@FragRed in all fairness, there’s no way the Wii u could be backwards compatible with the switch. The switch uses cartridges, while the Wii u used discs. What was useless was the lack of GameCube functionality for the Wii u. It had all the proper functions to run it cause the Wii could as well. Those Wind Waker/Twilight princess ports could have been straight from GameCube discs and not rereleased if the functionality for GameCube was added.
Wait, why do we need a signature? Eh, I don’t know. Here’s your signature.
[...]there’s no way the Wii u could be backwards compatible with the switch. What was useless was the lack of GameCube functionality for the Wii U[...]
To be fair to enable full, proper GC backwards compatibility in "final product" sense you would've wanted accessory compatibility. Which the Wii U did lack for GC outside of the GC controller adapter. Also even the methods that allow you to play GC games on the Wii U don't support playing the discs themselves. You were booting them from ISOs loaded to a drive via exploits in the Wii sandbox
Also in regards to them pushing GC ports on the Wii U, there weren't a whole lot. There were more GC ports on Wii than there were on Wii U. I mean there's Twilight Princess and Wind Waker of which Twilight Princess was a Wii game that could already be played on Wii U. And....... actually I think that's the only GC game that was ported to Wii U. Also Wind Waker HD I would argue is probably the most justified HD remaster Nintendo has done. Metroid Prime HD is up there but, Wind Waker HD is IMO the benchmark
With all that said, Nintendo could have put GC games on the Wii U VC. It would have certainly been achievable. Though given the relatively low success of the platform I can understand why they didn't think it was worth the effort. I mean, the Wii U VC quality in general was a bit average. Actually, as much as I loved the Wii U, I plugged mine back in a bit the other day and just in general I'm glad we moved on
But unfortunately, we have lots of hot air here as well since no one here seems to wait to put themselves onto YouTube video to counter those YouTube posters to whom we all can see and hear. They present information in person but those naysayers on here won't go so far as to put themselves but be quarter back couch potato trying to say they are more credible but won't go on the record of themselves on YouTube to counter those poster whom clearly have more creditability then some on here.
@SwitchForce
A couple of things. Speaking for myself but I'm sure others who dislike those "Nintendo news" channels would agree. Firstly I have a full time job, I'm not about to start making a YouTube channel where I discuss the "daily Nintendo news". Also if I was to do that I would want to actually contribute something to the discussion. Which in terms of rumours/speculation I would only be able to do if I had some insider information I could openly discuss. Which I wouldn't do if I had it because that kind of information would inevitably be behind an NDA
The people who make these channels? Either their standards are lower, they have far more time or they have something to add separately and the discussion of rumours/speculation is just a side bit. Most of the time it seems to be just the first two. The only ones I think are worth any time are the ones that have something additional to add. Digital Foundry being the clearest example
Posting on a forum and discussing this stuff? Well that's different. Here everyone is on the same level, everyone has the same starting point. If someone seems like more of an authority? Well it's just because in the open contest of ideas their views seem to win out. If you think someone is wrong? Well we're all on the same footing, your reply will be just as visible as their post. You can be outnumbered sure, but you won't be buried in the comments section or obscured by some algorithm that tries to maximise YouTube ad-revenue
Also.... if I was to land into a lot of money, enough to retire, and decided that I wanted to have a shot at a YouTube channel? It'd probably be something more along the lines of KazeN64 or JeffGeerling. Where I actually go and make something worthwhile and the YouTube video is just a way to put it out there. I certainly wouldn't make a Nintendo news rumour and speculation bit where I dribble on about nothing to waste 20mins of your day
@SwitchForce Do you really think those vidoes add value?! One of them said the Switch 2 is probably coming this year because an announcement for DLC didn't contain game footage - that's tenuous at best!!
@neonpizza I think @skywake said exactly what my stance is on those YouTube channels. And I’ll also add, not everyone can create a YouTube channel because for the likes of people like me, not everyone has a look that sits well on camera or that radio voice. I don’t meet either those criteria so I’d only find myself incredibly uncomfortable and likely find my comments mocking how I look and sound.
