skywake

These threads asking for advice on what to purchase are generally a waste of time as the OP is just wanting people to agree with what they've already decided. But for what it's worth I'm highlighting these two points that you made. Yes, as a home console playing multiplatform games the Switch isn't very impressive. If you don't care for specific titles you can dismiss it as something that you could emulate on PC if you really wanted to. Equally as a portable console you could dismiss it entirely because you already have a phone with mobile games and emulators. What I think you missed here is the way that the Switch exists in the gaps between other solutions. I don't care how good your phone is I doubt you're playing games like Breath of the Wild or Doom on it. You're probably not even coming close to games like Rocket League on it graphically. And as good as a high end PC might be for games living on the bleeding edge you don't really need that horsepower for a game like Smash Bros, Mario Kart or Jackbox Party Pack. Most of the value of a home console is for local multiplayer titles along those lines where, by their very nature, you need it hooked upto your TV. The Switch is a magnet for that kind of content ATM. Again, you'll get what you want anyways as you've made up your mind. All I'm saying is that given you have a PC already and you don't really have a huge interest in physical media anymore? The Switch fills more holes in your current setup than any of the other consoles.

The only reason to get any of these consoles for "home entertainment" other than games is the BluRay player. The UHD one in the XBox One in particular given it's a pretty decent value if you are also wanting to play some of the games. The rest of the "media features" of these consoles have basically zero value because, as you said, all of this stuff is built into modern TVs anyways. I got a new 4K TV and a UHD BluRay player recently upgraded from a ~7 year old TV. I've have been going through a few movies in various formats over the last day. TBH Netflix does a good enough job that if you've already stopped buying BluRays you're not going to start buying UHD BluRays. If I wasn't someone who already has a collection of BluRays and likes collecting physical media? I wouldn't have any media devices at all attached to my TV. But I am so... the XBOne S made a lot of sense until I saw a UHD BluRay player for $100AU less. Take this with a grain of salt coming from the dude who has Super Mario Kart as their forum avatar if you want. From the way you've described what you want I think you'd almost be better off getting a Nintendo Switch. The media functions on the PS4 and XBOne have zero value to someone who's not watching movies on discs. You already have a decent PC so you don't really need another box for multi-platform games. What you lack in your setup is a party game machine with games along the lines of Smash Bros, Mario Party, Mario Kart. What you also lack is a portable console for when you're not at your TV. So if you're to get a console at all get a Switch.

Yeah, the second port on anything but the super high end APs are purely for convenience and redundancy. There's not much of a reason for LAG on any of these APs anyways as they are not going to saturate 1Gbps. The Nano will get close if you have a whole bunch of Wave 2 AC devices hitting DL all at once but it won't quite get there and you're unlikely to do this in a home environment anyways. Always good to run two cables but only because the effort involved in running the cable is high and the cost of the cable itself is trivial It's worth pointing out that most of these APs come with a PoE injector in the box. From memory I think the only ones that don't are the multi-packs. In terms of the in-wall AP I don't think the range is quite as good because it has a smaller antennae array. The only reason I'd go with one of those is if you were installing it over an existing wallplate or if you wanted to piggyback a PoE device via the PoE passthrough like a camera or a VOIP phone. If you're doing new cable runs anyways I'd just run one for the AP and one two a couple of ports in a standard wallplate for a better and cheaper end result than the In-Wall HD.

I just got the Sony X900F mostly because it's the cheapest TV which has high peak brightness and full-array local dimming. Of course these other two sets you've listed are technically better for different reasons. Put as simply as possible the Samsung has lower input lag and freesync but that's about where the differences with the Sony end. The LG is an OLED which means effectively infinite contrast putting it in a different tier. I personally don't think the improvements are worth the money but of course it's your money not mine. My suggestion would be to either the Sony X900F or the OLED especially if this is going to be mostly a set for watching movies etc. If you're going with the Sony the price gap is pretty huge so as you said you could improve your experience further with either a larger set or some decent speakers. Keeping that cash in your pocket is also a good option. The only reason I'd go with the Samsung would be if you're primarily using this as a gaming monitor for your PC in which case the lower input lag and freesync might be worth it. But you are gaming on the PS4 Pro which doesn't have freesync support so it's a waste of time going this route IMO

As I said earlier, the whole "get it on PC" bit is a non-point here because the thing is bundled with download codes for the game. Effectively I'd be buying a UHD BluRay player with an unconventional remote that's bundled with some PC games. It just happens to also be able to run the games that are bundled with it. It's just a question of whether or not the extra bits you can do on the XBOne S are worth the slightly higher cost and unconventional controller for controlling media. I think they are especially given the game by itself is more than the cost difference between the UHD BluRay player and the XBOne S. Really, there are only that could convince me not to go with the XBOne S over a UHD BluRay player. If there's a really good deal with a UHD BluRay player? I'll go that route. Also the other thing I'm slightly concerned about is the noise of the XBOne S. I expect a standalone player to be quieter because they lacks fans of any sort, the XBOne S will make some noise. If it's loud enough that you can hear it during a movie? That would be disappointing... but from what I've heard but it's pretty quiet.

I have a wired connection to every room in the house so it runs fairly well. Because it's compressed a bit the image isn't perfect, colour especially, but I've never had issues with framerate. But TBH if I had to pick between a game running on my PC and the Switch port? I'd almost always pick the Switch port. The image is that much better over HDMI. And as I said, I'm getting a new TV and am going to be paying $240AU for a UHD BluRay player one way or another. It's $60AU extra to get the XBOne instead and the bundled game, Forza Horizon 4, is $64AU on the Microsoft store. Plus these games are cross-buy AFAIK so I get the copy on my PC either way. Really, if I want Forza getting an XBOne is the way to do it.

@SteveGrabowski0 Honestly, I don't really care what the games are that much and the only one I'm even remotely interested in is Forza. The main point was that I'm looking at getting a UHD BluRay player and it's $300AU for a console which has a UHD BluRay player bundled with some games or $240AU for a UHD BluRay player. The XBOne is pretty compelling. Anyways, there are 5 bundles at around $300AU, I didn't see any reason to bore this thread with the details but since you mentioned it... - XBone S + Overwatch + Forza + Gears of War 4 @ $299AU - XBone S + Rainbow Six + Fallout 76 + Gears of War 4 @ $299AU - XBone S + Halo 5 + Gears of War 4 + Some Fortnight credit @ $299AU - XBone S + Forza + Rainbow Six + Fallout 76 + Gears of War 4 @ $299AU - XBone S + Gears of War 4 @ $279AU If I was to buy it I'd get one of the bundles with Forza given it's the only game I have any interest in playing on it. Since I have Overwatch on PC and have zero interest in paying for online on the XBOne or playing a competitive shooters with a controller? I'd go with the one with Fallout 76. Simple choice and even if I don't care for any of these games it's still not a bad deal. The only thing I'm trying to work out is if I don't even bother with the "gaming" side of it, stick with my Switch + Steam Link as the "consoles" hooked upto my TV, pocket the ~$60AU and get a regular UHD BluRay player.

I'm not sure why you'd be surprised that a five year old console which bundled with 3 games costs about as much as a 1050Ti can't run games at 4K. Seems pretty obvious to me. Anyways, I'm currently seriously considering getting one when I upgrade to a 4K TV because it's an insanely good value console for what it does. Quite literally my options for getting UHD/HDR content on this new TV would be: - Upgrade my PC and drag it into the other room, ~$400AU to spend here and I don't get UHD BluRay playback - Get a UHD BluRay player for ~$240 without Dolby Vision, $280AU for one with DV - Get an XBOne S bundled with download codes for Forza, Rainbow Six, Fallout 76 and Gears of War 4 for ~$300AU Really, the XBOne S seems like a pretty easy sell if you're just wanting to get UHD/HDR content on your new TV. Not bullshit at all.

Possibly. I don't have any yet but I've brought into LIFX on behalf of a family member as a Christmas gift so they can be the guinea pig. But the more I research it the more I think the colour is almost a necessity if you want to do anything interesting with it. I probably don't want the hall light to be rainbow colours without those colours meaning anything. But I might want them to be a different colour in the morning depending on what the weather forecast is.

Yeah, I think that's something people aren't thinking about either. I have ~25 standard light fittings in the house (internal and external) plus 13 downlights. It would only really make sense to have maybe 6 of those globes programmable and probably half of the downlights. The bulk of the advantage would probably be had with the first 3 or 4. Full automation is a nice idea but you don't really need the shed light or any of the external lighting to be part of a "lets sit down and watch a movie" scene....

For starters you're losing out a lot by going that route. Most smart globes allow you to change the colour temperature which is the main appeal of them if you ask me. And if all you want is to be able to turn them on and off there are cheaper smart globes which are about the same price as a smart switch with dimmer support. You're not really saving that much by going down this route. Secondly with smart globe you still have a standard light switch at the wall so you can effectively override any setting and guarantee the light will be off. If the switch itself is smart you're losing that control. I don't see why people see the fact that there's a kind of fail safe by having a smart globe rather than a switch as a downside. Lastly there's the fact that maybe you have a bunch of lights on one switch and want to be able to control them individually. If you are controlling it entirely from the wall you have to decide what groupings the lights are in from the start. If the lights themselves have the controller you could, for example, setup a scene that has the downlights on the far end of the kitchen on bright and have them progressively get dimmer as you move into the living area. And if your answer to this is to just add more switches to the wall then you haven't really saved any money have you. Yeah but changing a globe is even easier and you get a better end result. The only advantage a smart switch offers is that you don't have to physically walk over to the switch if someone has turned if off. Literally everything else about it is worse. They're definitely a bit of a stupid novelty, the smart home thing in general is a little bit more hype than substance. Even so, the point of smart home stuff is to enable you to do things you couldn't do before. Replacing a switch with a WiFi enabled switch does not allow me to do anything new. Replacing a standard globe with a multi-coloured WiFi enabled globe with scenes and settings does.

Yeah, how stupid of them to use the standard, two pin, 240/120V AC globe fitting that is in pretty much every house. You know what's worse than spending hundreds of dollars on a globe that you have to still get up to turn on if someone has turned if off at the wall? Spending thousands on a fully automated lighting system with no shut off switch at the wall if it malfunctions and won't turn off.

I don't at all agree with the point about LIFX being the "most expensive" option. Sure if you compare the non-Mini LIFX bulb to the HUE the price is basically the same but that's comparing an 800 lumen bulk to a 1100 lumen bulb. The Mini is 800 lumen, the same brightness as the more expensive Hue equivalent they were comparing the price with. Plus you have to get the hub ontop of that. And sure for a house where you'd replacing 20+ bulbs all with smart bulbs the cost of the hub diminishes. But what if you want just a small number of smart bulbs? Lets be honest, do you need a WiFi enabled light globe in the shed/bathroom/laundry? Probably not. I reckon most people would be happy with 3-5 globes. For $250AU you can get a four globe 800 lumen, multi-coloured kit from LIFX. Philips closest equivalent starter kit has three 800 lumen globes and a hub for $290AU. No contest on price when you're making a fair comparison, LIFX wins hands down. .... also LIFX are an Australian company so I may be a tad biased

I could argue with some of the specific things people have said here but I think it's better to play it a bit more objectively. So here's pointless forum graph showing the top 100 games based on Metacritic rating. Now of course the PS4 and XBOne have a deeper library of highly rated games, they've been out for quite a bit longer afterall. Even so it's pretty amazing how small that gap is after such a short period of time. If you buy a Switch you're getting a deeper library of quality titles than you would get if you brought a 3DS. Infact you get a similarly deep library to the 3DS and Wii U combined which shouldn't be too surprising given most of the Wii U's library has been ported to Switch. It's also close enough to the XBOne that, all things being equal, you'll get as much depth from the Switch's library if you do your research. Of course thats assuming you're not completely opposed to the kinds of games the Switch is attracting. I'd also add that if you want a portable console or a console that caters to local multiplayer well? Get the Switch as there aren't really any other competitive options. If all you're after is a console for online competitive shooters then get a PS4 or, better yet, a decent PC. If you want something to hook upto your new HDR 4K TV I'd probably get an XBOne.

Something that's true for any tech really, there's always something else that's potentially better just around the corner. A good way to save money I guess but while you're waiting for the next thing everyone else is enjoying the current thing. Especially given that there is no actual announcement of a revision yet so it's at least a year away. And in any case, is it even worth holding out for a revision? What could they add to a Switch revision that would make the current SKU entirely worthless? If/when it gets a revision it'll probably just be a CPU/GPU bump, more internal storage and maybe a revised dock that supports HDR etc. But it's still going to be portable, it's still going to be underpowered. It's not going to be a pocketable 2080 or even a PS4 Pro competitor. If you were buying one then by all means, get the newer revision.... but I wouldn't wait for it and as someone who has a Switch I wouldn't be rushing out to upgrade. Also on Pokemon, 2019

