@nintendoboy16: I think people really don't give the Wii enough credit. The fact that it's also a fully fledged GameCube, controller support and all, makes it a really great little machine IMO. Don't let the shovelware blind you, I say
Nintendo did take out GC compatibility with later Wii revisions.
@emgesp: Ok? There were shitty gimped mini versions of almost every console made. The Wii actually had a good library, plus it was a GameCube on the side. Hence my statement. I think people were so fixated on the shovelware aimed at 5yos with awful waggle controls that its legit good experiences and features just got forgotten about. All the people in love with the GC... they should love the Wii. Because it's like a turbo, way more feature rich GC with new games and other interface options as a bonus.
Pointing to that weird end of life revision doesn't really change that. The late model ps3s sucked balls too and lost most of the wizbangs that made the og special. How about the multiple worthless revisions of the 360
@emgesp: So did MK2 on SNES. Examples of blood and graphical violence weren't totally uncommon and their censorship certainty gentled over the course of the N64.
One thing that would definitely provide an issue in a modern context is religious references and historical references. Nazis were a big no no. Wolfenstein II is coming to the Switch, and you will be fighting Nazis. Not
Source
Now think of what modern Nintendo looks like. Hell, Nazis, extreme gore and violence and then Manhunt 2. I mean it was Adult Only. A game banned in countries such as Australia... That's a huge stretch from some pixelated red blood in DOOM 64.
Of course, we can't necessarily blame Yamauchi as the man behind this. His presidency isn't exactly responsible completely. Nintendo have however been labeled a company too stuck in tradition (even by their own employees). That is something that Yamauchi's Nintendo employed to a dime. The modern Nintendo, and I mean as modern as two years ago, feels like it is trying to be a more youthful, approachable and adaptive company. Iwata definitely lay the brick work for this and Kimishima seems to be continuing this.
Also look at the GameCube version of BloodRayne for an earlier example. A game where you not only have this vampire chick (one in my avi) drink and hack the blood out of Nazis and demons, you can also "John Woo" the hell out them, and what's more is that the GameCube version has Nazi symbolism uncensored (at least in the US and UK versions), where as the PC version across the globe censors them.
@emgesp: Ok? There were shitty gimped mini versions of almost every console made. The Wii actually had a good library, plus it was a GameCube on the side. Hence my statement. I think people were so fixated on the shovelware aimed at 5yos with awful waggle controls that its legit good experiences and features just got forgotten about. All the people in love with the GC... they should love the Wii. Because it's like a turbo, way more feature rich GC with new games and other interface options as a bonus.
Pointing to that weird end of life revision doesn't really change that. The late model ps3s sucked balls too and lost most of the wizbangs that made the og special. How about the multiple worthless revisions of the 360
The only saving grace for the Wii is the fact early models can play GC games, otherwise it was a pretty lackluster console. Yes, it had a few solid titles, but its easily one of the worst Nintendo home consoles overall. Not Virtual Boy level bad, but still pretty disappointing.
@emgesp: Glad you enjoyed the older consoles. Guess we have very different gaming pleasures since there's a lot of Switch games I enjoy. I am surprised you're not interested in Zelda: BOTW or Mario Odyssey. Metroid Prime 4 or Yoshi. I'm curious what sort of games you are missing that Nintendo used to provide, but nothing will sway you now?
Actually asking, not asking smart :)
Its mainly I really like how the older games play, at least when it comes to Nintendo's 1st party titles. Kirby Adventure and Kirby Super Star are just much more appealing to me than Kirby's Yarn. I tried to get into Mario Galaxy, but I love the older Mario games a lot more.
Ohhh, well that's fair enough. not everyone liked the transition from 2D to 3D. I would highly recommend playing Yoshi's Wooly World on Wii U if you get the chance. It's not the most challenging platforming, but appearances aside it's actually a fun platformer. More in line with the older games. I wouldn't say as good, but I think you will enjoy it :) Also Yoshi coming out on Switch would be of interest if the other title interests you ^ ^I've been gaming since the original Nintendo myself
Switch has proven to be just like WiiU, with jokes like Rabbids and Metroid on it. How could you still like Nintendo, after it does stuff like that to it's loyal followers? WiiU was enough for me. I'd not take Switch even if someone paid me to play it.
