Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

@WebHead Why wouldn't some people be happy about that? They could play Zelda and Witcher/Skyrim/Doom all on the same system. There are people out there that still aren't convinced to pick up one of the two twins because of a lack of exclusives, maybe the Nintendo exclusives plus uncompromised 3rd party support (not lacking in graphics or online features) would be the system they want.

Again, no matter what Nintendo does, they will disappoint some people.

@DefHalan will some people like it? Absolutely. Will it be enough for what Nintendo wants? I doubt it. Besides during miyamoto interview about NX's new idea he kinda shot this down anyway.

@WebHead We will just have to wait and see. We have been speculating for over a year now, with no more information really given. How can we continue to speculate the same things. It is just a wait and see thing now.

I firmly believe Nintendo has a super clever idea up their sleeves that will appeal to consumers. I am also confident that it will be powered by a box that is not seen as last generation in the eyes of gamers. They have said that they don't want competitors to copy their idea so you already can rule out a generic Playbox proposition.

Edit* As annoyingly optimistic as I am...I am often proven wrong lol

@BiasedSonyFan If they aren't doing something crazy with the NX, why do they need to announce it so soon? In fact the less crazy stuff they do means the less time developers will need to support the system, which means they can wait longer to announce it.

I am not saying it is a generic box, I am just saying there isn't information to say what it is or what it isn't.

@DefHalan well I'm tired of waiting.

@BiasedSonyFan yes, and that is why they are waiting to announce the NX and build that trust. Announcing it too early could destroy the trusr since people might get bored of the concept before it even hits store shelves. There is a double edge sword no matter what Nintendo is doing or how they do it. They need to figure out what will have the most positive impact for their product, which is what they are doing.

@WebHead I am too, but I also don't want them to screw up their launch just to get information out sooner

@DefHalan in fact my nx hype is basically gone at this point. I just like chitchatting with you guys.

@BiasedSonyFan you aren't making any sense. I said the concept might become boring, I didn't say anything about the experience or product.

@WebHead Awww... we like talking to you too lol

@DefHalan I doubt that sometimes lol

@WebHead our conversations may get heated, but I have enjoyed them

@BiasedSonyFan I think a lot of people were bored by the concept behind the Wii U (the GamePad) before it released. There were tons of other factors with the Wii U but by the time the Wii U came out, people weren't too excited for the "Two Screens" anymore since they had been seening it for so long.

Not saying these are the reasons why they are waiting, just reasons why waiting wouldn't be a bad idea.

Hardware wise I believe it's a custom RX470 GPU with 8GB RAM, probably 12GB, HDMI 2.x with upscaled 4K output and a connection port for the Supplemental Computing Device. The SCD will be released a couple of years into the console's life span and will be required for VR if Nintendo decide to go that route. The standard console could probably handle OSVR, but I think they'd want to sell it as part of the SCD upgrade, if and when VR proves itself.

I think the machine will come with a more standard controller, but I still believe that a controller/mobile device with screen is part of the overall package somehow.

@WebHead It's Nintendo, there will be something different. I'm sure of that. The question is whether it's an expensive new feature, something completely different that tries to be its own thing or just a small affordable new feature like to scrollable shoulder buttons we saw earlier.

@BiasedSonyFan We don't know what they have planned. They may not have a hardware feature that is new and interesting, so the console could be a more traditional one. The new and interesting part could software based. The NX could just be that software feature, and the reason why they aren't talking about it. We really have no idea what it is or what they are planning. It could be a traditional console, that doesn't mean there isn't anything new or interesting. And why would they show off a traditional console without its main feature of appeal? Why would they show that main feature of appeal when, since it could be software based, it could easily be copied?

I don't care what other people "feel" about it because they are demonstrably wrong. The Wii U GamePad in terms of functionality and layout is the most conventional controller Nintendo has made since the SNES.

