Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

@skywake Ok, it seems like you are applying some extremist filter to what I am saying which is causing the misunderstanding. That being said this is my last reply. I don’t mind conversations but when I am being misunderstood the whole time I lose interest in continuing. Apparently I am explaining myself poorly. It feels like you are approaching this as a gamer that is excited for new tech. I’m looking at this purely from sale/business practices. As a gaming enthusiast I am extremely neutral as I will buy a successor in any event.

My argument about devs is that they want the easiest route for development rather than building a team to learn a system or focusing budget on optimization. Thats why many games that could run on switch either aren’t ported or are ported late (and kicked to outside devs). You keep sticking on the ps5 when I am saying that because Nintendo uses a withered tech design philosophy they won’t have the specs that give devs as uniform a development space as possible and that is why I mentioned previous consoles. This isn’t a new thing. This happens each console gen since the N64. So again Nintendo should focus on dev buy in. Because unlike the twins it won’t be automatic.

Nintendo already said the switch will have a long hardware cycle so that isn’t strange. And sales support that. I never said anything about stopping production at all. However if a new system is announced them consumers will buy less of the current system thus slowing momentum. I’ve only ever talked about maintaining momentum. Again with the hope that they are building enough buy in to push momentum to a successor. Again nothing extreme or all or nothing. The entirety of my posts are about how to maintain momentum during a system transition. Nintendo currently can keep stock flowing better than MS and Sony and they should leverage that given that in the shareholders meeting they had to adjust down due to materials shortage I think it is a fair assumption that ordering more parts would be primarily for the system that is flying off the shelves. Even if some of it were for a new system I doubt all of it would be as Nintendo has stated they are impacted with current demand by supply constraints.

Consumers still love the system and most are not gaming enthusiasts that get bored after 6 years to market. The switch is still selling very well. Dev buy in is what it is. Business wise it should stay where the money is but devs can afford to ignore Nintendo due to how games are monetized now. No matter the system. So again dev buy in is essential and that is specs independent; Nintendo has to cultivate those relationships.

Ok we are totally talking at right angles here so I’m done. I hope you get whatever scenario you are hoping for. I will wait and see what Nintendo does.

Has anyone played Klonoa on the Switch yet? I have it on both Switch and PS5 (physical) but have heard it’s not great on Switch which is a bummer be I bought it on there for portable play.

@alexwolf I think a eight year gap isn't the craziest thing in the world. The Xbox 360 was on sale for eight years before the Xbox One released. The PS3, Xbox One, and PS4 all lasted for seven years before their successors released.

@HotGoomba Kinect and PS Move (both in 2010) were kind of a Gen 7.5 (Xbox 360 and PS3 were Gen 7), not in terms of power but more that new hardware changed the game lineup rather dramatically.

The five to seven year console cycle hasn't been a thing in decades. The PS2 wasn't discontinued until twelve years after its launch. The X360 and PS3 both ran for almost a decade themselves. We got nine years of support for 3DS. And we're only into year six of the Switch.

Prepare to strap in for at least a few more before we get a Switch successor, folks.

@Magician In fairness, almost every device is supported for years after a successor releases.

@FragRed Seems fine to me. Native-ish resolution, decent load times, etc. The framerate hangs out around 50+ fps most of the time.

Yeah I don’t understand why even day1 adoptees are expecting like a four year cycle or something. That’s one of the best parts about console gaming unlike mobile. I’m not a fan of the mid gen upgrades though. Like slim it down, increase hdd space but don’t change the performance specs of the machine family. Hence why I am sitting on my Ps4 and xbone. Waiting on the day i can walk into a store and walk out with both the twins. Luckily for me no games that I really want have come out as exclusive yet. So my old twins (especially with gamepass) work just fine. Optimize and push for well made games. That is all we really need.

Edit: Welp was able to get a series x.

I have a physical release of a game and when I try to get gold points to for it, it says cannot collect points for this software yet. Why not yet, the game is only released 3 months on eshop and physical ?

@Ninfan Because Nintendo Gold Points redemption is a joke, especially for physical games.

