Nvidia sheild console ?150 Nintendo Switch ?280???

[Las7]

Lol really? your comparing a crappy looking game like zelda that could run on a PS3 without breaking a sweat to bloodbourne?? Methinks there is a slight graphics advantage in favour of the ps4 there my friend!

I assure you DS on a Switch would sell far more than Bloodborne did on the PS4, local multiplayer on the go... yes please... graphics will play second fiddle to fun as per usual. Also the rumble functionality might actually help with immersion and that's one thing people overlook regarding the control methods.

Anyone buying Nintendo consoles is buying it mainly to play Nintendo games. Zelda won't be a on a shield tablet, neither will Splatoon 2, MK8, Super Mario or Pokemon. Owning a Nintendo console is a tax for enjoying their games it's either worth it to you or it isn't. Difference is that this is also a high end tablet that could play ports of things like MGS5, DS, GTA5, Minecraft while adding handheld and local multiplayer to them.

 

[Cold Shiny]

I guess you could enjoy the mobile version of Zelda BOTW on your $150 shield and because it's mobile it should be no more than $5. What are Nintendo thinking not making a tablet without controlers that simply works with touch. Zelda: Touch of the Wild coming to an Apple device for $5 with micro-transactions.

When a console being released in 2017 can't even run a game that looks like a late ps2 game at a stable frame rate we have issues here.

You do realize how much fps is in exclusive Sony SP games like the Order and Bloodborne... it isn't 60fps thats for sure and they were no where near stable at launch.

Lol really? your comparing a crappy looking game like zelda that could run on a PS3 without breaking a sweat to bloodbourne?? Methinks there is a slight graphics advantage in favour of the ps4 there my friend!

Fonejackerjon, my man.

The Nintendo Switch is not marketed towards you. Nintendo is not aiming at you. The Switch is aimed at people who don't necessarily play games for insano bonkers graphical fidelity. Its ok that you like that stuff, but Nintendo doesn't have it, and honestly, they don't need it.

 

[Cold Shiny]

As I've said before, the average consumer doesn't care about specs, many probably don't even know what "specs" are. They just see that the console will have Nintendo games, so they buy it.

This eternal worship of GRAFAX is seriously unhealthy for gaming. Its a GAME, and you are supposed to WIN. That's it. The fact that Nintendo is going for 60 FPS on all first party titles is awesome, because FPS is always more important than GRAFAX.

They might not care about specs, but they'll care if the switch is incapable if running any game from this era and is therefore not going to have any multi platform games. You know, like the wii U.

All multi platform games sold like crap on the Wii U. Mass Effect, Assassin's Creed, Batman, Black Ops, they all sold terribly. People buy Nintendo Consoles for the Nintendo games. If all a consumer cares about is third party games, the Xbox One is right there for them.

One a side note, I'll start caring about third party titles when they stop universally sucking.

I'm sorry but what exactly makes Nintendo games so great? i have owned GC/SNES/WII/U Nintendo's exclusives are just ok they are not some kind of magical amazing experience, I just dont get it. Tell me what makes their games so great? and if they dicth the third parties like you say which is fine, why do they never come up with any original games and just recycle the same shit year after year after year?

Dude, you are not REQUIRED to like Nintendo games. There's just a lot of people who do, myself included. I know this is gonna BLOW everyone's minds, but people can like different kinds of video games.

 

[totheendofsin]

Dude, this is your second thread shitting on the Switch. It's clearly not for you, that's fine.

I'm sorry but what exactly makes Nintendo games so great? i have owned GC/SNES/WII/U Nintendo's exclusives are just ok they are not some kind of magical amazing experience, I just dont get it. Tell me what makes their games so great? and if they dicth the third parties like you say which is fine, why do they never come up with any original games and just recycle the same shit year after year after year?

They are generally well polished experiences, certainly more polished and well put together than most AAA games these days. Not to mention they made games alot of people enjoyed as children, so nostalgia is a big factor. It sounds like their games just aren't for you, that's fine

also as I pointed out in your other thread they do make original games, every console generation generally ends up with at least 1 major new ip (Splatoon being the most recent example) and they've also been releasing several smaller ip on the eshop like Boxboy

 

[DoPo]

Dude, this is your second thread shitting on the Switch.

