Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

I will be surprised if Switch 2 = Switch + 3DS.

20 bucks says it will be something lame like New Switch or Super Switch.

They should call it YAS, Yet Another Switch

Well we have seen how Microsoft handled the Xbox line. Xbox > Xbox 360 > Xbox One > Xbox One X > Xbox Series X/S. Microsoft managed somehow to convince people each time yes this is the next generation hardware in our platform but it can (sorta in regards to original Xbox & 360) run old generation games. If the next Switch is somewhere in the ballpark of PS4 power then it shouldn’t be hard to convince people just based on the graphics alone. That’s what marketing should push, the leap in terms of graphics because to your average gamer that’s the easiest and best way to understand why they need the upgrade outside of exclusives.

Or Switch Too.

While I understand Nintendo's proclivity to not use numbers (they never have), I think it would behoove them to rethink that strategy.

There's really not that many options for the next Switch with regard to names. They must keep "Switch" in the name. It's become their brand now, much like Xbox is Microsoft's brand and PlayStation is Sony's brand. Switch is now Nintendo's brand.

But how can they modify it for the successor? Well, I can almost certainly say it won't be "New" as much as it might be funny to meme. After the 3DS line used that term for a simple family revision, it's been tainted for use with a successor.

If you look at Switch Lite, it gives us the clues. The name is short, catchy, and conveys purpose, much like the name "Switch" does in the first place.

I think "Switch 4K" is a possibility; however, I think the fact not all games will be able to run at 4K, even with DLSS, and nearly none or them would run native... pretty much rules this name out.

The name must convey the generational leap. Just as "Lite" conveys the handheld only device and "OLED" conveys the OLED device, the next generation needs to convey the fact it's Switch, but the next generation system.

I honestly think Switch 2 is a hard name to beat, as gamers are accustomed to numbering from PlayStation. However, irrespective of my own thoughts, it's clear Nintendo doesn't like numbering schemes.

They could channel their retro glory days and go with "Super Switch", though I suspect it would be a risky move. On the one hand, it's a more flashy and catchy name than Switch 2, and if the stars align could propel the system to similar heights as Switch reached. On the other hand, it's not as clear as to exactly what it is- a better revision with more features but in the same family? If so then in what way? A more powerful "pro" model in the same family? Is it a successor? These are the kinds of questions higher ups will be discussing.

This isn't just some 2 yr revision for a handheld with separate console and portable hardware. This is a crucial transition. The entire company's future hinges on them getting this right. They're not like MS or Sony where video games are just a portion of their overall business. Nintendo Switch accounts for 95% of their total revenue. Unlike past generations, they don't have separate console and handheld lines, much less a 3rd pillar. They must get this right. And I think they obviously know that.

But for that reason, I wouldn't rule out Nintendo deciding to change policy and go with a numbering scheme hence forth. Not doing so may prove too risky for them at this point. As unsexy as a numbering scheme is, it may prove to have the most efficient risk/reward profile.

Naming of the system plenty of times has a connection to the name of the biggest launch game (e.g. Super Mario World, Super Mario 64, Super Mario Advance, Super Mario 64 DS, Wii Sports, New Super Mario Bros. U), so I'm guessing Nintendo Switch Prime. If it's a GBC type situation, Prime 4 would definitely be big enough to be the big launch title and Nintendo seems to have a lot more faith in the Metroid franchise nowadays.

I think this is a very pertinent point. But I think context is also important.

When the Wii U released, Wii had been losing steam for years. The casual market that was widely associated with the Wii had lost interest in the Wii and would have no interest in a more powerful version of it.

The Switch, however, is still going strong. If Nintendo were to ride this success and market the successor simply as a better way to play your Switch games (think more-or-less Xbox's current model, or the iPhone model)...then I think it could work. Heck, I'd even argue that a name like "Switch U" (not U specifically, but in that format), would work reasonably well at this point.

@Grumblevolcano
The games were named after the console not the other way around. Also for most of those consoles the naming was tied very much to what the hardware was. The N64 had a 64bit CPU which mattered in terms of marketing because the previous generation a lot of time was spent talking up the jump from 8 to 16bit. The DS had Dual Screens, the 3DS had 3D, the GBC had Color, the GC was a Cube. I don't think naming the new console after Metroid Prime 4 makes much sense.....