How can people think nintendo is back when they don't even have a home console on the market?
please look at the switch, it's even packaged like a nintendo hand held. Even at my local best buy the switch is in the displace area where they keep the 3ds. it's not where the xboxes and playstations are kept. want more proof, even the switch demo station is set up as the vita and 3ds demo stations before. with just the device no screen.
face it. switch is a portable console with a tv out dock. not a home console.
if you had and enjoyed the gameboy, ds, 3ds, psp, vita etc.. i suspect to you the switch is dream come true.
if you've never been into hand held consoles like myself, it's a zero interest device. hopefully nintendo get back into the home console market at some point.
I've never seen Nintendo in a state where they don't have a full home console on the market before. It's mainly an overpriced handheld.
@emgesp: Wii had "a few solid titles" huh? I'll name a few of them:
As I'm not an RPG fan you can see why I say a few.
The voice chat and online capabilities and system are horrible... sad. I know that isn't Nintendo's main selling points or what they are known for, but they need to get caught up in those aspects, and then sales would be completely off the charts.
Having to go through your phone and hopping through 48 rings of fire is ridiculous at best.
@koko-goal: What was it about the N64 that made it stand out as better than modern Nintendo?
I sort of feel yes and no. Yamauchi was great. Great as evident by things like NES, SNES and more but we forget he had to be convinced to do Gameboy, that games like DOOM and Binding of Isaac would not be on Switch if it were the Yamauchi era; certainly not in their current form because as great as he was in getting 3rd party titles on Nintendo platforms in that era, the game industry has changed.
We're living in a new world where creative freedom in the independent space isn't suffocated by the restrictiveness of a Yamauchi Nintendo and 3rd party developers are free to create the content they like for the platforms that suit them. I'd argue Yamauchi's philosophy on 3rd party content would prove even worse for modern Nintendo when we consider how his view of Nintendo as a company would disallow any violence, religious themed or suggestive content on Nintendo platforms. Yamauchi was great for Nintendo gaming at a time where gaming needed something like Nintendo. The Atari crash demanded structure of gaming and that was something Yamauchi gave in licence only games that Nintendo themselves would approve of, but 3rd party developers no longer need that. 3rd party developers would respond to such restrictions by saying no and simply publish their games on the many open platforms that are available now.
The gaming world is totally different, and if anything, clinging on to Yamauchi's antiquated philosophies are the very thing that hold Nintendo back. Do you think contemporary 3rd party developers would have any interest in producing their games on Nintendo platforms with the restrictive creative control that Yamauchi employed? I doubt it...
Bloodless DOOM, outright refusal of independently published games and no mature content would be paramount. I doubt cross play would be a thing if Yamauchi had anything to say by it. It's early days but I think Kimishima is going to be a good thing for Nintendo. It's already refreshing to see him employ and put faith into new talent at Nintendo, and give developers the freedom they need to create the projects they want. Let's remember that it's a brand new team doing the new Metroid Prime game. It's fresh blood and something that Yamauchi's Nintendo for the veterans probably wouldn't have greeted with open arms.
Bayonetta would never have been on a Ninendo platform if Yamauchi was still the president. Never. Nintendo's reputation of being a family friendly, old-man company with dated views stems from Yamauchi's legacy. Hence when Platinum were speaking with modern Nintendo about what they could and couldn't do with Bayonetta 2, they were surprised at how much freedom they were given in terms of content. Hell the suggestive Nintendo themed costumes were Nintendo's idea. Yamauchi would have said no to the entire game.
While you make valid points, Yamauchi was a businessman first and foremost and I think that was to Nintendo's strength. If we're to look at what Yamauchi did, we should also look at Iwata. I found this posted on Neogaf a few years back by someone in the industry familiar with Nintendo's managerial history, and it's a pretty damning indictment of Iwata's management. Not many know this about him doing this:
"From 1990-2000. Nintendo of America had production and management autonomy from Japan. NOA basically culminated its own production team, along a few co-designers, and started funding and producing games with developers. NOA had also procured the Ken Griffey and MLBPA license, NHL license, Kobe Bryant and NBA license, PGA license, Disney license, James Bond license, Starcraft license, and Star Wars Episode 1 license. They were producing their own first party games separate from Nintendo of Japan.
That all changed when Iwata transitioned from Global Marketing Chief to President. NOA production was killed, and Nintendo of Japan's SPD Department took over all Western development (Star Fox Adventures, Geist, Eternal Darkness GC). Henry Sterchi, Brian Ullrich, Ken Lobb, Ed Ridgeway, Jeff Hutt, Faran Thomason, and the whole crew left NOA to Microsoft and other developers. Since then, we've seen the Nintendo Western model we have today. Western developers reporting directly to Japanese management, and pretty much making B/C sequels to Nintendo IPs."
