Topic: Nintendo Switch 2

Had to split this into a separate post due to length (I was gone most of the day so I missed a lot).

Or maybe you're just oversimplifying these issues into false binaries to make the fanbase look more unpleasable than it is. There are more nuanced solutions that would be able to reduce the complaints (you'll never be able to 100% eliminate them, but there are definitely solutions that will turn down the temperature).

What happened with Mario getting tons of games in the 2010s and barely anything now are two opposite extremes. The best solution would be somewhere in the middle. The 2010s was the definition of quantity over quality with each of those entries being soulless, repetitive rehashes. But now we have barely anything in terms of new content. Ideally what they should want is more along the lines of 1 new game every 5-7 years (and I'm talking in between 3D Marios, adding 2D Marios to the mix gets a lot messier especially in light of what I discussed above of 2D adventure vs. Maker.

VC/NSO you're dealing with different people with different preferences, and there are valid reasons why you might want one or the other (with VC you get a better sense of ownership and don't have to make recurring payments for the game you want, but for NSO if you don't really care that much for a particular game and don't want to play it repeatedly, you can just pay a bulk fee and enjoy a variety of games for cheaper), or even different preferences depending on the game. But nothing says you can't satisfy both. IIRC Game Pass currently has a system where you can pay a subscription and download an individual game for a fee. Adopting something similar to that would be the best of both worlds.

Third party support again is more of a balance. Third parties work best as supporting pillars to a lineup, not something to drive the month and especially not the season/year. They very blatantly do not measure up to Nintendo's first parties.

As for digital games, pricing is a complex and messy issue and narrowing the topic to just digital games is being dishonest. The larger issue at play is that there's a prevailing feeling that everything on Switch 2 is too expensive and the controversy with the digital edition of Yoshi being cheaper likely has less to do with digital games and more to do with thinking Yoshi and the Mysterious Book isn't worth $70 regardless of format (a new trailer that reveals more details about the game might change some people's minds, but some people's minds might already be set in stone with this opinion). There's a lot more factors at play to the pricing issue than just physical vs. digital, there's also factors like the size, scale, scope, and content of the game (some of that also being tied to the genre), perceived upgrades over previous titles, comparisons with similar titles of that generation, and whether or not it's a new game or a re-release of some kind. And because YMMV when it comes to how much those factors matter, you'd be hard pressed to come to a consensus of what's a "fair" price.

So yeah a lot of this is being dishonest by stripping away most of the nuance and underlying reasoning and just boiling down the complaints to their simplest form. And you can't really do that here because that complexity helps resolve some of these surface level conflicts.

I personally believe that the Switch 2 will compete with PS6 / XBox Helix just fine In terms of third party support. Hear me out. When the current generation (PS5 / Series X and S) started, there was a lot of overlap between the previous gen and current gen among third parties, particularly PS4 and PS5. We are only just now getting to the point where a lot of games are skipping PS4, though some companies like Idea Factory (the publisher of the Neptunia series) are still putting out games on the ol' PS4 in the big 2026.

Development times and costs are only getting more intensive as graphics and such get more and more enhanced, and with how much the next generation PS6 / Helix will cost because of things like more powerful hardware combined with more expensive RAM (for anyone who is unaware, starting next month the PS5 will cost $650 in the US), I wouldn't be surprised if even fewer people buy those consoles because of their more expensive price. Which would mean that third parties have incentive to participate in yet another long cross-gen period because more people will have PS5 than PS6, which means it will be more easier to get their games onto Switch 2, since it is able to play games that are playable on PS5, an example being the upcoming Pragmata.

There might be a few really graphically intensive games only available on PS6 and Helix, but other then those few outliers, the rest should be able to exist on Switch 2 easily.

Yeah, nah, I think this is ignoring a few factors at play. On a raw power perspective the Switch 2 is behind the curve compared to the full home console tier products. Without question. But in terms of feature-set it's not behind at all and also won't really be that far behind what the next-gen brings either. And even in terms of raw power you have to consider the fact that there's a push from Sony, Microsoft and Valve for portable devices to be part of the equation. And these devices aren't going to have that same vast performance advantage over Switch 2 that Sony/MS have had over Nintendo's products since the Wii era

The third thing to note is that, at least for the medium term, the price of computing is out of control. If next-gen was to land next year? The audience for that is going to be fairly niche. Most people are going to be entirely priced out of it. Especially if all it is overing is more FPS which, lets be real, is pretty much all you're getting at that higher end now. As long as you have the feature-set, of which the Switch 2 does, most game engines are pretty scalable. The only thing you're getting is more performance and, I would argue, for most people the performance Switch 2 delivers is passable even on demanding games. Not earth shattering, not necessarily ideal, but certainly passable

To be clear I'm not necessarily sold on the idea of GTA6 being on Switch 2. I'm sure it could but I feel like that's more a question of corporate politics, raw cost/reward equations, Rockstar's perception of what "Nintendo gamers" want or some kind of image maintenance thing than a purely technical decision. Basically, I don't expect GTA6 on Switch 2 because I think Rockstar is selling the idea of high performance and "mature" audiences and, in their mind, Nintendo's hardware diminishes that

But I do expect that broadly third party support on Switch 2 will be stronger than it was on Switch. I'd go even further and say that we've already seen evidence of this. Hell, I would suggest that it's mathematically impossible for it to NOT have better third party support given it also plays Switch content

Multiplatform support is the best it’s been since…idk maybe the Gamecube? And with diminishing returns on graphics, the Switch 2 is in a much better position relative to its contemporaries than the Switch ever was.

Also Sony just announced insane price hikes for the PS5. Are they really going all-in on a new generation? Are consumers ready for it?

It's rather amusing knowing this guy is actually being dead serious.

The All-Seeing, All-Knowing Bolt has spoken, thus it must be. Personally I have my doubts and wouldn't get my hopes up, but you'd have to have quite the ego to declare such a thing as immutable fact.

Just like Switch wasn't able to compete with PS5 when it launched... oh wait.

Once again, Almighty Bolt has spoken. He, in his fansite forum wisdom understands scheduling better than the multi-billion dollar corporation with 4 decades experience which has resulted in the fastest selling console in history. If only they hired Bolt for his invaluable, uncanny insight, they wouldn't be in this hole they dug for themselves /s

It's not a DLC expansion, it's just a new "mode" for a game everyone already played on the record breaking Wii U. Why would anyone care about Super Mario 3D World and its brand new expansion, which no one has played yet, on a system everyone owns?

As opposed to just 9... what ever shall we do???

Back in the day, console generations lasted 5-6 years with sub-HD games. Switch is about to enter its 10th year on the market. Longer generations = longer gaps for IP which appear once per generation.

8 brand new 1st party retail releases for Switch 2 in the first 9 months, in addition to half dozen NS2 Editions, many with new content. Doesn't matter how many new games Nintendo releases, this dude will still say it's not enough."

Mmm hmm. It's "totally about Yoshi not being worth the price" which is why the physical price isn't changing in NA and the digital discount applies to ALL future Nintendo releases.

I'm not gonna pretend like I'm always right- Lord knows I've been dead wrong on many occasions, but you'd almost have to go out of your way to be this wrong about virtually everything you post.

@Bolt_Strike Except Switch 2 already does have better 3rd party support than Switch 1 ever did. It's getting major titles day and date like Resident Evil Requiem, Pragmata, 007 First Light, etc., in addition to receiving multiple high profile ports out the gate like Cyberpunk, Street Fighter 6, and Final Fantasy VII Remake.

That's something Switch 1 never really had outside of a small handful of "impossible ports" over the system's life, and it took MONTHS before we got the first few with Skyrim and Doom 2016. That's also in addition to receiving the types of games Switch 1 received and being able to play Switch 1's entire catalog.

Looking at what's upcoming and rumored: Elden Ring and Oblivion Remastered are coming. Devil May Cry V has a listing. MH Wilds is leaked to be in development. Marvel Rivals is confirmed to be in development. Crimson Desert is being looked into. Expedition 33, Metaphor, and Death Stranding are all heavily rumored. RDR2 is basically a poorly kept secret. That's just scratching the surface.