Nintendo Switch....DOA

[irish286]

To all the people claiming the switch is too under powered, just stop. It can run play a slightly downscaled Skyrim Special Edition. Screen shot comparisons prove this. Additional foliage and the enhanced shadow textures added in the special edition were present in the screen shots. Granted they appear downscaled but it's still far and above the capabilities of the old consoles. While the switch is obviously weaker, how many of you would honestly scoff at being able to play games with better graphics than a ps3 but not quite as good as a ps4 on the go?

 

[votemarvel]

Valve makes so much money with Steam that they don't need an Online Subscription.

Microsoft also take a 30% cut of everything sold on Xbox (360, One, and Windows Store). Sony take a similar cut.

Do you remember when Microsoft were charging for Games for Windows Live players to game online, they swiftly dropped that fee because they knew they were killing their brand (not that dropping it helped, the damage was done by that point).

Microsoft, Sony etc charge on their consoles because they can, because they know they can get away with it.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Valve makes so much money with Steam that they don't need an Online Subscription.

Microsoft also take a 30% cut of everything sold on Xbox (360, One, and Windows Store). Sony take a similar cut.

Do you remember when Microsoft were charging for Games for Windows Live players to game online, they swiftly dropped that fee because they knew they were killing their brand (not that dropping it helped, the damage was done by that point).

Microsoft, Sony etc charge on their consoles because they can, because they know they can get away with it.

Really? Well from the reaction I see from people about this I doubt it.

 

[WeepingAngels]

To all the people claiming the switch is too under powered, just stop. It can run play a slightly downscaled Skyrim Special Edition. Screen shot comparisons prove this. Additional foliage and the enhanced shadow textures added in the special edition were present in the screen shots. Granted they appear downscaled but it's still far and above the capabilities of the old consoles. While the switch is obviously weaker, how many of you would honestly scoff at being able to play games with better graphics than a ps3 but not quite as good as a ps4 on the go?

So it's a glass half full scenario for you because you see it as a powerful handheld instead of a weak console. Reggie though, said that it's more console than handheld and the 3DS will live right alongside the switch (see below). The complaints about it's power are related to it's high price compared to its more powerful competition. Now let's be clear, its competition is not the 360/PS3, that was the Wii. It's competition is not the Xbox One and the PS4, that was the Wii U. No, it's competition is the Xbox One S and PS4 Pro.

http://www.itechpost.com/articles/74441/20170114/nintendo-switch-vs-playstation-4-pro-xbox-one-s-now.htm

I think there's a sense that Nintendo Switch is a portable device. It is portable. But at its heart, it's a home console that you can take with you on the go.

http://nintendoeverything.com/reggie-talks-switch-online-service-info-teased-on-rebuying-classic-games-supply-concerns-3ds-here-to-stay/

 

[WeepingAngels]

Seriously, Nintendo's never played the power game, and if I recall correctly, none of their consoles or handhelds ever beat out their competitors in that realm.

The SNES and N64 did also the gamecube was more powerful than the PS2 and the NES was a step up as well from what was available at the time. The handhelds they have had very little competition. Basically they were interested in keeping up with their competitors (or even esclipsing them) in the power race until the Wii.

It's cheating to play the power game by releasing a console a couple years after your competitor, which is what happened with the SNES.

No it isn't. It's ok not to release your console at the same time as your competition, there is an advantage to releasing first too. It's a fact that until the Wii, Nintendo didn't release the weakest console of the generation.

I want to hit post but I find what I bolded so laughable that I now have to ask what your acceptable time frame is for a console to be released and not be cheating.

Edit: So, using your logic, the PS4 and Xbox One cheated by releasing a year after the Wii U.

Missed the part where the TurboGrafx-16 was the start of the 16 bit generation for Nintendo, not the SNES.

...or maybe the TG16 cheated (your word, not mine) by coming years after the NES? You can't define generation borders by CPU bits or the PS1 and N64 would be in different generations.

