"If Sony released a PS Vita 2 in 2020, that had a Tegra Xavier and could run the latest triple-A games, then people would probably buy it, especially if it had a tv-out/dock, like the PSP-2000 and Switch has."
That would probably be a PS5(I just can't see Sony ever releasing two separate dedicated gaming hardware anymore, considering how poorly they supported the Vita), but yeah that would be awesome. The PS5 being a hybrid would make me interested, otherwise I probably wouldn't be.
On to the main topic, no, I don't think Nintendo should've made two separate pieces of hardware. Having all Nintendo games on a single piece of hardware is a dream and judging by the past(Gameboy Player for GCN, the Wii U gamepad), you can see that Nintendo wanted to pull off something like the Switch for years, but the timing/hardware wasn't right.
On to the main topic, no, I don't think Nintendo should've made two separate pieces of hardware. Having all Nintendo games on a single piece of hardware is a dream and judging by the past(Gameboy Player for GCN, the Wii U gamepad), you can see that Nintendo wanted to pull off something like the Switch for years, but the timing/hardware wasn't right.
Yes, this is the best part, that all games will come to the Switch, except maybe a few lingering games before the 3DS gets discontinued.
I also don't see Sony releasing a hybrid and a home console, but it's for different reasons. I think it's just that it's getting too expensive to compete with Microsoft over specs. Think about it, it's unlikely that hardware equal too, or better than the Xbox One X will drop in price any significant amount in the next 2-3 years, and Sony probably don't want the PS5 to cost 700 dollars, so to make a hybrid console makes more sense.
Not at all. One of the good points about the Switch is being able to play your games in a single system, everywhere.
No more buying two console to access to Nintendo's full catalogue. Playing games like XC2 on the go, even with the graphical hit it takes, is a wonder.
@shadow-wolf Absolutely not. For the dedicated home console to be worth it, it would have to play games that the handheld version simply couldn't. Or developers would need to do a lot of extra work to make the games viable on both devices. Further any dedicated home console would have to compete with the already established and hugely successful PS4 line.
The success of the Switch is in large part 2 things. It's strong first party titles, and the unique advantage of it being a hybrid system.
If anything, Nintendo should have released 2 versions of the Switch. A cheaper, entry level version, and a more powerful, "elite" or "pro" version. The cheap one marketed toward kids and/or big families and the more expensive one meant to maximize graphical output and internal storage. But both should still be hybrids - that make them totally distinct from anything Sony or Microsoft have to offer. Both would share the same accessories and such.
Nintendo Switch FC: 4867-2891-2493
Switch username: Em
Discord: Heavyarms55#1475
Pokemon Go FC: 3838 2595 7596
PSN: Heavyarms55zx
@Agriculture It’s considered a failure because though it sold decently hardware wise, a lot of that is down to it being incredibly easy to hack. Actual game sales were low and movie sales were even lower. I remember shops trying practically give them away.
I see. It still doesn't fit the "Sony tried to keep two consoles at once" mantra. Sony is probably thinking about doing their own hybrid console.
Nah sony are done with portable consoles. Going down that route is the easiest way to hand back the home console market to MS
@Agriculture It’s considered a failure because though it sold decently hardware wise, a lot of that is down to it being incredibly easy to hack. Actual game sales were low and movie sales were even lower. I remember shops trying practically give them away.
I see. It still doesn't fit the "Sony tried to keep two consoles at once" mantra. Sony is probably thinking about doing their own hybrid console.
Nah sony are done with portable consoles. Going down that route is the easiest way to hand back the home console market to MS
I'm talking about a hybrid console, like the PSP Go, or the Nintendo Switch. The PS4/PS4 PRO is already weaker than the Xbox One X, so they'll probably gradually lose that market, especially if MS get more exclusives.
Marketingwise, "buy this console, you'll be able to play both on your TV and anywhere" works better than "buy this home console, and if you wanna play your games everwhere you can give us more money to get yet another console but that runs the same stuff".
Had it been that, I might have stuck to the 3DS for a while, waiting for a good reason to upgrade.
