Nintendo Switch....DOA

[WeepingAngels]

...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.

You seem a little confused.

TG16 was made by NEC and Hudson and was meant to compete against the NES. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TurboGrafx-16

On Sega, it was the Genesis/Megadrive, the Master System was an 8 bit console released in 1985. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_System

 

[WeepingAngels]

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.

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.

The Wii U had proper controls, even more traditional than the switch which seems to have done away with the Nintendo perfect D-Pad and acts like small Wii Remotes. How can you claim the Switch has more proper controls than the Wii U did? Traditional controls on the Gamepad did not keep developers away from the Wii U. You make it sound like developers were required to use the touch and motion controls on the Gamepad, they weren't.

Putting a map or a menu (which is already developed as a subscreen) on the second screen is a hell of a lot easier than down scaling your entire game to work on a weaker console than it was originally developed for.

The Wii U had problems but a second screen was not one of the big ones as the success of the DS and 3DS should show you. The Wii U had problems because Nintendo named, marketed and aesthetically designed it wrong. Look at the box, the Gamepad is featured front and center with the console itself in the back that looks a little too similar to the Wii. Given that it also shared the name 'Wii' it's no wonder many consumers thought that the Gamepad was just a $350 controller for the Wii.

 

[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.

You seem a little confused.

So I am. Also confused the names of the Mega Drive and the Master System.

Doesn't change the fact that Nintendo was willing to let the NES ride for years after the Genesis came out. Or that they were still releasing NES games years after the Super NES was a thing. (Kirby's Adventure being notable)

 

[WeepingAngels]

...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.

Or that they were still releasing NES games years after the Super NES was a thing. (Kirby's Adventure being notable)

That's called supporting your hardware.

 

[votemarvel]

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

Yes, really.

People continue to show Microsoft and Sony that they are willing to pay a fee to play online, either company would be foolish to stop it now. They might moan about paying it but they dutifully hand over that subscription money.

Subscriptions to play online are now so ingrained into the console market that it is impossible to get them out. Nintendo have seen how willing console gamers are to pay that fee and so want a piece of the pie.

It would take a move of such massive proportions to get the majority of people to stop paying their Gold or PSN sub and that would be the only way to get the fees dropped.

 

[WeepingAngels]

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

Yes, really.

People continue to show Microsoft and Sony that they are willing to pay a fee to play online, either company would be foolish to stop it now. They might moan about paying it but they dutifully hand over that subscription money.

Subscriptions to play online are now so ingrained into the console market that it is impossible to get them out. Nintendo have seen how willing console gamers are to pay that fee and so want a piece of the pie.

It would take a move of such massive proportions to get the majority of people to stop paying their Gold or PSN sub and that would be the only way to get the fees dropped.

...and next Valve may get on board because where you gonna turn if you don't like it?

 

[irish286]

The Wii U had proper controls, even more traditional than the switch which seems to have done away with the Nintendo perfect D-Pad and acts like small Wii Remotes.

So what? It took a $60 peripheral to give it a legitimate controller. The Switch comes with it. And are you seriously bitching about the d pad being turned into buttons? Sound to me like you're just looking for reasons to hate the Switch.

How can you claim the Switch has more proper controls than the Wii U did?

Because the joy cons turn into a proper controller as standard.

Traditional controls on the Gamepad did not keep developers away from the Wii U. You make it sound like developers were required to use the touch and motion controls on the Gamepad, they weren't.

They were still required to put extra development into that second screen. Combine that with the fact that Nintendo put an emphasis on them adding support for their Wiimotes and it made development a pain in the butt and not worth it.

Putting a map or a menu (which is already developed as a subscreen) on the second screen is a hell of a lot easier than down scaling your entire game to work on a weaker console than it was originally developed for.

Considering graphics cards now natively downscale automatically and the switch isn't that much less powerful I'm going to go ahead and say no, it's not easier.

The Wii U had problems but a second screen was not one of the big ones as the success of the DS and 3DS should show you.