While I agree that Yamauchi was strict in the types of games he allowed and inflexible in various aspects and old-fashioned in others, this was compensated for by his recognition of the western market and allowing NOA to operate autonomously from NCL developing their own software and utilizing licenses that held western appeal. When Iwata took over, he effectively eviscerated the entire western division of the company, shutting down all the western studios, and turned NOA into essentially nothing more than a localization and marketing branch for Japan. All those licenses gone. Who can calculate how much damage this move caused to Nintendo's market penetration and demographical appeal across various fronts (considering the west is the biggest market in gaming) throughout the years, but I'd estimate it to be fairly significant, and far more damaging to Nintendo's business than some monopolistic and strong-arm tendencies or censoring could ever be.
Near as I can tell, the only real argument on these boards against the Switch is "it's not powerful enough". Not powerful enough, or not powerful enough to "count" as a "real console". Bunch of elitist pixel counting malarky. Especially given the joke that the "real" consoles are from a horsepower perspective.
The complaints get wrapped up in other bows, like 3rd party support - and yet it hasn't been out long enough to say 3rd party support sucks; and unless you're looking for CoD and other AAAs, frankly all evidence so far is pretty positive in that regard.
GAMES. It's about games dammit. And not every console will appeal to you on that regard - that's why different consoles exist. Because we aren't all cut from the same cloth, and different types of games appeal to different people. People saying the Switch doesn't have enough good games? I'm sorry, but you are really just people who aren't "counting" the many games it has because they aren't to your taste. Same story for all those who discount the PS4's larger exclusive library because it's "weaboo crap". Those are real, tangible gaming options - newsflash, you just don't like them
@MirkoS77: That's very interesting. It would be interesting to see what modern Nintendo would have been liked if Nintendo of America retained a development team. All the same, the reason I love the SNES exists solely because of Japanese developers, and the small selection of N64 games I love too come from Japanese developers, and personally I would take the looser restrictions of 3rd party support over licenses for James Bond and sports games.
If Yamauchi's Nintendo would have blocked something like Binding of Isaac in favor of Golden Eye, well that wouldn't be my cup of tea.
Saying that, Iwata's Nintendo was a bit mad. The handheld departments were great, though. I am feeling (relatively) positive about Kimishima. Here's hoping.
I sort of feel yes and no. Yamauchi was great. Great as evident by things like NES, SNES and more but we forget he had to be convinced to do Gameboy, that games like DOOM and Binding of Isaac would not be on Switch if it were the Yamauchi era; certainly not in their current form because as great as he was in getting 3rd party titles on Nintendo platforms in that era, the game industry has changed.
We're living in a new world where creative freedom in the independent space isn't suffocated by the restrictiveness of a Yamauchi Nintendo and 3rd party developers are free to create the content they like for the platforms that suit them. I'd argue Yamauchi's philosophy on 3rd party content would prove even worse for modern Nintendo when we consider how his view of Nintendo as a company would disallow any violence, religious themed or suggestive content on Nintendo platforms. Yamauchi was great for Nintendo gaming at a time where gaming needed something like Nintendo. The Atari crash demanded structure of gaming and that was something Yamauchi gave in licence only games that Nintendo themselves would approve of, but 3rd party developers no longer need that. 3rd party developers would respond to such restrictions by saying no and simply publish their games on the many open platforms that are available now.
The gaming world is totally different, and if anything, clinging on to Yamauchi's antiquated philosophies are the very thing that hold Nintendo back. Do you think contemporary 3rd party developers would have any interest in producing their games on Nintendo platforms with the restrictive creative control that Yamauchi employed? I doubt it...
Bloodless DOOM, outright refusal of independently published games and no mature content would be paramount. I doubt cross play would be a thing if Yamauchi had anything to say by it. It's early days but I think Kimishima is going to be a good thing for Nintendo. It's already refreshing to see him employ and put faith into new talent at Nintendo, and give developers the freedom they need to create the projects they want. Let's remember that it's a brand new team doing the new Metroid Prime game. It's fresh blood and something that Yamauchi's Nintendo for the veterans probably wouldn't have greeted with open arms.
