Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

Well, The Witcher 3 released two years ago, and CDPR is currently working on Gwent and Cyberpunk 2077, so I think that a TW3 Switch port is out of the question. Let alone the question whether the Switch can even run the game or not. It was acceptable on PS4, but it was clear the system had difficulty running the game in some areas. Loading the menu took ages. If you really want to experience the game as it was meant to be, play it on PC.

@NEStalgia I wouldn't say CDPR is one of those companies. I think The Witcher 3 is their third game they ever made. Quite impressive. It didn't have the best performance at launch, but through extensive support, it runs pretty OK now. Personally they're one of my favourite devs. TW3 got a bunch of free DLC, new quests, new weapons and armour. And both expansions have to be the most generous form of DLC to date. The second expansion added easily another 50-80 hours to the main game, and it was only $20. So yeah, a developer with a lot of goodwill, I'm willing to forgive them the fact that their game didn't launch in a great state.

@Grumblevolcano Why? They've already confirmed a new FE game is coming to the Switch. At worst, this would just be a buffer title for 2018. And, moreover, this is still a proper FE game, whereas FF was some multiplayer shooter... thing that didn't resemble the core series at all.

@Octane Yeah. If I ever actually get around to playing the game, it'll be on my PC, which should run it at 60 fps.

Honestly, if the PS4 didn't keep getting good exclusives, I would sell the thing.

That's true for every system! I mostly play exclusives, they tend to be higher quality than the multiplat stuff. I do use my PS4 for the occasional third party game though. I need a laptop for school and work, and I don't really want to switch between a laptop and PC on a daily basis, so my PS4 is also my multiplat machine.

@Ralizah Also, I wouldn't even worry about the 60fps. It runs fine in 30fps. Decreased loading times on PC is where it's at.

@Ralizah Well there's 2 groups of FE fans:
1. All main FE games are proper FE games.
2. Awakening and Fates aren't proper FE games.

@Grumblevolcano It's fake. Even uses fan art on the cover.

@Grumblevolcano If it has all the dlc, I will gladly buy it again. I'm still working on Fates (Revelations) and I only just took Echoes out the shrinkwrap. I am always happy to see more FE the TV out option is more reason enough for me to buy it. So glad the Wiiu got handheld VC.

Edit...Actually if it is just dockable I'll double dip, no questions asked. Can't wait for the new Switch only FE.

I'm disappointed the fanbase split like that really. I mean if there was a complete game genre overhaul (look at Fallout), then sure I could get why the split happened, but some of the complaints the "purists" have make no sense to me.

typos abound.

@Octane I feel like the Switch and PC are both worth owning for the potential of their hardware. The PC gives you the best possible performance in demanding games (as well as allowing you to do about a million other things), and the Switch can be played anywhere.

If you can only own one platform, PS4 is probably the best thanks to its massive library, but it has no value to me as a piece of hardware.

And I'm sure the game is perfectly playable at 30fps, but 60 just feels so much smoother. I wouldn't buy a new platform just to play the game at a higher framerate, but I'd be insane to buy it for my PS4 when I could play it on my PC and have a far smoother gameplay experience. Good to hear load times and such are better on PC as well.

I (mostly) agree with you that exclusives tend to be higher quality, as they're able to fully exploit the potential of a platform in a way multiplats are usually unable to. They gives console libraries a sense of character, too.

@Grumblevolcano I get that not everybody is on board with the direction recent FE games took (and, I'll be honest: Fates was a massive disappointment), but they're nowhere close to being as hated and divisive as FF. Like I said, even if some fans think they're inferior, they're still proper FE games.

Now, if that new FE game for Switch turns out to be a Fire Emblem-themed board game or something, on the other hand...

@Grumblevolcano

Funny, last time I was on Reddit it was "Fates isn't a proper FE game". Somehow Awakening has been allowed!

@Ralizah I think that multiplats by definition are made to appeal to as many people as possible, hence why they're also on all (or most) platforms. Plus, first party games don't necessarily have to make a profit, as long as they can sell a system and in turn sell more games, it's fine too. And as you said, they tend to be better optimised for the hardware than other games.

I wonder: when did realistic graphics stop being the thing everyone wanted and just "meh" in Nintendo fan's books?

