My thoughts on the Switch and Nintendo's future

[mbryant]

So I know, there have been so many articles and videos about this but hey these are MY thoughts (which will be slightly disorganized). 

So let's start with form factor. Oh...My...God... I LOVE it. I always felt the standard 3DS screen was too small, the 3DS XL is fine but it's still just a bit small. This of course is obviously a tablet with removable controllers, so A+ in my book. 
Speaking of controllers.... I'm not 100% sold on using the Joycons sideways but we will have to wait and see. Using the joycons in each hand seems really cool and I'm looking forward to trying it. As for controller pricing, c'mon Nintendo...

 

Hardware and Graphics: So of course the Nintendo console for this gen is not on par with the PS4 or Xbone (see how original I am?) BUT I mean as long as games don't look blocky or have muddy textures (ahem, CoD) then it should be fine. I am sad to see that Breath of the Wild isn't running at 60, but assuming it maintains 30 and doesn't suffer the same frame drops as Twilight Princess HD then I'm cool. I'm not bummed about the storage options, sure I feel it wouldn't have really been a great expense to Nintendo to include more than 32GB internally but that's okay because micro SD storage up to (2TB I think?) is perfectly fine. 

 

Everything Else: I think the Switch is a step in the right direction for Nintendo. It's not going to be a huge success but if they decide to stick with this concept and improve on it the next time around I believe they could position themselves to be neck and neck....and neck (puns) with Microsoft and Sony. I'm not thrilled that they have virtually no lineup for the launch. This is the what 2nd or 3rd gen they've had pretty much no titles ready for the launch? To be fair Zelda is ready at launch but there isn't much there to bring in NEW people which should be crucial to Nintendo right now especially if they want to stay in the game. 

I also think it's stupid to launch the Switch while the 3DS is still on the market when it seems that the Switch could easily replace it. I'm sure they will kill the DS line eventually, but they really should do it now because they could pool all of their R&D to the Switch. I mean Nintendo is now the only company to have a (current) portable home console. 

Also local support for 8 consoles is AMAZING. One of the main reasons (other than Zelda) for me having a Wii U was for the multiplayer games. I spent many many hours playing Nintendo Land which almost made up for the cost of the console IMO because it was loads of fun, smash bros, and mario kart. 

So assuming they could hopefully eventually drop the prices of the controllers, sorry I just don't want to pay an additional $240 to support 4 players, and start pumping out good games instead of flooding the market with sub par garbage like they did with the Wii then Nintendo stands a chance to get close to Microsoft and Sony this generation and directly compete with them in the next. 

[kvn95]

I agree with a lot of things you said, but I do believe that the hardware is underpowered. And game 'cartidges' seem more like a nostalgia factor, and increases their collectability for fanboys. (Although it might increase their storage time(?))

 

[mbryant]

2 hours ago, kvn95 said:

I agree with a lot of things you said, but I do believe that the hardware is underpowered. And game 'cartidges' seem more like a nostalgia factor, and increases their collectability for fanboys. (Although it might increase their storage time(?))

 

I believe I did say the hardware is underpowered? lol.

As for carts, I personally prefer them to disk. Also I still feel the Switch is targeted more at kids and it's harder to damage a cart than a disk (in some cases). You know even teenagers are so damn messy too they leave discs everywhere as well so carts are good for everyone. I also see your point about the nostalgia factor though, 

[kvn95]

1 minute ago, mbryant said:

I believe I did say the hardware is underpowered? lol.

As for carts, I personally prefer them to disk. Also I still feel the Switch is targeted more at kids and it's harder to damage a cart than a disk (in some cases). You know even teenagers are so damn messy too they leave discs everywhere as well so carts are good for everyone. I also see your point about the nostalgia factor though, 

You know what would be crazy, running windows on that thing.

The OS will barely run, and might not be supported, but with ARM support round the corner, it might be possible.

Not useful, but certainly possible.

[mbryant]

2 hours ago, kvn95 said:

You know what would be crazy, running windows on that thing.

The OS will barely run, and might not be supported, but with ARM support round the corner, it might be possible.

Not useful, but certainly possible.

I'd honestly love to see Nintendo have some sort of partnership with Microsoft so they could make the hardware (with windows on it) and make their games (or at least first party games) exclusive to Windows, but that's just because I'm a PC gamer and also love Nintendo lol. The only way something like that could REALLY work would be if Nintendo stopped making hardware and just published all of their games for windows. 

[skywake]

5 hours ago, kvn95 said:

And game 'cartidges' seem more like a nostalgia factor, and increases their collectability for fanboys. (Although it might increase their storage time(?))

Zelda: BotW on Wii U: 13GB download, 3GB of space required for performance enhancing data pack with physical copy

Zelda: BotW on Switch: 13.6GB download.... nothing about a data pack mentioned

 

Food for thought

[kvn95]

5 hours ago, mbryant said:

The only way something like that could REALLY work would be if Nintendo stopped making hardware and just published all of their games for windows. 

 

Weird how it still applied to this day.

[ramencupofjoy]

8 hours ago, kvn95 said:

I agree with a lot of things you said, but I do believe that the hardware is underpowered. And game 'cartidges' seem more like a nostalgia factor, and increases their collectability for fanboys. (Although it might increase their storage time(?))

 

Well, what are you gonna load games with, then? Having a disk drive on a tablet isn't exactly a good idea, know what I mean, Verne?

[SteveGrabowski0]

I don't like the idea of the Switch at all. As a handheld it looks too much like a PSP. My experience with a PSP was that graphically intense games suck on a small screen. After using one I was so pissed I didn't buy a DS instead since those games with crappy graphics were much more fun to play on handheld than say GTA on my PSP. So the fact that Switch is the most powerful handheld does nothing for me. They had a winning formula with their handhelds based on the DS and I don't understand throwing that away to try to copy PSP and Vita as a way to play console level games on a small screen.

 

And then it's not good as a home console either. It's not powerful enough to allow third party devs to port their games over. The hardware seems to really limit the kind of games that can be made, that you only have to power to do kind of cartoony games. Those can be fun but it's nice to have some diversity in what you can play. The Switch just feels like a half ass handheld and a half ass console.

[kvn95]

14 minutes ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

The Switch just feels like a half ass handheld and a half ass console.

^This

But I do think Switch is a step in the right direction.

Albeit a costlier, and very delayed one. Given time, I think the second gen Switch (?) would be powerful enough for anything serious.

[TheBestUserName]

9 hours ago, mbryant said:

Also I still feel the Switch is targeted more at kids

There are no children or families anywhere in any of Nintendo's marketing material for the Switch. Any feelings that it's targeted for kids are your own doing. 

[Mira Yurizaki]

10 hours ago, kvn95 said:

I agree with a lot of things you said, but I do believe that the hardware is underpowered. And game 'cartidges' seem more like a nostalgia factor, and increases their collectability for fanboys. (Although it might increase their storage time(?))

I don't understand why you think cartridges bring out a nostalgia factor. For one thing cartridges never truly went away since Nintendo's portables always had them. For another, Sony uses them on the PS Vita, and are you going to claim Sony is trying to aim for nostalgia there when none of their systems used cartridges? At this point they may as well be nothing more than read-only SD cards.

 

But if you're going to go "then why not just make a purely digital download system"? Because not everyone either has home internet (Like Japan, many people use their phones to access the internet), has great internet (despite being in a city, the ISPs in my area offer only a piddly 3-4MB/s at best), or just doesn't want to deal with waiting for their game to download. Especially when consoles won't let you preload  the content (and even then with Steam and preloading a 50GB game takes like an hour for the thing to be playable).

 

Physical media is still a nice thing to have, regardless of what format it's on.

[Monkey Dust]

2 hours ago, M.Yurizaki said:

I don't understand why you think cartridges bring out a nostalgia factor. For one thing cartridges never truly went away since Nintendo's portables always had them. For another, Sony uses them on the PS Vita, and are you going to claim Sony is trying to aim for nostalgia there when none of their systems used cartridges? At this point they may as well be nothing more than read-only SD cards.

 

But if you're going to go "then why not just make a purely digital download system"? Because not everyone either has home internet (Like Japan, many people use their phones to access the internet), has great internet (despite being in a city, the ISPs in my area offer only a piddly 3-4MB/s at best), or just doesn't want to deal with waiting for their game to download. Especially when consoles won't let you preload  the content (and even then with Steam and preloading a 50GB game takes like an hour for the thing to be playable).

 

Physical media is still a nice thing to have, regardless of what format it's on.