Yes it was. No one wanted to deal with it. You're comparing apples to oranges trying to claim the dominate handheld unit having two screens means the extra screen and thus extra development wouldn't have been a factor for consoles.

The Wii U had problems because Nintendo named, marketed and aesthetically designed it wrong. Look at the box, the Gamepad is featured front and center with the console itself in the back that looks a little too similar to the Wii. Given that it also shared the name 'Wii' it's no wonder many consumers thought that the Gamepad was just a $350 controller for the Wii.

Really? You're trying to claim marketing was its problem? No. It's problem was the stark difference in power. The Wii U didn't even have a quarter the power of the Xbox One. That made ports exceedingly difficult. The Switch is within spitting distance.

 

[WeepingAngels]

So what? It took a $60 peripheral to give it a legitimate controller. The Switch comes with it. And are you seriously bitching about the d pad being turned into buttons? Sound to me like you're just looking for reasons to hate the Switch.

If you mean the Pro Controller, it's $50 but no, the Gamepad itself has traditional controls too. It has extra but the traditional controls are still there and can be used. I still use the D-Pad often for games designed for the D-Pad like NES and SNES VC games. Don't you?

Considering graphics cards now natively downscale automatically and the switch isn't that much less powerful I'm going to go ahead and say no, it's not easier.

...Yes it was. No one wanted to deal with it. You're comparing apples to oranges trying to claim the dominate handheld unit having two screens means the extra screen and thus extra development wouldn't have been a factor for consoles.

I want to nail this down. Are you saying that developers could have ported PS4/Xbox One games to the Wii U easily if it weren't for the second screen because the Wii U graphics chip could down scale automatically. Is that really your argument?

Really? You're trying to claim marketing was its problem? No. It's problem was the stark difference in power. The Wii U didn't even have a quarter the power of the Xbox One. That made ports exceedingly difficult. The Switch is within spitting distance.

This seems to contradict what you say above.

 

[irish286]

If you mean the Pro Controller, it's $50 but no, the Gamepad itself has traditional controls too. It has extra but the traditional controls are still there and can be used. I still use the D-Pad often for games designed for the D-Pad like NES and SNES VC games. Don't you?

No, because I didn't buy a Wii U. And the pro controller was $60 when it first came out with very few games that supported it. While the traditional controls are on the tablet it's still unwieldy for virtually no reason other than to accommodate the gimmicky second screen no third parties wanted to deal with.

I want to nail this down. Are you saying that developers could have ported PS4/Xbox One games to the Wii U easily if it weren't for the second screen because the Wii U graphics chip could down scale automatically. Is that really your argument?

You really need to work on your reading comprehension. What part about "the switch isn't that much less powerful" and "graphics cards now natively downscale automatically" didn't you understand? Are you really trying to claim the Wii U is as powerful as the Switch?

This seems to contradict what you say above.[/quote]
No, it contradicts your intentional misinterpretation. It's obvious you're just looking for a reason to hate the Switch.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

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.

Well we can't say that yet, it isn't even out, but you do make a good point. I guess my perspective on all this is more for the long term and I can't see consoles being able to keep going for another decade unless someone makes a big change to them that gives them something that you can't get with a PC.

 

[WeepingAngels]

No, because I didn't buy a Wii U. And the pro controller was $60 when it first came out with very few games that supported it. While the traditional controls are on the tablet it's still unwieldy for virtually no reason other than to accommodate the gimmicky second screen no third parties wanted to deal with.

Uh, you didn't buy a Wii U. I do hope that you put many hours into playing someone else's Wii U using the Gamepad before you tell me how uncomfortable it is.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

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

I could use the combined didactic powers of Dora, Clifford the Big Red Dog and the whole Teletubby troupe and still I fear the basic concept of two contradictory truths would elude him.

 

[irish286]

No, because I didn't buy a Wii U. And the pro controller was $60 when it first came out with very few games that supported it. While the traditional controls are on the tablet it's still unwieldy for virtually no reason other than to accommodate the gimmicky second screen no third parties wanted to deal with.