NEW WEBSITE LAUNCHED! Regular opinion articles, retro game reviews and impression pieces on new games! ENGAGE VG: EngageVG.com
@MarioBrickLayer Put this way at least they put a face to what they are saying compared to those here whom talks alot but won't go on the record to show who they are and what they say online. Regardless if they are correct or somewhere in-between they are doing something that is recorded for all to see and hear and they can't say oh I didn't say that or that wasn't my account their face is there. Excuses ,...excuses if one can type and rant on here you can do so on Youtube. Webcam are far cheaper then first came out and who cares how you look have you seen those videos for good and bad - did they care not really if people watch/subscribe that is their choice. This is why those on here trying to discredit those whom make video on Youtube rumor or some where in-between have more creditability then someone on here trying to discredit those Youtube posters. If one only cares how they look on Youtube then explaining rumors or what they hear about Nintendo upcoming then they go more issues then making a Youtube channel.
@SwitchForce Having everyone on every forum everywhere on the Internet posting comment videos on Youtube would lead to an unfathomable about of really poor content.
My issues with many of these channels, particularly the ones you posted is that they are just regurgitating content from elsewhere with little to no value being added, their commentary is poor at best. A large number of them are grifters who just react by reposting what others have done.
Personally, I don't care what anyone looks like on youtube, a lot of this type of content would work just as well if it was audio only. You seem to be implying anyone on here who refuses to make Youtube videos doesn't have a valid opinion, which I don't know how to respond to - it's farcical!!
Put this way at least they put a face to what they are saying compared to those here whom talks alot but won't go on the record to show who they are and what they say online.
Yeah, that's BS. I don't need to record myself talking crap for people to go back and see what I've said previously. I've been posting on this site with the same account, name and avatar for over a decade. I literally posted on the first page of this thread and the second page of the official Switch thread which was also originally a rumour and speculation thread for NX. Hell I made posts on here before the 3DS was announced speculating about what it would be, that's how far back my posts go. If you are really that desperate to prove that I've been wrong about things you can go into my comment history
For example in early 2015 I made this comment immediately after the announcement of NX:
I'm fairly confident it's a portable. Just because they included both the 3DS and Wii U on that slide doesn't mean that they must be replacing either both or none. And just because their portable and non-portable divisions are working together doesn't mean the devices will literally merge.
Also think about this from a technical standpoint. If they were to create a "hybrid" it would have to be a portable. Now mobile hardware has improved a lot over the last few years but not quite that much. If it's out next year then assuming they don't want it to be like lava in your hands and they want decent battery? The thing will be somewhere between the Wii and 360 in terms of horsepower. Now I don't know about you but.... I won't be replacing my Wii U for such a device. I would probably retire my 3DS however.
The interesting thing about that level of power however is that it would be powerful enough to play Wii U -ish games. Which if their portable and non-portable guys were talking to each other? Could mean quick and easy porting. And cross-buy
At this point in time? We had absolutely nothing to go on. So this was pure speculation phase. And in a sense, what I said here was certainly more accurate than what a lot of the prominent youtube "news" channels were saying at the time. A lot of them were pushing the idea of Nintendo basically releasing a PS4 Pro. If you remember around the Switch trailer reveal one prominent channel literally had a meltdown over it. While on day 1 I was saying NX would be a portable, that a hybrid would basically be a portable with video out and they'd leverage Wii U content by quickly porting stuff across. (I wish I had been right about cross-buy though)
What I said was definitely wrong for a few reasons. Firstly I didn't expect the Switch to be as large a device as it ended up being, I don't think I expected it to be actively cooled. So the Switch had a lot more thermal headroom than I thought it would. I also expected it to release sooner than it eventually did (I always make this mistake) so by the time it did release tech at the "Nintendo tier" had marched on a bit more than I thought it would have. Both of those things meant I underestimated how powerful it would be, I thought it would be a slight graphical downgrade from Wii U but it ended up being a slight upgrade
Hell, this is a part of a post I made in early 2010 on a post about Miyamoto hinting about a "Wii HD":
yeah, this is close to non-news. Having said that, why wouldn't the next home console from Nintendo do HD? This is 2010 not 2004 and when it comes out it will probably be 2012. At this point if they did less than HD for their home console even the casual gamers would start asking where their pixels are.