 

[Casual Shinji]

So it's a glass half full scenario for you because you see it as a powerful handheld instead of a weak console. Reggie though, said that it's more console than handheld and the 3DS will live right alongside the switch.

See, this is how it could've gotten me excited; By being a console that merged both Nintendo's home console and handheld games. If the Switch had the ability to play 3DS games on your TV I'd be very tempted to buy one on release, as I haven't owned a handheld since the original Gameboy. But as it stands the Switch just feels like a repeat of the Wii-U.

I mean honestly, what makes the Switch different from the Wii-U, apart from a handful of gizmos and the ability to play it for three hours in handheld mode? It's going to be just as severely underpowered compared to the competition, and it's going to have the same lack of third-party support.

 

[WeepingAngels]

So it's a glass half full scenario for you because you see it as a powerful handheld instead of a weak console. Reggie though, said that it's more console than handheld and the 3DS will live right alongside the switch.

See, this is how it could've gotten me excited; By being a console that merged both Nintendo's home console and handheld games. If the Switch had the ability to play 3DS games on your TV I'd be very tempted to buy one on release, as I haven't owned a handheld since the original Gameboy. But as it stands the Switch just feels like a repeat of the Wii-U.

I mean honestly, what makes the Switch different from the Wii-U, apart from a handful of gizmos and the ability to play it for three hours in handheld mode? It's going to be just as severely underpowered compared to the competition, and it's going to have the same lack of third-party support.

The Wii U is a dual screen system and right now, not having tried the Switch, I prefer the Wii U. I just installed the hi capacity battery into my Gamepad so from my perspective, off tv play is better on the Wii U than it will be on the Switch. I don't see myself taking the tablet out in public like I do my 3DS. I am even skeptical about taking my Vita out in public with it's open, unprotected screen.

 

[Casual Shinji]

The Wii U is a dual screen system and right now, not having tried the Switch, I prefer the Wii U. I just installed the hi capacity battery into my Gamepad so from my perspective, off tv play is better on the Wii U than it will be on the Switch. I don't see myself taking the tablet out in public like I do my 3DS. I am even skeptical about taking my Vita out in public with it's open, unprotected screen.

I'm saying this from an angle of 'How is the Switch going to solve the issues that were plaguing the Wii-U?' Because nothing about it feels like a drastic shift or kick in the pants. It just feels like another Wii-U that's more portable. That's it. And I honestly don't think that's even close to being enough.

 

[Saelune]

The Wii U is a dual screen system and right now, not having tried the Switch, I prefer the Wii U. I just installed the hi capacity battery into my Gamepad so from my perspective, off tv play is better on the Wii U than it will be on the Switch. I don't see myself taking the tablet out in public like I do my 3DS. I am even skeptical about taking my Vita out in public with it's open, unprotected screen.

I'm saying this from an angle of 'How is the Switch going to solve the issues that were plaguing the Wii-U?' Because nothing about it feels like a drastic shift or kick in the pants. It just feels like another Wii-U that's more portable. That's it. And I honestly don't think that's even close to being enough.

What issues were "plaguing" the Wii U? Most of the issues seem not specific to the Wii U, cause the problems people always gripe about is lack of 3rd party games.

But then, I am of the mind that the Wii U was a fine system.

 

[Casual Shinji]

What issues were "plaguing" the Wii U? Most of the issues seem not specific to the Wii U, cause the problems people always gripe about is lack of 3rd party games.

But then, I am of the mind that the Wii U was a fine system.

The issues that caused it to largely fail.

I think the Wii-U is a fine system, too, but that doesn't stop it from barely getting turned on except to play Wind Waker, Super Mario Galaxy, maybe Tropical Freeze, and coming March, Breath of the Wild. Now I know this'll differ from person to person, and that the Wii-U was mainly a companion console, but even with that the console was barren.