Bayonetta would never have been on a Ninendo platform if Yamauchi was still the president. Never. Nintendo's reputation of being a family friendly, old-man company with dated views stems from Yamauchi's legacy. Hence when Platinum were speaking with modern Nintendo about what they could and couldn't do with Bayonetta 2, they were surprised at how much freedom they were given in terms of content. Hell the suggestive Nintendo themed costumes were Nintendo's idea. Yamauchi would have said no to the entire game.
While you make valid points, Yamauchi was a businessman first and foremost and I think that was to Nintendo's strength. If we're to look at what Yamauchi did, we should also look at Iwata. I found this posted on Neogaf a few years back by someone in the industry familiar with Nintendo's managerial history, and it's a pretty damning indictment of Iwata's management. Not many know this about him doing this:
"From 1990-2000. Nintendo of America had production and management autonomy from Japan. NOA basically culminated its own production team, along a few co-designers, and started funding and producing games with developers. NOA had also procured the Ken Griffey and MLBPA license, NHL license, Kobe Bryant and NBA license, PGA license, Disney license, James Bond license, Starcraft license, and Star Wars Episode 1 license. They were producing their own first party games separate from Nintendo of Japan.
That all changed when Iwata transitioned from Global Marketing Chief to President. NOA production was killed, and Nintendo of Japan's SPD Department took over all Western development (Star Fox Adventures, Geist, Eternal Darkness GC). Henry Sterchi, Brian Ullrich, Ken Lobb, Ed Ridgeway, Jeff Hutt, Faran Thomason, and the whole crew left NOA to Microsoft and other developers. Since then, we've seen the Nintendo Western model we have today. Western developers reporting directly to Japanese management, and pretty much making B/C sequels to Nintendo IPs."
While I agree that Yamauchi was strict in the types of games he allowed and inflexible in various aspects and old-fashioned in others, this was compensated for by his recognition of the western market and allowing NOA to operate autonomously from NCL developing their own software and utilizing licenses that held western appeal. When Iwata took over, he effectively eviscerated the entire western division of the company, shutting down all the western studios, and turned NOA into essentially nothing more than a localization and marketing branch for Japan. All those licenses gone. Who can calculate how much damage this move caused to Nintendo's market penetration and demographical appeal across various fronts (considering the west is the biggest market in gaming) throughout the years, but I'd estimate it to be fairly significant, and far more damaging to Nintendo's business than some monopolistic and strong-arm tendencies or censoring could ever be.
He unified Nintendo and its fans. Instead of having games that were only big in west or only big in Japan, he focused on games the whole world as one enjoyed. He was right, it changed the whole industry. Yamauchi never realized this cause he wasnt a gamer. Iwata is.
@koko-goal: What era were their glorious days? NES and SNES?
From NES - Gamecube, of course
Really? I'd argue their glory days were with the SNES. That's when they had the best games. Post SNES (N64 and GC) are their decline.
N64 era. You can't say these were glory days when a new entrant Sony, known for the walkman, comes into the market and releases a console and sells over 100 million and the n64 sells around 30 million. Sure they had maro 64 and orcarina. genre defining tittles. n64 even had golden eye and my personal favorite wrestling games like wcw revenge and wave race and diddy kong racing were fun, but it didn't matter they would lose their appeal. n64 showed nintendo's failure or unwillingness to adapt to new technologies. They didn't want to put new technologies in their systems, they wanted to make them cheap where sony was all about that cutting edge tech. Using CDs instead of cartridges. Yeah they had orcarina of time, but did you see ff7? goldeneye is cool, but let me show you metal gear solid. you like top rally gear, have you heard of gran tursismo? nintendo stuck with old tech, and reminiscent of today, the sames games cost more to buy on nintendo's platform.
This was supposed to be nintendo's glory days but a new console sprung up, and new ip's were springing up to that were go head to head with nintendo's staple IPs. Gran Tursismo selling around 10 million around the same as mario 64. Far from being nintendo's glory days, this generation not only showed gamers, but developers too that there is a better option than nintendo out there and this was born out in sales and developer support.
The situation only got worse next in the gamecube generation. nintendo again, failing again to utilize the best medium for games at the time (DVD Disc). the biggest and best games were on playstation 2. metal gear solid 2, gta3, final fantasy, and it didn't take long for previous gamecube exclusives like RE4 to make it over to ps2. plus they continued to pepper them with new IP. jak and daxter, ratchet and clank, sly cooper, god of war etc.