I'll put it this way. If you sat me infront of a screen and asked me to pick one controller for Overwatch, GTA, Rocket League and Super Meat Boy. Just one for all of them. But I had to pick between the Wii U GamePad, WiiMote + Nunchuck, Wavebird and N64 controller. I'd pick the Wii U GamePad. Even if the screen didn't work. So if you want to argue that the Wii U isn't a "traditional console" because GamePad is unconventional? Then you better be ready to also throw the N64 and Gamecube under the bus.....

@BiasedSonyFan
It's a scapegoat, plain and simple. Whether it's their opinion or not that the GamePad is "unconventional" is irrelevant. Because it's not. And that's not the reason why people didn't buy the Wii U. People need to stop blaming the GamePad for everything.

I'll throw a couple of alternate versions of the Wii U timeline out there for you. The first one is as follows. It doesn't get the GamePad, it has no screen on the controller. But in that first year it still doesn't get GTA, FIFA, Battlefield, Minecraft, Tomb Raider. And while it gets Assassin's Creed, Batman and CoD it's still content that's just as good on the PS3/360. Basically it would have been the Wii U but with a Pro Controller in the box instead of the GamePad. Which means that it has no unique features and games like Nintendo Land and Mario Maker wouldn't have been possible. Do you think that would have been a system that sold?

And then there's the other way they could have gone. It still has the GamePad but instead of being PPC based it's x86 based which makes it easier for third parties but Wii BC is lost. They give it enough horsepower that it's close to the XBOne and instead of $350US at launch they sell it for $399US. Which by the time the PS4 launches is $100US more than what the Wii U was going for. Because it's basically a PC it also gets more third party content. For arguments sake lets say Tomb Raider, Battlefield and FIFA but not GTA until the "remastered" versions come out. For that first year its by far the best console to play these games on. Do you think that would have been a system that sold?

If you think the first scenario would have been a more compelling Wii U and the second wouldn't have made a difference then fair enough. Keep saying that it's all the GamePad. But if you think the second scenario would have been a better buy? Than either the Wii U as it is or the other scenario? Then you have to admit to yourself that it wasn't just the GamePad. For what its worth I think with hindsight the second scenario would have worked and the first one would have flopped harder than the Wii U as it was did.

@BiasedSonyFan
The relative success of the Wii, DS, Kinect, iPhone and N64 would suggest otherwise. I don't think people are as opposed to a company changing "what has worked" as you claim. They're far more concerned about what content they can get on this new platform that they couldn't get before. The Wii U didn't fail because the GamePad was a bad idea. The Wii U failed because it lacked the content people wanted.

If the Wii U had been seen as a platform that:
1. Was an upgrade from the PS3/360
2. Was a viable platform for third party content
3. Offered first party experience not available/possible elsewhere

Then it would have done well. The GamePad wasn't the barrier to that. The fact that they didn't sell the GamePad very well until Super Mario Maker was an issue. The fact that in 2013 people were mostly interested in games that didn't come to the Wii U also hurt. And the fact that it failed in these respects didn't make it a non-traditional console. It made it the wrong console for the wrong time.

I think the main issue people had was basically the Gamepad existed instead of a large spec upgrade. Let's look at the XB1 for example, the biggest issues people had with that was not only the initial vision like with always online to work and can't buy/sell preowned games but also the fact that Kinect 2.0 existed instead of a bigger spec upgrade.

Lots of people were happy when Microsoft basically confirmed RIP Kinect a bit before E3 2014 and that's when people started again that Nintendo should abandon the Wii U Gamepad ("If Microsoft can turn back on their gimmick, why can't Nintendo?" logic).

https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2014/05/talking_point_for_be...

I don't understand the graphics argument at all. If graphics is important to gamers, they should buy a PC. Xbox one and ps4 are really not that impressive. Most games run under 1080p60. And since they started with their subscription models, it isn't even more expensive.

For me, the only real argument people use is they want console specific games.