I think the name should be something Nintendo-ish. Some English word that sounds "cool" in Japan because it's English but then we all sit here going "but why?". Something stupid. With that said, and speaking of stupid, there is a very small window where I do very slightly like the idea of them calling it the Switch 2. Because I kinda want to buy a 2.5Gbps network Switch and post it on here like maybe a week before release. Just so I can make a post I finally got a switch with a 2 in its name, then post an iPerf result showing a >2Gbps transfer

So, with Metroid Fusion on the way to NSO this week, I thought I'd pick up some 2D Metroid. I'm new to the series, having previously only played Dread, Zero Mission and Samus Returns (so 5 -> 1 -> 2), so Super Metroid (3) felt like the obvious next step.

And I'm finding it...okay, I guess?

Like, I can really appreciate it for what it was at the time, but there are so many things about it that I find frustrating. Mostly this boils down to the controls (how clunky it is to press select/minus to cycle through weapons, the overly vertical jump, the wall jumping, the grappling) and just how cryptic everything is. I can't imagine having played this without a guide and NSO's rewind function - I would've long given up without these.

Overall, I think Dread is the only game I've played in the series that I would call "great". Zero Mission and Super Metroid feel a bit too tedious and archaic for my tastes and, while I did enjoy Samus Returns, it overall just pales in comparison to Dread.

I will give Fusion a try but maybe it's time I accept that I'm just not that into old-school 2D Metroid. I like it in concept, but I feel I've been a bit spoiled by modern Metroidvanias and the evolution of control schemes and QoL features over time.

I for one don't give a monkeys what they call it. It's the people that didn't buy a Wii U because they thought it was a Wii I'm concerned about. Maybe they should call it something different to Switch all together. Just in case.

@buizel, @Grumblevolcano, @JaxonH e @Jump, for Nintendo next hardware is crucial for Nintendo to name the console with a name that make even the casual players understand this console is a true sucessor of Nintendo Switch, not a mid gen console or a acessory, like the PS4 Pro or the Wii U as Nintendo marketing made many casual players think, it marketing must be crystal clear, whenever the name of the Nintendo Switch sucessor is, is a true sucessor of the console.

@Buizel
I'm a diehard Metroid fan, and even I have trouble going back to Super. The dated controls, floaty jump and difficult navigation is a bit much for me.

But Zero Mission has none of those faults. The controls are excellent (not as good as Dread, obviously- there's no free aim or slide), the jump is quick and responsive, you can grab ledges, its not confusing... alongside Fusion I'd say it's the pinnacle of 2D Metroid in the pre-Dread era. I wouldn't lump in the same group as Super Metroid. Not to say Super isn't also a masterpiece (before I get lynched) but it's one of its time, whereas I think Fusion and Zero Mission are still masterpieces by today's standards.

Fusion is like Zero Mission but it's a bit more linear as it explicitly states where to go next, objective to objective- you just have to find your way there.

Imo, Dread is on another level. It's my favorite 2D Metroid of all time. But Fusion and Zero Mission are still up there. Samus Returns is an incredible remake, it's just that... the source material was the worst entry in the franchise so there's only so much you can do. Still, compared to the original GameBoy release, it's magnificent by comparison. The added map, quick travel spots and entirely new areas with redone graphics and mechanics make it feel like a new game. It's only next to Dread that it feels inferior. It may not be my favorite Metroid but it's still a gosh darn good game in its own right.

But Dread and the Prime Trilogy are the best there is (with Prime 2 being my favorite of the trilogy, but all three are exceptionally good games). Fusion and Zero Mission I'd put a notch below Dread. Then Samus Returns, then Super (if it had better controls and precision movement like Zero Mission I'd rank it on par with Fusion and Zero Mission, unfortunately those aspects hold it back, for me anyways).

My rankings would be:

Prime 1 > Prime 2 > Prime 3 > Fusion > Dread > Hunters > Super > Federation Force > Metroid (NES)

Haven't played Zero Mission or any form of Metroid II (while I did buy Samus Returns day 1, my 3DS wasn't in a good enough shape to play most 3DS games including it). Other M I bought on Wii U VC out of interest for how bad it was but never got around to playing it. Pinball is too different to put in a tier with everything else.

Fusion I put just above Dread given I feel the SA-X sections in Fusion were handled better than the EMMI sections in Dread but the overall games are still very close.

I'm struggling to click with Prime a bit, which is sad for me as I can appreciate fully that it is an 'objectively' good game... and the remaster quality is really quite fantastic.

Which is strange, as I absolutely adore Dread and everything about it. I love having my ass handed to me by several of the bosses, especially the last one(!), and the general tone of the game was great. It was wonderful also to have a tight 8-10 hour experience, and the whole game felt incredibly streamlined from start to finish.

But Prime... just feels like a bit of a slog at times? Fast travel would be a game changer, but also I feel the difficulty curve isn't there either. I appreciate the irony of playing a metroid game and whinging about backtracking, but the backtracking really does feel excessive. I'm 3-4 hours in, but think I'll park it for now and try to come back to it (play from the start) at later date.

Maybe worth noting I came to Prime having just finished off Inscryption - which is/was one of the most unique and incredible gaming experiences I've had!

@JaxonH My main issue with Zero Mission IIRC was the map layout. Also wasn't too keen on the ending sequence as Zero Suit Samus, but that's just me. I also found the bosses to be downright brutal. Dread struck a good balance of the bosses being challenging but also feeling like you had the tools at your disposal to beat them --- whereas I honestly don't find combat all that fun in pre-MercurySteam Metroids.

Fusion does sound a bit more up my alley, which is why I'm willing to give it a try. I think I might be burnt out a bit after Super Metroid though, so I probably won't play it on release.

@CJD87
Prime is built around backtracking. You'll revisit the 5 main areas several times. However, each time you're pushing through into new unexplored areas, except in a few cases where you're temporarily passing through on your way to another area.

The thing you have to do with Prime is, adjust your mindset. I know modern gaming has conditioned us to get what we want immediately, especially those of us in the microwave generation, but for Prime ya just gotta go with the flow and enjoy the ride wherever it takes you. Use the opportunities to keep an eye out for new secrets, mentally map where you need to come back later once you've obtained an upgrade, and just have fun soaking in the world. Don't feel like you need to rush to get where you wanna go. Just pace yourself and make it from save point to save point, taking it one stretch at a time.

All that said, I do expect Prime 4 to offer fast travel in a similar vein to Dread. As a matter of fact, both Prime 2 and Prime 3 had limited forms of fast travel. Prime 1 is the only one that didn't.

Even so, as long as you hit the Artifact Room in Tallon Overworld and scan the artifact statues to get hints on their locations, you can scoop them up as you play the game normally and won't have to worry about making a big round robin gathering quest at the end of the game. I've already collected 10 of the 12, and am in the final area for the last 2, and I plan to grab them on my way through.

@Buizel
Definitely play Prime Remastered, if you haven't already. It's up there with Dread as one of the best Metroid games and by extension, one of my favorite games of all time. Fusion is part of NSO+ and will be waiting for you any time.

@JaxonH Definitely considering picking up Prime, but I'm actually challenging myself to not spend any money on games for a few weeks (maybe even until Zelda is out) as an opportunity to both save money and maybe getting through some of the back log.

Rest assured that it's near the top of my list though. I do have the Trilogy on Wii U so worst case I could give that a go. I didn't quite get along with the controls though...

Wii U name was sound funny for me to see what happened to its sales.
Wii U name sounds like Wee U Wee U Wee U Wee U.... (Ambulance alarm). 😆
And it described exactly the danger situation of Wii U sales.
Lesson for Nintendo, don't give a name that sounds like a danger situation.

@Buizel
Controls have long been the Achilles Heel of the Prime games. The Wii Trilogy motion controls felt better than the original GC controls at the time, but compared to modern control schemes they're simply insufficient, and have always been the one thing I worried about when recommending the games to others. Remastered fixes this issue with flying colors.