Nintendo Switch - Hands On/First Look

[nicklmg]

Check out the Nintendo Switch on Amazon: http://geni.us/Zy6z

 

We sent Luke over to Toronto to get our first hands on experience with the Nintendo Switch!

 

 

[ARikozuM]

First?

 

I think the Switch is a good console that allows you to take things wherever you're like. The car? USB-C car charger! The local library? They have outlets everywhere. The park? Well, you should go for a jog, but power banks!

 

As far as specs, I could care less. It's not like Nintendo doesn't make the most of what it has. Just look at the GameCube. Thing had "theoretically" 60% lower performance than the PS2, but nearly all games on both platforms ran better on GC.

[Shiv78]

2 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

First?

Third?

 

If Nintendo had made the U this... they would have sold soooo much more

[imreloadin]

2 minutes ago, Thread212 said:

I have more computing power on my toaster.

I bet you still manage to burn it every time too huh?

[Suika]

The tl;dw is that Luke beat a little girl.

 

At Mario Kart.

[Daniel644]

the more Luke talks the worse this piece of crap sounds.

[ARikozuM]

Just now, Daniel644 said:

the more Luke talks the worse this piece of crap sounds.

He's talking about the specs like he's some PC Master Race child.

 

Oh, wait...

[Daniel644]

1 minute ago, ARikozuM said:

He's talking about the specs like he's some PC Master Race child.

 

Oh, wait...

I was more talking things like the dock costing 90 dollars

[captain_to_fire]

I bet the girl and her mom got a selfie with Luke. I don't think the girl is watching LTT unless she responds here. 

[skywake]

54 minutes ago, Daniel644 said:

I was more talking things like the dock costing 90 dollars

I don't understand why this is a sticking point for so many people. You don't need the dock to charge because it's USB Type C and you can get a USB Type C cable for a few dollars. You don't need it to have the Switch work on your TV because there is a dock included in the box. The only reason you'd want extra docks is so that you can easily swap between multiple TVs/monitors. Emphasis on the easy because you can still physically unplug the dock and move it even without a second dock.

 

Is it overpriced? Definitely, 100%. It should be at least 30% cheaper if not half the price. But it's not a necessary thing. An extra dock is a convenience ontop of a convenience that you didn't even know you wanted a few months ago. The fact that we're even talking about being able to unplug a console from one TV and move it to another mid-game is crazy in itself. The closest thing you can get to that on other systems is in-home streaming. I just think its odd that people will complain about the asking price for this non-mandatory option for a fairly niche scenario which isn't really available on other platforms....

 

If it's too expensive? Here's a novel idea. Live with the idea of the Switch being a console that you set up on one display. You know, like you have done with every console or PC you ever had before it. Live with the idea that if you want to play games on another TV you'll have to unplug HDMI + Power.

[Daniel644]

3 minutes ago, skywake said:

I don't understand why this is a sticking point for so many people. You don't need the dock to charge because it's USB Type C and you can get a USB Type C cable for a few dollars. You don't need it to have the Switch work on your TV because there is a dock included in the box. The only reason you'd want extra docks is so that you can easily swap between multiple TVs/monitors. Emphasis on the easy because you can still physically unplug the dock and move it even without a second dock.

 

Is it overpriced? Definitely, 100%. It should be at least 30% cheaper if not half the price. But it's not a necessary thing. An extra dock is a convenience ontop of a convenience that you didn't even know you wanted a few months ago. The fact that we're even talking about being able to unplug a console from one TV and move it to another mid-game is crazy in itself. The closest thing you can get to that on other systems is in-home streaming. I just think its odd that people will complain that this non-mandatory option for a fairly niche scenario which isn't really available on other platforms is too expensive....

you kinda answered your own question, it's a STUPID price for a "convenience" feature. but that was just one of the things that jumped out as negatives. by the time you buy a second set of Joycon controllers and a second dock you are $170 of the $299 price tag for the "console".

[The Sloth]

really excited hope they hit it out of the part with this. the concept is awesome just hope the end product is good. 

[skywake]

31 minutes ago, Daniel644 said:

you kinda answered your own question, it's a STUPID price for a "convenience" feature. but that was just one of the things that jumped out as negatives. by the time you buy a second set of Joycon controllers and a second dock you are $170 of the $299 price tag for the "console".

You're complaining that out of the box you only get:

- A portable console

- A dock for that portable console to connect to your TV

- Two controller halves that can be used for single player or 2 player for some games

- A bit of plastic that turns those controller halves into a standard controller

- HDMI/Power cables

 

While in every other console package you get:

- A home console that you can connect to your TV

- A single controller for one player

- HDMI/Power cables

 

"The Switch is expensive when you factor in the cost of extra Joycons and docks". Well sure. But the PS4 gets expensive when you factor in the cost of extra controllers, a Vita for portable play and a second PS4 for your other TV. So it's not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison.

[twoSalty]

wow. thats a dank thumbnail. "This is like a Picasso, like a Michelan... Donatello, Michelangelo" ~Nicky V

[MoonlightSylv]

LOL WHAT IS THAT THUMBNAIL

 

(not complaining, it's just funny)

[NerdyCoder]

Look at that thumbnail

[Razor512]

That will be a massive failure.