@Grumblevolcano Sony barely supported the PS Move, at least to the extent of the Kinect, so I don't think fully agree with those add-ons being "Gen 7.5". But the Kinect definitely brought back some light into the systems, even if it was short-term.

It's time...

@Ninfan
A lot of physical games do that for some reason. It's only 1% back on physical anyways, so you're missing out on 20 cents to 60 cents, depending on the game. It's annoying but not a big enough deal to ruffle my feathers.

@HotGoomba
While gold coin redemption for physical games is half baked, the redemption for digital is absolutely phenomenal. 5% back automatically, with some games promotioned with even more gold coins? That's money in the bank.

Buying eShop cards from eneba gets you at least 10% off (13% off last 2 times I bought), with 2% back from using my CC to make the purchase, with another 5% back in gold coins when spent on the eShop... that's basically 20% off every single digital game, day one.

Back in the day when BestBuy used to have the Gamer's Club Unlocked membership (GCU) it was a $30 membership fee to get a 20% off discount on all physical games. Now granted, it also worked for amiibo at the time, and any game/controller "bundle" would typically also qualify (like Mario Party bundled with a Wiimote), but still. This is basically just as good as GCU, but for digital games, all without a membership fee.

I love it. The gold coin program is by far the best rewards program of any of the major platforms. MS and Sony have okay membership programs, and Steam's sucks with just SteamShop points good for avatars and emoticons and stuff. I wish every platform would just give you 5% back on every purchase.

@NeonPizza
Doom Eternal actually has a remarkably stable frame rate.

It's pared back visually and only outputs at 720p docked, but framerate is excellent. Far improved over the original Doom 2016 Switch port, and even that was playable.

Handheld Doom Eternal on Switch is chef's kiss. Especially on Switch Lite where the smaller screen hides the lower res. It's so fast in motion you don't even notice. I've never played a more exhilarating portable game than Doom Eternal on Switch in handheld mode via gyro aiming.

@Anti-Matter do switch releases on Play-Asia, have an English language option in the settings ?

@Ninfan
Not every Japanese games have English language option, depend on who is the developer.

@NeonPizza
I mean, to be fair, comparing to 60fps or 120fps is always going to seem lacking by comparison. And Switch just isn't the device for that. I think most people (myself included) aren't nearly as sensitive to image as you are, to the point they're always comparing to 120fps and referencing CRTs and talking about motion judder, etc.

So while I acknowledge perception is completely subjective and your experience is of course valid for you, the way it was said just came across as declarative, kind of as if, "that's just what it is, it's bad" and I don't think that's the case.

Compared to other 30fps games, I'd rank Doom Eternal on Switch in the 90th percentile for smoothest experience. The motion blur helps with that (in my subjective opinion).

But ya, I just noticed the vast majority of your posts talking about 120 frames and CRTs and all this other stuff most people just don't care much about, so while your experience may be useful for others who share your enthusiast ideals, I don't think it's going to serve as a very reliable indicator for the majority, which is why I wanted to share my experience with the game, as I feel my tolerance and expectations for performance is much more closely aligned with the average Switch owner.

@Ryu_Niiyama
To be honest I think you're completely misunderstanding where I'm coming from. I am a developer, although not a game developer to be fair, and obviously I'm a tech enthusiast. So sure I'm coming to this from that perspective, more power = more possibilities. But to be blunt that's also the reality of the situation here, and good sales/business management has to understand that reality

At the end of the day we're talking about a platform to deliver games. That's all this is. The more compelling games a platform can attract per dollar the more attractive it is to a consumer. And because specs grow exponentially there's always this elastic band that's being stretched every day after launch. Go too early and you miss some of what you could've milked out of it, wait too long and it snaps like it did with the Wii -> Wii U transition. That's the balance these platformers have to make. And it's not easy

Basically game platforms have three main phases. Early on they're super compelling for developers primarily. Solid power, great raw value but the platform maker isn't making much of a margin and the library is pretty small. And from a developers' perspective even if the console bombs you know in the first few years there will be dedicated fans who will still pick it up. A couple of years after launch the hardware isn't quite as good value on its own and developers are starting to hit limits but the library has grown to make up for it in the minds of consumers and the margins are growing. There you hit your peak, when it's most attractive to consumers, which for the Switch was clearly around 2020