Given the size of the console optical media wasn't going to be viable, tiny carts were the only way to go. As regards digital downloads only, I think it would put a lot of people off, both nostalgic collectors and gamers on a tight budget for who resale value of a game is important.

 

My big concern with the Switch is the line of games at launch look very limited, with the big rockstar release, Zelda BotW, also coming to Wii U.

[mbryant]

8 hours ago, TheBestUserName said:

There are no children or families anywhere in any of Nintendo's marketing material for the Switch. Any feelings that it's targeted for kids are your own doing. 

look at the line up, I should have included "casual gamers" in my statement. Still look at the games, Mario Kart, Zelda, Splatoon, Arms (or whatever that is) Mario Odessy etc. 

[mbryant]

9 hours ago, kvn95 said:

^This

But I do think Switch is a step in the right direction.

Albeit a costlier, and very delayed one. Given time, I think the second gen Switch (?) would be powerful enough for anything serious.

Yeah which is what I've been trying to tell people on BOTH sides of the fence since we found out what the "NX" or Switch was. It's certainly a step in the right direction. On another forum some months ago I stated that Nintendo  has a LOT of work to do to show gamers (as a whole) that they are capable of studying the market and what gamers want. The trust from the people who were burned by the Wii and Wii U won't return with one console release especially if that console flops. They have to do everything right with the Switch AND continue that trend with the next console. If they blow it with their next console I think their hardware game will be dead.

[TheBestUserName]

2 hours ago, mbryant said:

look at the line up, I should have included "casual gamers" in my statement. Still look at the games, Mario Kart, Zelda, Splatoon, Arms (or whatever that is) Mario Odessy etc. 

The term "casual gamer" is tossing around meaninglessly.  It's dismissive of genres that aren't FPS or MOBA.  

 

"Casual gaming" isn't defined by the title or the genre, it's by how serious and intense (or lack thereof) the player is for whatever game he happens to be playing.   

 

Now I realize that games like "My Pet Horse" or "Dogz" or any of that crap don't invite any sort of "hardcore" players or styles, but realistically speaking, a person can be a hardcore gamer and play Mario Kart or Splatoon (or even Mario).   Those games are very competitive in the online arena. 

 

 

[mbryant]

2 hours ago, TheBestUserName said:

The term "casual gamer" is tossing around meaninglessly.  It's dismissive of genres that aren't FPS or MOBA.  

 

"Casual gaming" isn't defined by the title or the genre, it's by how serious and intense (or lack thereof) the player is for whatever game he happens to be playing.   

 

Now I realize that games like "My Pet Horse" or "Dogz" or any of that crap don't invite any sort of "hardcore" players or styles, but realistically speaking, a person can be a hardcore gamer and play Mario Kart or Splatoon (or even Mario).   Those games are very competitive in the online arena. 

 

 

I'm not saying they can't be, but "hardcore" is generally used in reference to games with a large user base. CoD, Battle Field, CSGO, Street fighter, etc.. However I see your point. I understand that someone could for instance be a "hardcore" minecraft player but there's no competitive community to speak of with that game. 

[TheBestUserName]

4 minutes ago, mbryant said:

I'm not saying they can't be, but "hardcore" is generally used in reference to games with a large user base. CoD, Battle Field, CSGO, Street fighter, etc.. However I see your point. I understand that someone could for instance be a "hardcore" minecraft player but there's no competitive community to speak of with that game. 

I follow you.  The terminology is just a failure of the gaming industry and gamers.  I'd still argue (in spite of my online reference above) that hardcore gamers can play single player, too.  It's the mental state of mind, not the game or how many players are involved at one time.**

 

It's just a stupid label that gamers toss around to denigrate other gamers and/or specific kinds of hardware.  

 

 

** Another example could be Fire Emblem. It's a strategy game that takes a lot of skill, patience, and planning. A person can easily dump many dozens of hours into it. But it's entirely single player, and only on Nintendo [aka, inferior] hardware.   I'd still call that pretty hardcore. 

 

 

[mbryant]

2 hours ago, TheBestUserName said:

I follow you.  The terminology is just a failure of the gaming industry and gamers.  I'd still argue (in spite of my online reference above) that hardcore gamers can play single player, too.  It's the mental state of mind, not the game or how many players are involved at one time.**

 

It's just a stupid label that gamers toss around to denigrate other gamers and/or specific kinds of hardware.  