At this point, some of you will say oh i'm making an argument from sales. Sales don't equal quality. but i'm actually not. I'm making the same argument all the switch owners make. "it's about the games". but sales begot games and with ps1 and ps2 it's definately about the games and their game library trounces the competition at the time. and before a single poster list why n64/gamecube was better and list all the games they loved and another poster list why ps1/2 library was better and list all the acclaimed games there, just stop. you're one poster your list doesn't prove anything. lets take a worldwide poll instead, just vote, which system did you buy, PS1/2 or n64/cube? wait we don't have to conduct that poll, we have the historical sales data and the results are in. more people chose ps1 alone than n64/gamecube combined. so much for their glory days. Maybe nintendo were making their best games during this era, but a lot of people were not playing them. And i think nintendo themselves realized this. their audience they made games for have moved on, and instead of trying to make another system something to tempt them and get their gamers back, they left them and went after a new market. and thus was born the wii sports and brain age era.
face it. switch is a portable console with a tv out dock. not a home console.
The reality here is that this is the direction we are going, consoles are antiquated at this point. There is no real reason for them given how many households have PCs and devices that can now game fairly well. Nintendo tried to do what companies need to do, but their not really the company to do it. Nor is it a hardware thing, more of a software.
Even though Nintendo bit it again IMO, so did Sony and MS. This 8th generation thing has been a joke.
@metalboi: not even. my ps4 has optical out, does the switch? no it doesn't. switch doesn't even support dolby 7.1 surround.
That's a massive fail if true imo
nintnendo is stuck in the past
@GameboyTroy: Switch was obviously made as a portable device first and a console 2nd. Yep, a killer handheld for those who love Nintendo's handhelds, but can't really be taken seriously as a home console.
Why? It hooks up to my theater system just like the other consoles I have, it plays games at 1080p and 60fps for most tiles, just like other consoles, has crisp 5.1 lcpm just like the other consoles.
tbh I've enjoyed the Switch (as a home console) much more than I did the first six months of the PS4's life span.
Sure, I'll agree it's a handheld first and foremost, but there's nothing you can say (or anyone else for that matter who doesn't actually own one) to tell me otherwise, because it functions better than I ever imagined as a home console. It's no coincidence that the people who don't have a Switch are the ones saying it's not a very good home console, and that isn't even based on experience.
You can also say it doesn't hook up to a home theater like other consoles, it doesn't play blu rays, it doesn't have netflix or spotify, it doesn't play games at the same graphical settings, it doesn't have 7.1 surround sound, and it doesn't have optical and ethernet ports just like other consoles.
TV out is just a feature for the switch. and nintendo's marketing term hybrid console has people confused a bit. imagine if they released the switch with no TV out, would you still call it a home console? was the psp a home console cus it had a tv out option? no, it's that the switch is 13 years later and it's graphics can hold up better on a tv. but it doesn't compare to a home console experience. i think just because something can display to a tv doesn't make it a home console. it's like marketing the wii u as a portable because of the screen in the controller. "hey i can play wii u games on the toilet" not it's not a portable system, it is actually a home console, but just has a feature that sort of mimics a portable device. switch isn't a home console and feature wise it mimics one.
you don't have to look to hard to see how switch falls short in the home console department. just compare it to hmm i dunno say... ACTUAL HOME CONSOLES? Aside from whats already been mentioned, lets just look at basic home console tenants. ps2 looked better than ps1, ps3 looked better than ps2, ps4 better than ps3. switch does not look better than the wii u. and even if it slightly does, it's not a great because wii u looks about as great as 360 so you're already going back 2 generations. what graphical fidelity should we expect from a home console? well lets look at what home consoles have been delivering since 2013. switch being realsed in 2017 and costing more can't match them but comes in at lower graphical settings. switch cost more, and you need to pay extra for a usb ethernet adapter if you want a wired connection on a home console? i guess apps are a given on a home console now. not netflix on switch. would you agree going back 2 generations it's expectant that a home console should be able to connect to a online service? we'll you'll need additional hardware to connect the switch for online chat and don't forgot the switch already cost more. home consoles comes with pretty nice comfortable game controllers out the box, well you have to pay extra to get a pro controller on switch, oh ya did i mention switch already costed more? If i wanted a great portable system i'd buy a switch. if i want a great home console i'll buy one of those, but i won't pretend the switch is one, or buy the already pricey switch and then accessories on top to add ports and controllers to make it feel like a home console...smh.
and no, i don't need to buy a switch, and unbox it to know what it's feature set is.
face it. switch is a portable console with a tv out dock. not a home console.
