Forums

Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

Posts 1,761 to 1,780 of 46,968

skywake

BiasedSonyFan wrote:

I'm only expressing a common criticism of the Gamepad, whether it is right ot wrong. I've seen gamers immediately dismiss the Wii U because of "the stupid, gimmicky, giant screen" in the middle of the Wii U's controller. To these gamers, the Gamepad breaks away from the tradition of controller design that they have become accustomed to when they buy a video game console. That's not my problem, but it is what it is.

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.....

Edited on by skywake

Some good Aussie musics: King Gizzard, Pond, TFS
"Don't stir the pot" is a nice way of saying "they're too dumb to reason with"

skywake

@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.

Edited on by skywake

Some good Aussie musics: King Gizzard, Pond, TFS
"Don't stir the pot" is a nice way of saying "they're too dumb to reason with"

skywake

@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.

Some good Aussie musics: King Gizzard, Pond, TFS
"Don't stir the pot" is a nice way of saying "they're too dumb to reason with"

Grumblevolcano

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...

Grumblevolcano

Switch Friend Code: SW-2595-6790-2897 | 3DS Friend Code: 3926-6300-7087 | Nintendo Network ID: GrumbleVolcano

Therad

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.

Therad

rallydefault

Therad wrote:

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.

You're right on the resolution, but in terms of "impressive," it really depends on the game. The Order has some of the most beautiful, realistic graphics I've ever seen - and I have a high-end gaming PC. The twins are capable of putting on some incredible graphics. Even Ryse on the Xbox One, especially years ago at launch, was incredibly gorgeous.

But yea, I agree with your original statement that implies gamers really don't care about graphics as much as we argue they do. I think a wrinkle for that, though, is that many many many console gamers don't game on PC at all, leaving them in a sort of vacuum where yea, the graphics on their consoles games could be "not great," but how would they know? They have nothing to compare them against aside from other console games.

rallydefault

parallaxscroll

I think it's NOT a hybrid system, meaning a handheld that plugs into an HDTV or a docking station.

parallaxscroll

Therad

@rallydefault I agree, but those that argue that graphics matters always throws out some specs, when art direction is often more important.

Therad

Octane

@rallydefault It also depends on how you're looking at it. Sure a PC is able to deliver better graphics for multiplat games than consoles, but at what cost? Not every PC gamer has a $1000+ high-end PC. When I compare games on PC to Uncharted 4 for example, then I think consoles still hold up pretty well. I do think that graphics are an important factor, but it's more than just the framerate and resolution. It doesn't have to be the best, but when games can still impress me from a visual point, then that's always better than sub-par graphics.

Octane

skywake

We might be finding out what the NX is pretty soon.....

Edited on by skywake

Some good Aussie musics: King Gizzard, Pond, TFS
"Don't stir the pot" is a nice way of saying "they're too dumb to reason with"

Grumblevolcano

In the end, the hybrid theories are correct then?

Grumblevolcano

Switch Friend Code: SW-2595-6790-2897 | 3DS Friend Code: 3926-6300-7087 | Nintendo Network ID: GrumbleVolcano

rallydefault

@Therad @Octane

Yea, agreed on both accounts. Some PC gamers really do only game on PC, but they play stuff like Dota, which isn't exactly cutting-edge in terms of graphics, but it doesn't have to be. And art direction is, I agree, the #1 most important thing for a game, not pure graphical power. For example, I LOVE the graphics in the game Bastion - they're simple, but it fits the vibe of the game so well. I love the graphics in FF XIV, because they match the more "realistic," thinking man's MMO style the game has going for it.

I'm actually somebody who dreads game developers thinking we only want games that are photo realistic. Blegh. That would be terrible. Though I guess I'm in the right place, because I don't really see Nintendo taking up that idea lol

rallydefault

skywake

Grumblevolcano wrote:

In the end, the hybrid theories are correct then?

It appears so. Also fair to say that I was entirely wrong. But close to the mark early on. Then more wrong recently. Though correct in some respects. But also entirely off the mark.

Some good Aussie musics: King Gizzard, Pond, TFS
"Don't stir the pot" is a nice way of saying "they're too dumb to reason with"

-Green-

Always go with your gut feeling, I always say.

"Enthusiastic Hi" (awkward stare)
Nintendo Switch Code: SW-5081-0666-1429
PS4 Thing: TBA

rallydefault

skywake wrote:

Grumblevolcano wrote:

In the end, the hybrid theories are correct then?

It appears so. Also fair to say that I was entirely wrong. But close to the mark early on. Then more wrong recently. Though correct in some respects. But also entirely off the mark.

I think it looks pretty darn cool. Does this mean, really, that it does replace both the Wii U and 3DS?

rallydefault

skywake

BTW, the chip they're rumoured to be using here? It's approximately half way between the Wii U and the XBOne. Which on a portable system is pretty awesome. It slaughters anything you'll find in a smartphone though some tablets are pretty close. But I wouldn't expect the next big AAA game to appear on it. And the spec makes me wonder about the cost.

Will it bring across third parties? Probably not in the way that we would have wanted. But it is certainly going to make it easier for Nintendo if this is their single platform going forward. Because if you only need to get one Nintendo console for all of the things? It'll have more first party content. So that'll make it a pretty easy sell.

Edited on by skywake

Some good Aussie musics: King Gizzard, Pond, TFS
"Don't stir the pot" is a nice way of saying "they're too dumb to reason with"

skywake

BiasedSonyFan wrote:

There are going to be some disappointed gamers today if the information in that web page is true.

Not that I care, though. I don't think most of the gamers in this thread care either, since it seems that they enjoy Nintendo console regardless of graphics technology.

I for one wanted a portable from the start. So I'm pretty happy with a new portable that can do this...

Edited on by skywake

Some good Aussie musics: King Gizzard, Pond, TFS
"Don't stir the pot" is a nice way of saying "they're too dumb to reason with"

-Green-

Eh, people would be disappointed regardless of what the NX is. You can't please everyone.

"Enthusiastic Hi" (awkward stare)
Nintendo Switch Code: SW-5081-0666-1429
PS4 Thing: TBA

Top

Please login or sign up to reply to this topic