Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

@MarcelRguez
Yes, I know they are, and have said as much.

My point is that despite EA treating Switch like an afterthought (or at least, no better than past gen versions) the game should not be automatically written off. Not saying people should blindly buy it, I'm saying they shouldn't blindly write it off simply because of the engine it's running or one mode the PS4 version has over it.

We aren't complaining because its not the PS4 version.

We are complaining because this has every single hallmark of EA doing very little and using it as justification to give us the finger and walk off.

@MarcelRguez
By that logic one would have no games left to play. And despite intentions, you have to look at what message you're actually sending.

The only message that will be sent to EA is that Nintendo fans won't buy anything they put on the system, and FIFA will well and truly be the last game we see from EA on the Switch. That's the message they'll hear, loud and clear. If you do buy it, perhaps they'll get the message you will tolerate one less mode. But maybe you will. Surely a game with one less mode is better than no games at all?

Sometimes it's better to put your love of games above your pride. When I send a message, I do so on Twitter, where they'll actually hear it and know my intentions (like with Mega Man Collection 2- fans took to Twitter and believe me, they hear us- the comments are a circus). Of course, if a person genuinely doesn't think the game is worth buying then they shouldn't buy it. But if they do... they shouldn't pretend like it's not just because it has a small strike against it.

@DarthNocturnal
Indeed it is.

Which is why the lesser of two evils should be the easy choice. Better to play a game you want and ensure future games you want can see the light of day, than skip a game you want and ensure support is withdrawn. On the one hand, the only price paid is the loss of a single mode, while on the other hand the price paid is missing out on not just one game, but all future games as well.

It's a lose lose, but one demands far greater payment than the other

@MarcelRguez
"Being a sucker"

That's pride talking. All games are not created equal. The sooner you come to terms with that the better. You know how many games have extra content on one system vs another nowadays? That doesn't make them "fundamentally incomplete". It's missing a mode, lets not try to pretend that's more severe than it really is. If a person truly cared about that one mode so much the game is no longer worth buying, I support that decision. If a person doesn't even have a clue with the mode is and only cares about their pride being hurt, then no I do not support that decision.

Especially on Switch, where every game offers twice the value of any other version, lest we forget. Sure, EA is only offering 95% vs PS4/X1, but they're offering 100% vs PS3/360, and thanks to Nintendo you can double that. So 190% value vs PS4/X1. So it absolutely is about pride and nothing else. Ignoring value and focusing only on "what the other guy has". That's pride stemming from envy. It's what it is. If the game isn't worth buying then don't buy it, but if it is, don't pretend like it's not just because version B has something it doesn't.

Judge each and every game based on what it offers, not based on what it doesn't. Just like every console should be judged based on what it offers, as opposed to what it doesn't.

@MarcelRguez I'd never advocate buying something you don't think is worth buying (I certainly won't be buying this, regardless of how much or little content is in it), but it's worth pointing out that if FIFA on Nintendo Switch fails, they're going to chalk it up to Nintendo gamers not buying their games and just write the market off. There's no sense in "sending a message" if they just take away the wrong thing from it.

@Vee_Flames Nah. It's the best game in the series, both on a gameplay and a narrative level. Combat was pretty dynamic and fun.

With that said, I could happily live without ever playing another ND game again. Actually, if Sony didn't keep getting great Japanese exclusives, I'd probably ditch the Playstation brand entirely and go PC + Nintendo exclusively. I play almost nothing but exclusives on my PS4.

@MarcelRguez How? By writing an email? I'm sure EA gets thousands of emails every day saying a variety of things. Your "message" wouldn't be received in any real way.

Like I said, if you don't feel like it's worth your money, then, by all means, don't buy it, but you're not really communicating anything to them other than "we don't want your games." That's presumably already the assumption at EA, otherwise they would support Nintendo consoles more than they do.

@MarcelRguez
I never said you should buy it, only that you (and others) should judge it on its own merits.

they are the same console. It's just that the seller is offering you a battered one when there's another one in mint condition for the same price right next to it

No consoles are the same, or equal. A PS4 version may have less content than X1, yet may run better. There are never two equal versions. Only question is what advantage each version brings to the table, and how much disparity there is.

Missing a mode isn't "battered", it's simply missing a mode. If the two consoles were equal, and a consumer owned both, and it was simply a choice of A or B, with B missing a mode, then yes A would be the default choice. But the thing is no two consoles are equal. And while B is missing a mode, it also adds double the value by including a complete full-parity handheld version for the same price. And then there's the fact not everyone owns both consoles either. What you end up with is a situation where Switch version is still the easy pick for anyone who cares about portability, or for anyone who does not have both consoles. Only for those who don't own Switch, or own both and care nothing for portability/care about graphics more... only for those is that extra mode worth the price.

@Ralizah Well, the story of U4 is excellent. Lots of juicy twists here and there. It's not predictable, and that's what I love the most. I'm not sure if I like the story better than TLoU's, though (and that was a great game).

The gameplay? Nope. Just the other day I encountered Nadine and was like "Yay, I finally get to fight her." All I got was a cinematic with "bash the button" sequences littered all through it. It was like the game was trying to engage me so that I wouldn't be bored to death.
And then you have the whole repetitive hide-in-the-grass scenes where you have to take down all the enemies in order to move along. And climbing. A whole lot of... climbing. And climbing. Combat's pretty fun, sure... but at the end of the day I just try to zip through the game so that I get to the cinematics.. when I can finally TRULY enjoy the game. What does this mean for me? A movie.

I haven't gotten around to playing the other games yet (I have the Uncharted Collection, so it's only a matter of time), but I did try out Uncharted 3 for a bit. All I took from it is that it reminded me of the awfully long intro scene of Twilight Princess. All I had to do was walk around. I couldn't even run (what is this, Pokemon? ). That bar fight at the beginning was decent, though. Hopefully my experience changes when I get to play U3 more.. but I'm not holding my breath.

OK let's be honest here. EA is using the old ignite engine for this. Is it the worst thing in the world? The attractiveness of this title is playing a full fledged fifa on the go. The switch in portable mode is more powerful than ps360. Now if they gave us a a up port of a 360 version would you guys be happy? What I mean is obvious visual upgrade, better textures, stable 60fps, etc. Docked 1080p 60fps. Does anyone here believe this will happen? I'm always gameplay over graphics but at least try EA. Say hey due to time constraints and new hardware we are not using frostbite with this version. But give us an obvious better ignite version with better graphics. Also the story mode won't be available on launch but we are working on it and we are looking to patch it in later. The reason people have little faith and is giving EA crap is because as far as we can see there has been little effort to make switch standout or at least side by side with other versions. You have to give a little to receive a little. It's easy to blame every Nintendo console "lack of power" as to why EA is making these decisions. More could have been done. Hopefully we are pleasantly surprised by what we actually see and get with the switch version. EA you Ned to back up that "custom made for switch" talk.

Unfortunately, despite the majority of console games being bought by hardcore gamers (especially with mobile taking a piece from nearly everything else's success), I'm pretty sure a decent chunk of consoles are only sold for people who buy them for SPORTS11!1!11!1

So if Nintendo Switch doesn't get proper SPORTS11!!!111! then there's a reasonable chance it will hurt 3rd party support as a whole as it won't get games we want specifically because someone who would never play those games we want didn't get it because it lacked handheld SPORTS!1111!!1

However, considering there is an audience for an NBA Jam-lite game that got relatively meh reviews, it is not impossible for me to believe it might succeed regardless of what happens with this version. Switch is such a weird anomaly for software sales that I literally have no idea right now.

@Vee_Flames The gameplay is great compared to the other games in the series. The vast, vast majority of the game doesn't require any sort of adherence to the stealth mechanic. It, along with the new grappling hook mechanic, just adds to the dynamism and possibilities of combat. Much better than previous games, where combat was incredibly basic (punch somebody or hide behind a waist-high wall and shoot/throw grenades at people). The climbing controls are also way better than in previous games. I'm not praising the fact that the game is basically a long, interactive cutscene with some shooting and a lot of climbing: I'm saying it's the best execution of that formula.

TLOU didn't work for me. Game was miserable. Tropey characters. Barely any actual plot. Gameplay was a loop of shooting at hordes of enemies, creeping past clickers, walking slowly while people talk, dragging planks around to make bridges, and tediously creeping around and stealth killing one-dimensional goons.

@kkslider5552000

I really hope that a full fledged nba 2k18 for switch sells very well. I really can't wait to see these ports and how they turn out.

@MarcelRguez
That's just not true. The value of portability is at $40 for sub-HD games, surely $60 for console level HD games. Slightly better graphics are not equal to $40-60. They're just not.

Your point about engines is reaching. You have not seen how the game runs and you cannot judge it's performance until you see how it runs.