The reality here is that this is the direction we are going, consoles are antiquated at this point. There is no real reason for them given how many households have PCs and devices that can now game fairly well. Nintendo tried to do what companies need to do, but their not really the company to do it. Nor is it a hardware thing, more of a software.
Even though Nintendo bit it again IMO, so did Sony and MS. This 8th generation thing has been a joke.
PCs have always been there. But people still bought nintendo systems to play the games not on pc. now a day, sony keeps that alive. even if you have a pc people will still probably want to play that new spider man game, or horizon or last of us, uncharted, got of war, last guardian, gran turismo, shadow of colossus etc..
plus consoles are cheaper, deliver nice graphics, they're smaller, sit right under your tv, play your movies, easy to unplug and take with you if going to a friends or cottage for a few days. ps4 sold great and that flew in the face of analysis predicting end of consoles. ps4 selling better than 360 and ps3. one x has lots of excitment as well. this gen they did a pretty nice job with the interface letting you record your game clips super easy to edit them no need for pc and share to youtube, stream your games twitch and mixter thats where a lot of it is going and they made good efforts to incorporate that stuff in their systems. still don't know a lot of people with pcs hooked up to tvs. devs still mainly focus on console first. games still release first on console and you still have things like games releasing broken on pc. and sony/ms are smarter at trying to keep people in the eco system. flash sales, giving away free games with their online services. and tried things like trophies and gamer score. nintendo tho.... not as confident in their ability, portability is their last stronghold for now.
The low storage I think is really what is most concerning.
Your sig says you own a Vita. How do you feel about its proprietary memory card structure compared to Switch's open mini SD card design, in comparison?
It's a problem too but on Vita, nothing required installation when you went physical. A 8GB card was fine.
PCs have always been there. But people still bought nintendo systems to play the games not on pc. now a day, sony keeps that alive. even if you have a pc people will still probably want to play that new spider man game, or horizon or last of us, uncharted, got of war, last guardian, gran turismo, shadow of colossus etc..
Yah, so its not about being a PC person or console person. The average consumer, does not give a shit. A lot of people seem to think that the hardcore fan base is representative of a product sold, and its not. Its at most, around 30% for something like gaming, 5-10% for a movie or something. Its also not about PCs "always being there" (because they have not). Its about the majority of American households now having a PC, tablet or phone(this is rather new event) and the technology to turn a hardware problem into a software solution. Which is the goal of any tech company.... imagine how much easier and cheaper.... and how much higher the profits are, for Sony, MS, Nintendo to say "We wont spend 100 million on research and develop, then 300 million on manufacturing and instead release this software and you can stream the latest exclusives" This is the direction we are headed anyway, its not debatable. Any person in the tech industry will tell you this, in fact the reason the 8th gen consoles are so crappy and nothing but low grade gaming PCs from 2010, is because they didnt plan on it. They expected the technology to have moved away from dedicated consoles, this is why Sony and MS bought up like every single cloud service they could find. Because again, you already own devices that can take advantage of cloud technology. Think of it as the camera in the phone.
Near as I can tell, the only real argument on these boards against the Switch is "it's not powerful enough". Not powerful enough, or not powerful enough to "count" as a "real console". Bunch of elitist pixel counting malarky. Especially given the joke that the "real" consoles are from a horsepower perspective.
The complaints get wrapped up in other bows, like 3rd party support - and yet it hasn't been out long enough to say 3rd party support sucks; and unless you're looking for CoD and other AAAs, frankly all evidence so far is pretty positive in that regard.
GAMES. It's about games dammit. And not every console will appeal to you on that regard - that's why different consoles exist. Because we aren't all cut from the same cloth, and different types of games appeal to different people. People saying the Switch doesn't have enough good games? I'm sorry, but you are really just people who aren't "counting" the many games it has because they aren't to your taste. Same story for all those who discount the PS4's larger exclusive library because it's "weaboo crap". Those are real, tangible gaming options - newsflash, you just don't like them
Horsepower matters when it comes to getting adequate support, at least when it comes to getting the big third party games. The fact that Doom and Wolfenstein ll are being ported doesn't mean its powerful enough to handle every third party title. We also don't know how the performance will be for those games on the Switch. If they are 30fps then why even bother when everyone else gets to experience them at proper 60fps?