Uh, you didn't buy a Wii U. I do hope that you put many hours into playing someone else's Wii U using the Gamepad before you tell me how uncomfortable it is.

I didn't need hours trying it before I decided I didn't like it. I also didn't need hours playing it to listen to customers that bought it complain about it. The Wii U was drastically underpowered and had a wonky controller. Which lead to no support. Which lead to no one buying it. The Switch is only slightly underpowered and has normal controls when using the comfort grip.

 

[Kameburger]

So....after zelda and mario release what next?? Another mario and zelda two years later?

I'm sorry but I fail to understand how anyone can defend nintendo at this point they appear to have learnt nothing from the wiiu If anything it's worse this than that. Why do they continue to misread the market and chase a casual audience that doesn't exist anymore.

Oh and as for the whole 'it's OK if Sony Microsoft to charge for online. ' they are established good service providing free games, some aaa and not one thirty year old 8-16 bit game a month.

I think it's still a little to early to tell, but I think Nintendo has always aimed for people who want something different out of their gaming devices than what Sony or Microsoft has offered.

I think for instance you could look at this and say hey, I can play multiplayer games basically out of the box because it comes with two controllers. It clearly has local multiplayer which seems to be all but dead on other consoles except for with fighting games. The controllers look like they were designed for people who haven't really followed the evolution of controllers for the last 25 years, and in that sense I think it touches a farther reaching and broader demographic. The games look like classic Nintendo games, which should appeal to classic Nintendo fans.

I mean I think I'd prefer for Nintendo to just be different. Nintendo games on the WiiU for what its worth almost always ran at 60 FPS even if they were graphically inferior which speaks volumes about their priorities. And I think in general the games on the console had great presentation. if that continues I don't really see how this could be a terrible thing.

I hate to be rude here but it sounds like this console wasn't gonna please you anyway. But what would you want it to replace in your collection if it did meet your expectations? What is your ideal Nintendo Console?

 

[Fonejackerjon]

So....after zelda and mario release what next?? Another mario and zelda two years later?

I'm sorry but I fail to understand how anyone can defend nintendo at this point they appear to have learnt nothing from the wiiu If anything it's worse this than that. Why do they continue to misread the market and chase a casual audience that doesn't exist anymore.

Oh and as for the whole 'it's OK if Sony Microsoft to charge for online. ' they are established good service providing free games, some aaa and not one thirty year old 8-16 bit game a month.

I think it's still a little to early to tell, but I think Nintendo has always aimed for people who want something different out of their gaming devices than what Sony or Microsoft has offered.

I think for instance you could look at this and say hey, I can play multiplayer games basically out of the box because it comes with two controllers. It clearly has local multiplayer which seems to be all but dead on other consoles except for with fighting games. The controllers look like they were designed for people who haven't really followed the evolution of controllers for the last 25 years, and in that sense I think it touches a farther reaching and broader demographic. The games look like classic Nintendo games, which should appeal to classic Nintendo fans.

I mean I think I'd prefer for Nintendo to just be different. Nintendo games on the WiiU for what its worth almost always ran at 60 FPS even if they were graphically inferior which speaks volumes about their priorities. And I think in general the games on the console had great presentation. if that continues I don't really see how this could be a terrible thing.

I hate to be rude here but it sounds like this console wasn't gonna please you anyway. But what would you want it to replace in your collection if it did meet your expectations? What is your ideal Nintendo Console?

Very simply...Nintendo to produce a standard high power console, reasonable price and get those supposed intelligent Nintendo software designers to come up with some original games and original characters and not recycle the same games generation after generation after generation, Zelda BOTW doesnt look that great, it looks like a late PS2 game. Whatever happened to that high end Zelda game that was teased on the original WiiU launch video? How can anyone trust Nintendo when they lied about that? That Zelda looked amazing, but it was vapourware.

 

[Yoshi178]

come up with some original games and original characters and not recycle the same games generation after generation after generation.

Splatoon and ARMS aren't new enough IP's for you?