Actually the third this month it's the fourth overall:
One [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.943836-Why-the-Nintendo-Switch-will-Fail-and-fail-hard]
Two [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.945858-Who-is-the-Nintendo-switch-marketed-for]
Three [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.946027-Nintendo-Switch-DOA]

 

[shrekfan246]

When a console being released in 2017 can't even run a game that looks like a late ps2 game at a stable frame rate we have issues here.

You should go play a late PS2 era game, the nostalgia goggles are pretty thick.

Like, I play a lot of retro games, and anything purporting to be "realistic" generally makes my eyes bleed these days. My memory of them is distinctly better.

Yeahhhh. Like, I got no beef with the PS2, I still think games like Final Fantasy XII and Okami are utterly beautiful even today, but it makes me laugh whenever people make that comparison these days. Especially since, as anyone who regularly watches Jim Sterling could attest, there are games that actually look like PS2 games coming out on Steam every day.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

As I've said before, the average consumer doesn't care about specs, many probably don't even know what "specs" are. They just see that the console will have Nintendo games, so they buy it.

This eternal worship of GRAFAX is seriously unhealthy for gaming. Its a GAME, and you are supposed to WIN. That's it. The fact that Nintendo is going for 60 FPS on all first party titles is awesome, because FPS is always more important than GRAFAX.

Is there actually confirmation that Nintendo's first part titles are going to be running at 60fps? When I watched nintendo's presentation and they were showing off Breath of the Wild it definitely did not look like it was running at 60, but I can't be sure whether that's the game, or the video, or the stream.

Totalbiscuit mentions it in this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCrjI3O0fWY

Now obviously, the trailers shown up till now have been in 30 FPS. However, it has been made clear that the trailers shown were running using the Wii U, not the Switch.

Nintendo confirmed that Breath of the Wild on the switch will run at 30fps at 900p docked. So even docked they couldn't hit 1080p much less 60fps.

 

[Fonejackerjon]

Dude, this is your second thread shitting on the Switch.

Actually the third this month it's the fourth overall:
One [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.943836-Why-the-Nintendo-Switch-will-Fail-and-fail-hard]
Two [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.945858-Who-is-the-Nintendo-switch-marketed-for]
Three [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.946027-Nintendo-Switch-DOA]

Well its deserved! Honeslty the presentation was an absolute shower.

 

[Rangaman]

Dude, this is your second thread shitting on the Switch.

Actually the third this month it's the fourth overall:
One [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.943836-Why-the-Nintendo-Switch-will-Fail-and-fail-hard]
Two [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.945858-Who-is-the-Nintendo-switch-marketed-for]
Three [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.946027-Nintendo-Switch-DOA]

Well its deserved! Honeslty the presentation was an absolute shower.

Yeah that's great and all, but two of those were posted before the Switch presentation. One was posted back in October, on the day the sodding thing got a reveal trailer. I don't mean to sound like a certain other forum member (who shall not be named) but I think that perhaps you should calm the hell down and have a look at MaybeThisShitJustIsntForYou.txt

 

[WeepingAngels]

So...the switch is basically an Nvidia shield console which originally sold for ?150 with a controller. It's less powerful than that as its downclocked.

So we are paying an extra ?130 for consoles for a crappy 720p screen! My 3 year old Galaxy note 4 is 1440p

Do Nintendo realise that by the time this is released there will be smartphones MORE powerful than its hardware. Let that sink in for a bit....Smartphones will be more powerful than a brand new console by a country mile. The Samsung S.8 will kill it in terms of power.

Seriously why Nintendo why?

32GB 6s Plus is $649. Let me know when it gets down to $300.

 

[WeepingAngels]

As I've said before, the average consumer doesn't care about specs, many probably don't even know what "specs" are. They just see that the console will have Nintendo games, so they buy it.

This eternal worship of GRAFAX is seriously unhealthy for gaming. Its a GAME, and you are supposed to WIN. That's it. The fact that Nintendo is going for 60 FPS on all first party titles is awesome, because FPS is always more important than GRAFAX.

The average consumer is stupid. People should care about graphics and performance, it's important, whether it's about the technical side or the art side. I also don't see how it's bad for gaming, games that aren't know for their graphics still get praised all the time and thanks to people caring about graphics, developers push themselves alot more these days.

That's just my opinion anyway.

Development costs are through the roof and they can't stay on this course. Needing to sell several million copies just to make a profit is bad for gaming as it limits what types of games companies are willing to gamble with and that's for companies who can afford to make a game at all. More and more will go bankrupt because 'graphics are so important'.

Really, how long will we be on this destructive course until people realize it's a path to bankruptcy?

Edit: I should clarify that if Sony & Microsoft want to continue to chase the powerhouse PC's then more power to them but it is beneficial if atleast one console maker chooses not to. I think the Switch is overpriced for it's hardware too but I don't want stronger hardware, I want a lower price.

 

[votemarvel]

32GB 6s Plus is $649. Let me know when it gets down to $300.

My Galaxy S7 cost ?330. That's ?30 more than the Switch and in fairness I suspect the Switch has an edge when it comes to specs.

But here's the thing. Why would I take the Switch out and about with me when I have my S7? Sure it only has a 5.1 inch screen but it's one that is 1440p, I carry it with me anyway and it is capable of playing a good selection of modern titles, and a huge selection of retro games.

I can even buy a bluetooth controller for it to clip into should I want physical controls, if that gets lost or damaged it's a fraction of the price to replace over the cost of a new JoyCon.

Graphics don't make a good game you're right, though I would argue that they certainly help, so given that why would I buy a Switch over continuing to game on the move with my phone?

 

[Yoshi178]

Graphics don't make a good game you're right, though I would argue that they certainly help

not really. there's a ton of 8-bit and 32 bit games i'd much rather play over 4K shit that gets produced now.

 

[baddude1337]

I suppose it's lack of power is pretty surprising, but then again it IS a portable system.

That being said, considering a Shield K1 Tablet is about ?200 with the controller, has a HDMI out for TV, game stream capability (although the selection is generally pretty lacklustre) and Android, meaning plenty of emulators/fan & official ports of PC/console games, the price is certainly a bit iffy. Plus being Android means its much more than a gaming focused device. I can't see many people browsing on the internet or watching Youtube/Netflix on the switch, for example.

I would be more interested if I didn't already have a K1, which the Switch seems to be a Nintendo focused successor to, meaning far less closed in terms of game choice and general use.

 

[WeepingAngels]

32GB 6s Plus is $649. Let me know when it gets down to $300.

My Galaxy S7 cost ?330. That's ?30 more than the Switch and in fairness I suspect the Switch has an edge when it comes to specs.

But here's the thing. Why would I take the Switch out and about with me when I have my S7? Sure it only has a 5.1 inch screen but it's one that is 1440p, I carry it with me anyway and it is capable of playing a good selection of modern titles, and a huge selection of retro games.

I can even buy a bluetooth controller for it to clip into should I want physical controls, if that gets lost or damaged it's a fraction of the price to replace over the cost of a new JoyCon.

Graphics don't make a good game you're right, though I would argue that they certainly help, so given that why would I buy a Switch over continuing to game on the move with my phone?

The games. If you want to play a Zelda game or a Mario game (legit) on the go, you will have to choose one of Nintendo's handhelds. I prefer not to carry a Vita around but if I want to play Final Fantasy X on the go, I will.

 

[Fonejackerjon]

I guess you could enjoy the mobile version of Zelda BOTW on your $150 shield and because it's mobile it should be no more than $5. What are Nintendo thinking not making a tablet without controlers that simply works with touch. Zelda: Touch of the Wild coming to an Apple device for $5 with micro-transactions.

When a console being released in 2017 can't even run a game that looks like a late ps2 game at a stable frame rate we have issues here.

You do realize how much fps is in exclusive Sony SP games like the Order and Bloodborne... it isn't 60fps thats for sure and they were no where near stable at launch.

Lol really? your comparing a crappy looking game like zelda that could run on a PS3 without breaking a sweat to bloodbourne?? Methinks there is a slight graphics advantage in favour of the ps4 there my friend!

Fonejackerjon, my man.

The Nintendo Switch is not marketed towards you. Nintendo is not aiming at you. The Switch is aimed at people who don't necessarily play games for insano bonkers graphical fidelity. Its ok that you like that stuff, but Nintendo doesn't have it, and honestly, they don't need it.

