Topic: What upcoming Switch game are you most excited about?

@HauntingNostrils Exactly. I just hope that there will be some awesome experiences left without everyone caving to portability and the Switch.

Not everything has to be downgraded and adapted to it. Look at Monster Hunter World, awesome game. Would it have existed the way it does if it was made for Switch? Not a chance.

No, it wouldn't, but the experience is where it's at, and it may well look different but still play the same, Monster Hunter games are only slightly changed from game to game, I can attest to that as I tested the first PSP one when I worked as QA for Sony Europe in Liverpool, it's not some big deal in the mechanics department. Aesthetics are important to people, I get that, but I've been blown away all my life by games like Castlevania and Manic Miner and Splatterhouse, it doesn't take processing power, it just takes ingenuity. I get your point though, man, I do.

@HauntingNostrils I also understand yours. Graphics is just that, without solid gameplay to back it up, you may as well watch a movie. But that gameplay needs to be good, it needs to be fluent, not hampered by the hardware it's on. It needs to be able to render things properly.

An example of this, is a game near and dear to me, that being Total War: Warhammer 2. I've got over 1000 hours in the first game, and am getting there with the 2nd, but my old 960 graphics card can't handle the settings on medium, so I use my PC's memory to give a hand, which in turn gives me frame-drops and performance problems. The game is worth it though, and I'll see about upgrading as soon as finances allows.

As for MH, aye, it's stayed largely the same for quite some time, but now it's really stepped up to the next level with World. Isn't this great for the franchise in general?

@MFD " should your demand for portability overshadow the need for a good game experience? "

Does the presence of portability actually overshadow the game experience? Graphics sure. Game experience? Not unless it's a bad game or a bad port. That's the whole point of Switch. If I wanted bad game experiences in exchange for portability I'd use my Vita....

"Should your want for convenience force all developers to scramble to Switch and port their games?"

Force? No. Create opportunity? Sure. People that are buying Switches want to buy games to play on their Switches. If they developers want to sell games to people who want to play them portably on Switches.....what exactly is the down side for them? Is the alternative to have 3 nearly identical boxes that do the same thing and cause little need for developer ports? Those 3 will become 2 which will inevitably become 1. Only reason XBox still exists at all is because Microsoft has the money to keep shoveling into the abyss until it works, and other business initiatives they'd like to steer with it. No other company would still be doing it.

That's kind of the point of multiplat on a scalable game engine. If you want sparkling 4k graphics you buy an XBox 1 X and a copy of the game to run on it. If I want to have decent 720-1080p TV play and supreme portable play I buy a Switch and a copy of the game to run on it. Similarly on PC, if I want to play the game and not pay much I'll buy a used GTX 1050 and turn the graphics down. If you want supreme 4k you can splurge on SLI GTX 1090Tis and do it. Same game, scaled for different performing hardware. That's the whole reason different platforms exist to begin with....to chose your hardware form factor that works for you. Switch exists to offer a different hardware form factor that can largely play the same games if ported.

" I just hope that there will be some awesome experiences left without everyone caving to portability and the Switch."

Thing is awesome experiences were already downgraded for the current consoles. PC ran circles around them a decade ago. PC games were dumbed down to accomodate X-BOX. Then held back again for PS3/X360. And PS4/X1 wasn't that much of a bump and PC continues to be held back. Powerful hardware could do so much more. But....at what cost? And what shrinkage to the player base? Truly, Switch and PS4 are closer to each other than PS4 is to high end PC.....so who is limiting who? And can developers afford the budgets for those "awesome experiences"?

As for MHW ,it wouldn't have to be that dumbed down to run on Switch. The gameplay itself isn't much more demanding than the 3DS games. The visuals are quite demanding. The animations are demanding. That could be changed without breaking the game. (In the case of MHW speaking of portability, I'm not buying it because on a non-portable device it wouldn't see the play time it needs to shine. A grindy game works better portable for me. A narrative game works ok on PS4 for me.) It won't come to Switch because the in house engine isn't suited for it without too much work. But the game could have had it been implemented in a way that could. I fully suspect the next MH will take the World type gameplay to Switch.