From there you enter the third and final phase. The hardware is really starting to show its age so developers are looking for the next thing. Both because other platforms give them more flexibility and because we're at the tail end now and you don't want to launch in trash time. Hell, at this stage the platform holder would be literally telling developers about their next thing. So announcements dry up for consumers. Also for consumers hardware generally has advanced by like 8x/$ so they're looking at other products that run rings around your platform. Does it immediately stop sales? Well no. But it does kill momentum

So when I look at the Switch now? I see a platform that's firmly in the third phase. Which means they need to release new hardware to keep the momentum going. This is why we got the OLED model, and also why we got the New 3DS when we did. Because new hardware? Well that changes the equation, especially if it's a dramatic upgrade at a point where they've already squeezed all they can out of this platform.

So yeah, of course I want new hardware because I'm a techie and I like shiny things. But that doesn't mean it doesn't also make sense from a business perspective. Because like it or not, Nintendo is in the business of selling shiny things. They want to catch the eye of people who are, frankly, far less interested in Nintendo's core IP and far more interested in the raw value of the hardware than I am

@JaxonH Ok, maybe I was a bit strict when it came to Nintendo Gold Points. Mostly because I get physical games.

@Slowdive Great, now I can play a mediocre experience on Switch!

@NeonPizza I'm ok with 30fps, but from what you're saying, it might not be the case for you because you have, what I'm assuming is a 120hz TV, which from what I heard doesn't handle 30fps and 24fps content well. Is that the case, because if it is, it might be the TV smoothing the frame rate, which I think isn't great for Switch games. Or it's the opposite, I don't know, I don't have a OLED TV, I don't even know what I'm talking about lol.

Consumers don't look at it like that. For the average gamer the upgrade path would've been something like PS2/GBA -> Wii/DS -> PS3/3DS -> PS4/Switch. PS2 sales peaked in 2003, Wii sales peaked in 2008, PS3 sales peaked in 2011, PS4 2017, Switch 2020

Switch is definitely into its late mid-life. The promise of a couple of big, highly anticipated games to anchor 2023 (BoTW 2 and MP3) means that it still has relevance and a hook for the enthusiast crowd but that will begin to fade as soon as BoTW 2 is released. The clock is definitely ticking and they will need to talk about a successor next year (even if they can't release it).

I expect that Nintendo will continue with the Switch into a "late phase 3DS" style strategy to move the console into a budget space pitched at younger players. I think we'll see some relatively low cost, low effort ports of 3DS and Wii games (particularly thinking of things like Kirby Planet Robobot, Woolly World, DKC:R, Mario Galaxy 2, WW & TP HD etc.) and possibly other things that target a broad "blue ocean" audience (Nintendogs Switch surely?) or are straightforward to make (Oracle games in HD) or both. They've cultivated this install base - it is time over the next 12 months to harvest that yield in a way that they kind of fumbled with previous consoles like Wii, DS and 3DS then the console can become a budget gateway into the Nintendo ecosystem for a further 2-3 years.

I think the Switch will be far more successful in this role than the Wii, DS or 3DS ever were for a whole host of reasons.

@StuTwo Spunds like what they tried to do with the 3DS... Though in that case they didn't start that until after the Switch had already launched. Wonder if they'd be gunshy to try it again?

@link3710 Maybe but I think that the position of the Switch is much stronger than the 3DS was ever in. Obviously unit sales are much higher for the Switch at this point in its lifecycle but the difference in active install base is probably even greater than the difference in install base.

How many 3DS's were collectors editions or replacement "upgrade" systems with the older version stored in drawers? Few were shared "household systems" in the way that many Switch consoles are. And of course Switch software has always sold incredibly well. The 3DS always had a dedicated fanbase but it was also clearly built around a gimmick that became a bit of an albatross around the games design from early on - it made porting often difficult and meant that (when games were ported) they were typically compromised in some way (or at least perceived as such). Ditto the Wii.

Switch doesn't have these same issues and the nature of the modern eShop means that - whatever its downsides - you can buy good (in some cases definitive) versions of games from most of the biggest franchises.