@metalboi: Switch does if you want full content like in NBA2K and Doom even if you bought the game cart. Shame Nintendo got cheap.
I never defended Vita. However the memory issue was better than Switch if you went physical which I general go for when the platform uses cart instead of disc.
@metalboi: Switch does if you want full content like in NBA2K and Doom even if you bought the game cart. Shame Nintendo got cheap.
I never defended Vita. However the memory issue was better than Switch if you went physical which I general go for when the platform uses cart instead of disc.
Switch's cards are not proprietary, they're cheap, and they take only a few seconds to change. Don't really see what the problem is here.
Not cheap at all. A 200GB SD card is like $80. Sure it's cheaper than Vita but then again memory was also a serious issue on it. That's like saying Burger King is healthier than McDonalds.... Not sure why you brought up the Vita at all since memory is a known issue on it.
Xbox One and PS4 can use external HDDs and guess what? 2TB is commonly $45-50. Since Switch is a portable device it won't be able to utilize an external HDD. Not in the portable form anyway.
I'm glad Switch is doing well, but while it's a great side console, it will never be at the level of PS4 or X1 in terms of third party support (RDR2, Cyberpunk 2077, Battlefront 2, DOOM at 60fps, etc).
Not a Nintendo hater, btw. Always loved the company, but haven't been a fan of their hardware decisions since Gamecube.
@metalboi: Not only external HDD are much cheaper, they are available in MUCH larger capacity. Hence why Switch bigger issues include memory storage. This wouldn't be a problem if games didn't required partial installation for some titles. The fact that early year 1 titles doing this does not bold well for the future as games will be bigger.
128GB cards for $40 is expensive as hell.
It's bc of games! (Wii U failed)
Sorry, but when people say "games" they are not only refering to exclusives but overall library. The WiiU had some good exclusives, sure, but lacked on 3rd party support. Thats part of the reason why it failed. So yeah, games (as in overall library) is a legitimate reason why consoles sell. The PS4 has both worlds (good 1st party and 2nd/3rd party support) and that has a major role on why it's winning.
I agree power is (at some minor level at least) quite irrelevant.
@metalboi: Not only external HDD are much cheaper, they are available in MUCH larger capacity. Hence why Switch bigger issues include memory storage. This wouldn't be a problem if games didn't required partial installation for some titles. The fact that early year 1 titles doing this does not bold well for the future as games will be bigger.
Cartridges are getting cheaper as we speak, and it's only a few titles that require the install. Cartridges are much tougher, faster and more convenient than discs ever will be. I'd say the future does not bode well for discs.
It doesn't which is why digital content is rising. HDD are ever growing in capacity so this is a non issue on all platforms outside of the Switch. We now have 20TB HDD and it is quickly getting bigger. SD card aren't growing fast enough and that leaves Switch as a console with a major fault. Not only that, carts are cheaper but it still cost way too much.
LA Noire is $10 more on Switch than any other platform. That is laughable as it will likely look and perform the worst.
@metalboi: Nope. Less than 4x times(or more depending if it is docked or not) the resolution and sub par frame rates equals a sub par port. Portability doesn't mean jack if it doesn't perform. Tons of handheld console title on portable like Ninja Gaiden 2 Sigma, Smash Bros, Mortal Kombat 9 on Vita and those certainly aren't the definitive version.
Hard to even consider Switch portable as it is too big and it only last 2 hours on battery anyway.
Plus, Xbox One and PS4 year 1 number are much higher than Switch. LMAO
@metalboi: Nintendo live in the past. Old IPs keep them alive while the new ones are there as mid tier exclusives. Sony will bring you the new with the old like Horizon and Detroit. PS is the mother load of console exclusives and variety. Don't like Uncharted? They have Persona. Don't like Persona? Horizon, Spider-man Last of Us, GT, God of War, TLG, Until Dawn, Yakuza, etc. Not to mention it gets 99 percent of the 3rd party stuff.
4K is not only the future but the present. I game on 4K daily and only accept less if there is no other way.
You should just make the SWITCH and join us hahaha. Seriously, all consoles are great and fun in their own ways. I own multiple and honestly...unless you're PC gamer, you really shouldn't talk about frame rates and resolution because they win.
played 6 hours of BOTW in 4k, game is meh...
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment