skywake

@Wolf_Lbh Not reading that whole thing but as someone who has followed Nintendo closely for more than a decade? I wouldn't expect too much from the next direct. E3 for Nintendo where they build interest into the holiday period. They'll focus heavily on one or two games that they think will drive sales for the holidays. The typical yearly cycle is something along the lines of this: First Direct of the year: A broad outline of what the year will have. Often announcements for stuff they'll cover in more detail at E3 Pre-E3 Direct: Cleaning up loose ends. Eg the Direct from a few months ago which had a lot of 3DS games, notice no 3DS at E3? E3 Direct: It used to have to cover everything, now it doesn't. Even so E3 is still almost purely about building hype going into the end of the year Post-E3 Directs: Often very specifically focused on one thing which is immediately relevant The way Nintendo usually manages things? I'd expect 2-4 Directs for the rest of this year. I'd expect they'd cover very specific and immediately relevant topics. Expect more on Smash Bros, expect more on their online services. Beyond that I wouldn't be surprised if there was some time spent on indies, third parties and the 3DS. Pokemon will probably also get something just before the release of the new game. I don't see what the Wii U has to do with this. Of all the things Nintendo did wrong with the Wii U I don't think their E3/Direct strategy was one of them. The way they handle things now is significantly improved over what we used to get during the Wii/DS era. Most of that was developed while the Wii U was tanking on shelves.

Not saying it's bad but it's still one of the least ergonomic controllers I can think of. So if you're fine with the 3DS the Switch won't be an issue for you. Except that it's bad for the opposite reason. Nintendo are basically putting all of the information into the name itself.... New -> The revised internal hardware with improved CPU/RAM 2DS -> Without the 3D screen XL -> The larger screen variant Now if Intel did the same thing Nintendo is doing and called for example the i5 8500 a "8 3G 6C6T"? That'd be a mouthful and bad for the same reason "New 2DS XL" is a bit average. But at least you'd be able to see the name and know exactly what it is.

The fact that neither of us remembered this and @ono seemed to misunderstand your point when you corrected us should tell you how big of an issue it is. I'd note that every portable that has had analogue sticks has had this "issue". The 3DS is arguably the worst in this regard. Personally I don't even consider it to be a negative when playing in portable mode at all. If the Switch was a home console only? Then sure. I'd be complaining about how average the JoyCon are as a controller option compared to the Pro Controller. They are a little bit small and the placement of the sticks isn't ideal. If it was just a home controller I would have been wondering why they didn't instead just release a v3 of the WiiMote or something. Not saying that they're horrible but they're definitely not a step forward. But as a portable? I don't think there has been a portable that has had controllers as good as this.

In terms of portability I'd put it somewhere between a super portable laptop and a tablet. You'll want to get a case for it and it's not something you're going to put in your pocket. But if you're taking a bag with you that can fit a laptop, keyboard, mouse, PSP and 3DS I'm sure you'll be able to find room for it. IMO it's far more ergonomic than any other portable Nintendo has ever made. Largely because of the size but also because it actually has proper analogue sticks and four well placed triggers. The right joycon issue was a hardware issue with the first batch of controllers where the right joycon had poor bluetooth range. Nintendo offered a free repair and joycon released since don't have the same defect.

Honestly unless you have a really awesome internet connection you can probably get away with your ISP provided router for routing. When most people say that their "internet sucks" what they mean is that their WiFi coverage is poor. That's probably your biggest bottleneck. So what I'd suggest is getting one or two either AC Pros or AC Lites, run ethernet to them and strategically place them in your house. Ideally on your ceiling or high up on your wall and in the centre of the area you want to cover. Go with the Pro if you want to really take advantage of the 5Ghz band, the Lite is fine for general internet usage and Netflix etc. Even for a difficult house 2 is pretty decent. Brick house with two slightly less than ideally placed AC Lites here and I don't really have any connectivity issues at all. If I was super pedantic then sure 5Ghz coverage isn't perfect with just two AC lites when you have brick walls everywhere. But even in that room if I run a speedtest between a tablet and the Unifi Controller I'm still getting 50Mbps throughput and 7ms ping. With an AC Lite, in a brick house. edit: Testing this now I can actually walk a good 10m from the back of the house and comfortably watch a BluRay rip from my NAS without issue. As long as you don't walk into the shed because then it's starts dropping frames left and right.

Most UHD BluRays come with a regular BluRay disc. The same was true for a lot regular BluRays and DVDs as well as discs and digital copies. It makes sense given that most people don't have UHD BluRay players and they're trying to encourage people to start building a collection. What's a few dollars extra for a UHD copy even if I don't have a UHD BluRay player yet? I get to watch the movie now at 1080p and I don't have to buy it again when I make the jump to 4K.

@KAN1102 The article you linked to really only lists two options. Their first option is to wire speakers directly to an AMP/Receiver of some kind that can handle more than one set of speaker outputs. They then split that into three options which, when push comes to shove, all involve running speaker cables to individual speakers throughout your house. Their second option is to use some kind of multi-room audio solution that takes advantage of your home network to group separate sets of speakers together. Which they've for some reason split into WiFi, Powerline, Ethernet and then listed again by itself for good measure. Personally? I think getting a commercial piece of hardware that does the multi-room audio stuff is better than running speaker cables. Especially for home use. Of these options? Sonos is probably the best and for this use case you'd get a pair of Sonos Connects. But if you're on a budget you can get a Chromecast Audio that'll also allow you to group two rooms. There's about a 5x cost gap between the two options. I prefer Sonos as it gives you significantly more flexibility and more options for expansion.

This isn't what a HTPC is. A HTPC is specifically a PC that slides into an AV rack, is connected to a TV and is controlled from a comfortable viewing position. Really if you want to get into the specifics of the term it's something that was at its peak in the early to mid 2000s. Microsoft was the one pushing the idea the hardest and the original XBox was seen as part of that push. It was never about productivity, it was always purely a Home Theatre PC not a home office PC. Once you start talking productivity of course a PC wins hands down. But at that point we're not talking HTPCs anymore.....

At around that price point I'd look at getting two devices for those uses. A chromecast will do a good enough job for most of your media stuff and you can get them for ~$50AU. Then for streaming your games I'd go with a Steam Link. If you can find a good deal on both you should be able to get them at ~$100AU in total. Because to be honest those little Android TV boxes are more trouble than they're worth. And the other suggestions in the thread about going for an Apple TV or Raspberry Pi aren't very good IMO. A Raspberry Pi isn't really a good option for streaming games over your network so that's half of your use cases dead. And an Apple TV costs quite a bit more than $100AU. Really if you were happy to spend as much as you would to get an Apple TV I'd recommend getting an XBOne S for about the same.

Except that running Ethernet to an access point gives you more options down the road. It also means that the load across your network is spread across multiple access points. Most of the higher end access points/routers on the market get those high numbers by adding bands together. Having multiple access points is basically the same thing... except spread out across the area you want to cover. Is your option cheaper? Well maybe in the short term. But you'd be going to a lot of effort for something that won't give you the best results now and won't scale going forward And anyways, the most "expensive" part of running Ethernet is the time required to do it. The cabling is dirt cheap and there's no reason why you can't re-use your existing gear. You don't have to buy a bunch of new access points, you can just use it to improve the placement of your existing access point or add a single new AP in a place you don't have coverage. If you're going to the effort of doing this do it properly. WiFi has more overheads than and is technically slower than Ethernet even in lab conditions. Also the way most routers are wired up the WiFi portion is actually connected internally to an Ethernet port. So I'm not sure how well this would work but even if it worked fantastically well it'd be slower than ethernet.

Because it's expensive and outside of moving large files to and from network storage there's not much of a practical reason for it. And even then if you are moving a large file across your home network odds are at least one of those ends has a single mechanical HDD. A single mechanical drive will just barely saturate 1Gbps. Even the above is a very occasional and atypical scenario even for an enthusiast's home. The most traffic heavy scenarios my home network would involve multiple video streams taking different paths through the network. Someone will run through the NAS, some will go over the internet and they'll all go through different ports on my switch do different end points. And even UHD movie rips aren't going to saturate 1Gbps, they'll probably fall short of 100Mbps!

I'm not sure where you're coming from. I don't think anyone in this thread has made a comment from that angle. I certainly haven't as I am a massive fan of small form factor PCs and the idea of a HTPCs. Have been for decades. I'm just questioning what value a HTPC has in 2018 when pretty much everything I'd want to do on my TV can be covered by the TVs built in functions. Really the only thing a HTPC can offer that I can think of is the ability to play PC games at a higher quality than you would games on other platforms. None of the other things you can do with a HTPC have much value at all because most modern TVs can do all of that out of the box. The only thing that's kinda missing out of the picture is BluRay playback, especially UHD BluRay playback. And for that it makes far more sense to get an XBOne S.

The same was true of the old video rental store model in a different kind of way. A fantastic service for when you don't know what to watch and want to just browse from a large library of content. Not that reliable if you wanted something specific. Even in the age of streaming video if you want a specific piece of content anytime you have to buy a copy. For that and the quality difference physical discs are far from dead, especially for enthusiasts. ...fair enough I think. Not every post has to have people agreeing with it. Every platform currently on the market has its own strengths and weaknesses. Ignoring those entirely and making a theoretical "equivalent" PC misses the point. Simple as that.

@minervx Maybe so but that wasn't really the point I was making. There are some people and I'd argue a non-insignificant number who still want higher quality movies. Likely even more than that who want a bit more control over their content than what you can get out of Neflix. Just to prove a point here are 10 randomly selected movies from my collection (selected via random.org) and their current availability on Netflix: Wreck it Ralph - No The Truman Show - No Galaxy Quest - No Star Trek Into Darkness - No Kill Bill Vol 1 - Yes The Avengers - No Home Alone - No The Incredibles - No District 9 - No Mars Attacks! - No 1/10 is currently on Netflix I think it's fair to say that Netflix isn't necessarily as accessible in every sense all the time.....

Well I know the Vinyl fanboys say otherwise but CDs are in every sense technically better than Vinyl. And 320kbps mp3s are pretty much as good as a CDs given that CDs literally have no compression at all. So there's not really much of quality argument for music and these services pretty much have every artist on them at all times. It's purely a question of cost and/or collectability. I personally still buy CDs but only because I already have a decent collection of digital music and also because CDs are often cheaper than iTunes/Google Play. Entirely different story with movies. It's literally the same technology whether you're using Netflix or a BluRay player it's either H.264 or, with UHD BluRay, H.265. So when I say that Netflix at 4K is less than half the bitrate of a 1080p BluRay? That's a measurable reduction in quality. So right there there's more of a market for BluRays than there is for Vinyl or CDs because that's one clear selling point it has. Ontop of that there's the question of availability, video streaming services have a rolling catalogue so what's on there one day might not be the next. If I get a disc of my favourite movie I can watch it whenever I want. And don't get me started on the DRM nightmare that is purchasing digital copies of movies from iTunes/Google Play. I've always loved the idea of a HTPC but it has never really made that much sense and it makes even less sense these days than it ever has. I mean I could use it to both playback and rip movies but I have my main desktop for ripping disks and TVs have media playback built in these days. I could use it as a file server but I have a NAS for that. I could get a TV tuner card and setup a TV recording box but I don't watch enough free to air TV for that, TVs have recorders built in now and most stations have online catchup services anyway. Between the functionality built into the TV, a non-UHD BluRay player, a Nintendo Switch and a Steam Link the only thing I'm missing is UHD BluRay playback. And for that a HTPC would not only be a huge PITA but it'd also be far more expensive than an XBOne S. Honestly, standard BluRay playback is enough of a PITA on PC I don't even want to think about going down the UHD BluRay route.

Netflix's 4K service is under half the bitrate of a standard BluRay. So you can argue that it's "old tech" all you want but it still definitely has a market. And that's before you consider the fact that 1. Streaming services have a rolling catalogue so your favourite movies aren't always there and 2. the DRM on iTunes and Google Play for movies is garbage. Regardless, UHD BluRay is one of the main reasons why you'd want to get an XBOne whether it was an S or X so omitting it from an "equivalent" build kinda misses the point a bit. Anyways, if you were to build a HTPC I think your approach is backwards. What I'd do is consider what I'd actually want to do with said HTPC and, honestly, it'd mostly just use it as a secondary PC if I was to build one. Maybe a bit of light gaming but I think 4K media playback would be the main point. And for the price an XBOne S absolutely demolishes anything I could build for that purpose.

I already have a BluRay player, Switch, Steam Link and Chromecast hooked upto my TV so it's not like I can't already play most media and most games. So it'd have to do something else to win me over. For that price I highly doubt it will, I'd get far more out of an XBOne S or PS4 at that price. Hell I could sell my graphics card and get something better even with GPU prices as they are and get more from the money. Buy an entry level soundbar even. It really doesn't make any sense at all at the price.

That's not my understanding of the old setup. I was under the impression that if you wanted to move from one 3DS/Wii U to another you had to physically have your other console running. Both needed to be connected to the internet for the entire process. The new console couldn't even be connected to your account at the same time. And it was a very long transfer process. With the Switch? Yes you need to go into the eShop and uncheck the box for the old console being the primary console. But that's it. It's definitely an improvement on how it used to be. Pre Switch Nintendo was tying everything about your account to the console itself. With the Switch its tied to your account. Technically your old console doesn't need to be working for you to copy your purchases across.

Well that but also what you're doing on the network. If you're copying a multi GB file to a NAS then you'll notice a difference even if you have the best Wi-Fi signal and gear. But if you're just browsing the internet? Your Wi-Fi probably won't be the bottleneck and even if it was you'd likely not notice

If we're being a bit pedantic here technically the category of the cable is really just a measure of the cable quality. You could in theory push 10Gbps through Cat5 if the cable was short enough and you could fail to link at 1Gbps if your Cat7 cable was too long or a bit dodgy. The hardware itself really doesn't care what cable you use as long as the signal can get through. All of the official cable requirements? They list a cable length as well as the category of cable. None of them mention Cat7, the list is as follows: 100Mbps - Cat5 @ 100m 1Gbps - Cat5e @ 100m 2.5Gbps - Cat5e @ 100m 5Gbps - Cat6 @ 100m, Cat5e in "most use cases" 10Gbps - Cat 6A @ 100m, Cat6 @ 55m 25Gbps - Cat8 @ 30m 40Gbps - Cat 8 @ 30m

In a house most runs are going to be well under 100m so even pushing to 10Gbps cat6 should be fine. Also I know it's a bit of a tech no-no to say some spec is enough but... for consumers 10Gbps between rooms is a bit overkill. If 10Gbps makes sense for a home user at all it'll likely be more useful between say a NAS and your switch because a lot of devices are hitting your NAS. It makes less sense, for example, going out to your TV.

Especially given that they fixed the bug with a firmware update within about a week.....

The bug is tied to the date you first played the game. As I understand it they're doing a date calculation for that display and weren't taking into account the year. In any case, they put out this tweet before this thread was created....

Cartridges aren't using the same kind of flash that you find in an SSD or even a SD card. It's read only memory and it's therefore cheaper so that equation doesn't necessarily add up. And in any case, if NAND flash gets to the point where it's so cheap you can replace the HDD with an SSD? We better still not be using discs also. Optical media is far closer to death by cheaper cartridges than the HDD is from cheaper SSDs. Australia. Economically about on par with Canada in terms of cost of living, income etc but with half the average internet speed. We're most definitely buying 4K TVs and then streaming sub-HD Netflix to it. Yeah, we'll just take our business to that other service which is also running past our houses. Oh wait, I forgot, most people only have one service option available to them. It's almost like telecommunications infrastructure is a natural monopoly like water, gas, power, sewage, roads. Voting with your wallet doesn't work when there's only one option on the ballot.

Getting the best signal out of Gamecube games is tricky. It was new enough that a digital video signal was considered but not new enough that anyone ever brought into it. And then with the Wii Nintendo famously decided not to go HD so there's no HDMI. Lastly when they did finally go that route it was with the Wii U which dropped support for Gamecube titles. Probably your best and cheapest option would be to get component cables for your Wii and just see how your TV handles that signal. Unlike composite you can get a fairly decent picture out of a component signal even on a fairly modern TV. If you're not happy with the results, and we're mostly talking about latency, only then I'd look at upscalers. Because you'll want the component cables either way.