PS : Also, I think most people are "portable players" OR "home players" that are happy to very occasionally "do the other" but wouldn't necessarily buy a system twice for the occasional game.
For anyone concerned about the "lesser" performances of an hybrid console like Switch compared to a home console, I suggest you to try Skyrim both on the PS4 Pro and on Switch, lol.
Oh and make sure you take a walk on the seaside or visit a lake.
Lol
I used to be a ripple user like you, then I took The Arrow in the knee
Thanks for all the replies everyone! (Wish there was a reply all option...)
Upon posting this thread, my personal opinion was that I also thought the Switch route was better than having two systems play the same games — Mainly because it allowed home console gamers to try out handheld gaming and handheld gamers to try out home console gaming. And it was a more exciting concept than the two-console concept. However, many people have mentioned how they wished Switch was a home console so it could have more power, so I was curious what other people thought if they had went the two-console route.
But you all have mentioned many more reasons why the Switch concept is better. I do think they did a good job with the Switch and I really really REALLY hope they continue this concept in the future. I will be incredibly disappointed if they revert back to a solely handheld system or solely home console system in the future in the name of "trying something different."
@Joeynator3000 lol. I did realize the title would be a bit of an eyesore in the Forums page, but at least it managed to fit in two lines.
I really don't see Sony doing this. They'd have to make too many compromises and a lot of their whole thing is the 60fps/4K/VR schtick.
In the short to medium term sure but in the long term I think all consoles will start to look like the Switch. Really we're going to hit a point where more power doesn't mean anything anymore. And so at some point the advantages of having more horsepower in a traditional form factor will be overshadowed by the advantages of portability. And really, 1080p/60fps is an entry level spec that portable devices like the Switch will be able to easily handle in a few years. And the jump to 4K is significantly less difficult than the jump to HD was.
I originally thought the NX was going to be 2 systems with the same OS before it was revealed to be the Switch. Nintendo's doing everything major right with the Switch so far so one system's the way to go. My answer would be different if Nintendo majorly messed up the Switch.
CrazyOtto
3DS Friend Code: 4511-0465-7453 | Nintendo Network ID: MrSRArter
Well, a smaller, cheaper, more portable version of the Switch is inevitable at some point. So really, your scenario is kind of what will happen anyway. The Switch and the Switch Lite (or whatever). Both obviously being essentially the same, with all the same games, OS, etc. I mean, there's inevitably going to be a redesign at some point, and it's probably not going to be a bigger model because it's already massive (for a handheld). Nintendo pretty much said all this before the Switch was announced.
No, I disagree with that topic. I wouldn't want two separate consoles to do what one console is already doing. The switch already does things differently. If anything, a new version of this within one system would make a lot of sense than having 2 consoles out there doing pretty much the same thing. The main focuses are it just would not make any sense. Maybe Nintendo can update the switch or come out with a version two. But no I disagree, there is only a need for one console.
This question shows a total lack of understanding how Nintendo operate. Their consoles have always had a hook / gimmick. The gimmick of the Switch is you can play it anywhere. It's a great hook! When Nintendo releases a new console, it will have a new gimmick that the Switch doesn't do and it will either fail, live alongside the Switch or surpass it. No one here has any clue what that will entail. But making a conventional handheld with a conventional home console is something Nintendo have said time and time again they cannot compete with and it's much better to bring a unique item to market. Not sure why folk don't believe them.
I never drive faster than I can see. Besides, it's all in the reflexes.
Imo releasing two separate consoles would be the equivalent of releasing another Wii-U. The reason why the Switch doing so well is because of it's unique concept (also not repeating the same mistakes with the Wii-U) of taking AAA games on the go. It feels amazing to me to be able to play Mario Kart 8 DX in my bed in HD graphics.
There would also be the problem of having to support two consoles at once limiting the library and potential for both.
I truly believe the Switch is the future of gaming.
Forums
Topic: Do you think Nintendo should have released a portable console and a home console that played the same games and had the same OS, instead of the Switch?
Posts 21 to 40 of 40
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.