Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

@YummyHappyPills Shurgs, I just quoted so I could make my comment. I'm in Arizona, USA anyhoo.

@-Green- Nintendo are never going to use normal physical storage, they haven't since the N64 debuted. The storage is a prime reason third party skipped N64 and Gamecube. And with Nintendo seemingly going cartridge only for the future, assuming the Switch is the model they take forward with future consoles, don't expect third party to be strong.

OMG, all the butthurt over one omitted announcement for a shinier version of some old games...

I've very little doubt the Spyro trilogy won't come to Switch, fwiw, not that it'll be for me cos I got the originals to play on my Vita for about £3.

@FragRed It's not just the game cards. That's one, because they're a lot more expensive than Blu-ray discs, and it requires third parties to set up their own game card manufacturing belt, unless they buy from Nintendo. It's less powerful as a result of its hybrid nature, so getting games to run on the Switch takes a little more effort, and since it uses a different architecture to the x86 architecture PS4, Xbox and PC use, this also means that engines need to be ported over to be compatible with the Switch. That's not an issue for games that run on third party engines like Unreal Engine, but a lot of companies still use proprietary engines for their games.

Sure, the result is the Switch, but it comes with compromises, like anything really. The only reason to guarantee nearly every game is to build a PC in a box like the PS4 and Xbox.

@FragRed I'm not expecting anything. I'm not sure why you're telling me about physical storage and stuff.

Really is baffling that Spyro isn't heading to Switch OR PC. If I were to play Crash or Spyro at 30 FPS (PS4 Pro still runs Crash at 30 FPS and I think that'll stay the same for Spyro), I'd play the Switch version instead and have the 60 FPS on PC. PS4/Xbox One versions are already inferior to PC versions, after all.

It really feels like WiiU all again. No sign of Switch releases. Yeah we get games year later or then never.
I dont really understand we Spyro isn't coming to Switch at the same time as PS4 and Xbox. I would love to support Switch but they are making it really hard.

To be fair, there are a number of releases coming to Switch. Like the Crash Bandicoot collection. I don't know why that one is coming to Switch and not the Spyro remake, but I don't know much about either franchise, gaming engines, etc.

I do know that the Switch is different from every other platform and is also very weak. That is going to hurt it. It's just a fact of the matter. The Spyro remake shouldn't be too hard to run on the Switch, but I don't know.

What happened is that third parties took a wait and see approach and then got caught with their pants down when the Switch turned out to be successful. As a result Switch wasn't part of the original planning for several games, leading to late ports of games like South Park and Wolfenstein.

Going forward though, I think we'll still see third party games come to Switch later because publishers realized they can get people to double dip for the Switch version.

Basically, the main reasons to buy those late ports is because you only own a Switch or because you really really love the portability. A lot of the times, it just seems like the Switch player base gets inferior (a result of hardware) more expensive ports. It's sort of draining.

I'll understand if the Switch can't handle the game if there really is so much under the graphical hood. I won't like it, but it's whatever. But not going to PC? THAT is really stupid, especially if Spyro will remain at 30 FPS like Crash did on PS4 anyway.

@IceClimbers How many people are there that double dip on so many games though? A few hundred dedicated Nintendo fans on NintendoLife and other forums? This also means companies have to advertise the game twice, which I think is more expensive than the extra few quid they make from the double dippers.

@Octane Based on sales of some of these ports, there's a few hundred thousand double dippers.

I'll just wait for next year for when Spyro comes out on Switch. Considering all the leaks suggested PC/Switch were coming at a later point (though I don't think a single one mentioned XB1 at launch), I'm not that worried. It'll get here when it gets here.

Switch 3rd party support is ramping up, and it's getting alot (a lot) more support than Wii U.

I want every game on Switch, because games are more enjoyable and more flexible on the system. But I don't even remotely expect every game on the Switch. Just go with the flow. It's a console handheld hybrid in HD. That's cool as heck. And it's getting way more games than 3DS or Vita ever got, and way better games at that. Playable at way higher standard of quality with way more flexibility and diversity.

Besides, to be perfectly honest, who gives a crap about Spyro (or Crash, for that matter) when you've got games like Mario Odyssey and DKC Tropical Freeze. People get so blinded by what they don't have they can't even see what's right in front of them, or how green the grass really is.

But IceClimbers is right. Most 3rd parties were expecting an epic fail and thus did not commit to the system. It'll take several years for Switch versions to be fully rotated in. But there's so many good games I'm super excited for that are coming to Switch, I have little time to care about what's not coming. If I'm super desperate for a game I can just buy it elsewhere.

Basically, count your blessings. We're getting a ton of great games and all of them are, at least to me, 10x more exciting being on Switch. 5 great games on Switch excites me more than 50 games on any other console.

I'm hoping that we'll get Supergiant Games on board of Switch, they make great games, and their quality keep going up. One of the most excellent indie dev I've ever seen.

@subpopz Nintendo could've avoided using carts for Switch by removing the portability. I think that's the point being made, with the N64 onwards Nintendo had a chance to use normal physical storage to get that extra 3rd party support but they went against it because it got in the way of their vision for the console.

For a true digital future to work there are a number of hurdles that still need to be overcome, and that won't be easy due to the number of companies that would need to come together. First of all, Nintendo needs to understand how to do sales better, though they are improving. The biggest problem is the fact Nintendo won't do first party sales.

All three Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo as well as third party publishers need to start handling digital game prices better. Right now it can be quite a bit cheaper to buy physically day one than it is to buy digital, and those digital prices rarely go down unless in a sale, whereas physical does and can go down by a large margin. If you really want to embrace this idea of people buying into your back catalogue, you need to reduce the prices.

Then last of all is internet speeds and download caps. This is still a big problem in large areas of the developed world. I understand Australia are really bad in this department, but large areas of the US still have crap speeds etc as well as the UK. That will require large sums of infrastructure to be spent by the internet providers.

@FragRed The biggest problem with a ''digital future'' is that platform holders will have an effective monopoly on their online store. With physical, if I think the price is too high in one store, I go elsewhere. And if plenty of people do that, that store will lower its price to increase sales. Basic competition. This is not the case for digital storefronts. If you want to buy digital, the platform holder's digital store is your only option. At least there's the option to buy physical right now, and I hope that option remains viable for as long as I live.

https://store.nintendo.co.uk/games-nintendo-switch/spyro-the-...

Thoughts?