 

It is far too flawed at the hardware level to instill much confidence.

 

Usually when a company opts for non-user replaceable, they are looking at a 1-2 year life cycle. The non-user replaceable battery is usually a planned obsolescence function where since li-ion batteries lose capacity over time, by the time the next device comes out, your current one is not offering as good of an experience anymore,and you are more primed to want a new one.

 

Usually over the course of around 500-800 full charge / discharge cycles, the battery will gradually lose around half of its capacity, If the battery is giving you enough capacity when new to get you through the day, then within a year, if your use habits do not change, then you will be over 1 charge cycle as you have to top the battery up part way through the day, and by the time it has lost a large portion of its capacity, you will be charging it 2+ times per day. This extra cycling will accelerate the rate as which the battery degrades.

 

With the average console lifespan ranging from 5-10 years, there will be a lot of people who will be upset when their device is out of warranty and only offering around an hour of gameplay when off of the dock.

If they wanted to instill any sense of longevity, they would have given it a user replaceable battery for at least the main console with a relatively short battery life, any degradation in the battery will be more noticeable.

 

Overall, they are either focusing on a 2 year life cycle for the console, or they are hoping that people will be enough of a fanboy to pay what will likely be a super inflated price for them to replace the battery (as most people will likely not be willing to do it them self.

[NumLock21]

The reaction of many when they saw the thumbnail.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[GoodBytes]

20 minutes ago, Razor512 said:

Usually when a company opts for non-user replaceable, they are looking at a 1-2 year life cycle. The non-user replaceable battery is usually a planned obsolescence function where since li-ion batteries lose capacity over time, by the time the next device comes out, your current one is not offering as good of an experience anymore,and you are more primed to want a new one.

I don't know what crap you buy. But system with integrated batteries usually put ones that are heat resistant (won't ware out from heat, an issue with older Lithium-Ion battery tech), and can keep 80% of its capacity after 4 years. 3DS and WiiU users can vouch on the long lasting battery of their system. Their capacity might not be great, but they are not garbage batteries either.

 

20 minutes ago, Razor512 said:

With the average console lifespan ranging from 5-10 years, there will be a lot of people who will be upset when their device is out of warranty and only offering around an hour of gameplay when off of the dock.

Maybe back in 2008 or 10, but today with decent Lithium-ion batteries, this is not a problem on any system and controllers using Lithium-ion batteries. I never heard a person complain that they need to buy a new battery for their system, or buy a new controller because the battery is done.

 

20 minutes ago, Razor512 said:

If they wanted to instill any sense of longevity, they would have given it a user replaceable battery for at least the main console with a relatively short battery life, any degradation in the battery will be more noticeable.

 

Overall, they are either focusing on a 2 year life cycle for the console, or they are hoping that people will be enough of a fanboy to pay what will likely be a super inflated price for them to replace the battery (as most people will likely not be willing to do it them self.

I had superb experience with Nintendo when servicing my Wii. Their price was negotiable and even then they were ok. Shipping is handled by them and free both directions.

[Razor512]

You shouldn't have to go through negotiating pricing and shipping items back in forth for minor hardware issues such as a battery.

Also while not the same form factor, the layer construction is the same as with modern lithium polymer cells.

http://industrial.panasonic.com/cdbs/www-data/pdf2/ACA4000/ACA4000CE254.pdf

 

If maintained right, a li-ion battery can last 20 years, but that all depends on how many cycles you put them through. For a low power device like a controller, even a 50% drop in battery capacity will not hurt as much since those devices can go over a week on a single charge in some cases. But if you have a device that is giving you 3 hours of battery life when new, then something like an 18% capacity drop (after around 200 cycles), will be noticeable, as that is a loss of 32.4 minutes of game time.

 

The lack of user replaceable batteries, also harms the people who are willing to take the device apart to replace it, as aftermarket batteries for devices with non-user replaceable batteries, tends to be far more expensive, since the target market is smaller, and they have to justify making a custom battery that will only fit one device. While for devices with a user replaceable battery, the replacements are often far cheaper since more people buy them, and economies of scale and competition can drive prices down.

 

The battery issues I describe, are for modern cells. In the past, they were much worst, where you could only expect to  get around 300 cycles out of a battery before they lost too much capacity to be useful, (e.g., old laptops where after a while, the battery would only be able to run the system for 15-20 minutes).

 

Furthermore, the lack of user replaceable batteries, hurts those who are willing to take their device apart to replace the battery, as due to a smaller target market, economies of scale do not kick in for batteries that have to be custom made to fit a specific device.

 

 

Also wanted to add, if you look at a modern, yet non major branded cell, such as this https://www.sparkfun.com/products/8483

We start to see some pretty bad cycle life. http://www.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Batteries/UnionBattery-2000mAh.pdf

[skywake]

1 hour ago, Razor512 said:

That will be a massive failure. It is far too flawed at the hardware level to instill much confidence.

