Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

If the connection on the switch itself can be used for high-speed transfer. The devil is in the details. Do you have any breakdown of the pins on the switch, or are you guessing?

Like I say, I'm no expert - it just seems as though the Switch was designed with 'future-proofing' in mind...even if its just to give themselves options down the line. The memory card slot, for example, is capable of handling yet-to-be-released 2TB cards...I just can't imagine why they'd have put these high-speed connections (and ample space) in the back of the dock unless they were at least giving themselves the option of being able to utilise them down the line, somehow? Why else would they be there? ..they're hardly conveniently placed for anything other than a potential plug-in to the back of the Dock itself?

@NaviAndMii

It may we be that they can do it but, yeah, what @NEStalgia said (I almost understood it 😉 ).

Personally I'd have thought it more likely there will be a new iteration of the Switch itself using a more powerful Tegra in two or three years. Maybe the X2 will be a lot cheaper. A more powerful, but completely scaleable SOC for the main system. Existing docks still work as they currently do, as do all the existing games.

While I understand the idea the of a dock expansion pack for the dock, I just cannot see it happening and like what others have said it would fracture the Switch user base. I have also got used to playing all my current games in docked or handheld mode depending the mood I'm in and whether the TV is being used or not. If a game requires the extra horse power of a dock expansion, that means I'm now tied to the dock for that particular game and unable to play in handheld mode I suspect.
I think we will eventually see a hardware revision but personally I believe that will be a Switch 2 or Pro, whatever they want to call it running the latest Nvidia Tegra chip.

I do think we will get PSTV-esque home console model without the tablet, but it would still play all the same games as the original hybrid model.

On the back of the box and the eShop page of every game it's clear to see for the consumer which setups can be used (and with how many players). Every game should aim to have all 3 methods, but ports of touchscreen-based games like Voez and Severed cannot be replicated with other controls without losing essential parts of the core gameplay, so it's fine for those games to still be played on the touchscreen only.

You see, out of 100 games, 2 are touchscreen-only games. That's only 2%.
There will be more coming that are touchscreen-only, hopefully continuing to be only games where it makes logical sense and not because of developer laziness.

@SKTTR It is the idea of a precedent being set. Yes, it may only be these 2 games, and if that stays the same, or just more of that, then I've said nothing, but what if Game Freak does it handheld only? What then?

Edit: Think with me for a sec, what if Game Freak, for example, limits trading to handheld only? Or some other integral feature, because they feel that Pokemon is a handheld game first and foremost? (having been on handhelds exclusively with it's main-line franchises)

Fe (from EA originals) just announced at gamescom for the Switch

@electrolite77 Yeah, that'd make sense ..maybe they just put those ports (and left a little space) in the back of the Switch Dock to give themselves the option down the line? (I'm talking at least a couple of years from now, if not more) ..it could be that they do choose to go down the 'Switch 2' route instead - but at least they appear to have built the console in such a way so as that they have a couple of different options to choose from

I totally respect peoples' conflicting opinions on the subject, either way - it's certainly been a healthy and thought-provoking discussion!

Personally, I think the idea of an 'Expansion Pak'-type-thing could be quite attractive down the line (when the Switch has well and truly established itself, that is) - and, with a bit of careful planning and consideration, Nintendo could make it work without risking the Switch's identity - but, based on those holding the opposite view, it'd certainly be a tricky balancing act (and probably not one that'll come any time soon I imagine - if at all!)

Yes, I understand that. Actually, several consoles have done these sorts of things. Near the end of its life the Atari 2600 had the Supercharger, the Genesis/Mega Drive had the 32X, etc. And maybe when Switch is getting long-in-the-tooth it might do well to get a final boost from a life-extender like this for a small set of going-away titles--but I don't think it's healthy to a console's ecosystem to introduce something like this early in its career as it risks confusion in the market. It's much more a business thing than a tech thing.

http://www.nintendo-insider.com/fe-explores-a-dark-nordic-for...

This looks cool and EA has now announced 2 games.

@chvage Didn't see your comment.

Then they would probably sell less games if people would care that much about trading. I don't see a good business case to limit a game artificially to handheld. Everything except the touchscreen works in TV mode.

@Therad Agreed, but I remember reading somewhere that Game Freak was really attached to the idea of people going out and about to trade, hence why.

The Pokémon main RPGs were never touchscreen-needing games. Since the new Pkmn is a game build from the ground up for Switch it will obviously run in all 3 modes. It is not a tablet, mobile, 3DS, or Wii U port that depends on a touchscreen, you don't need to be concerned.

@SKTTR I hope you're right, I just remember, as I've said to Therad above, that Game Freak was really attached to the idea of people going out and about to enjoy Pokemon, hence handheld preference.

@UmniKnight You can still go out and about and enjoy Pokémon on Switch.

In fact, I'm pretty sure it didn't use a touch screen and used that mantra just fine until Diamond and Pearl. And there would be nothing to gain gameplay wise from using a touchscreen beyond side modes.

So let me ask you this, would they prevent a signal being sent to your TV when playing Pokémon, because of a side mode that needs the touch screen. Or would they just be logical about it, and let you use the controls like in the past for selecting moves and menus and even to this day MOVING AROUND THE WORLD.

You really are horrified of a handheld only future, to the point you're getting so paranoid about a game, that began as a handheld only, with no touchscreen, being suddenly relegated away from a TV screen...just so it can use the touch screen.

Pokemon on Switch will probably work like MK8 Deluxe. If you want to use the touch screen for menus you can while in handheld mode but the game also works perfectly fine via button controls in both handheld and docked modes.

@UmniKnight I think you're giving too little confidence to the dev team at GAME FREAK there, buddy.

@BLP_Software Call me paranoid as you wish, I'll assume the worst, not be caught off guard like Monster Hunter XX did me. And, let me then ask you, why would they be "excited" about how people play the game the most? Why does that matter? Why would Game Freak even care about something so utterly pointless?

@MegaVel91 After MH, I will give nothing confidence. Remember Scalebound? Was to come out on Xbox wasn't it? We know what happened there.

@DarthNocturnal That is true, but if developers can lock in use of either mode, then the fact remains that it can happen. I just don't think Game Freak will manage to get it done properly, considering how attached they are to their out and about game-play (As in, wouldn't surprise me if there are features locked to handheld mode)