

[WeepingAngels]

I honestly can't believe how many people I have seen defend the dead pixel issue, a dead pixel on a brand new device is like a scratch on a brand new car and no one would defend the manufacturer saying 'that is normal, deal with it'.

I haven't seen anyone defend the 'dead pixel issue'. It's just not an issue exclusive to the Switch. It's no more and no less likely to occur on a Switch than any other screen.

The issue is the warranty, where there's a leeway of around 5 dead pixels. Even then this is a common factor for a few of companies who produce LCD screens. People need to at least be consistent in their complaints.

If you thought I was being inconsistent then I should clarify. I don't care which company refuses to see a dead pixel as a defect, it is a defect and they should fix it for free or replace it. My PSP had a dead pixel and you can bet your ass I took it back to Gamestop and got it replaced. Does that clarify things for you?

Is this thread missing posts, my entire post from earlier is gone even though part of it was quoted.

If you're within the return window, that works for Switch's as well. Well, as long as you're willing to sit on store credit until they get some more in.

That's why I advise people to buy their Switch from a store with a friendly return policy. Still doesn't change Nintendo's attitude (the whole industries attitude) that dead pixels are fine until you get more than few of them. They aren't fine for a brand new device.

 

[WeepingAngels]

It wrong when everyone commits murder but it's ok to concentrate on one murderer when discussing his/her story.

Likening an industry standard to murder is a pretty piss poor comparison, my friend.

Comparisons don't need to be perfectly equal.

The biggest issue I've heard on why the standard is in place is the cost of replacing the under x-amount of dead pixel screens would actually increase customer cost in the long run.

So the price doesn't take into account the defect of dead pixels, doesn't make dead pixels ok. As i say below, dead pixels shouldn't raise the overall consumer cost if it's as rare as people claim.

Personally speaking, aside from the original PSP run, I've never had a pixel-based screen have dead pixels in all the years I've owned them or set them up for customers, nor have I any secondhand/thirdhand anecdotes of such to go on, so the issue is not exactly one that I find to be worthy of massive backlash. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I am saying that it never was an issue until Nintendo stated they were complying with an industry standard... so, yeah.

Things don't usually become an issue the first time they happen, it takes time but then some small thing will raise the public awareness, usually unexpected and there are always loads of people saying 'why do you care now, you didn't care when did it?'.

There are plenty of common issues with the Switch to take issue with, and again as far as I'm aware, dead pixels is in the rare to super-rare column, making it a non-issue for a majority of the owners.

Well people who only think about their own experience are a problem. Dead pixels may be rare but they do happen and if they are so rare, why would it increase the customer cost overall?

I just find it odd that this standard is not new at all, and yet only now is becoming a vocalized outcry simply because Nintendo said something about it upfront rather than bury it in the back-end of their warranty.
I'm not defending it necessarily, I'm just finding the outcry vs. commonality of issue inequal.

Like I said above, the public awareness is almost always late and set off by a small, unexpected thing.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

Comparisons don't need to be perfectly equal.

No, but they do need to be comparable. A crime of highest proportions and a non-criminal act are not comparable, regardless of your feelings of the act.

So the price doesn't take into account the defect of dead pixels, doesn't make dead pixels ok. As i say below, dead pixels shouldn't raise the overall consumer cost if it's as rare as people claim.

It was one of the reasons I'd heard from manufacturers, and I apologize for not clarifying that this was many years ago when I'd dealt with manufacturers direct and had policy explained to me. Things were much more expensive back then, and I'm fairly certain that industry standards dictated by that time period being still standard today are the way they are simply because it's not as big an issue as people are making a stink about. I'm not claiming the practice to be a good one, only saying its been around a long time and likely a holdover from that age where it'd have been much more expensive to the consumer to provide RMA service for small amounts of dead pixels of a certain threshold.
Should it be changed? Yes, but I don't expect Nintendo to be the one to do it.

Things don't usually become an issue the first time they happen, it takes time but then some small thing will raise the public awareness, usually unexpected and there are always loads of people saying 'why do you care now, you didn't care when did it?'

My argument is that its so low a rate of failure that its essentially a non-issue, especially since this isn't news about the industry. This is public knowledge of the standard. Its only because Nintendo disclosed the policy in plain sight that people have latched onto it and blew it up. Not because of actual failures, mind you.

Like I said above, the public awareness is almost always late and set off by a small, unexpected thing.

More likely in the gamer sphere, people latch onto anything they can raise a stink about, regardless of it actually being an issue. You can't tell me gamer culture doesn't make mountains out of molehills, even when there are legitimate issues to actually raise a stink about. Choosing the disclosure of a years long, and publicly acknowledged industry standard as "this makes Nintendo a crap company" flag-waving issue is a terrible misconception.
I am all for taking companies to task for stupid shit they do, but my view is that issues that are actually major problems with the company itself should be the first and foremost target, like the connectivity issues for the joycon, the overall interference from outside wireless devices, poor placement of the charging slot... Low initial unit shipping... Stuff that actually is a problem.

 

[WeepingAngels]

No, but they do need to be comparable. A crime of highest proportions and a non-criminal act are not comparable, regardless of your feelings of the act.

Did my use of the crime of murder make it impossible for you to understand my point that it's ok to discuss Nintendo's policy in a thread about Nintendo even if others share the same policy? ...and to carry it a bit further, 'other people murder too' is not and should not be a defense for murder.

My argument is that its so low a rate of failure that its essentially a non-issue, especially since this isn't news about the industry. This is public knowledge of the standard. Its only because Nintendo disclosed the policy in plain sight that people have latched onto it and blew it up. Not because of actual failures, mind you.

It's no longer a non-issue if consumers decide to make it an issue and consumers do have that right.

More likely in the gamer sphere, people latch onto anything they can raise a stink about, regardless of it actually being an issue. You can't tell me gamer culture doesn't make mountains out of molehills, even when there are legitimate issues to actually raise a stink about. Choosing the disclosure of a years long, and publicly acknowledged industry standard as "this makes Nintendo a crap company" flag-waving issue is a terrible misconception.
I am all for taking companies to task for stupid shit they do, but my view is that issues that are actually major problems with the company itself should be the first and foremost target, like the connectivity issues for the joycon, the overall interference from outside wireless devices, poor placement of the charging slot... Low initial unit shipping... Stuff that actually is a problem.

Yeah, consumer outrage sometimes makes little sense and sometimes the problem gets fixed before the outrage blows up. I'll give you an example of something that should have blown up long ago but has so far not blown up. I remember when Direct2Drive sold out to Gamefly, people lost some digital games and then again when GFWL went under, some games were also lost.

When console/handheld digital stores start closing people will lose every game they don't have downloaded (think about small HDD sizes on consoles). This is something that should have been hashed out long ago. What rights do consumers have with regards to digital content being available for re-download? 5 years, 20 years? Consumers deserve to know BEFORE they buy how long they are guaranteed access. One day though, some little thing will cause outrage and while we are wondering what took so long, we will be glad it's finally being addressed.