 

Usually when a company opts for non-user replaceable, they are looking at a 1-2 year life cycle. The non-user replaceable battery is usually a planned obsolescence function where since li-ion batteries lose capacity over time, by the time the next device comes out, your current one is not offering as good of an experience anymore,and you are more primed to want a new one.

Between portable consoles, phones, laptops, tablets and other devices I haven't had this experience with batteries. Yes some devices towards the end of their usable cycle don't hold the charge anymore. But that's pretty much always years into use (i.e. 3-5 years) by which point the hardware is seriously outdated and is in need of replacing anyways. Even devices I have had that had user replaceable batteries, as much of a security blanket that option is, I've never seen the need to replace the battery.

[Razor512]

1 minute ago, skywake said:

Between portable consoles, phones, laptops, tablets and other devices I haven't had this experience with batteries. Yes some devices towards the end of their usable cycle don't hold the charge anymore. But that's pretty much always years into use. By which point the hardware is seriously outdated and is in need of replacing anyways. Even devices I have had that had user replaceable batteries, as much of a security blanket that option is, I've never seen the need to replace the battery.

 

Since the capacity loss is gradual, and many decent smartphones and tablets will last a long time on a single charge, there is room for your use habits to adjust. For example, you may bias the automatic brightness to a slightly lower level, or you may check your email less often, or play fewer games. Overall for devices like this, you will do less with them over time. Beyond that, software updates will improve the efficiency of the device, which helps counter some of the capacity loss, but still over time,  the capacity goes down, and by the time the next device comes out, people are primed to buy it, as their old device is no longer allowing them to comfortably do all that they want, but with a new phone, and new battery, all of a sudden, they are excited at being able to run all of their favorite apps, and  use them more than they did on their last phone, and have more battery left over at the end of the day.

 

The goal of the non-user replaceable battery is to ensure that by the time the next iteration of the device comes out, you are topping the battery up one or more times during the day, and you have to take additional measures to not drain the battery so much.

The issue with the Nintendo switch is that the capacity issues will be felt much earlier on, since the console is so limited in its feature set, it will be almost exclusively used for gaming. With the new Zelda game, they are estimating 3 hours, and it is not that visually demanding of a game. If a more demanding title is used, then it is possibly to end up with even just 2 hours on a single charge, and if that drops to 1.5 hours over the course of a year, then that will be very noticeable, and will negatively impact gameplay.

[Godlygamer23]

Now here's a question I want to pose for myself. Do I purchase a Playstation 4 or Nintendo Switch? The regular PS4 can be had for a sweet deal at the moment, also coming with UC4, but the Switch might be an interesting platform.

[skywake]

44 minutes ago, Razor512 said:

The issue with the Nintendo switch is that the capacity issues will be felt much earlier on, since the console is so limited in its feature set, it will be almost exclusively used for gaming. With the new Zelda game, they are estimating 3 hours, and it is not that visually demanding of a game. If a more demanding title is used, then it is possibly to end up with even just 2 hours on a single charge, and if that drops to 1.5 hours over the course of a year, then that will be very noticeable, and will negatively impact gameplay.

I'd like to see how long your phone would last trying to run a game like Zelda:BotW. Or any portable device of that size for that matter. Just to make things clear here the rated battery life is 2.5-6.5 hours depending on what game you're playing. A more demanding game like Zelda will be closer to 2.5hours, a less demanding game like Shovel Knight will give you closer to 6.5hours. Which is about the same as you'd get on the 3DS or Vita. The only difference being on those older portables "more demanding" is PS2 graphics rather than the half-gen gap between 360 and PS4.

 

And that's on a 4300mAh battery which is pretty decent for a device that size. Really, you're taking the worst case scenario and chipping away at it as much as possible. What you're doing is not really an accurate criticism.

 

11 minutes ago, Godlygamer23 said:

Now here's a question I want to pose for myself. Do I purchase a Playstation 4 or Nintendo Switch? The regular PS4 can be had for a sweet deal at the moment, also coming with UC4, but the Switch might be an interesting platform.

Depends on what you're after. Personally I'm getting it anyway for the Nintendo exclusives, doesn't matter how good the actual device is or not. But even if I wasn't a Nintendo fanboy I think the different form factor makes it a nice complimentary device for my PC. I have my PC for games like Doom at home and I have my Switch for filling in the gaps. If it was Sony making this rather than Nintendo I'd probably still get it... just after E3 instead of at launch....

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Godlygamer23 said:

Now here's a question I want to pose for myself. Do I purchase a Playstation 4 or Nintendo Switch? The regular PS4 can be had for a sweet deal at the moment, also coming with UC4, but the Switch might be an interesting platform.

It all depends on personal preference. I would go with PS4 seing it has cool games (graphically). But that's also because I never owned any Nintendo based device before, only a PS3 with PS move and it was a great experience, especially with PS exclusives. 

 

Wii U is more a family console rather than a competitive or visually stunning gameplay. Though PS4/X1 does offer the same with PS Move and Kinect but not thr same as what Nintendo does. Again it depends on user's preference. Same can be applied to soon to be release Switch.