@induktio1984: There are 60 different reviews of it on Metacritic, all positive, with a 98 Metascore. Is that enough for you? Or do you prefer the belief that *all* gaming press is, somehow, involved in a Nintendo-favoring conspiracy?
I remember the fifth generation of consoles. The industry was largely making the transition from 2D games to 3D ones. It was a world of wonder and new possibilities. It was a world of faulty games and horrible mechanics, because nobody fully understood *how* to make 3D games play well. The classic and acclaimed Final Fantasy VII, for example, was filled with game design problems that were detrimental to the experience. We didn't care, because, as I said, it was a new world filled with wonder and new possibilities.
Now we have VR and the same thing is happening. Nobody, no developer, no game designer, no player, knows how to really use this new technology, how to make refined gameplay, how to just make things work. Everything is experimental, is a test, is pushing beyond what we know of game design. And that's where this game is. Its *expected* to be faulty, we should know that. What we should ask about it is: is the new experience worth? I do believe so. There's nothing like it, as an experience, outside VR. Early adopters should know the caveats that comes with "early adopting".
@d_: You could be right if we were talking about a "home console" here, most people wouldn't really care about its size. But the Switch is a handheld console first, and when talking about portable and handheld devices, size does matter.
@geotherma: I didn't see they comparing it to the Ouya also. Or the Vita. So what's the point? They compared it to the most relevant consoles and then threw some random stuff in just for fun. The Shield Tablet didn't make the cut.
@n7vakarian: Because "the tablet" is the whole switch - it IS a handheld console. The base is just a charging dock and an easy to use and convenient plug for your TV, nothing more.
snxx's comments