Are you talking about changing the GAMEPLAY or are you talking about changing the graphics to benefit switch? Those aren't the same thing. Much of the casual market has been convinced that they are, but they aren't.....and switch is reminding people of that. Doom LOOKS way worse on Switch than an X1X. But it plays exactly the same. Of course a top end PC and a nice Razer mouse in high DPI mode....sure...it plays better.

@NEStalgia I understand people's want for convenience, but the Switch doesn't feel equal to me. Go around the internet, and you see praise for it as a handheld, you see people cream over it for it's portability and catering to their lives, but is there anyone who publicly gives a fart about the dock? No, not that I've seen.

If Nintendo advertises Pokemon Switch as the first main-line Pokemon on big-screen, they give me hope that they truly give a damn about the underdog mode. If not, then it's proof that it's a side-accessory, kept around until it's no longer needed.

My hype for Octopath has been rekindled.

@MFD That's a little anecdotal though. People talk about the portable feature about it because that's the unique feature that sets it apart from everything else, and is a feature that many many gamers have dreamed about having, an ACTUAL console rather than a separate portable console that is portable (look at all the XBox and Playstation mod projects to build a display into it to make it "portable", plus the gaming laptop industry.) Casual players have maybe skipped gaming and the Switch makes it appealing by making it portable. Super hardcore gamers have spent decades and hundreds to thousands of dollars to shoehorn "sort of kind of" have portable gaming on this scale. And Switch actually did it for $300. So of course that's what people are going to talk about. Another TV console with less power than X1 but more than 360 and WiiU isn't going to light up forum chatter. A crazy powerful handheld does.

But that doesn't mean the same people don't use or value the dock. It's just not the stand-out feature that makes it interesting. I don't really talk about the dock ever even here, I talk about the awesome portable featureset....but I use the dock about 50% of the time. That's what makes it great. I can play a regular PS4 style session, then pick it up for 15 minutes out of the dock later to "just finish up that one quest" (which usually turns into doing 3 more quests...but oh well, sleep can wait ) or pick it up for 15 minutes to cram in a little crafting, farming, hunting, or "get through the dialog" before I dock it an hour later and play for 2 hours. The dock is key to the flexibility. The portability of course is the part that is unique and interesting to talk about, but if it were just a "4DS" without the dock it wouldn't be the complete package that accommodates all desires in gaming seamlessly. I use it differently than I use my PS4 because it's portable. But I use it differently than I use my 3DS & Vita because it's dockable. In productivity tools they talk about the "workflow" and how better tools have a better workflow. Switch, for gaming, simply has a superior workflow, from portable to dock to portable again. It works the way I dreamed my DMG1000 GameBoy could work with my NES 30 years ago. Do I like what my PS4 Pro can do well? Of course. But it's almost a treat where Switch fits better into the regular flow.

There are definitely people like yourself who ONLY are interested in TV play docked, where Switch becomes "only about playing exclusives" since it's not as good at that job as a PSXBox. There are people who are ONLY portable gamers and the big thrill is that it's so powerful for a handheld. But I think the bulk of Switch owners appreciate it specifically because it's both. The ability to go back and forth between handheld and console without losing the game or the progress is precisely why it "caters to people's lives" in a way just another handheld wouldn't.

I think Nintendo's own data showed that more hours were used in docked mode by owners than portable overall. If anything, in actual usage hours, it's portable mode that's underused (and Nintendo's own data shows it.) So, no, the majority isn't using it as just a handheld. But those docked users are likely ALSO using it as a handheld. People just talk about the handheld part more because that's the part that's cutting edge tech and changes how you can access your games from any time in the past. For casual players that makes gaming more appealing. For core gamers, that really expands how you can engage the hobby. This week I'm catching up on some PS4 games....so I'm using my Switch in handheld mode only when I'm not sitting down for the PS4. Getting some Rabbids battles in, and playing the DQ Builders demo and Octopath demo in. (And testing DBZ:X2 that I impulse bought on sale (shut up @Ryu_Niiyama ), while the PS4 gets the solid hours of couch time. Last month I was all about Odyssey and Rabbids on the dock with some quick handheld sessions of ARMS online. PS4 just can't do that. And yes, I have a Vita and remote play configured. PS4 just can't do that.