 

[totheendofsin]

Very simply...Nintendo to produce a standard high power console

I'd bet money if they did that people like you would be saying "Why should I get this when I already have a ps4/xbone/pc?" so that's a no win situation for them

get those supposed intelligent Nintendo software designers to come up with some original games and original characters and not recycle the same games generation after generation after generation

ok, here's the statement that got me to comment here because this is a criticism I see all the time thrown at nintendo, you know who I never see it thrown at, Blizzard, do you know what Blizzard's last fully original ip was before Overwatch was? (as in not a sequel, spin off, or crossover title) Starcraft. Granted Blizzard isn't a console manufacturer but still, 18 years before they came up with something new. Meanwhile Nintendo puts out at least 1 major new IP every console generation in addition to a ton of smaller IP on the eshop, the idea that nintendo just recycles the same characters over and over again is a lie

Zelda BOTW doesnt look that great, it looks like a late PS2 game. Whatever happened to that high end Zelda game that was teased on the original WiiU launch video? How can anyone trust Nintendo when they lied about that? That Zelda looked amazing, but it was vapourware.

if you think it looks like a PS2 game than I honestly don't know what to tell you

 

[Yoshi178]

Very simply...Nintendo to produce a standard high power console

I'd bet money if they did that people like you would be saying "Why should I get this when I already have a ps4/xbone/pc?" so that's a no win situation for them

get those supposed intelligent Nintendo software designers to come up with some original games and original characters and not recycle the same games generation after generation after generation

ok, here's the statement that got me to comment here because this is a criticism I see all the time thrown at nintendo, you know who I never see it thrown at, Blizzard, do you know what Blizzard's last fully original ip was before Overwatch was? (as in not a sequel, spin off, or crossover title) Starcraft. Granted Blizzard isn't a console manufacturer but still, 18 years before they came up with something new. Meanwhile Nintendo puts out at least 1 major new IP every console generation in addition to a ton of smaller IP on the eshop, the idea that nintendo just recycles the same characters over and over again is a lie

Zelda BOTW doesnt look that great, it looks like a late PS2 game. Whatever happened to that high end Zelda game that was teased on the original WiiU launch video? How can anyone trust Nintendo when they lied about that? That Zelda looked amazing, but it was vapourware.

if you think it looks like a PS2 game than I honestly don't know what to tell you

you.

i like you.

 

[WeepingAngels]

No, because I didn't buy a Wii U. And the pro controller was $60 when it first came out with very few games that supported it. While the traditional controls are on the tablet it's still unwieldy for virtually no reason other than to accommodate the gimmicky second screen no third parties wanted to deal with.

Uh, you didn't buy a Wii U. I do hope that you put many hours into playing someone else's Wii U using the Gamepad before you tell me how uncomfortable it is.

I didn't need hours trying it before I decided I didn't like it. I also didn't need hours playing it to listen to customers that bought it complain about it. The Wii U was drastically underpowered and had a wonky controller. Which lead to no support. Which lead to no one buying it. The Switch is only slightly underpowered and has normal controls when using the comfort grip.

Whatever you say. I think I'll just go play my Wii U and think of how uncomfortable the Gamepad should be because irish286 said so. Maybe if I try hard enough, my hands will start to cramp up like they are 'supposed to' (yet never have before) using the Gamepad.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Zelda BOTW doesnt look that great, it looks like a late PS2 game.

It's just the art style that makes it look bad. I expect it won't take long to adjust to once you are playing it.

Whatever happened to that high end Zelda game that was teased on the original WiiU launch video? How can anyone trust Nintendo when they lied about that? That Zelda looked amazing, but it was vapourware.

Nintendo likes to play around with art styles. I remember the backlash of the art style used in Wind Waker, when people played it though, it easily became one of their favorite Zelda games. Nintendo had teased a more realistic art style prior to Wind Waker too and it just a tech demo. They did make Twilight Princess with that more realistic art style. It looked good but do all Zelda games need to look realistic? Do all games need to look like real life?