The swiftness with which the Switch was announced seemed like a response to the floundering of the Wii-U. So I'm sure most people -- myself included -- expected Nintendo to come out with a console and/or line-up that would restore faith and indicate a real change. But this just seems like it's going the same damn route, which didn't exactly work out for them previously.

From the first-party side nothing intersting was announced that I can't play on the Wii-U, and I'm sure I don't have to expect any sort of third-party support. So what we're getting is another strictly Nintendo machine for playing the same old stagnant IPs.

Again, I would've gotten excited if it allowed me to play 3DS games on it, sort of showing how dedicated they are to the whole home console/handheld merger, and thereby revealing something that was genuinely different than before, but no, it's just Wii-U2.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

To all the people claiming the switch is too under powered, just stop. It can run play a slightly downscaled Skyrim Special Edition. Screen shot comparisons prove this. Additional foliage and the enhanced shadow textures added in the special edition were present in the screen shots. Granted they appear downscaled but it's still far and above the capabilities of the old consoles. While the switch is obviously weaker, how many of you would honestly scoff at being able to play games with better graphics than a ps3 but not quite as good as a ps4 on the go?

but then people can't measure their polygonal dicks by bragging about how many triangles something can generate and are robbed of the easiest metric by which to judge a game's "quality." Then they'd have to use "hard" metrics like controls, story, level design, and gameplay design which can't be judged in simple numerical terms.

Speaking of controls, I find it funny how Nintendo pulled the rug out from under everyone and revealed that they're bringing waggle back in a big way with the Joy Cons. They're more advanced than the Wii-motes were by far and the fact that they can function as individual controllers for most multiplayer titles is a big plus. There's also the HD Rumble which can probably give better tactile feedback than before (plus it's weird how we haven't had a major innovation in rumble for nearly twenty years). That's just hilarious ho Nintendo distracted everyone with the portability of the Switch and then revealed the waggle.

 

[meiam]

The issues that caused it to largely fail.

I think the Wii-U is a fine system, too, but that doesn't stop it from barely getting turned on except to play Wind Waker, Super Mario Galaxy, maybe Tropical Freeze, and coming March, Breath of the Wild. Now I know this'll differ from person to person, and that the Wii-U was mainly a companion console, but even with that the console was barren.

The swiftness with which the Switch was announced seemed like a response to the floundering of the Wii-U. So I'm sure most people -- myself included -- expected Nintendo to come out with a console and/or line-up that would restore faith and indicate a real change. But this just seems like it's going the same damn route, which didn't exactly work out for them previously.

From the first-party side nothing intersting was announced that I can't play on the Wii-U, and I'm sure I don't have to expect any sort of third-party support. So what we're getting is another strictly Nintendo machine for playing the same old stagnant IPs.

Again, I would've gotten excited if it allowed me to play 3DS games on it, sort of showing how dedicated they are to the whole home console/handheld merger, and thereby revealing something that was genuinely different than before, but no, it's just Wii-U2.

The switch isn't the successor of the wii U, it's the 3DS successor. The 3DS did really well so the switch has a pretty bright future. I know nintendo love to say it's an hybrid, but there's literally nothing about it that's hybrid, it's an handheld trough and trough. Literally, the dock is just an overly complicated charging cable and HDMI cable (that nintendo has the gall to charge 90$ for).

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

...or maybe the TG16 cheated (your word, not mine) by coming years after the NES? You can't define generation borders by CPU bits or the PS1 and N64 would be in different generations.

You know Nintendo made the TurboGrafx-16, right? It was supposed to the the NES's successor. And it was distinctly less powerful than the Genesis/Master System, while coming out at the same time. Like, the same month even. The SNES came out three yearslater in Japan because the TurboGrafx-16 losing market share to Sega's Master System/Genesis in a big way.

The generation border between the NES and the 16 bit era is defined by two 16 bit consoles coming out at the same time.