@NEStalgia On account of XV2, if you're looking for people, I own that one to. (Wasn't an impulse buy, just me having some really stupid idea about wanting to support third-parties on Switch)

So if someone were to want a Switch for solely docked play, would you dissuade them?

@MFD I have to get into it and figure out how it plays, I'm still in the tutorial. It's a bit overwhelming at first, but I figure it starts to make sense over time. I'm completely unfamiliar with DBZ so it's....an experience! I just have to peel myself away from the Octopath and DQ:B demos and buckle down.

If someone were comparing a Switch versus a PS/XBox solely for docked play of multiplat titles, yeah I'd dissuade them. For any given multiplat, played only on the TV and never utilizing portability, Switch is A) less likely to actually get the game at all, and B) will offer a worse looking version. OTOH for someone looking to play ONLY multiplats, I'd say XBox 1 X would be the best choice for that of the 3. Better online, better performance for multiplats than the other two, so if someone's debating between a PS4 and Switch for docked play-only....it would come down to which games you want. The two libraries aren't going to significantly overlap, so that becomes a pretty hard choice. If you want to play FIFA and COD, well, XBox is kind of ideal, and PS is very close, Switch is a non-starter. If you want to play Uncharted, Gran Turismo and Persona 5 you've only got one choice. And if you want to play BotW, Odyssey, and Splatoon 2, you've only got one choice. PS4 and Switch differentiate themselves very nicely. X360 is mostly a carbon copy of PS4 but with less games and less exclusives unless you LOVE Halo, Gears, and Forza. But if you're mostly about AC: Origins and Titanfall....X1X will do it better.

So PS4 and XBox are different mainly in what kind of gamer they'll attract. PS4 certainly has "more of everything" and X1S really...unless you love the online or exclusives has so little going for it, but X1X has a definite appeal to a certain gamer. But Switch versus either is very different both in library and features.

So for someone that absolutely would NOT use portable, ever, If they're most interested in the games that are on Switch the Switch is still going to be the best platform for them. If they're not interested in the games that are on Switch or are interested in the games on PS4 more, then why would they get a Switch if it offers neither the library nor the features they want?

@subpopz Actually that article is newer than the one I was thinking of, so I don't think there's a newer one. The one I was remembering had the slight skew in the other direction (which seemed odd given Japan's preference for portable.) But in either case, yeah, mixed use has always been the majority. And even using the "opposite" mode 10-20% of the time still puts value on the feature. I wonder if there's many who truly ONLY use it in one mode or the other.

@NEStalgia Yeah... I grew up with Nintendo, you know. Started with SNES, own the original gameboy, all of that. Only had a Playstation 1 back in my day, otherwise only PC and Nintendo so far. I'm just intertwined with their IP, sadly, since Nintendo is all to keenly aware of that and constantly making me wonder what the fluff they're doing

As I've said to Thanos, I've never really worried about Nintendo's hardware before, but the Switch has me worry in regards to the underdog mode.

@MFD Switch is probably the least worrying Nintendo hardware in AGES, really. NES was a monopoly in the US. SNES was very strong, but dropped a bit. GameBoy was of course iconic and massive (outselling, I believe, even mighty PS2, though it took more years to do it. (Edit: if we trust VGchartz it did not.) ) But N64 was a sharp decline, GCN was a disaster, Wii was a super success but showed Nintendo moving away from the kinds of games those of us that bought their games before had liked, and WiiU was...well....WiiU. Only the DS wasn't very worrying in that time. 3DS launched to a rocky start but then rebounded into a powerhouse. But at first it didn't look that way.

Switch....other than that perception issue you and I'm sure some others may have....it's more powerful as a home console than the predecessor, waaaaay more powerful than any portable that's ever been made by them or Sony, and took off like a rocket right from launch. Introduces the all new hybrid concept of gaming, and based on sales, that concept is very very resonant with gamers/consumers (unlike "2 screen console gaming".....). It mirrors the success of the Wii, while showing a focus on actual gamers rather than trying to lure non-gamers as the primary feature. And is selling Wii-like numbers anyway!