 

 

** Another example could be Fire Emblem. It's a strategy game that takes a lot of skill, patience, and planning. A person can easily dump many dozens of hours into it. But it's entirely single player, and only on Nintendo [aka, inferior] hardware.   I'd still call that pretty hardcore. 

 

 

I can't process any more lol. Also I hate your profile pic, thought a bug was on my screen >.> 

[TheBestUserName]

1 hour ago, mbryant said:

 Also I hate your profile pic, thought a bug was on my screen >.> 

No, you love it. We all know you do. 

[skywake]

21 hours ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

I don't like the idea of the Switch at all. As a handheld it looks too much like a PSP. My experience with a PSP was that graphically intense games suck on a small screen. After using one I was so pissed I didn't buy a DS instead since those games with crappy graphics were much more fun to play on handheld than say GTA on my PSP. So the fact that Switch is the most powerful handheld does nothing for me. They had a winning formula with their handhelds based on the DS and I don't understand throwing that away to try to copy PSP and Vita as a way to play console level games on a small screen.

The thing that made the DS/3DS great wasn't that it had worse visuals than the PSP/Vita. It was that Nintendo's content makes sense on portable systems. Nintendo makes visually simple games with cartoon-like graphics which are easier to appreciate on a smaller screen. They make games that don't have a lot of narrative structure which makes them easy to pick up and play for small periods of time. They prioritise high frame-rates and small load times which works well on a portable. Lastly they make power efficient systems which gives you more battery life.... relatively speaking...

 

And when I look at the list of the Wii U's best selling games I see a lot of games that have worked well on the 3DS. Or could have worked well. Mario Kart, Smash Bros, New SMB, Splatoon, Mario Maker and so on. I want to play those games away from my TV. When I look at the PS4's best sellers I want to play them all on my TV. GTA, Fallout and the Last of Us? Those games would not translate to a portable system well. Well GTA would but the others not so much.

[Mira Yurizaki]

17 hours ago, TheBestUserName said:

The term "casual gamer" is tossing around meaninglessly.  It's dismissive of genres that aren't FPS or MOBA.  

 

"Casual gaming" isn't defined by the title or the genre, it's by how serious and intense (or lack thereof) the player is for whatever game he happens to be playing.   

 

Now I realize that games like "My Pet Horse" or "Dogz" or any of that crap don't invite any sort of "hardcore" players or styles, but realistically speaking, a person can be a hardcore gamer and play Mario Kart or Splatoon (or even Mario).   Those games are very competitive in the online arena.

I'm not even sure if you can say "hardcore" vs. "casual" is whether or not you play competitively. For example in FFXIV, the "hardcore" players do higher level raid content while "casual" players don't, even though both can have high level end-game equipment (FFXIV provides like a half dozen paths to get end-game tier equipment).

 

The terms were also thrown around during GDQ, where a "hardcore" player is someone who speedruns while a "casual" player is someone who doesn't.

 

Though I do realize I'm just picking at the last point since the second sentence basically says what I just said. But you can be "hardcore" on "casual" games too like those, depending on how much time and energy you spent on it. Like min-maxing to get the best thing ever.

[TheBestUserName]

2 hours ago, M.Yurizaki said:

I'm not even sure if you can say "hardcore" vs. "casual" is whether or not you play competitively. For example in FFXIV, the "hardcore" players do higher level raid content while "casual" players don't, even though both can have high level end-game equipment (FFXIV provides like a half dozen paths to get end-game tier equipment).

 

Though I do realize I'm just picking at the last point since the second sentence basically says what I just said. But you can be "hardcore" on "casual" games too like those, depending on how much time and energy you spent on it. Like min-maxing to get the best thing ever.

Understood.  That was addressed by a subsequent post of mine.   Quoted below. 

 

18 hours ago, TheBestUserName said:

I follow you.  The terminology is just a failure of the gaming industry and gamers.  I'd still argue (in spite of my online reference above) that hardcore gamers can play single player, too.  It's the mental state of mind, not the game or how many players are involved at one time.**

 

It's just a stupid label that gamers toss around to denigrate other gamers and/or specific kinds of hardware.  

 

 

** Another example could be Fire Emblem. It's a strategy game that takes a lot of skill, patience, and planning. A person can easily dump many dozens of hours into it. But it's entirely single player, and only on Nintendo [aka, inferior] hardware.   I'd still call that pretty hardcore. 

 

 

I'm pretty sure we agree on this topic.