Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions

@Ralizah TBH, I think its just one of those things that we have to wait and see.

I don't no were they will take it ether, but thats evolution I guess.

Xenoblade X has a fantastic soundtrack.

It's probably unpopular from the perspective of IGN, they called the game's soundtrack "noise". But having said that I hate NLA's day theme too, it's pretty deplorable.

@TheJGG This probably follows in line with popular opinions sooo,

IGN is crap.

@TheJGG I like some of X's music, but some of it just isn't to my taste.

I'd have said the NLA day theme is better than the night one, although they're both kinda ruined by those grunty vocals.

The battle and exploration music is much better though and going into overdrive is an absolute banger.

I think I have to go back to before the Gamecube/GBA era to find a Nintendo era that the Switch era matches up well with. Quality is there at the expense of less games. Since owning both a Nintendo console and handheld for their specific era, I've never felt they were compromising quantity to maintain quality. It's crazy to think that in the time it's taking to even see a trailer for Metroid Prime 4, Retro Studios back then was able to assist development with Metroid Prime Hunters as well as develop/release Metroid Prime 3 in 2.5 years. Advancing technology feels like it's hindering development.

While that is true, it is also true that generational leaps are getting smaller each time with more incremental upgrades, rather than bold steps. What this does mean, however, is if the Switch successor jumps right to this current generation, the leap is going to feel like one of the most astronomical in gaming history. You imagine if all you know is 720p rough 30 fps and then suddenly you have like 1440p 60 or something. It'll blow your socks off.

Also, it is worth mentioning the leaps also feel smaller, because it feels like consoles are finally starting to catch up. I feel like this new generation of consoles have shown the viability for the console for really the first time, in a long time. For pretty much every generation before this one, there was really no comparison between the experience of playing a title on PC versus a console.

But if you can now spend 500 quid and play games in 4k 60 fps without all the faff that comes with PC gaming at times, I'd have to assume for a lot of consumers that'd be a lot more tempting than trying to find a likeminded PC, which is likely to probably be more expensive (unless you're savvy with your parts finding and can build itself) for minimal comparable gains.

I feel like eventually, console generations will be defined by a console’s gimmick over power to differentiate itself from other consoles, and past systems.

Something like the Wii U is actually exactly what I want from the Switch 2 or whatever. The Wii U was backwards compatible with all Wii games and controllers but the GamePad was a big new addition that enabled a lot of new game ideas... in theory. In practice it was too important to the usage of the system, so when it turned out that most players didn't see the point of it, the console's image couldn't really be salvaged.

If the Switch's successor has some new gimmick that has as much potential to be revolutionary as the Wii U GamePad had, but without being as intrusive for people who just want to play normal games (and developers who want to make them), it could be a success. But finding that balance would be difficult.

I'm I the only one that thinks nintendo is like the best at doing gimmicks? I mean come on every other console that try'd pretty much failed, or at least phased out.

The wii's gimmick was motion, ds gimmick was a portable gaming, 3ds gimmick was 3d (Though that one kinda sucked) the wii u's gimmick was again on the go gaming, but you could play a console without taking up a whole tv, on top of the touch screen (Even though this bombed) and the switches gimmick is all of that, but you can switch your screen's controllers into actual controllers if you had a grip, or just free style with both your hands.

I don't think sony or Xbox has even touched the amount of gimmicks nintendo has, and most of the time, the real gimmick of there consoles is more power, if you can even count that.

@Snatcher
The only gimmick from XBOX was Kinect, a perfect version of Eyetoy from PS2.

The Best thing from Kinect XBOX 360.
I have to dance like this from Dance Evolution XBOX 360. 😆

@Snatcher Nintendo knows how to do weird ****. They've honed their craft ever since the NES, with ROB and the Zapper which together actually somewhat saved video games as a whole since they were marketed as toys rather than games, enticing people who had been burned hard by the crash a few years prior.

Also, people may say their gimmicks are dumb and stupid, but every time their competitors (PS and Xbox) attempted a similar thing to what Nintendo were doing at the time, it usually backfired. Move and Kinect were blatant attempts to cash in on what the Wii did (another console people said would suck beforehand funnily enough) while Playstation's attempts to combat the DS with the PSP and Vita, while having great games, were crippled by weird data storage choices and the general feeling of 'Why not just get a DS?'.

I've been saying this for a while now, but Nintendo's gimmicks are what makes Nintendo... 'Nintendo'. And if they can find a way to make the next gimmick after the Switch to be even better, I don't think it would be too surprising after everything's that' happened before.

@Pizzamorg
The same has been true of every gaming console when compared to PCs near launch. I think the PS4/XBone was about the closest console launch we got to having PCs look competitive on price/performance. And the 360/PS3 gen extended out for so long that by the end the gap between PCs and Consoles was comically huge. But outside of that, consoles have always been pretty competitive

The same would probably also be true of the PS5 if it wasn't for the outlandish component prices currently. A "mid tier" gaming PC can run rings around a PS5. Problem is a "mid tier" GPU costs a good 5x as much as it an equivalent tier card would have three years ago so building a new PC for gaming right now is just dumb.....

Also sitting on the fence of this hardware power argument. There are diminishing returns for spec. 4K means less than HD etc, etc. But there are still advancement to be had.

In the case of the Switch but, raw spec isn't as important as some of the low hanging fruit they could tackle. Faster storage, HDR, VRR. Easy wins. But even a slight bump in performance would allow games to hit resolution and frame rate targets more consistently. Maybe some more AA, a bit of DLSS, maybe even 1440p. Doesn't have to be dramatic jump to be a significant improvement

The trying to copy and backfiring thing is so true! Every single time they have try'd, it just does so much more poorly.

But your post pretty much sums up what I'm trying to say, and its all soo true! Nintendo's trademark is left field ideas at this point.

Maybe my memory is muddling it a bit, but I am pretty sure this is the closest the gap has been between PC and gaming consoles in memory. Especially when it comes to raw performance, maybe not always visual fidelity, but it is insane that there are people out there who have never experienced 60 fps gaming before this current console generation, something which has been a staple of PC gaming for as long as I can remember.

That divide will of course grow over the course of the generation, especially as the consoles currently do not have a DLSS equivalent, so we're already seeing titles having to sacrifice performance for things like Raytracing (and usually a very compromised version of Raytracing, not the extensive raytracing you can get on PC), so it does fill me with worry about the longevity of this cycle in that regard.

But as others have said, it kinda feels like we're hitting a wall when it comes to raw fidelity (and I know we say that every time, until we push through it), even now it takes a very powerful, well optimised, rig to max out your games, play them in 4k and 60 FPS. With many choosing instead to use a combination of 1440p and DLSS to find a sweet spot between performance and visuals. I am sure 8k gaming will happen one day, but it seems like a wasted endeavour right now. I think the industry reflects that as well, with sideways moves like Raytracing, or improved motion capture, or upscaling tech like DLSS really being a lot of the focus lately, rather than just raw pixels.

@Euler I can agree that the switch needs a successor (I really don't think or want it to be called switch 2 ever, most uncreative name, that or new switch) at some point probably 2024, but I'm not gonna pay 90$ for marginally better graphics on the same games I had on switch just to play them on the new console and I doubt a lot of other people will either. Also they already did a deluxe version of mario kart 8 so another would be hugely unnecessary and super redundant at this point, even if it included all the new dlc with it. Also they shouldn't release a new console every year, every 6-7, or 8 years is good. They do need brand new games though I can agree with that but I would say backwards compatibility would be HIGHLY recommended with the switch, and just every new console they come out with. But that's just my opinion.

@Snatcher The question now becomes does that still make it weird or is it now normal?

(also, I don't why the hell this image is so gigantic)

@Pizzamorg
The PS4 launched in 2013 with something approximating an RX7770. Ish. The 7770 launched in late 2012 with a RRP of $160US (obviously without the rest of the components). The PS4 was $400US at launch. So a PS4 spec on PCs was attainable, if you were smart with your budget, at the same price at launch. Just.

The prices now are kinda stuffed because the PS5 has a RRP of $400US for the base model, $500US for the disc model. If you can get it. It's probably around the spec of a 2070 which launched in 2018 for $500US.... and now sells for $800US.... you can't reach the PS5 spec on PC without over spending

If you go back to the 360? It was equivalent to the 7800gt which sold for $500US at launch. Basically when the 360 launched. The 360 sold for $400US at launch. And the PS3 while expensive was one of the cheaper BluRay players at launch. The PS2 was the same for DVDs. So the absurdity of now has basically taken us back to the old "normal".

Consoles used to be well beyond what PCs could do at the same price. That PCs offered more at reasonable prices and value over the 2010s was unusual

Consoles have always been better value for most people, really, @Pizzamorg .... If you want to share your build for a PC that's the same sort of price as a Series X or PS5 with equivalent specs, please do! You're always paying a bit over the odds for pre-built brand name PCs, so it'll have to be a custom build but we'll assume you can assemble it yourself, even

Fair enough! All I remember is the PS4 running in rough 1080p at a rough 30 fps at a time when PCs could stably lock both, if not higher, as common place. Your Series X/PS5 version of say AC Valhalla isn't going to be a significant stepdown from your PC copy of Valhalla on either a performance, or fidelity, standpoint - even on a PC say two to three times or more, than the price of the console is the point I was making. This was never really the case from memory in the past, but I am getting old, so I bow to your expertise if the truth was otherwise.

"But if you can now spend 500 quid and play games in 4k 60 fps without all the faff that comes with PC gaming at times, I'd have to assume for a lot of consumers that'd be a lot more tempting than trying to find a likeminded PC, which is likely to probably be more expensive (unless you're savvy with your parts finding and can build itself) for minimal comparable gains." Me, on the other page.