Sure it won't get games like Destiny 2 because the hardware's not a good fit for that. But the "loot crate" audience in gaming is almost creating a new different market. Switch is filling a very big hole, I think, of traditional gamers even from Playstation that are getting annoyed with the microtransaction-alwaysonline-DLC-driven modern gaming and want a pure game experience. I think that hole is bigger than Sony believed existed, and bigger than even Nintendo realized existed.

Like subpopz link shows, the big take-away is no matter if you use it 50/50, or 10/90 in one mode or the other, a huge portion of users are using it as a "switch"....and that's something no other machine does. Whether you only dock it to play a party game with friends, or only undock it to check battle results after a splatfest, it's still utilizing that hybrid nature that only Switch does. It's something you REALLY miss when you can't do it. Even for a quick check on the eshop. PS4 I have to power up the TV and the console and grab a controller just to check the store or download progress. Switch I just pull it out of the dock and check. Sounds silly but after you're used to it gaming seems so awful and inconvenient. Even that makes "hybrid" worthwhile. (Did I mention how awful Remote Play is? I did? Because if I didn't, I should point out Remote Play is awful.... Switch does well what Vita/PS4 does very poorly. RP "works" but it's just such a hassle, and by the time it powers up the PS4, connects....syncs....starts....and then you realize you're missing buttons to really play..... Switch makes that seem so seamless and elegant.) RP has improved since I last checked, it has a 60fps mode now. It works a lot better than it used to. But it's still too much hassle to actually use. Especially now that Switch exists.

If nothing else, Xenoblade 2 should convince you that the dock is still a focus. The poorer performance handheld means docked was their main thinking for that game. But they're not going to ADVERTISE the docked mode specifically because it will always look inferior to PS4/X1X, and it doesn't highlight what makes Switch different. Advertising is all about differentiation. A docked console doesn't differentiate them so they won't highlight that. Being able to undock it does. It seems like the message is working. And if it were just a portable, I don't think sales would be close to what they are. Vita is what a "powerful handheld" looks like sales-wise if it's not backed by a great concept and great games. Switch has either already outsold or is just about to outsell Vita lifetime sales (less than 2M more than WiiU...) In 11 months.....

Looking forward to Dark Souls. Never played it. (Basically, all my posts from last year about looking forward to Skyrim can be reused for Dark Souls!)

@GrailUK Nintendo only gamer? (Just curious.)

@Ryu_Niiyama Pretty much. I really dig their creativity and integrity.

@GrailUK Cool! I'm excited for you then. Did you pick up Skyrim?

@NEStalgia Well, I don't undock my Switch ever, so I don't care for such things either

My roommate is using remote play to play MHW on his base PS4 on PC, and I've not heard him about it...

Well then, how about that part of advertising Pokemon as being the first main-line Pokemon on a big screen? What's your take there?

Bayo 3. Platinum always delivers.

@MFD I haven't actually tried the RP PC app. That'll be a better experience since you can use a real controller. That was introduced later....the original RP was just for Vita...and only supported 30fps....and of course Vita's missing half the buttons and replaces them with the rear touch pad. It now supports 60fps but....it's still a pretty awful experience But only the Vita version is really competition for what Switch does, since the PC app still needs a wired PC and monitor, kind of defeating much of the point of RP

I don't know about Pokemon marketing. It kind of depends on what they do with the engine, which we haven't seen yet. If they try something very different, they'd definitely highlight that. If they go conservative and stick with an isometric game (or pseudo isometric like SuMo) they'll just focus on the game without talking about modes. One thing they WON'T do is highlight portability since that's already assumed for Pokemon And it depends....if they roll out a "2DS" version of Switch portable-only cheap edition, they'll mostly highlight that new hardware with it. If they don't, then there's a fair chance they advertise the big screen "first" for the series.

@Ryu_Niiyama Yep! Loved it. It was comically clunky in places but forgivable because of how much character / story development the game gives you.

@MFD Oh I concur, my friend, It is a good step up, there's something especially pulse-pounding about the atmosphere of a hunt this time around, more so than I've experienced with the series before, although with the limited time I've had on it I am finding it a tad on the easy side - but it's early doors yet.