Report: Nintendo Switch Isn't as Powerful as a PS4

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

games like Okami, Zelda, Journey and Overwatch are all capable of running on the Switch.

Right there you are making claims of what games can run on the Switch. I require proof that you know what games can run on the Switch.

Re-read my post, I said "seem to".

Emulation not only requires that the platform meet the expected requirements of the game, but exceed them as it also has to run the emulation software at the same time.

And I did answer the question.

People love low res games, because they are the kinds they grew up with; Nostalgia.

Now do me the courtesy of answering mine.

 

[gorfias]

Those consoles failed for other reasons, N64 would've done better if it had used CDs instead of cartridges(which cost 70-80 dollars compared to the 50-60 dollars PS1 and Saturn games cost), the latter format made N64 versions of games inferior to PS1 verisons, as the latter did not have to have it's games severely compressed and could feature voice-acting(which took Nintendo ages to learn how to do on the N64), the Gamecube's bizarre mini-disc format(which like the N64 catridges had it's limitations in regards to voice-acting, which was noticeable on the GC version of Def Jam Fight for New York) and lack of ability to play DVDs unlike the Xbox and PS2 is what set it back(you'd think Nintendo would've learned from Sega's failed GD-ROM format).

N64 Absolutely about the carts. I think they held 1/10th the data the CDRoms (which, I think for PS1 could play music as well)and cost more. But it had "3d" images that popped at the time compared to what the PS1 could do. The mini disc was a bad idea and that the PS2, with no additional purchases, could play DVDs (a cheap player by itself cost about $200 at the time) gave people reason to get that system. But the cube would have lost that gen even though it was the more powerful system. Most people get one console. PS2 was BC with PS1 and had been out for a year before the cube, so that people had already bought the thing (hence MS rush to get out the 360) and had a library of games while the Cube had Luigi's Mansion. So Nintendo realized it didn't need to be #1 power, they need a hook. And we go the Wii.

Wii U didn't offer enough of a hook and failed. Crappy marketing didn't help.

The Switch appears to be doing everything right that the Wii U did wrong. Better hook (real portability) and infinitely better marketing. People can actually understand what it is.

But you still have the problem the Cube ran into: that we've had the PS4 and XB1 for 3 years (Already!) with BC... and will still have better graphics than the Switch. And the hook? Do we really want portability from a 2nd device when we already have our smart phones?

It is going to be a challenge but count me interested.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

I don't have the time nor patience

If I can statistically prove something, which I have, then it cannot be factually wrong. And if you are too lazy to do your own research, then this debate is over, and you have lost.

BTW; Skyrim is yet to be a formally acknowledged title, by either Nintendo or Bethesda.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

You've literally not presented a single statistic in this entire argument. You haven't even tried, because you're aware that you're factually wrong. And I've no need for research?

Perhaps you forgot the research I presented where almost 100,000 people thought that graphics were an important part of games?

You on the other hand have made several statements, none of which you have even remotely tried to back up. Stating what games can run on the Switch for example, still waiting on that proof.