Gamecube? I personally still think most GC games still look good. I just prefer 60fps over everything else. A game can look good without cutting edge 4k graphics.

@Hieronymus-E I've never been particularly enamored with realistic art-styles in games. If I want realism, I'll watch a movie. Or go outside. There's no version of GTA that's more realistic than actually going out and carjacking some poor innocent civilian.

I wouldn't double dip on FE Fates. It's a Fire Emblem game, all right, but how I hate Corrin.

Anyway, at this point we've had so much rumours about ports that I take everything with salt until its confirmed. It has lead to a lot of problems for Splatoon, for example, some people still think its a port and not a sequel.

@Hieronymus-E
I think that people so enamored of realistic graphics grew up and had to face the real world.... where they had a lot of realism to face.

I wouldn't buy Fates again, even if I did love Conquest's maps.

Although I don't mind some of the characters. Hey IS, make more games like Echoes, thank you.

@Hieronymus-E Somewhere near the end of the gamecube era, I think. Honestly hyper realistic graphics don't age well. Noting wrong with having people look like people but we are hitting a diminishing returns point now as most games have very poor textures but decent to good object models. However I think it was more the step away from fantasy that brought the split in the camps. Look at JRPGS; most are fantastica,l even Boy Band Road Trip ...I mean FFXV, while many western studios became obsessed with visceral, dark visual cues.

I remember thinking Goldeneye looked amazing... now not so much, yet games that were either technical marvels or more fantastical in artstyle still hold up for me.

@Ryu_Niiyama Pretty sure Wind Waker is the poster boy example here.

I bought FAST RMX 2 days ago and it's such a huge improvement over the Wii U version.I enjoyed it on Wii U but never really loved it.RMX though is a different beast,it feels amazing to me and it looks incredible both docked and in handheld.I never bought the DLC on Wii U so the 14 new tracks make it feel like a new game.The HD rumble adds so much to it too.It's hard to describe how it feels to me,it's like it makes my vehicle feel heavy,it adds a feeling of weight and makes the gameplay more immersive. I've read some folk saying they thought the HD rumble in RMX was terrible though,I don't get that.It's not really powerful but it's definitely noticeable and feels very different to standard rumble.

@IceClimbers example of when nintendo gamers shifted to less graphics obsession? um I remember that there was big backlash to WW due to the Spaceworld demo. A lot of people were expecting an evolution to OoT and felt WW was not the answer. Of course in hindsight now the game was fantastic and and as always Nintendo made a suburb design choice, but I wouldn't say that was when Nintendo gamers abandoned graphics comparisons. I would say that really galvanized the kiddy vs hardcore nonsense that Nintendo has been dealing with ever since. I think those that didn't care about graphics from the start were able to dig in their heels after WW but we started to get obvious splinters in the fanbase. People started drifting and making baseless claims about the library. I know during those days I was a big graphics nut and I used to argue down how the GC looked better than PS2 despite its popularity (I still agree with that from a technical perspective but I lost the fangirl rabid emotion to the argument). I was also in my mid adolescent years when the GC came out...perils of youth. During the gamecube era we still had a decent number of mascot games or SD games. And those dropped off a cliff with the ps3 and 360, while Nintendo remained more varied. I think seeing that comparison (Because quite frankly the ps2 was shovelware central despite the rose tinted glasses) brought many into gameplay and artstyle over realism camp.

Before I comment - this is not a dig at the switch.

We need to stop looking at graphics exclusively. The important thing here is processing power. Yes, graphics can benefit, but so can AI, world building, scope and the precious fps. In addition, peer to peer and straight ports can also benefit with improved architecture. So when we talk about Nintendo fans not caring about graphics, do we also mean the above aren't important also? Nintendo does well making games run at 60fps. Of course, this means cuts in other areas.

I meant in any shape or form, not necessarily the best experience. Technically with AU RRP...

$360AU: 3 extra JoyCon sets
$300AU: 3 extra WiiMote + Nunchuck/CC
$300AU: 3 extra Switch Pro Controllers
$210AU: 3 extra Wii U Pro controller
$120AU: 1 extra JoyCon set

All of these options add four player multi to varying degrees.The Switch is either the cheapest or the most expensive depending on what you're actually demanding. I say let players 3 & 4 share a JoyCon set.