Just hardcore nintendo fans then. What makes this different from the wiiu?

 

[Fonejackerjon]

32GB 6s Plus is $649. Let me know when it gets down to $300.

My Galaxy S7 cost ?330. That's ?30 more than the Switch and in fairness I suspect the Switch has an edge when it comes to specs.

But here's the thing. Why would I take the Switch out and about with me when I have my S7? Sure it only has a 5.1 inch screen but it's one that is 1440p, I carry it with me anyway and it is capable of playing a good selection of modern titles, and a huge selection of retro games.

I can even buy a bluetooth controller for it to clip into should I want physical controls, if that gets lost or damaged it's a fraction of the price to replace over the cost of a new JoyCon.

Graphics don't make a good game you're right, though I would argue that they certainly help, so given that why would I buy a Switch over continuing to game on the move with my phone?

The games. If you want to play a Zelda game or a Mario game (legit) on the go, you will have to choose one of Nintendo's handhelds. I prefer not to carry a Vita around but if I want to play Final Fantasy X on the go, I will.

Doesn't that prove that your being forced to do something you don't want too,? having to buy a crappy system just to get your zelda or mario fix? Nintendo should go software only, but of course they won't because that's too consumer friendly and that has never ever been Nintendo M.O. they seem obsessed with screwing people over and the hardcore fans just say 'please sir can I have some more!' Lapping up every crumb of a substandard port they spew out. Ie bomberman for $50, when it should be am arcade $10 game. Honestly the blindness of some people is amazing

 

[Las7]

You do realize that Nintendo will sell more than 15 million Switch devices in Japan alone?

This is replacing 3DS in Japan by early 2018 and that's what matters over there - not specs. There is like 3.5 mil Wii U sold in Japan and 4 mil PS4s, compare that to 22 mil 3DS and 7 mil Vitas. As soon as Switch gets Splatoon2, Minecraft, DQ, MH and Pokemon Stars nothing else will matter.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Doesn't that prove that your being forced to do something you don't want too,? having to buy a crappy system just to get your zelda or mario fix? Nintendo should go software only, but of course they won't because that's too consumer friendly and that has never ever been Nintendo M.O. they seem obsessed with screwing people over and the hardcore fans just say 'please sir can I have some more!' Lapping up every crumb of a substandard port they spew out. Ie bomberman for $50, when it should be am arcade $10 game. Honestly the blindness of some people is amazing

Man, you made two topics about the same thing because one console has a design philosophy you don't like.

You don't get to rag on anyone about "blindness".

EDIT: Timeline. Didn't realize the third topic got necro'd

 

[WeepingAngels]

32GB 6s Plus is $649. Let me know when it gets down to $300.

My Galaxy S7 cost ?330. That's ?30 more than the Switch and in fairness I suspect the Switch has an edge when it comes to specs.

But here's the thing. Why would I take the Switch out and about with me when I have my S7? Sure it only has a 5.1 inch screen but it's one that is 1440p, I carry it with me anyway and it is capable of playing a good selection of modern titles, and a huge selection of retro games.

I can even buy a bluetooth controller for it to clip into should I want physical controls, if that gets lost or damaged it's a fraction of the price to replace over the cost of a new JoyCon.

Graphics don't make a good game you're right, though I would argue that they certainly help, so given that why would I buy a Switch over continuing to game on the move with my phone?

The games. If you want to play a Zelda game or a Mario game (legit) on the go, you will have to choose one of Nintendo's handhelds. I prefer not to carry a Vita around but if I want to play Final Fantasy X on the go, I will.

Doesn't that prove that your being forced to do something you don't want too,? having to buy a crappy system just to get your zelda or mario fix? Nintendo should go software only, but of course they won't because that's too consumer friendly and that has never ever been Nintendo M.O. they seem obsessed with screwing people over and the hardcore fans just say 'please sir can I have some more!' Lapping up every crumb of a substandard port they spew out. Ie bomberman for $50, when it should be am arcade $10 game. Honestly the blindness of some people is amazing

If I had to play Mario or Zelda on the Vita, that would be something I don't want to do. I absolutely love the DS/3DS. When you get right down to it though, having to buy anything to play a specific game fits your example. No one should be making exclusives, is that your point?