 

[Casual Shinji]

The switch isn't the successor of the wii U, it's the 3DS successor. The 3DS did really well so the switch has a pretty bright future. I know nintendo love to say it's an hybrid, but there's literally nothing about it that's hybrid, it's an handheld trough and trough. Literally, the dock is just an overly complicated charging cable and HDMI cable (that nintendo has the gall to charge 90$ for).

Really?! The succesor to the 3DS? I really don't see that AT ALL. And if that really is Nintendo's intent for the system than that's incredibly stupid. Not only is it much too bulky, but it's got detachable bits; Not very efficient for on the go, I'd wager.

And it comes with an actual controller in the package, as well as another controller periferal that you can buy for it. I'm sorry, but the claim that it's a handheld through and through doesn't fly for me. This is trying to be both, and most certainly trying to show that they're still in the home console game.

 

[Elvis Starburst]

All I have to do is quote you. Look, I'll even screencap it. I can't make this any more easy for you. A puppet show maybe.

positive reviews that have also been saying the game controls horribly.
maybe you should actually listen to the actual words reviews say and not focus solely on the review scores

Please record a puppet show. I've love to see it

 

[Specter Von Baren]

So it's a glass half full scenario for you because you see it as a powerful handheld instead of a weak console. Reggie though, said that it's more console than handheld and the 3DS will live right alongside the switch.

See, this is how it could've gotten me excited; By being a console that merged both Nintendo's home console and handheld games. If the Switch had the ability to play 3DS games on your TV I'd be very tempted to buy one on release, as I haven't owned a handheld since the original Gameboy. But as it stands the Switch just feels like a repeat of the Wii-U.

I mean honestly, what makes the Switch different from the Wii-U, apart from a handful of gizmos and the ability to play it for three hours in handheld mode? It's going to be just as severely underpowered compared to the competition, and it's going to have the same lack of third-party support.

What's the difference between the new X-box and Playstation systems and the current ones? The overall issue here is that consoles are already becoming defunct thanks to computers.

The issue overall, as I see it, is that the Switch is the correct idea. Handhelds still outclass phones when it comes to gaming so making a home console that's meant to be a mix of the two in order to tap into that market makes sense. The problem is as you said, third party support. In that case Sony and Microsoft have the third party support, or at least, the third part interest but they're still making their systems to be worse computers and Steam is taking away A LOT of third party interest from them.

One of these three companies needs to make proper hardware that's not trying to be a computer but also needs to have third part support to back it up if one of them is going to survive.

 

[irish286]

It's competition is not the Xbox One and the PS4, that was the Wii U. No, it's competition is the Xbox One S and PS4 Pro.

Yes, it is competition for them. The Ps4 Pro is $400 and because Sony has already said they won't make any games Pro exclusive it's pointless and expensive. The One S is actually decent. However you're still measuring by graphics alone. The switch now has proper controls that can be configured into a proper controller. While it does have a touch screen It's not Dual screen so developers don't have to add anything just convert. The Wii U's problem was its proprietary nature. The Switch corrected this. Yes it has proprietary features. But all seem to be optional. Yes it would take a little work converting the graphics for some games. But considering it can run a slightly downscaled Skyrim Special Edition it should be able to run most games with a little tweaking. Opening up the Japanese market thanks to it being region free.

I don't want to play on the go. The power trade-off isn't worth it for me.

Ah, so because it's not worth it to you it's worthless to everyone as well and bound to fail. Got it. Flawless logic there.

 

[Casual Shinji]

What's the difference between the new X-box and Playstation systems and the current ones?

Not much beyond more power. But then the Playstation and Xbox didn't have any real trouble appealing to a large demographic, the Wii-U did. We can talk about how modern consoles are just shitty PCs til the cows come home, but they're still extremely popular.

The Wii-U obviously showed Nintendo has a problem to solve, and I don't see the Switch as a succesful answer to it. Not even so much because of the device itself, though the lack of power will again scare off third-parties, meaning less diverse line-up.

Something really different was needed here, something akin to the Wii, and the Switch did not deliver this.