Be mad at EA. Call them out... I know I will and am. But I'm not going to pretend the added value of getting an extra handheld version (something that usually cost $100 for Wii U + 3DS or PS4 + Vita) is somehow "offset" by slightly better visual fidelity. Now, this is not to EA's credit, it's to Nintendo's credit in spite of EA. But as a consumer, the bottom line is all that matters, regardless of who's to thank for it.

I've played soccer games before and have had fun with them. If EA does a decent enough job I may be willing to give it a shot. I'm not fussed with all this modes they have. All I want is the core game to be good and look good.

@MarcelRguez
Nintendo did indeed make a trade off of visual fidelity for portability. But yet again you were confusing their cost with consumer value. It may have cost them the same, but as a result the system inherently offers more for the same price, both in terms of hardware and software. It doesn't matter what it cost Nintendo- what matters is what it costs us. Again, the bottom line for consumers. Part of the price we paid was slightly worse visuals in all games, but that doesn't change the fact slightly better visuals don't even remotely compare to the price of a handheld game separately. Which is why the system is such a great value and it's why games like this still offer advantage over other versions.

As for the engine, you can speculate, that's all you can do. A game in Frostbyte can still run like crap and a game in any other version can still run good. There are no guarantees of anything. You are speculating. If it does run worse, when we know for sure, then by all means point it out. But wait until we know.

I'm not defending EA, I'm defending the common sense of not allowing pride to dictate consumer decisions and allowing perceived "insults" to overbare the value of a game.

I say judge based on its own merits. If it's not worthy, then deem it not worthy on its own merits, not simply because of what it lacks compared to some other version (unless slightly better graphics and that one mode are what you truly care about, more so than the the portability of Switch, but if that were true I doubt you'd be in this forum right now as Switch owner)

It would have been nice for Nintendo and EA together to make a switch specific reveal trailer for nintendo YouTube channel. If it's different then embrace it and support it. Don't look down on it.

@Octane Well that isn't a fair comparison. No matter your feelings on Ultra SFII it isn't an exact clone of HD Remix and it isn't missing modes (Bonus stages were removed in 1994 with super turbo...they weren't coming back) and for what it is worth Bomberman is a new game. If you are saying bomberman as a game genre isn't worth the 40 bucks (because you don't like the game itself) that is different than saying oh this game is gimped. When I think gimped I think day one dlc (capcom X Tekken had the dlc already baked into the disk and locked or Dragon Age origins had day one dlc with a built in NPC that doubled as the dlc store front for that content) or in the case of EA actual modes missing from the base game because they can't be bothered to build an optimized port of the current version. Actually reminds me of ME3 on WiiU. A game that didn't even get all of the DLC for that game and then competed with a trilogy that was cheaper and got all the dlc.

For bomberman and USFII it is on the customer to note the changes and decide if they want to pay for the updated (SF) or new (BR) game. with Fifa, EA is just cutting modes to cut costs (or maybe to get the game out on time ) but they are selling a legacy version of the game on a system two gens above the legacy target. With 2K18 coming out on Switch with (as far as we know) no cuts aside from graphics (which is expected) I really can't cut EA any slack. That being said I'll likely buy the game because it is still portable fifa (and my last fifa was 16 which used ignite as well so I won't notice the difference and the games I have played with frostbyte...I kinda don't like), but I am beginning to turn a blind eye (HAHA pun intended!) to EA as a company because of shinanagians like this. I don't say this as a nintendo gamer I say it as a multi system gamer. I should be able to make a choice with my wallet what version of a game I want to play and not be punished for it. I've moved most of my fighting games to PC for instance. I don't always get same day release but I get the same content as console gamers. All I am asking for is parity when possible so I can play where I want...and I've yet to see why it wasn't possible this time around for Fifa.

I think this is the worst part. No matter we take an L on this one.

However I propose this. Wait and see the Pokémon Direct tomorrow.

Two options arise from it:

A) If Switch gets a main series Pokémon game, it means it has Monster Hunter, Fire EMblem, and Pokémon. It inherits the legacy of 3DS and has it's own merits on top of that. EA be damned the 3DS was fine without them, so in that scenario, so will Switch.

B) If its NOT a main game for Switch, then we come back:

B.1 - EA gets our money and we tell them its okay to be treated like dirt, as such, they keep giving us games. Not good consumer practice games, but games.
B.2 - EA walks away because we refuse, we lose their support and the possibility of a snowball effect
B.3 - EA walks anyway, because they clearly saw Switchh as a failure from the start, no matter how well it sells, because EA is EA and they'll find a reason.