Nintendo Switch....DOA

[Casual Shinji]

It was also marketed poorly. Like, "why would I buy this $300 Wii peripheral" poorly. Having a 3rd party heavy launch lineup where your pledged 3rd parties back out at the last minute didn't help either.

And the Switch is giving me a major case of deja vu. Large sections of the presentation were dedicated to awkward Wii actions you could perform with the joycons. Nintendo still trying to recapture what is lost, instead of making real changes.

And as for that Switch launch line-up... Yeah. I think even the Wii-U had a better one.

If you say so. I felt the Wiimote was pretty sturdy while I have to encase the PS4 controller in some NERF plastic to feel like I'm not going to break the damn thing.

I wasn't refering to the Wiimote, I was refering to the joycon; the slip of plastic that barely covers half of your palm. 50 bucks, please.

 

[Blitsie]

Paid online.

I think I'm done here.

it's ok when Sony and Microsoft do it.

Really? I've seen people be defensive about XLive Gold, but this was back during the 360/PS3 gen where it was supposedly the better service of the two because of it being premium or something like that? I only got into online console gaming this gen so I'm not sure. The response to PS Plus being a big paywall for a lot of online features was quite negative from what I've seen and Gold as well started getting more flak as people started asking "just why?". So its warranted that Ninty is getting crap for also trying their luck here.

But eh, money talks and they're certainly getting it, we otherwise wouldn't have had paywalls if it didn't now would we?

 

[Foolery]

It was also marketed poorly. Like, "why would I buy this $300 Wii peripheral" poorly. Having a 3rd party heavy launch lineup where your pledged 3rd parties back out at the last minute didn't help either.

And the Switch is giving me a major case of deja vu. Large sections of the presentation were dedicated to awkward Wii actions you could perform with the joycons. Nintendo still trying to recapture what is lost, instead of making real changes.

And as for that Switch launch line-up... Yeah. I think even the Wii-U had a better one.

Nah. Wii U had New Super Mario Bros. U and some half-baked ports that you could get on other systems. It's more akin to the Wii, like you said, even launching with a Zelda, that's also on the previous system.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Nah. Wii U had New Super Mario Bros. U and some half-baked ports that you could get on other systems. It's more akin to the Wii, like you said, even launching with a Zelda, that's also on the previous system.

I think some ports would've been justified for the Switch launch. Anything to pad out the dismal line-up they have now. It would've benefited Nintendo if they'd put some of their top Wii-U exclussives on the Switch for launch. Very few people bought the Wii-U anyway, so it's not like the Switch would be in danger of overlapping with it. And by doing so they might've swayed a lot of people who were hesitant on picking up a Wii-U, but still wanted to play Mario 3D World, Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze, and Bayonetta 2, to buy a fresh new Switch. At least it'd have a nice collection of high quality and diverese games to show off on launch along with Breath of the Wild.

 

[WeepingAngels]

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.

Never made that claim. So now not only are you an irrational hater, but a liar as well. Congratulations.

Oh damn, where did that report button go? Ah, there it is....

 

[Foolery]

Nah. Wii U had New Super Mario Bros. U and some half-baked ports that you could get on other systems. It's more akin to the Wii, like you said, even launching with a Zelda, that's also on the previous system.

I think some ports would've been justified for the Switch launch. Anything to pad out the dismal line-up they have now. It would've benefited Nintendo if they'd put some of their top Wii-U exclussives on the Switch for launch. Very few people bought the Wii-U anyway, so it's not like the Switch would be in danger of overlapping with it. And by doing so they might've swayed a lot of people who were hesitant on picking up a Wii-U, but still wanted to play Mario 3D World, Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze, and Bayonetta 2, to buy a fresh new Switch. At least it'd have a nice collection of high quality and diverese games to show off on launch along with Breath of the Wild.

I imagine that'll be done sometime down the road. Switch is already getting Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, I wouldn't be surprised if they repackaged Smash Bros. and Hyrule Warriors fairly soon.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I imagine that'll be done sometime down the road. Switch is already getting Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, I wouldn't be surprised if they repackaged Smash Bros. and Hyrule Warriors fairly soon.

They need that shit now though, at launch. I know Nintendo for some stupid reason likes to sparse out their games, but they need the best their stable has to offer to pull the Switch into the public's eye.

 

[Kameburger]

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.

Standard High power Console, with more original games and new characters? Nintendo hasn't done that in literally 4 (arguably 5) generations. At what point are you just expecting Nintendo to just not be themselves?

I mean for what it's worth even if you look at Zelda, they are producing a system that is meant to power the game at the same specs in a handheld as it does in a full screen, which must be a pretty difficult task. I'm also willing to bet it runs at 60fps on both handheld and TV modes, which is more than you can say for a lot of games on other consoles.

 

[Las7]

Their multiplayer games target 60fps(ARMs, MK8, Splatoon) - Zelda will be 30fps on the Switch and probably below 30fps on the Wii U. I don't see how they get it to run 60fps, unless they have some wizards working some magic in the background.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

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.

You know, as much as people give shit about Nintendo reusing their titles, the other systems aren't always much better. Various games will come out from different people but a lot of them are muddled together and samey. I look at Steam and see lots of similar games too. Its becoming much and much less about coming up with something truly unique and more about what you do with it and the quality.

Honestly the last game I remember being truly different from anything I'd played before was Katamari back on the PS2...

 

[Yoshi178]

Oh no, a $300 console is less powerful than a $800 computer that requires a new graphics card every 4 months. Whatever shall I do?

Well, it's also less powerful than two other home consoles that are the same price, that also have a larger library, and that you can pick up with a bundled game, and where the controllers are cheaper, and where the monthly free games included with a subscription you actually get to keep.

It's not just less graphics, it's when compared to the competition there's little if anything for the Switch to brag about. With free online gaming having been scratched off the list now, too. It's handheld so I suppose it can brag about that for about the 3 hours of battery charge it has.

last time i checked the DS4 and basic Xbox One Controllers didn't have Motion and Gyro Sensors in them, they didn't have HD Rumble, nor did they have have a camera on them like the Joy Con does. the Joy Con is more advanced tech than what the DS4 and standard XBone controller have.

oh and by the way, the Xbox One Elite Controller is still almost double the price of what 2 Joy Con Controllers are. (at least in Australia it is anyway. over here 2 Joycons cost $120 whereas an Xbox One elite controller costs $200 over here)

 

[Bellvedere]

last time i checked the DS4 and basic Xbox One Controllers didn't have Motion and Gyro Sensors in them, they didn't have HD Rumble, nor did they have have a camera on them like the Joy Con does. the Joy Con is more advanced tech than what the DS4 and standard XBone controller have.

oh and by the way, the Xbox One Elite Controller is still almost double the price of what 2 Joy Con Controllers are. (at least in Australia it is anyway. over here 2 Joycons cost $120 whereas an Xbox One elite controller costs $200 over here)

It doesn't matter what tech is in it if people don't value the experience it provides as much as the asking price. If someone would prefer a cheaper controller over say being able to count imaginary ice cubes or play rock paper scissors, then having the extra "tech" is a mistake not a justification. At least as far as that person is concerned.

For all that Nintendo is pushing the ability to play the Switch your own way, they're putting a pretty high cost of entry on any option that isn't alone (worst roof top party ever).

EDIT: Aaaand I goofed up that last sentence. I meant high cost of versatility unless you're playing alone.

 

[votemarvel]

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?

Such is the blind love of Steam among PC gamers that I actually think Valve could get away with it.

Where would I go if Steam did start charging for online play? GoG, Origin, UPlay. Play the Steam games by using customer servers. There are a wealth of options available.

I would like to point out that I do actually have a active Live subscription at this point in time, due to run out in August . I managed to pick up three years worth of Gold for around ?40. Why did I buy it? I had made good friends with many people abroad and wanted to remain in contact with them, at that point in time Live was the only option to do so.

These days I have those friends on Facebook and other chat programs, I even travelled to the States to visit a couple of them. My 360 now sits under the TV in the living room to act as a media extender, a job that it continues to do excellently by the way (far better than the One ever managed).

Anyway I realise that I've neglected to actually comment on the Switch in this thread, so here we go.

I don't think it will be dead on arrival but I think it will swiftly need to decide where it wants to focus, home or mobile. I think developers will quickly reach a point where they can't, or simply won't, put the time and effort in to make sure the games run well when the Switch is undocked.

Will Nintendo allow the third party publishers/developers to make a 'Docked Only' Switch game? That I think will be the point the Switch's future will be decided.

 

[TheMajesticSpaceDuck]

For some people the pros outweigh the cons. For some the Switch is providing something they want. For others not so much. How is this a heated argument? If you want one buy do if you don't don't.

 

[Casual Shinji]

last time i checked the DS4 and basic Xbox One Controllers didn't have Motion and Gyro Sensors in them, they didn't have HD Rumble, nor did they have have a camera on them like the Joy Con does. the Joy Con is more advanced tech than what the DS4 and standard XBone controller have.

Then they'd better have an announcer in every store that sells them to tell the average consumer how totally advanced and worth the price these things really are.

It doesn't matter how advanced the tech inside these things are, it's ridiculous to ask 80 bucks for something that just controls a simple videogame. And yes, both the regular PS4 and Xbox One controllers are also pushing it, but Nintendo is now going even beyond that with amounts to two itsy bitsy remotes.

oh and by the way, the Xbox One Elite Controller is still almost double the price of what 2 Joy Con Controllers are. (at least in Australia it is anyway. over here 2 Joycons cost $120 whereas an Xbox One elite controller costs $200 over here)

That's probably why it's called 'Elite' and not 'regular'.

 

[Yoshi178]

That's probably why it's called 'Elite' and not 'regular'.

it's ridiculous to ask 200 bucks for something that just controls a simple videogame.

 

[Casual Shinji]

That's probably why it's called 'Elite' and not 'regular'.

it's ridiculous to ask 200 bucks for something that just controls a simple videogame.

Yes it is, and some people might want to, but if they don't they have the choice to get the regular, cheaper version. Again, it's called 'Elite' for a reason, as in, 'more fancy and expensive than the regular controller'.

I don't know why you're trying to compare the Elite controller to the joycons, since one is the fancy option and one is the default.

 

[CaitSeith]

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?

Such is the blind love of Steam among PC gamers that I actually think Valve could get away with it.

Remember, they didn't get away with paid mods.

 

[votemarvel]

Remember, they didn't get away with paid mods.

That's a fair point.

 

[Mahorfeus]

The Switch is confirmed to come with no software whatsoever, right? I mean, even the Wii came with Wii Sports, which was basically virtual crack to everyone that played it. Maybe it's cost prohibitive, but you'd think that they'd do something similar. I mean, hell, 1-2-Switch would be ideal for that. It doesn't strike me as a game many people would be willing to shell out 50 USD for anyway.

Granted, my future vision is already telling me that I'm going to end up with one of these. I still don't understand why aren't waiting until the holiday season to release it.