It's an angry stick person with a feathered cap setting things on fire..... Anyways, he didn't have the feathered cap in previous games either. I think this story is yet another case of people being outraged about someone supposedly being outraged by something. Who cares if he doesn't have a feathered cap. Did the feathered cap really matter to you that much? I don't think so. The game isn't even out yet and I bet none of us would have even noticed either way if there wasn't an article about this whining about "political correctness gone mad"

Probably not something worth doing considering that: 1. In order to get this you need to have paid for a subscription 2. This app literally needs to check in once a week to keep working Doing this seems like an easy way to pay Nintendo money to have your account banned

I like that I posted this list last week.... At the time only Animal Crossing and a 2D Mario were missing on the Switch either as a thing or on the horizon. Then today they go and announce both. They've just gone down the list of their best selling franchises haven't they....

I'm basing this purely on sales on previous consoles. New SMB Wii outsold Galaxy about 3:1, New SMB 2 despite being the least interesting entry IMO matched the sales of 3D Land. Then on Wii U the incredibly unimpressive New SMB U outsold 3D World. There is quite a bit of precedent there. Though with that said, if you were to rank all the "3D" mario games by sales it'd be: 1. Super Mario 64 (11.9mill) 2. Super Mario Galaxy (11.4mill) 3. Super Mario 3D Land (11.3mill) 4. Super Mario Odyssey (11.2mill) 5. Super Mario 64 DS (10.3mill) 6. Super Mario Galaxy 2 (7.6mill) 7. Super Mario Sunshine (6.3mill) 8. Super Mario 3D World (5mill) It's going to be the best selling 3D Mario, easily. So you're probably right

It's a bit tricky to figure out which games are their biggest currently. In the previous generation there were some franchises only on 3DS or Wii U like Splatoon or Animal Crossing and other games like Metriod which were pretty much absent entirely. And with the Switch obviously it hasn't been around for long enough to have all the franchises. But Pokemon is definitely #1 and as a best guess I'd say the franchises rank something like this in terms of "sales potential": 1. Pokemon 2. Mario Kart 3. 2D Mario 4. 3D Mario 5. Animal Crossing 6. Smash Bros 7. Zelda 8. Splatoon 9. Donkey Kong Country 10. Metroid

To put it simply: Red/Blue -> Original releases (technically the "originals" were Red/Green in Japan. Our Red/Blue are closer to Japan's "Blue") Yellow -> A revision on Red/Blue that revised the story to tie in better with the Anime (your starter is Pikachu and Jessie/James are part of the story) Gold/Silver -> The second generation of games. New Pokemon, significant graphical improvements. Not a bad way to jump into the GB Pokemons Crystal -> Basically an enhanced version of Gold/Silver. Which basically amounts to a more in-depth story and animated sprites (it was a GBC only title) My suggestion? Red/Blue are good versions to start with purely because that's what everything else was built on. But, putting nostalgia aside, the Gen 2 games are clearly better titles. I'd recommend Crystal as the animated sprites when you first start a battle do add to the game.

It's actually a pretty good game that really plays to one of the Switch's most unique features. We have had powerful portable consoles before, we've had home consoles with motion controls before. Touch screen gaming is also a thing and has been for a while. But there really hasn't been another gaming device before the Switch where you can sit a screen on a table and share a controller with a second player. Simple 2D fighting games in particular shine on this system. For me I've found that games like "Keep talking and Nobody Explodes" and the Jackbox party Pack games have been the biggest surprise. They've basically replaced Cards Against Humanity as the games night staple for me. I'm also kinda interested in the idea of Mario Party for the first time in a long time for the same reason.

A very niche market. If you have enough money for a Switch and games you have enough money for a phone or tablet. This isn't 2005 when the DS launched and having a web browser on a portable device was surprising.

True. Either way I find it hard to care. Every other device in your house already does everything so having one device that only does one thing isn't the end of the world. The idea that consoles must also be media-hubs belongs back in 2000-2010. Back when the Playstation was a Trojan horse for new disc formats and the 360 was the cheapest way to get HD content on your TV. These days you have a phone in your pocket, a chromecast in your TV and a BluRay player under it. Don't get me wrong, the Switch would make a nice little device for watching Netflix. It's just that for me and probably most people it's only valuable in the same way that the "take a photo" mode on a car dashcam is valuable. If for some reason it's the only device you have with you at that point that does it? Then sure, it becomes useful. But most of the time you're going to have access to something else that does a better job.

When these third parties release apps. NicoNico already has an app so the idea that Nintendo are blocking these is a bit illinformed....