Also this fun post in 2009 where I basically dream of a future where Switch exists:
I hope the next gen moves back to cartridges which could soon hold about 8-32GB for under $10 a pop without the horrible seek speeds or read times of optical media. [...] Secondly I hope like hell the next gen consoles drop HDDs and go the NAND flash route. Yes its expensive but damn its fast and also quieter than a mouse. On a home console there isn't much need for multiple TBs of storage (32-64GB is plenty) and the only reason you would want TBs of storage is to playback media..... but that's what external storage is for
So basically... I want a DSi that I can plug into my TV via HDMI that has about the same amount of power as a PS3/360
But the point is, my comment history is up there for all to see. You can read it, it's still there. It's even searchable if you really want. And I've always been one to put theories out there that could easily end up being wrong. So the idea that I can't be held to account over what I say because I don't post my face, date of birth, home address and blood type is BS. This is a raw contest of ideas, there is literally a record of what I've said here on this forum in plain text. What more do you need?
Ah yes, 2015 speculation, good times. Remember that time some crazy punk tried to argue that if Nintendo stopped producing two versions (a portable and a console) of the same games, and instead put all their efforts into single versions, said games would get more attention, top the charts, and sell more than they were selling Wii U & 3DS versions combined.
Said punk even used Smash Bros. as a specific case, predicting it would sell more than 9 million units.
@gcunit: If the Home Console and Handheld console don't require each other, then it isn't a Hybrid Device. Sharing games across the devices is smart and something Nintendo is already working towards. It has its ups and downs and I don't think it will eliminate the need for two versions of games. Certain experiences work better as portable and some work better for at home. But the conversation was about a Hybrid device and if the machines do not require each other then it is not a Hybrid device.
Hence I said above to call it a 2-in-1 if you prefer.
With your Smash Bros example, you are looking at increasing production costs and lowering possible income. That is not going to work for a company. They would need to basically make and test two different versions of a game to run off of two different platforms but only selling 1 copy for those two platforms.
I disagree. Production costs for Smash U and Smash 3DS, when added together, would be greater than the costs of my hypothetical single Smash NX. There would be an obvious efficiency there.
Then, everyone who wanted Smash NX on a portable could still buy it; everyone who wanted it on home console could still buy it. The only sales you'd lose would be those who want it on both. But this would be made up for by the increased desirability of the system (Pro tip: consumers like saving money) and the higher profile of the game, and the system, would see greater profits not less.
Eg. Don't have the figures to hand, but let's say Smash U sold 3 million units and Smash 3DS sold 7 million units. 10 million combined. I would wager that no more than 1 million of those customers bought the game on both systems (meaning 9 million unique customers).
So if the same 9 million bought a copy of Smash NX and could play on either system, the game, and the system/s it could be played on, would receive greater market attention. Imagine the hype - Smash NX topping the home console charts 5 weeks straight. This, and the bonus of being able to play it on a portable or home console, would see software and hardware sales increase, taking the game beyond those 9 million customers. Smash NX GOTY!
@gcunit I haven't read this whole conversation so sorry for butting in, but I thought the the hindsight smash predictions are interesting. Smash sold around 15 million combined wii-u/3DS which is about half the 30 million+ Smash has sold on Switch. I doubt many analysts would have predicted just how much the sales would jump for Switch. Granted, that's only one franchise and the Switch version is very high quality. Of course Switch hardware sales is also higher than wi-u + 3DS but the wi-u sales were so low that practically speaking it is just a comparison with Switch and 3DS. Switch is still very far from hardware beating an actual 'good' dual-generation like snes + gameboy, but it would be interesting to try to compare software sales versus costs.
That switch prediction, 6 years ahead of its time. Now that is beyond impressive! Predict more stuff
To be fair I'm still doing the same sorts of speculation now. My stance now though is that the Switch concept is basically end game. So I don't really expect any dramatic changes from what we already have. Maybe we get something smaller than the Lite and the internal spec will improve. But fundamentally I expect more "Switch". Which isn't that exciting a prediction....
