- 2,998
- England
- Peasantslayer
Buying a decent tablet and a PS4 would make more sense to me, the Switch needs a really well done Pokémon RPG to take off imo.
Reggie says it won't!Well, I think I've decided.
I need one of these in my life.
I'm probably not going to preorder (mainly due to Amazon completely running out of preorder stock), but I'll try to pick one up for my birthday, in June, along with MK8 Deluxe.
Hopefully, Nintendo have learned from their mistakes and don't have a stock situation similar to the NES Mini.
Yeah because I want to buy 2 expensive devices instead of just 1 that can't even play the Switch exclusives that I want.Buying a decent tablet and a PS4 would make more sense to me, the Switch needs a really well done Pokémon RPG to take off imo.
I'm not saying the Switch is gonna do remarkably well, but it will definitely find success with more demographics than just "Ninty faithful". Portability is a feature, not a gimmick... and yes, despite the Vita being a flop, there are people who care about having a powerful portable system.
Okay, can you find me the same product that does what the Switch does cheaper from a hardware perspective? All functionality included, no exceptions.
We'll be waiting.
Remember the switch does Handheld and console at the same time, as a console it lacks but you can take it a play it anywhere, on the train, on the plane, wherever you're waiting. I'd take a console you can take anywhere over a more powerful console anyday.
Remember not all games are confirmed and with signs of Skyrim, Sonic and even FIFA heading to the Switch it already has far better support than the Wii U.
It's less gimmicky as you'd think, at its core its just a handheld-console hybrid.
Portability does not exclude you from plugging it into a power source. For example, the vast majority of trains and some buses now have plug sockets, charging whilst you work so it is ready for your commute home, or sitting in your holiday home with it plugged in whilst you game. All perfect examples of how it becomes a very worthwhile feature not a gimmick.Not really with realistically a little bit over 2 hours of juice running top software. Id hardly call that much of a feature, but a gimmick sure.
A portable product that features but about 2 hours of use, id struggle.
They said battery life ranges from 2.5 Hours and 8 Hours depending on game. Zelda and Mario Kart likely won't have the same battery life.Its portability is weak, Playing Zelda or Kart will get you a bit over two hours.
I never got the logic on focusing a console for its power. If its power you want from a console, play PC, not even PS4 and Xbox ONE won't be able to catch up to the "master race". and people don't buy consoles based on power anyway, it's all about marketing. PS4 is the first console to win the "console gen war" that also has the most power but that doesn't include handhelds as if you do, 3DS beats the PS4 and is the weakest of the 5.Its pretty much what it is, a weak console with a portability gimmick. I get nintys thinking, with consoles they are near dead but if they can manage a decent number of their former handhelds owner to buy in they have potential for sales that they lack with a pure console.
Issue is its a jack of two main trades nothing close to a master of either.
Portability does not exclude you from plugging it into a power source. For example, the vast majority of trains and some buses now have plug sockets, charging whilst you work so it is ready for your commute home, or sitting in your holiday home with it plugged in whilst you game. All perfect examples of how it becomes a very worthwhile feature not a gimmick.
They said battery life ranges from 2.5 Hours and 8 Hours depending on game. Zelda and Mario Kart likely won't have the same battery life.
I never got the logic on focusing a console for its power. If its power you want from a console, play PC, not even PS4 and Xbox ONE won't be able to catch up to the "master race". and people don't buy consoles based on power anyway, it's all about marketing. PS4 is the first console to win the "console gen war" that also has the most power but that doesn't include handhelds as if you do, 3DS beats the PS4 and is the weakest of the 5.
Compared to the 3DS and Vita, I think the Switch does far better in the handheld department.
True portability means at the very least decent performance on a single charge, but i commend you a good spin for a excuse for its pathetic performance.
Well in north america they don't. In Toronto i could't even get on a bus then hop on the subway and go from one end to another with out the Switch dying on me if i played a big game. That is pathetic for a product that claims to be a "portable"
Honestly I find it impressive that it can do it for as long as the original 3DS battery life.So, wait, you're expecting a semi-portable console to last like 8 hours while playing a AAA game?
Rrrrrright, ok.
Wow. This came out of left-field.
Between this and HD Rumble, the price is starting to make a bit more sense.
Honestly I find it impressive that it can do it for as long as the original 3DS battery life.
So, wait, you're expecting a semi-portable console to last like 8 hours while playing a AAA game?
Rrrrrright, ok.
Definitely a good point, at my Hands-On the console didn't have any touch screen capabilities fwiw.Sounds great but the wording of the announcement is throwing me off a bit: "Immersion Corp......today announced that it has signed a multi-year agreement with Nintendo to allow Immersion to adapt its TouchSense® technology to the new Nintendo Switch system." That makes it sounds like they've only just agreed the partnership - if that's the case how could the technology be incorporated into the console design when launch is only a few months away? I may well be reading it wrong but it seems a bit odd, that and the fact Nintendo haven't yet mentioned this themselves.
Yeah, the upgraded versions. Talking about the original 3DS that could only go up to 4 at Max.3ds was 3.5 to 8
Was just about to say the same thing.Yeah, the upgraded versions. Talking about the original 3DS that could only go up to 4 at Max.
True portability means at the very least decent performance on a single charge, but i commend you a good spin for a excuse for its pathetic performance.
Well in north america they don't. In Toronto i could't even get on a bus then hop on the subway and go from one end to another with out the Switch dying on me if i played a big game. That is pathetic for a product that claims to be a "portable"
Not really with realistically a little bit over 2 hours of juice running top software. Id hardly call that much of a feature, but a gimmick sure.
This is my issue, I don't know whether to flog my Wii U. I've already put my pro controller, Wii remote plus and MK8 up for sale but the console itself.. I just don't know. I wouldn't have anything to play Bayonetta 2, Donkey Kong Tropical Freeze or The Wonderful 101 on if I ever wanted to.The more I've read and watched I'm starting to see where this would fit in. I love Nintendo's own games and never really bought 3rd party developed games for my consoles by them.
What is now making me think I may try and get one is portable Zelda. I love my 3DS for some portable gaming but the thought of a full on experiance even if the FPS drops a tad might be worth the price of admition.
I'd probably retire the WiiU and box back up. Hmmm lots to think about.
Jim Sterling really lays into it on his YouTube channel, apparently you'll get an ancient .ROM file a month for subscribing which Nintendo then revoke at the end of the month.After watching the presentation and reaction/feedback videos from numerous people, I have to say I'm on the fence on this console. (TL;DR post below)
First of all, massive props to Nintendo for using a standard USB Type C socket for charging the console, and the expansion of the hard drive using standard micro SD cards. No more proprietary nonsense like what we get from the Vita. However, the paltry 32GB internal hard drive is bugging me. Yeah sure, that will definitely expand as time goes on, but I'm pretty sure it can be bigger at launch. Keep in mind that since it's internal, said 32GB hard drive would also have to contain the Switch's OS and other related software. This would use up roughly around 7-10GB of the space, which could leave you with just 21GB (maybe less) of free space right out of the box. That doesn't seem like a lot, especially since we don't know how much space a Switch game in general would take up. Also, the 720p resolution for the tablet screen ain't bad. Heck, a lot of PS3 games run just on 720p and they look pretty good.
Now then, for the bad news (ugh...)
My biggest pet peeve would have to be the online service IN GENERAL. First, it's a paid subscription. Some people, especially fans might argue that "Nintendo is moving along with the times" and such, but you have to remember that Nintendo claims the Switch will not be sold at a loss. If they really are confident on profiting from it right from the start and then onward, why the need for a paid online service? Heck, at the launch of Playstation 3, Sony sold the system at a massive loss. The price tag was a whopping US$600 and it was still a loss for them. Yet the online features of the system were 100% free. Sure, production costs have gone down drastically over the years, but damn. I can understand the PS4's paid subscription because Sony claimed the PS4 will also be sold at a loss on launch. Oh, and what about the Vita? Great handheld, powerful console, and its online services are, you guessed it, free of charge!
Second, say you have already paid for said online service. Then you have this, the "companion smartphone app" for the Switch. I'll be frank by describing it in two words: gimmicky and stupid. Supposedly, the app allows you to invite friends and other players, and communicate with each other using voice chat. From the app. From a separate device. I'm pretty sure there's an unwritten rule that these two basic features should always, ALWAYS, be built-in to the console's online features. The Switch assumes that you have your very own smartphone with you, and at all times. What if your smartphone runs out of juice while playing with the Switch? What if it gets broken or busted? What if it gets lost? What if it was your other smartphone and you left it at home for some reason? Also, the Switch has a bog-standard 3.5mm audio jack for using earphones. Why not use the same jack for voice chat? Once again, look at the Vita. You can send invites to your friends FROM THE CONSOLE ITSELF, have them join a Chat Party, and the damn handheld even has a built-in microphone in case your earphones don't have one (I was actually surprised it had a built-in microphone, very handy on the first time I joined a Chat Party)
And the last bit, the last 🤬 bit that caught my ire on that app, is this:
"A free, limited version of this app will be available for download in summer 2017."
a FREE, LIMITED version of the app. I'm not quite sure, but does this mean that people will eventually have to pay for the app, a separate payment from the online subscription? This is crazy. If this isn't an example of corporate greed, I don't know what is.
EDIT:, If I may add, Capcom could have helped Nintendo in this by announcing a Monster Hunter game for the Switch. I was actually hoping to see it at the presentation, but no. I'm not really a big fan of Nintendo's first party lineup, but a Monster Hunter game would seriously make me consider buying a Switch.
I'm far from a Nintendo expert. In fact the only console of theirs I own is a SNES that I bought nearly a quarter of a century after it's launch. Therefore, forgive me if I've got it wrong, but wouldn't most or all of the aspects you are deriding the Switch over have applied also to the original Wii? It was more expensive than the lowest priced Xbox 360, certainly relatively underpowered, I'm unsure about 3rd party devs, but Nintendo have historically been quite insular, and talk about gimmick pushing....!!Doubt it, overpriced underpower lacking 3rd party support gimmick pushing product.
Wiiu all over again.
I'm far from a Nintendo expert. In fact the only console of theirs I own is a SNES that I bought nearly a quarter of a century after it's launch. Therefore, forgive me if I've got it wrong, but wouldn't most or all of the aspects you are deriding the Switch over have applied also to the original Wii? It was more expensive than the lowest priced Xbox 360, certainly relatively underpowered, I'm unsure about 3rd party devs, but Nintendo have historically been quite insular, and talk about gimmick pushing....!!
Hindsight is meant to be 20/20, but it seems like you're somehow still fumbling through the darkness in looking right past the Wii and condemning based on the Wii U, despite their seemingly similar attributes.
If you're backed by the current factual state, you might want to consider that NES is the 5th best selling Nintendo console, and will be 6th within months or even weeks since 3DS is just about to pass it. DS, Gameboy, GBA, and Wii have all sold more and were released (of course) after the NES. It would also be reasonable to think the 3DS could surpass the PSP by the end of its life. Nintendo is by no means in a bad state. Financially, they are in a good place. People that call themselves realists either don't like something or are pessimistic about almost everythingI'm condemning Switch based on history. Ninty consoles have been declining since the original Nes, Wii broke the pattern while wiiu went right back to its decades old downward trajectory.