What's up in the air a bit is how they manage the transition to the inevitable higher spec hardware. And on that bit I've been parroting one idea for years. I think they need to keep the architecture similar enough that software purchases can stick around between "generations". Generation transitions are risky, the more they can minimise that risk the better. I expect more games where they release it once and just endlessly release DLC and patches for it rather than doing sequels for new hardware
Calling it now, no Smash for the new hardware. No Mario Kart 9. Instead we'll see these games as they were on Switch on the new eShop with a patch that unlocks more performance. Games as a service is here to stay, like it or not
How they market the new hardware I'm not sure. But I expect the hardware itself will interact with the Switch library not unlike how the GBC interacted with the GB library. And the release of new software will be "cross-gen" in a similar sort of way to what we got back then
@skywake I’m not buying no new Mario Kart or Smash. Nintendo happily released 2 Splatoon games on the same system, a live service franchise. They could have easily just kept adding to Splatoon 2 but they saw how well it sells and made that incredibly easy money. And I bet the next Switch gets multiple new games in the franchise too. They also did 2 Mario Party games without either having DLC. One new Mario Kart per generation is what I expect which will be a live service game but it’ll start with less tracks, characters and vehicles than previous and will slowly drip feed over the years.
NEW WEBSITE LAUNCHED! Regular opinion articles, retro game reviews and impression pieces on new games! ENGAGE VG: EngageVG.com
@FragRed
I could well be wrong but if I was pressed to make a prediction about the next console generation it would be that. It would make sense to extend some of those evergreen titles out potentially even across generations. I mean you can look at it in terms of how many unit sales they could make for one title. Alternatively you could look at how many existing owners of this game there are that are paying for NSO. How many of them you could drag across to new hardware by saying the game will run better over here
With Smash Bros I think its even more cut and dry. I don't think there would be that much interest in pushing for a new Smash without Sakurai and I don't really see Sakurai diving back into Smash anytime soon. So we could definitely have a "console cycle" without a new Smash. But if there's BC I don't think that's a major issue, especially if they drop a performance enhancement patch. I mean the Smash community stubbornly stuck with Melee for years, they can remain enthusiastic without a new title dropping. If Smash on the new hardware has a 120Hz mode or something they'll race to get the new hardware just for that
But yes, Splatoon 3 does go against this idea. I still don't quite understand what the point of Splatoon 3 was. Though you are right, it did somehow still manage to almost match the sales of Splatoon 2. Even so, I don't think it was the greatest move to make. With that said, Splatoon does have a single player mode in a way that Smash and Mario Kart don't so. There's certainly some room for sequels in that sense
With Mario Party? I mean, I don't think anyone buys a Switch for Mario Party. I don't think anyone would maintain a NSO sub for online Mario Party. Also the target audience for Mario Party, I'm not sure they're the sort of user who would pick up DLC. It's a different sort of title entirely
@skywake I'm guessing the next console is released in 2024, my predictions for games on the next console are:-
2024 - 3D Mario + Metroid Prime 4
2025 - Animal Crossing
2026 - Super Smash Bros 6 (7-8 years since Ultimate is a reasonable gap?)
2027 - Splatoon 4
2028 - 3D Zelda
Other games I think fir in there somewhere...
Mario Kart 9 - Obvious one, but not sure when this comes given we're getting DLC until the end of 2023?
3D Donkey Kong - I believe a movie has been confirmed, I think Nintendo will want to try and elevate Donkey Kong to being as close to Mario and Zelda as they can get
Star Fox - Good title for a remaster or new game
F-Zero - depending on if there is any truth to the rumours about something coming this year
@MarioBrickLayer I think Animal Crossing is going to be further out than 2025. Maybe a new Splatoon will take that void. New powerful hardware should allow them the chance to do more with the game. Really, they should have made the third game for the new hardware. But I agree with a new 3D Mario and Metroid Prime 4 being released first year.
NEW WEBSITE LAUNCHED! Regular opinion articles, retro game reviews and impression pieces on new games! ENGAGE VG: EngageVG.com
@skywake Splatoon 2 should have continued with new single player DLC and new maps and weapons added then released a new game for the new Switch hardware. The more powerful hardware should allow them to do a lot more with the game. Since that’s not the path they seemingly took I wonder if Nintendo considers it kinda like COD, only not as frequent. By that I mean multiple games per system.
NEW WEBSITE LAUNCHED! Regular opinion articles, retro game reviews and impression pieces on new games! ENGAGE VG: EngageVG.com
Forums
Topic: The Nintendo Switch Rumor and Speculation Thread
Posts 2,321 to 2,340 of 4,277
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic