One of the questions raised when the Nintendo Switch was announced was if the console would have some sort of dual screen mode. In the reveal trailer, users could be seen switching between the tablet and TV screen, but they weren't shown using both at once in a manner reminiscent of the Wii U. There was a possibility that Nintendo was simply choosing not to show the feature at the time, but it's now been made clear that Nintendo Switch will be a single screen device, full stop.
Polygon recently reached out to Nintendo for clarification over this question and received this response:
Nintendo Switch is dedicated to deliver a single-screen experience, on whatever screen you might choose.
Obviously, Off-TV Play will still feature here – that's the whole point of the console – but it seems that you can kiss those GamePad inventories and maps goodbye. Some may be disappointed to hear this, as the second screen aspect did add to the gameplay experience in many cases, but clearly Nintendo wants to focus on a more conventional approach here.
What do you think? Will you miss the second screen? What do you think were some of the best applications of the idea? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
I'm kinda sad to see this go. I've caught myself a few times looking down at my PS4 controller when playing an open world game, expecting a map or something to be there. Still, I can do without it; it was a nice feature, but not essential.
Yep the maps and inventories available at a touch in your hand were extremely handy but no big deal really.
the retro compatibility with 3ds and WiiU seems less and less likely... plus, if they ask me to buy my eshop library all over again... they can go.....................
the NS looks cool, but i'm getting less than hyped as i hear more about it...
Not really surprised. Can't use the screen when it's plugged in the dock.
And having to use the touch screen entirely for Kirby: Rainbow Curse...
Well, basically Wii U gamepad concept.
If there is dual screen, can you imagine how pixelate and jaggiful of 3DS games when displayed on big TV ?
Having a second screen was at times nice (Zelda, Xenoblade X), but instances in which it was used well were very few and far between.
One less distraction for software developers is the way I see it.
Not surprised either. It enhanced gameplay in some very limited contexts on Wii U (Zombi U, Splatoon, maps, Nintendoland), but honestly it always felt too separated and I'd prefer to pause than leave the top screen hanging while I figure things out on the bottom screen.
This ISN'T TECHNICALLY correct. While a single system may be a single screen experience, the demo showed the NBA game playing across two systems wireless. In theory, a developer could make it so that if you have a second unit it could pair to behave as a second screen with one system merely acting as the host for the tv.
Obviously this wouldn't be a common approach, but I could see it be used for non-core elements/minimum extras like inventory, maps, or such. If the market for such a feature seems small, the developer could just as easily make the same second screen be a tablet. Keep in mind, if you have kids (plural) your not likely to have just one handheld for the car trip, despite that Mario Kart clip. A reasonable percentage of owners will have two or more.
Heck if you want to take it a step further, a developer could make it so that the systems pair together and split the processing across both units effectively doubling the power of the system. That seems unlikely to happen, but in theory it works...
@Urameshi I'm tempted to change my name to Kuwabara now lol
I guess we now know why the map on the gamepad seems to be taken out for BotW. Shame really, loved my second screen!
Most games, I honestly couldn't care less. At least home console games. Splatoon's risk-reward map checking mechanic can probably be substituted with a screen-covering map, and Arkham Armoured... I can live without it.
That said, if this system looks to replace both the home and handheld consoles that 3DS touch screen will be SORELY missed.
This is why when people say it's "basically the Wii U" it drives me crazy. If you think about it, it's nothing like the Wii U.
I haven't experienced Wii U second screen yet, although I suppose it would be hard to imagine a DS/3DS successor without a second screen. It doesn't surprise much that Nintendo moved on from the key feature that failed to boom like Wii's motion controls did, but on the ironic flipside, it contributes to making Wii U its own experience despite the many ports and remakes we're likely bound to see on NS. Including Virtual Console whose DS titles might end up exclusive to Wii U after all. Unless NS emulates the screens side by side somehow. *
In regard to wii u gaming. No!
In regard to handheld ds gaming? Yes!
I'm really sad about the loss of the double-screen gaming. We know that if the Switch becomes a hit in the first 2-3
years of life, then the 3DS will be next.
How will Splatoon be played? I see it as more than possible but I don't want that compromise. I like the map. It makes it possible to find opponents.
I hope it has a touch screen. That way I can play the pokemon tcg.
Sad but unsurprising, considering how many developers (including Nintendo) didn't use that second screen to its full potential.
@ziffy I felt like the 2nd screen was just shoehorned into Splatoon, it could've been perfectly fine with an on-screen map. Motion controls, on the other hand...
It was a fun feature on Wii U, although arguably it caused as many problems as it solved. The main appeal was, after all, off-screen play, and that's exactly what Switch is!
Disappointing but an ommission I can live with. Even if it just would have been used for maps or inventory, it's handy. Now I'll have to look a maps, and menu screens like a cave man
On the plus side, I guess it makes conveying what the Switch can do easier. There aren't a million different functionalities being shown off, like what happened with the Wii U.
That's a bummer, Splatoon won't be the same without it...
Definitely sad to see second screens and such no longer becoming the case for the Switch. I really liked that for the Wii U and I truly would've wanted it to be the same case for this system. Only more than so much words can be described how much having an inventory screen and map helped me in the Zelda Remasters, Lego City Undercover, Axiom Verge, Guacamelee: Super Turbo Championship Edition, Tokyo Mirage Sessions #FE, Shovel Knight, Shantae and the Pirate's Curse, Splatoon, Hyrule Warriors, and much more
Oh well, if that means making it easier for third-party developers to bring their games to the Switch, then I'll try and deal with it
Well that's a shame........
I fully understand why they have chosen to 'move on' from the failed Wii u . However I for one LOVE what the Wii u second screen has done for my gaming choices!!
Games like deus ex and zombie u have been simply better than other versions because of the second screen for starters. Then there are the games like xenoblade and arkam city which you can simply do more to navigate the maps in less time and with far less effort(imagine xenoblade with even MORE menus!!). Then there is the non split screen local play on 1st person shooters etc which I love, or the pikmin 3 companion map option, or the Mario party mini games, or the game &wario style games like the drawing one. All in all, I used the old features extensively so I hope I get as much out of the new device........
Interesting how many features that Nintendo themselves popularised are seemingly being left out for the Switch: a proper d-pad, dual-screen gameplay, a stylus, camera(s), glasses-free 3D and we still don't know about touch or motion controls.
Or...maybe the TV will act as the second screen. Switch console can acts as lower screen and TV acts as upper screen.
@MitchVogel That was certainly possible. I did like the super jump to teamates feature using the gamepad. That could be done by setting teamates to the pro controller +pad. As for motion controls it did have limited pro controller support by having a Wiimote strapped to it to emulate the motion controls. Maybe the new pro controller has it?
I'm fine with this. Obviously on the go the games need to be designed for touch screen use, or fail. I am going to miss the 3DS though.
The d-pad in particular is really disappointing to me. It doesn't matter so much when playing via the TV, since you can just use the classic style controller. But for on the go, it seems like a big problem (I don't envision myself carrying around both the Switch and the classic controller).
Other than that, though, I'm happy with what I've seen regarding the system so far.
@BensonUii We are thinking on the same level.
Disappointing, the second screen was really useful for displaying information, reducing clutter on the main screen. MH3U on the Wii U was beautiful with everything located on the gamepad.
I think for games like Zelda and Xenoblade, the 2nd screen was an incredibly useful feature. Not just for maps but in the case of Zelda, switching items on the fly made for extremely seamless gameplay.
I know my misses is really upset about the loss of a 2nd screen as when we play MK8 or Mario 3D World, she will play solely on the game pad as she's of the tablet generation and hasn't really gamed before the Wii U so likes having the screen 12 inches from her face.
I think that if you had the option, it would have been nice, but that may have made it harder to develop for, which is why they left it out. I mean, we all know what happened to the Wii U...
Some great uses of the gamepad in Zombie U, Arkham City, Deus Ex and Xenoblade Chronicles X. The two screens used in these examples and others enhanced the gameplay very well. It was good to see developers make the most of the control setup and do clever things with it. It's a wonder other 3rd parties weren't keen to do the same.
I'll definitely miss having two screens, and it's kind of why I hope the Switch doesn't replace the DS line... Having two screens has been really handy in a lot of ways, so I hope that doesn't go away for ever.
This is common sense: Single screen = easy porting and developing games for Switch. Wii U and 3DS using dual screens made things difficult to port from other systems.
The return to good old single screen will pleased developers. That means more 3rd parties and more games for everyone.
Also no more gimmicks like 3D, stylus and motion control = traditional gamepad experience. Switch is a return to the Gamecube era with a portability feature.
Kimi is erasing everything that Iwata did.
Splatoon 1 should have had off screen play too.
Disappointing. The Switch probably can't handle it too well. The Switch caused enormous delay to Zelda: BOTW and its limitations are dictating certain aspects of the game. We're supposed to progress not regress with each generation. The Wii U can do things that the Switch can't.
Paper Mario Color Splash have options to enabled or disabled off tv play. When you play it on your Gamepad, the enemies still visible, though in smaller size window.
Good riddance second screen!
@Great_Gonzalez Extremely handy seems big deal for me...
@Anti-Matter they have just confirm that's not the case - even though it was obvious from the video. The dock supposedly is nothing, may have a bit of power for increasing the resolution, but the main purpose is displaying the tablet on the tv. So basically the dock is useless without the tablet
@SLIGEACH_EIRE Thank god there's no second screen. Maybe they won't force the touch screen/motion gimmicks like on Wii U.
@Morshu-San There was nothing wrong with the second screen, they just didn't use it often enough or implement it well enough. It never reached its true potential. Super Mario Maker was its best showpiece and that took 3 years after launch to happen.
@Bflury pretty much everything you just said it utter nonsense and clearly won't come true. Why would the average person buy more than one console for their kids? If a family has a ps4 for example and young kids it is usually shared between the kids, same with the switch, it's a home console that you can carry about but most likely with a home console price.
Seeing as most developers gave up on the wii u screen towards the end I doubt they will even think of the odd person owning 2 of them. And they could do a tablet second screen, but look at ps second screen and ms glass screen, both have about 5 games at the beginning that supported it and then the devs gave up because nobody used/wanted it.
I will miss the second screen, AC black flag and mass effect were greatly improved with the map down there, but the majority complained about it over and over and Nintendo obv is trying to please the majority now
As a big splatoon lover, i'm wondering how they'll do the gyro part for the remix/new version we saw. I tried twin sticks so much but i could never play it right. Got more questions as well. Next year seems so far away....
And just like that, the dream for a Fallout game where the Pip Boy is on the second screen is dead. Just like God. Nintendo killed both.
They appear to making the focus of the Switch clear, which is a good sign.
As someone who loves their Wii U, I am a little disappointed but I'll get over it.
My main disappointment is that my dream of a HD Metroid Prime with a scanner in my hand tracking Metroids reminiscent of the Aliens films is dead 😔
@G-Boy yeah, I know. Splatoon would be much better with an on screen map. not the. look away from the action idea.
@huxxny Yeah i hope with this whole My Nintendo and unifying all nintendo consoles under one account will make it so we can keep our libraries for the Switch, wether it will be so we can redownload VC games, or maybe even the Wii and WiiU games digitally to play on the Switch.
@SLIGEACH_EIRE you are getting this information from?
BotW's FPS is because it is clearly an unfinished game, running on an unfinished system, both of which still have 6months of tweaks and optimizations.
Single screen is fine, having two screens was necessary back when the touch screens being used were of lower quality but that doesn't seem to be a factor anymore. That said, this thing better have touch altho at the same time what do you do when it's docked?
@argol228 Please don't use the r-word, our profanity filter doesn't like it. Thanks.
NOOOOO!!!!! there must be a way... down the road. there MUST be a way. i mean look already. they said that there would be no further info on the switch until next year but there seems to be more of it just the day after. this is just initial distancing from the wii u for general public, i have to believe.
@Niinbendo They basically removed this feature from the WiiU version of Zelda because it couldn't be implemented in the NS version
I'm very upset about this decision
The WiiU would have been the better version but obviously they don't want that
Not bothered about dual screen , will be easier for 3rd party devs to port games over if the switch is a single screen experience.
I like what Nintendo have done with the switch , they have made it different enough to stand out but have also made it so that actually making the games for it won't be all that different from the other consoles.
Hoping the power is there and the price is right , if so Nintendo could do alright.
Well, most developers just slapped an inventory or map on the second screen anyway, purely for the sake of doing something with it, so i think we'll manage fine without a second screen, it might take some adjusting for a few games though (Like Pokémon), but i'm sure there will be plenty of screen space for menu elements on the single (and bigger) screen.
The GamePad wasn't used for anything but maps and inventory in the Wii U games I own, so eh, I'll live
Good decision #no confusion
Shame but I kind figured from the trailer. Dude picks up the screen from the dock and the image on the TV immediately disappears.
Makes the changes of a NintendoLand 2 slim though which is a shame .
We don't know yet about hidden surprises from Switch. Better wait for next trailer.
Personally, the lack of a second screen does not bother me too much. It was a nice feature, but in the end it was only indispensable for a very limited few WiiU and 3DS games; most only used the lower screen for maps/inventories, which could have just as easily been accessed through a pause menu or something similar. That said, I'd be kinda disappointed if there were no touch screen - though that's unlikely, as it has been a major feature of on-the-go gaming since the DS came out.
I already knew that, i truly love it already. No show some games. Even if nintendo wants to wait i hope third party devs wil reveal some
Thank god! Love Nintendo, always hated the WiiU second screen.
I have a feeling the 3ds may be around longer now
I love the second screen aspect of the DS and 3DS and was excited that the wiiU had brought it to the home console experience. I for one love my wiiU and the more that is coming out about the switch the less it interests me. I already use a tablet for gaming that I can connect to my pair of Bluetooth analog controllers which I can connect to my TV when I'm at home and take it with me and play on the go. Sure there is alttlr excitement left but it seems that the experience that they are offering can already be had to quite a substantial degree.
It is apparent that Nintendo is hoping to incorporate every lesson they learned from the Wii U
@Nintendian the Switch was first announced as the NX before Iwata's passing. Kimishima didn't scrap Iwata's ideas and start from scratch. Nor is he erasing what Iwata did.
@readyletsgo there's been talk that the Switch is a replacement for the WiiU only and that it is NOT the successor to the 3ds and that will not be even close to coming around for a while. I repeat, the Switch is NOT taking over for the 3ds.
Or maybe you could buy three consoles and link them all together allowing you to use second screen features, while increasing the processing power of the Switch, giving it better graphics than a high-end PC.
That seems unlikely to happen, but in theory it works...
Just from watching the reveal trailer, you can tell this is Nintendo transitioning into a new phase. Dual screen gaming is great, but not needed for the NS.
It's all the other uses that make it so interesting. Personally, I can't wait to take living room gaming with me anywhere I go.
So sad to hear this. I was hoping for a Starfoxinspired Han Solo/Millennium Falcon multiplayer game. Wouldn't it be awsome two have one piloting the Falcon and one or two manning turrets?
I really liked the dual screens on the DS for 3DS, mainly for having a map on a separate screen. It worjed really well for dungeon crawlers like Etrian Odyssey and SMT4.
@Expa0 3ds isnt going anywhere, you don't need to mourn it.
As others have mentioned, I'm a bit concerned about our purchases from our Wii Us and 3DS consoles.
If I have to rebuy all my VC games, then I'm not going to be happy.
...but in regards to the article and no more second screen... It's kind of sad. The original DS blew me away and ever since then, portable gaming is just better with 2 screens. All the action on the top, all the maps and inventory and stuff on the bottom. I couldn't imagine playing Monster Hunter with all the stuff crammed onto one screen.
In regards to second screen gaming on the home console (Wii U)... eeehhh I don't really mind. It's too jarring having your eyes focus on things too far away. It worked on 3DS cos the screens are right next to each other.
I just hope they make a new DS console running on SwitchOS But there's too many complications... I can dream.
Of course not, but I doubt there are going to be many new upcoming games for the 3DS, which means that future SMT titles won't enjoy the dual screen map. And I'm really worried for Etrian Odyssey since the map making is one of the main gimmicks in the series, and without dual screens and possibly without touch screen as well I dunno how the series could go on.
@BensonUii yeah I thought about that to, and it opens up online co-op too. But dom you like the idea?
@Expa0 theres rumours going around based on a Japanese tweet released today that an actual 3ds successor is coming out in a couple of years but its not 100% confirmed yet. Other game sites have written up articles about it. Im just going to wait until i see confirmation but nothing i see points to the 3ds being done away with. The Switch is a home console that can go portable, that doesn't mean it is also THE portable console.
I don't get why people are complaining, you all hated the Wii U because of the touch screen, now that that is gone you're complaining that it isn't like the Wii U? C'mon make up your mind.
@retro_player_22 people complaining about the touch screen on the WiiU and lamenting it not being on the Switch are two things that might not be related. You're shouting into the void remember? Those might be two separate groups of people.
This is gonna be offtopic, but I was thinking. Aonuma said regarding Breath of the Wild: “I’m not going to create something where the users are going to have a different experience [on Wii U and Switch]”
So I'm searching for footage of or since E3 of people using motion controls of the GamePad to aim their arrows, which we've seen Aonuma and Miyamoto use in the first few sneak peak gameplay footage. This would confirm motion controls for Switch for me, but I can't find it! Anybody?
@jimi Agreed. This isn't good news and suddenly something that had great promise and was looking like true innovation is now looking kind of lame and several steps backward... just so you can take games with you. I don't want to go back to navigatING with a stick or interrupting the flow of a game to bring up an inventory screen. I don't see the value of once again cluttering the screen with maps or other status overlays or again, stopping game play to bring up a map. Nintendo brought these great innovations, trained us how to use them, evagelised their importance and value... and now are saying 'just kidding! Clutter and sticks are what the cool kids are doing! Second screens are for chumps!' Yeah. Not ok. And definitely a step backwards.
I already had drawn out discussions how "stupid" it is, that the system A) Isnt backwards compatible to the 3DS and B) That the Tablet cant be used as a controller with a screen, because "That would be totally cool" -.-
I may not be the biggest fan of this, but some people are really grasping for straws just to have something to complain about...
@Tsusasi If only more people would look at it like that.
For the WiiU, these usages were labeled "gimmicky" and now that their gone, you have the same people complain about exactly that (im not refering to you, were on the same boat here)
@retro_player_22 That's a rather broad statement, don't you think? I always loved the Gamepad and the touch screen and I'd hoped from the moment that this was announced dual screen and touch interface would still be a part of the experience, just refined and capacitive with multitouch. I always thought the second screen was a great innovation and an inspired way to declutter the game play screen and provide an intuitive and logical evolution of UI/UX in gaming. I never once hated the gamepad and I don't think most did; they just wanted more from developers and a touch screen more in line with mobile.
Agreed. All the complaints about dual screen being a gimmick and how it kept 3rd parties away. Now we see a good list of supporting devs and the dual screen gone, and lo and behold now it was "innovative" and "innovative Nintendo has gone backwards"
I don't recall anyone calling Wii U innovative before! Just "stupid dual screen gimmick caused Star Fox to look like crap and play like crap, why can't they just make a normal console experience that's all I want".
I would have loved to see it but, at the same time it was never that cool. I live without it every day on X1 and PS4. I can live without it with Switch too.
Well, it was obvious based on the trailer. Nintendo stated that this is their home console. I personally loved the second screen on the WiiU, but it was a bit bulky to use with Smash and other games. It kind of hurt my hands when I played to long. Their were many complaints about just wanting a normal controller. I'm just thinking about the DS/3DS line. No second screen means ugly port. We all can speculate that this console is suppose to replace their handheld as well. I don't know about you all but that second screen for DS/3DS games were great and innovative. It is undeniable. It will be missed.
I own a Vita and I don't seem to miss the second screen and all when I'm playing because it was a different experience. I don't think it's a deal breaker. This is the new system and we all don't really know that much information on it. We should take a step back and wait for a little bit more information.
@Anti-Matter (your first comment) Wasn't 3DS capable of displaying higher quality images, but was limited by the screen resolution though? I may be wrong but I heard something about that somewhere.
Not that I'm willing to play 3DS games on a TV but pointing out the graphics may be tad better than we think.
Well, there goes pretty much all the DS/3DS and Wii U backwards compatibility.
I really was dreaming, once upon a time, that the Switch (NX) would bring all previous Nintendo previous/current consoles and games together in one hugely convenient place, rather than leave an extremely important and large chunk of them behind.
I loved dual screen gaming (aside from a few judgment lacking decisions). But in a way I'm relieved. And the reason for that is because the concept turned people off and made the console the object of ridicule, despite actually being a really cool mechanic.
It's ironic though, people always say Nintendo needs to stop making consoles just for the Nintendo faithful, but the only people who enjoyed the dual-screen mechanics were in fact the Nintendo faithful. It didn't seem to draw anyone else to the table.
People said they should make a console for more than just Nintendo fans. Said they should make a normal console without "silly gimmicks", yes I believe that's the term people used. Well here you go. No "silly gimmicks" just broad functionality.
Of course I would have loved to seen the return of dual-screen gaming. But I wasn't one of the ones complaining about Wii U being a gimmick either.
That is one thing I'll miss. MH3U was definitely one of those games that benefitted dual screen more than others.
Everybody, relax. For analogy, we didn't complain for Single screen on TV for Wii. But complaining when Switch become single screen, not dual screen. What is that mean ? Why can we embrace the Single screen concept for Wii except Switch ?
Well, how about Monster Hunter on Wii ? Just only Single screen for playing.
I can see how two screen gaming could be an issue for the devs and also how gimmicky it sometimes is. Most of the times the screen serves as a quick inventory or map - useful but not essential. In case of pokemon it greatly influences the flow of the battle but you can still do the same things via buttons. One Majhong game on 3DS uses the screen as a mouse/touchpad but selecting the tiles directly on the screen sounds more efficient.
Second screen serves as a convenience, but for the most part it isn't essential for a succesful gameplay.
Yet... There's Etrian Odyssey.
I guess you will be missed.
...Unless they split the screen verticaly somehow :U
About Etrian Odyssey, maybe another solution like Paper Mario Color Splash Off TV Mode or FF Crystal Chronicles Ehoes of Time Wii version (Though, it looked so awkward). FF 3 remake also become Single screen on PSP and Mobile.
I believe it's a bold step from Nintendo to ditch the second screen feature to differentiate the Switch from Wii U even more.
@KTT - Etrian Odyssey is a biggy. I think they could use some of the single screen's Real estate.
For all those people that don't think this is a touchscreen. They need to recognize. Who would want a tablet that isn't a touchscreen?
It is a mobile device. It has to have it because of typing, browser, apps, and many more. What are you people smoking?
@JaxonH At the end of the day, it boils down to what you do with it.
Games like Zelda for instance greatly benefited from a second screen if only for a more immersive experience not constantly interrupted by menuing.
On the other hand, it doesnt make or break a game. It can only enhance it slightly.
People moaned and cried about "game X isnt on Y" or "they should be less gimmicky" and now, there is no X and Y anymore, and you cant be less gimmicky than a bogstandard tablet with control units and its STILL wrong.
So yeah, best cause of action: Ignore everything, from everyone.
At this point, the Nintendo fanbase entered its "Sonic Phase", and Nintendo is already wonky enough without that nonsense.
No doubt. Should save the complaints for the real concerns like battery life and whether they'll sell an extended capacity battery on the side.
People are thirsty for complaints though. Too thirsty.
There'll be plenty of time for that when we actually have real concerns on the table.
@BensonUii it could be it's the old classic of the more you need to play it the more your audience shrinks. There will be a some who have access to two but not many.
I would have thought dual screen would have been left in as an option, even if it meant that your game took a graphical hit (let's face it only really Nintendo will be use it and they made games look stunning on the Wii)
Still. It's not really an issue, we'll have plenty of great games all the same!
@huxxny what this is really telling me is that the switch will not actually be replacing the 3DS. We can probably expect a dual-screen with touch portable somewhere down the line.
This is my biggest issue. The UI in games like Fire Emblem, Pokemon, and Monster Hunter are going to be so much more cluttered without the second screen. Meanwhile, games that relied on it like Etrian Odyssey are going to have to be overhauled.
I hope it has a touch screen just so I can type my messages on Miiverse assuming they will continue using Miiverse.
One question still stuck in my head about integration with smartphone from last rumour about Switch. What is that means ? Is it possible for Switch to Turn ON my smartphone, enable to do a phone call, sending email, playing the mobile version of Nintendo games ?
@teucer - I hope so.
@teucer this is what a lot of people were talking about and according to rumours from an investors Q＆A thats exactly whats happening.
I'm personally glad two screen gameplay is gone. That's the biggest down side of Wii U. I'd rather always use pro controller when possible. Longer battery life not to mention
It's going to be weird playing game franchises that have been relying on dual screens for so long.
Is touch control supposed to gone as well? If so game series like Rhythm Heaven are going to have a rough time...
I'm guessing dual screen games will probably still be on the virtual console, but they'll probably just have both screens on the tv screen or something like that. Although if touch control is gone too then that'll be a problem.
The reason why Dual Screen feature is not present in Nintendo Switch is because even Nintendo itself is not using it fully in its Wii U games recently. Smash Bros. only uses it for Stage Creator. DKC: Tropical Freeze? only Off-TV play. Splatoon may miss it, but not much.
If this means to bring more games easily to Nintendo Switch, then I'm fine with that.
In other news: water is wet
@Anti-Matter Hmm, I'm not sure what are you refering to as I don't own Wii nor Wii U. All images and videos I see on Google show a normal gameplay to me.
Etrian Odyssey uses touchscreen to draw your map manually, on the fly as you walk in the labyrinth. Drawing those maps is one of the most crutial aspects of the game and serves as the main feature. It's important for the gameplay to have it all the time visible and accesible, without the menu hassle.
And to your 113th comment. I belive it should have some kind of instant message and/or phone call equivalent included. Without the censoring or banning (Swapnote/Flipnote Studio anyone?) and improved social service (Miiverse). A tablet without social connection is a waste - from a casual's view. Also, casuals love mobile, simple games, and tablets/smartphones are simply perfect for short burst of gaming in public transport. I imagine they would take an advantage and publish some Android games onto it.
The device not only would fit for hardcores (assuring the strong start) but with all of the above, it should appeal to casuals as well.
That's just a theory, not saying they will do all of these.
I wonder what this means for Zelda. Which will be the best version?
Great stuff. It added very little to the experience, it shows positive signs Nintendo have learned from some of their mistakes. They're sending out good, clear signals as to what Switch is. I always thought one of the indicators of how confused they were with Wii U was that they got done over by the ASA in the UK for putting out adverts that stupidly implied you could play any game Off TV. None of that anymore.
I feel like the haters won a little bit. I commend and respect Nintendo for doing what they have to do to stay relevant to the masses but we are back to lowest common denominator gaming. I tend to get burned by that so I am a little nervous about future creative franchises. Ah well, so long as Nintendo keeps making games I'll keep playing. It truly is the end of an era though.
Totally getting BotW on wiiu now.
Edit: didn't realize that the gamepad was nerfed in the wiiu version. That really breaks my heart. Ah well still getting wiiu version first.
@Bflury and I've thought about a companion app. Most people already have a phone or tablet, maybe let them sync with the Switch and use them as the second screen.
This might actually explain the Mario Kart and Splatoon NS versions. Without a second screen no-one can do a lazy port of their Wii U title, they have to move all that stuff to the main screen/menu. If they're going that far I think they also chose to update the games in a few other ways, to increase the price since they had to put more time in.
I'm perfectly fine without the second screen. Did Bayonetta 2 use it for anything much? That's the only game I really want to see ported to NS
@JaxonH I have one major complaint, that is the lack of a D-Pad in handheld mode.
I'd even be willing to purchase an extra JoyCon (was it called that ?) for the left side that has one.
Other than that, basically reasonable stuff:
Battery life, Base price and contents, game price...the usual deal.
Though i have to admit, the D-Pad thingy is a major thorn in my side, so it really is down to "Is its cost worth the discomfort ?".
Other than that, no complaints. Its exactly what people always whined for. It "goes with the time". Tablets are in, have a tablet. You don't like gimmicks ? Ok, none of that. You can't decide between home console and portable ? Ok, how about both ?
They addressed every major complaint people had about the WiiU. The fact that some are still complaining sadly shows how "valid" these complaints were in the first place.
"Boo, no backwards compatibility !" First things fist, YOU wanted them to ditch the gimmicks. It can't be compatible with games made for consoles with said gimmicks.
Second: YOU wanted them to "start fresh", they did, and now YOU want to go back ?
So yeah, again, i'm not entirely sold, but Nintendo did good. The issues lies with me, not with this system.
So what I gather from this is that if there's still gonna be a Wii U version of Zelda, it may have gamepad maps and inventories, but Switch may not... Could make it tough to pick a version. Or has the Wii U version been canceled?
Well I'm not surprised by this. The dual screen idea while supported I don't feel was never fully realized with what to do with it. Will be missed. Fun experiment while it lasted
This is the first piece of Switch news that makes me sad. I can't imagine playing a game such as, say, Axion Verge on another console and have to pause constantly to locate yourself. This was a real pain while I played Hyper Light Drifter on my PS4.
I do hope there's a touchscreen at least, making stuff like a Mario Maker sequel still possible.
@Giygas_95 There is going to be a Wii U version of Zelda, but Aonuma already confirmed it won't have the inventory and map on the second screen. In that sense Switch and Wii U versions will be the same.
While the second screen has somewhat useful in games like Xeno X, I never used it much. I grew up playing games in a single screen, with an on screen map. I'm a bit relieved, because it means third parties have even less of an excuse to not port games to the console
Good. This means developing games for the console is much easier now.
Thank goodness. No more star fox zero disasters
@Morshu-San yes. I'm with you. I don't understand the concept of taking something that is perfectly good and normal and then adding something to it to make it more complicated than telling us it's better, it's like if we had a car comma and everyone is used to driving a car with a steering wheel a gas pedal and brake pedal. If Nintendo made the car Miyamoto would have two or three steering wheels a couple of different gas pedals and probably a touch screen for the brake... more complicated does not equal better.
So glad they are doing traditional controls.
That's perfectly fine.
@Equinox I think - and hope - that the series will live on on 3DS
@bubby444 that's not what people have been saying. What people have been saying is it's what Wii U should have been. And it's true: the Wii U should have never wasted time on the two screen approach. No one cared for it outside of Nintendo's core, who would have bought anything Nintendo was selling.
The only feature of Wii U that the masses wanted was Off TV play, and Nintendo eventually took note of this and reacted accordingly.
I just can't believe that after 4 years the successor to the worst selling Nintendo console of all time was... a more refined version of the worst selling Nintendo console of all time.
@KTT i just dont get that controller in that picture. The face buttons on the left and right of the controller are entirely too far over to the edges. Looks uncomfortable. In comparison, look at the placement of the face buttons on the much more superior Wii U Pro controller.
I will miss the gamepad for certain occasions as lots of people have already pointed out.
However, I see this as a trade-off that allows for easier development and parity of game availability.
It's the same for backwards compatibility. If the Switch were backwards compatible with 2 screens, it would not be possible to attract third party developers in large numbers. The ease of the development environment is paramount, so in that sense, it does seem to be the correct decision. Switch just cannot be all things to all people.
That stinks. No Nintendo land and how will pikmin work? I do get why though.
It's not worth it. DS Virtual Console is no longer possible, which doesn't look good for the Virtual Console as a whole.
A true shame, the second screen was a nice little extra and even gave some very unique experiences and small fixes that made some great games that little bit better.
Anyway it's not a deal breaker or a tragedy, I just feel slightly annoyed that I supported and loved all Nintendo's idea of the last decade just for seeing them ditching many of them now T.T;
If playstation and xbox can manage it, I'm sure the switch can manage without a second screen. If a switch developer wanted to use two screens, I suppose it's possible for the switch to be paired to a tablet, but the issue with that is not everyone has a tablet, and a smartphone screen would be too small. Two screen gaming is nice but it's not a must.
Star Fox could have been a lot better without dual screens. Hopefully Zero will make it to the Switch!
Good-bye Map for BotW.
Nintendo screws up all their innovatons
@gatorboi352 I'm in the opinion that untill you try it, you won't really know how how it feels like. I would assume 2DS is weird to hold but seeing it on display I found it strangely comfortable, for example.
The lack of a second screen thing was obvious. They made it clear that the single screen of Switch was the console itself. Not the hub that connects to the TV. If you remove Switch from the hub -and it's the only thing with the cartridge- of course the hub/tv will become useless.
"Said they should make a normal console without "silly gimmicks", yes I believe that's the term people used. Well here you go. No "silly gimmicks" just broad functionality."
I'd say a console that is a tablet with removable controllers which can be used at home in a docking station is the ultimate 'gimmick'.
Not that there is anything wrong with that, but that is what sets it apart from everything else, i.e. a gimmick.
A touch screen at one point in time was considered gimmicky, but now it's just an expected feature that has been widely adopted by all companies.
No more Etrian Odyssey, I guess. :/
Eh, fine with me.
Ever since the DS (or the Dreamcast before it, I suppose), I've been sceptical about how useful a 2nd screen really is. That said, it's one of the more likeable novelties I've seen, and I've definitely played games that have made decent use of it. Overall, though, I'd say it's not worth the extra expense and power, not to mention that it's better to have one large screen rather than two small ones.
Only thing of concern is Etrian Odyssey. That's the one series where you really do use two screens at once.
I'd be lying if I said I'm not a little disappointed because of how well the second screen worked for a some of the Wii U's games, but I think it would have been a huge mistake not to go back to single screen gameplay given that this is supposed to be a handheld/console hybrid.
Yeah, I don't understand why people are saying there's not D-pad; have you guys never placed a PlayStation console? All 4 home consoles and both handhelds have had separated D-pads like that.
I'm still holding out hope, honestly. "Dedicated to deliver a single screen experience," doesnt seem to 100% rule out the possibility of dual screen play, but that games will be playable with single screens by default (like the traditional controls by default).
People will argue that if it could do dual screen play, they would've shown it in the trailer, but they also didnt show motion controls and touch controls, and I think it's safe to assume those are gonna be mentioned when Nintendo delivers more news next year. Surely Nintendo's currently just trying to distance the Switch from the Wii U for the time being keep the message on point (and to not further take away more than they need from its final holiday sales).
I just find it hard to believe there's not much more tech to the dock than just being an HDMI passthrough/charger, or that they couldnt just reverse the roles of the Wii U (system) to the Gamepad (receiver) and leave the option open for devs who want to use it.
But I'll concede when they straight up say "dual screen play isnt possible".
I will only be dissapointed if the joy-cons don't have motion control or if it is not a touchscreen. It needs to be able to surf net, Netflix and YouTube. That would be a given since both Wii U and 3ds can. And didn't anouma say Zelda would have motion controls from SS on??? So that would mean m+ controllers. Again, both other consoles have motion controls. But I will miss having a clutter free screen and map in your hands though...
Okay guys. Let's imagine Paper Mario Color Splash. We can Enabled or Disabled Off TV play. By Enabled Off TV Play, it will make TV screen goes blank and Gamepad as main screen plus we still can peek the enemies when we are choosing the cards during Battle. By Disabled Off TV play, it will make TV as main screen and Switch console as Second lower screen. That was my thinking. Be Positive. Maybe actually second screen concept hidden like that.
Don't be ridiculous. This is what happens when internet brainwashing runs rampant.
This is about as straightforward as it gets. A device that plays games and docks the a TV is the ultimate NON-GIMMICK.
Don't confuse practical functionality with gimmickry. God forbid a console have more functionality. It's people like you who label actual advancement in functionality as gimmicks that are damaging gaming.
Oh, my iPad can connect to my TV? Guess that's just a gimmick. Oh, it has online? Gimmick. We should just keep it local MP how it's always been. Analogs? Gimmicks. Shoulder buttons? Gimmicks. Snappy OS? What a gimmick.
And most of all, the gaming device can actually play games on the TV too? Biggest gimmick of all time!
Wind Waker HD would have been unbearable to play without the touch screen, which was so snappy that I could map two favored items to "permanent" buttons and just keep switching items in one slot, making me feel much more free to play how I want. But, I can still be optimistic that Breath of the Wild will be designed around not needing to switch items all the time.
Good! I am happy about it. The Gamepad was so muddy and dull I hated looking down, in fact when I was forced to use having the LED blare in my eyes made me skip a lot of games that just mirrored what was already n my huge HDTV that I would have otherwise enjoyed.
I believe win, lose or draw they will keep the 3DS line around for quite some time with new variations and incremental updates. it si time to move on to much more focused gameplay on a focused screen with better visuals that don;t need to multiple views or throwaway maps on games that don;t need it.
I sure do hope for the multi-touch rumors and I would Looooove head tracked 3D for the portable but I doubt that part especially= another reason they may keep the 3DS line going, like the gameboy line did for so long.
It's a little disappointing to lose the second screen, but I think it's the right move. If you're using portable mode then you wouldn't have a second screen anyway, and Nintendo should be trying to give players the same gaming experience regardless of whether they choose to use it as a portable or as a home console.
Multi function is not a gimmick.
If all those features are gimmick, then are you expecting Classic NES again ? No wireless, No virtual memory card, No touch screen, No motion play, No Youtube, No internet, No update, No Off TV play, etc ?
Get Your Own Switch!!!
Lol.. It's fine with me.
I'm cool with it.
@Luna_110 So will the second screen just be for off-TV play? Seems kind of odd to have it on Wii U and not use the gamepad screen for map and inventory, but I'm glad it doesn't mean the Switch version gets gimped features.
Exactly. Only for off TV play.
Personally, I don't find it odd, they don't want to have two different builds of the same game.
If they had the second screen use for Wii U, they would be handling two different source codes.
I can't believe how much the dual screen is being blamed for Star Fox Zero's disasters, like that second screen was responsible for the chicken form being useless drivel with bad controls reminiscent of a poor GC game, or the Gyrowing levels feeling like they were taken from a vaguely nostalgic (but mediocre) N64 game. But yeah, there was still no need to shoehorn the dual screen or the motion control in, but that wasn't the hardware's fault.
@Luna_110 I'm glad they're focusing on a single screen now, as it makes the Switch the most traditional console they've done since Gamecube, but I'm gonna miss the second screen for inventory and maps...And since this'll probably replace 3DS as well, I'm gonna miss glasses free 3D too.
That's the end of Super Mario Maker. I think after the feedback from certain players who got confused playing Starfox Zero it's probably not a surprise.
While I do love those second screen features on the Wii U, I'm not that heartbroken over it because I've been also been playing my single screen fun since my first console, the PS1.
Hopefully, the console will provide plenty of fun games to play.
If my entire eShop 3DS/WiiU purchases and registered games and Virtual console games don't carry over to Switch. I'm not buying it.
@Galactus_33 totally agree. But I would also like it to stay on my wii u. Games should be connected to your Nintendo network account.
@Bflury By that logic, every game that supports online multiplayer offers a dual-screen experience.
@Anti-Matter Because we moved on. We evolved our gaming experience. We were introduced to a new way to interact with games on a home console and were sold on the idea that this was a new paradigm by Nintendo themselves. We saw how beautiful games became when there was no on-screen clutter; we gamed edge to edge. We interacted directly with on-screen objects with a touch screen and rudimentary haptic feedback to reward us. We had more precise control over those objects. To a point made above, how in the hell do you faithfully and with equal ease of use execute a game like Mario Maker if there is no touch screen?
I was always annoyed with having to pause to use menus, maps and items but I just accepted it because that's how it was done. Then we got the Wii U and a second screen... a touch screen. We moved forward and evolved... and now we are taking 2 steps back. We are now going to be interacting with games that have items and maps and menus the way we did with 8 and 16 bit games. Nintendo was right about the WIi U's Gamepad and the general gaming public and pundits were wrong; it has value and IS evolutionary, if not revolutionary. Nintendo just handled it poorly and it's design team really missed the mark on the console and gamepad itself. Their marketing was a complete failure, and that's being kind... and they failed to properly evangelize their system or their concept of gameplay to 3rd parties and gamers alike. But as new way to play and interact, a new interface and a fresh way of looking at gaming, it was spot on.
And now we are thrown back decades. Distilled to it's basic concept as shown and discussed so far, it's a moderately powered console that you can take with you but plays like every other console at the end of the day. And that's really cool, but it really is nothing more than a better designed and executed NVIDIA Shield... and as announced and discussed so far, that's the only new experience it's bringing to the table. Reconfigurable controllers have been around for a while in the PC realm and it really is the Shield at heart.
So that is why some are (rightfully) upset about this news. It's Nintendo in retrograde telling us that the last decade of Nintendo gaming was a mistake or a lie and that the future is the past... on the go.
We don't have the full story so I hope things change in some way, but now more than ever I think it's time for Nintendo to step up with more info instead of going into hiding hiding until next year. The cat is out of the bag and tearing crap up. They need damage control before more negative rumors spin in the vacuum they've left.
@JaxonH You got that right. Heck, playing video games on a PC, handheld or console is in fact a "gimmick" (i.e. a feature that is meant to give a product attention for people to consider buying).
People throw around "gimmick" like it's apparently the ultimate sin and should apparently just be "normal" like using buttons on a controller (also, buttons on controllers are technically "gimmicks" that give a gaming system attention to customers who are interested in the thing which obviously isn't a bad thing) and people who say it isn't are hypocrites.
It's such a lazy criticism and it should be pointed out that most features that are considered standard on PCs, consoles and handhelds are actually good "gimmicks" that can benefit the system more and allow for a better experience.
@Equinox Don't worry, the new Etrian Odyssey for Switch will come packaged with graphing paper.
No second screen means it's easier to develop for. Maybe in a future console they can use dual screens again.
While it will be missed at the same time it was pretty clear to me that it wasn't going to be possible in the Switch. There is no way that I can think of to be able use both screens at the same time seeing as the device has to be sitting its dock in order to display the image on the TV. It's the end of an era, and hopefully the beginning of an exciting new one!
"Thrown back decades"
Well, I do agree I loved dual screen. But given single screen gaming is still prevalent today it's not exactly the same thing as going back decades. It's like the d-pad. It's still being used today because it's still works just as well as it ever did. And while dual-screen gaming does provide benefits it comes at a cost. And with this system part of that cost would mean that Switch couldn't exist. You can't do dual-screen gaming and have the console be taken on the go because then what do you use as a second screen.
It's an either/or proposition and they tried the dual-screen way last generation. That's simply a sacrifice that had to be made to obtain the new functionality that we're getting. Which I should add is something Wii U couldn't offer, didn't offer, and is something none of us will probably want to do without either once we're accustomed to playing games anywhere.
Ya, that's probably not gonna happen. Not even PS4 or Xbox One allows you to migrate your "entire catalog of purchased games". No console does. And Switch, I can almost guarantee you, won't either. Heck, PS4 has been the champion of crossbuy and yet, not one single VC game from PS3 or Vita has been made available to PS4 owners. They're just not releasing them at all because it'd just result in handouts and no sales. Can't say I blame them really.
Best you can hope for- best any of us can hope for, is discount for VC upgrades. At least the need for crossbuy is eliminated by the system being a hybrid. That's huge.
Well, you do have a point with StarFox.
But a lot of people did blame the second screen because it was the second screen that was trying to be showcased, and what led to cockpit view gyro. It was also blamed for the graphics.
That heading delights me to no end. Instead of two crappy, low resolution screens I'll get a huge, bright, detailed one? Capacitive versus resistive? And no more gimmicks to make the bottom screen useful? Yes please!
@JaxonH Gaming today on other systems stills uses concepts and experiences that have been around for decades. The Wii U changed that and it was a fresh start and welcome change. And dual screen on the go could be handled one of two ways. Have the menus and other secondary info/items on-screen while on the go (the price of playing portably), or for games that need it, split the screen vertically (basically like a 2DS, which is one screen).
Just because something works well enough doesn't mean you shouldn't evolve. We've been show new ways to play and now they're gone. Backwards. Decades.
Interesting. Still, I'm cool with it. I've definitely had my fun with dual screens. And at least with the Switch, I'm ready to move on.
@MrWarner14 I think of gimmick as a 'trick', a novelty that is not essential but interesting. If the gimmick becomes importantly enough, or proven to be more than a trick, then it stays as part of the system. Think of that vibration add-on with N64, it's a gimmick back then but now is indispensible to controller.
Switch removed a lot of the gimmicks developed in the last decade to become a bare-bone minimalist console. I think Nintendo is getting tired of introducing new gimmicks and frankly all these 3D, dual screen, stylus, motion control, etc are adding up to become a distraction that doesn't serve much purpose. They are fun for a while but in the end it's the solid game design that matters, and Nintendo is ace in that.
Developers getting too focused on these gimmicks tend to deviate from making a solid game just to add some features to make use of these gimmicks which resulted in an incoherant gameplay experience. Remember the recent Starfox Zero? Or those early 3DS games trying so hard to use 3D or it's motion control?
Disappointing. Splatoon won't be the same and no possibility for a game like star fox zero or no more Etrian odyssey.
There are too many comments to search to make sure I'm not repeating someone else, but because the Switch appears to create a local wifi or Bluetooth LAN perhaps Nintendo will integrate their mobile efforts with the NS? Why couldn't Nintendo create an app that allows your cell phone or tablet to act as a second screen for optional maps and other features the DS used its second screen for?
For all the crap Nintendo get for being "all about gimmicks", this is looking to be least gimmick-y system they've had since well....the Gamecube.
No camera, debatable touch screen, no motion stuff thus far, no second screen. I think its safe to say they've lost the casual crowd to mobile games for good bar their own mobile games and focusing more on the Core gamers. Yes you can argue the hybrid thing is a gimmick but A) No one's forcing you to take the thing outside if you don't want do, like how you HAD to adapt to the Wii's motion controls or always had to have the Wii U Gamepad on (Okay they might have a new Streetpass thing, but I know 3DS gamers they don't even know about the feature or just don't bother with it.). And B) Its something that actually can fit into older gamers' schedules, whether it be the train ride to work, a long plane ride on holiday or anything, you can finally find that extra bit of time to play and beat those long triple A titles when both work and family eat up all your free time.
Not to say they won't appeal to casual at all, kids will always wanna play Mario and such, but I just feel they're going to be put back of the line now with the core gamers being put back at the front now. Of course, I could be wrong and Nintendo showcases all manner of attachments you can slot into the tablet's sides when they next give details, but then we havent seen a usual Mii focused game for Switch yet have we?
It's not just evolving. It's a trade off.
You get one thing and give up another. Dual screen costs in graphics, it costs in development support, it costs in image and success of the system, it costs in forfeiting the play anywhere Switch design.
It's one step backwards but 10 steps forward with the new design.
I promise you, playing Breath of the Wild in HD anywhere I go is far more valuable than swiping attack cards onto the TV in Paper Mario.
It's not just a simple no-cost evolution. It's a trade off.
As an older gamer, Gameboy was just fine pressing start to access inventory. The same was true for every other system before Wii U. I really like what they are offering with Switch. Plus, imagine how difficult it will be to mess up a future Star Fox game on a console like this.
I have a smartphone now. If it is true then my smartphone can acts as a lower screen.
As interesting as the dual screen concept was, not even Nintendo could consistently use it effectively. For every Nintendoland, there was a Star Fox Zero or worse a game that just ignored the functionality entirely.
Now Off-TV play, that was something that I loved and the majority of my gameplay was in fact done on the gamepad. It was just easier to play on the gamepad while the family watched some animated film for the 100th time. Not to mention I could sit comfortably and play a game like Xenoblade Chronicles X while listening to the hockey game.
Plus, for every barely used feature they drop that is a price tag coming down to a more reasonable rate. And let's be honest, they need to hit $249.99 to $299.99 way more than anything else to have a chance to enter the market where XBO and PS4 sit at $299.99.
I would speculate that they can still have dual screen when it comes to DS/3DS. You can play it vertically while still having one screen but with 2 images on the same screen .
@JaxonH Fair point on the graphics, actually. I'd forgotten about all the complaints about graphics, and admit that my standards are a bit low on that end when it comes to vehicle-based games (just happy to see a reasonable draw distance and 60fps). But then, I loved using the gyro aim when I actually remembered it was there (and flew like normal without any trouble when I forgot about it) and prefer the first-person view anyway. And Nintendo did try too hard convincing us to use the GamePad where it wasn't needed ("Use the motion controls, Fox!"), rather than letting just sit around as an option.
Finally a singlescreen console from Nintendo!!!
Ought to make those whom bashes the DS & WiiU Game Pad happy. I never got the hate over the Game Pad honestly, (I don't think gamers & developers gave it much of a chance) especially from those who didn't like the "gimmicky" Wii-mote & nunchuck. The Game Pad was more of a "normal" controller then that, just with a touchscreen, scanner, and microphone built in. (So no need to buy those separately. Surprised developers didn't take advantage of the microphone for voice chat in games. Granted, being cussed out by 11 year olds loses it's charm.)
My only critique with it is, how it's required to operate the console, and some aps/games don't always offer alternatives like using the Wii-mote for Youtube would've been a better alternative if you wish to watch it on the TV then the Pad.
Granted I don't have the U Classic Controller to see if it can be used in it's place.
Much like Wii U gamepad that play NDS VC.
@rjejr Looks like we've got confirmation that Nintendo purposefully nerfed the Wii U version of BotW because of Switch.
I will miss dual screens myself.
so....how will splatoon work.....you need the gamepad to jump to your teammate's location...
now im even more hesitant on where to the botw on
@Angelic_Lapras_King actually kids just wants to play call of duty and minecraft but i get ur point nintendo did a smart move this time
I think Nintendo devs got tired of trying to make a second screen work like they were supposed to on Wii U. They have essentially admitted the gimmick was bad. Just look at what Aonuma said: "We realized that having something on the GamePad and looking back and forth between the TV screen and the GamePad actually disrupts the gameplay, and the concentration that the game player may be experiencing. You have your car’s GPS system on your dash. If you had it down in your lap, you’re going to get into an accident!”
Looks like the end for Etrian Odyssey.
i am really gonna miss the second screen options especially on games like zelda which was REALLY useful
@Seacliff maybe they will continue to make the games for 3ds ?
Considering that the entire screen gets obscured when docked, this is hardly surprising in the slightest.
I enjoyed having a second screen with the Wii U for some games, namely Super Mario Maker and the Zelda ports, but it is not a feature that I would miss. The fact that I can still play this off-TV is good enough for me.
@Tsusasi "Nintendo was right about the WIi U's Gamepad and the general gaming public and pundits were wrong; it has value and IS evolutionary, if not revolutionary."
Oh really? From Nintendo themselves:
“We realised that having something on the GamePad and looking back and forth between the TV screen and the GamePad actually disrupts the gameplay, and the concentration that the game player may be experiencing. You have your car’s GPS system on your dash. If you had it down in your lap, you’re going to get into an accident!”
My first reaction to no second screen (or touch screen) is "Well, so much for Super Mario Maker, but there is just so much unknown about this system still so there is no reason to get up in arms about it yet. Super Mario Maker was a big hit for Nintendo and I can't see them looking at that and saying "Nah, we aren't going to do that again." Maybe they will have a way to connect our WiiU GamePads for certain games. Maybe they'll come out with a touch pad accessory just for something like Mario Maker. I mean, they made a mouse for the SNES for Mario Paint. I have faith Nintendo has plans we are just unaware of, because Super Mario Maker was too good for them to give up on the Switch.
Thus re-confirming no Wii U support. I'm disappointed in a way as I would have liked the ability to play the likes of Xenoblade Chronicles X on it, even if just a download version. The 2nd screen was essential for that. At the same time, I won't miss the games that tried to make touch screen input standard like on the 3DS. It was almost impossible to play Kirby & the Rainbow Curse for long periods because holding the GamePad in one hand was difficult. Still, it would have been nice as an option for developers to give you a 2nd screen for maps, etc.
@hieveryone Again true, which hopefully Activision will have a COD for them to take on the go (IW might be worth a launch title since that could also mean we get the Remastered Modern Warfare to Switch as well). Guess really its the Brain Age adults and the Wii Fit grandmas that'll be long gone.... XD
@Seacliff Also the end of good UI for mainline Pokemon games.
That's fine by me. What's more interesting is whether it will support Wii Remotes. If not for the cursor (I don't expect there to be a port for a sensor bar in the Switch), but at least as extra controllers.
I hope there's support for up to 8 controllers like the Wii U, so it would be extremely helpful for lots of people if they supported Wii Remotes.
Yeah, I always knew they did, but this seals the deal. I'm waiting for some Nintnedo talking head to tell us Wii U owners how lucky we are that we got it at all and they didn't drop the Wii U version entirely. Which I would still be thinking, only I saw that $5 pre-order card in Target, and the new trailers the other day were probably put up as a reminder that we are still getting it. We just have to wait an extra 6 months for a new console to launch.
Miyamoto sure did seem happy though using that real time interactive map and touchscreen (0:50-1:10). Has anybody asked him directly how he feels about them taking it out? I know Anouma said it was a distraction, but I can't recall Miyamoto addressing it.
@JaxonH "I promise you, playing Breath of the Wild in HD anywhere I go is far more valuable than swiping attack cards onto the TV in Paper Mario."
Ok, why would you, when you have been winning the argument all day, make such an irrational comment as that? Giving up the interactive real time map in Zelda U on Wii U (see above) so they can make the Switch version not seem inferior has nothing to do with that stupid card mechanic in PM:CS. If you want to say you are willing to give up dual screen in the Wii U version of Zelda to play Zelda Switch on the go, fine, say that, but to say you're ok w/ them gimping Zelda U to do away w/ that stupid card mechanic in PM:CS doesn't make any sense, 1 game has nothing to do w/ the other.
I get it, life will go on, back to normal 1 screen gaming like we've always had, but you can't compare Zelda U which was promoted as making such good use of the dual screen, like WW HD had, w/ Paper Mario and it's card flick, 2 very different games, that's just a really odd comparison.
Not surprised. Nintendo just wanted a system that everyone could understand this time around. For whatever reason that I'm still vexed about, the mass market was confused by the Wii U. Nintendo is just aiming for a straight-away home console gaming experience you can take with you.
It also keeps the 3DS relevant. This is NOT the death knell of the 3DS. Dual screen gaming will continue with the 3DS and future iterations.
Was the second screen truly essential to XCX? The way I see it, it was comfortable for fast travel and to manage Frontier Nav, but you could still access that menu pressing a button, for example. It was what happened when you were playing in Off TV mode.
The second screen was useless in combat too, it didn't show any data on your enemies for example.
If they twinkle around with it a bit, they couls still port it without problems. It isn't like Nintendo Land where the second screen was essential for it.
PS4, XB1 and PC games do this sometimes even if it is just through the internet accounts and not directly connected. Companion apps.
It's quite feasible that it will interact with the mobile apps from Nintendo and it would be cool if it was more direct interaction. I'm thinking about how they'll continue with the success of Mario Maker. At the least, I hope the Switch has a touch screen but maybe one reason not to do that is to support mobile integration instead.
However, I'm pretty sure Star Fox Switch will require a smartphone — or two.
Has there been any confirmation if there is a separate charging port on the actual controller while in portable mode? Thinking something like how you usually charge the 3ds or wiiu. I was thinking if this thing has a 3 hour battery life it would not be as awful if there was like a USB charger or something.
Here's the dictionary definition of a gimmick...
"an ingenious or novel device, scheme, or stratagem, especially one designed to attract attention or increase appeal."
It's not automatically a negative term. The console/hybrid concept of the Switch is a gimmick.
Don't get so butt hurt.
Since they have this will we ever see another DS/3DS style game again? Will Nintendo release a successor to the 3DS? Some kind of clamshell portable device?
I see some on here talking about gyro aiming and I don't think that's going away nor does it have to.
I know Nintendo Land isn't your favorite, but I was just playing Zelda Battle Quest on Nintendo Land with my son yesterday, and man... the arrow aiming and firing is kinda awesome. And the peaking over at the big screen while 1 or 2 or 3 other players are fighting with swords and choosing how best to support them. It's fun and intense in the harder levels. Love it.
It's going to take at least 2 Nintendo Switch devices to make that happen. Which, you know, is possible and all, but will any games be made like that? Where a TV will host a couple players and then a second switch player will have their own view? Seems less likely.
Maybe though. It would be cool to have Splatoon tournaments where one switch acts in a spectator view (on the TV probably). In that case, you could maybe peak up to see the map. Expensive, though.
Nobody bought the wii u so it is best they move away from it. This may mean the 3ds and 2ds continue for longer now as a seperate pillar. If Wii U botw used the gamepad as a map id get it for that. Im just gonna get it on switch now instead.
I also expect nes and snes vc support to go. And potentially n64. They have dedicated nes mini and future snes mini/n64 mini for that for casual gamers wanting nostalgia.
I hardly ever play vc on wii u. I just seem to collect them each generation. I would love hd ports of n64 and cube games though.
By that definition everything falls into that category. Even video games themselves. And that speaks nothing of the negative connotation the term carries with it.
In which case the term adds absolutely nothing of value to the discussion. It's a constantly regurgitated lazy criticism.
And I'm tired of not having intelligent discussions about things. But that won't happen until people stop falling back on Internet memes and cookie cutter bullets point criticisms they find a way to apply to anything.
Bring an intelligent opinion to the table for us to chew on. Not " this is just another gimmick, the most I've ever seen"
@rjejr One aspect of dual screen I liked was using it with two players on a single player game. Wind Waker did this well (Pikmin had the potential but failed). My kids enjoyed managing the inventory and map and researching while I played Wind Waker with a Pro Controller. Not seeing that as something developers would even think of even with two Switches handy.
So, I'm going to miss it, but Splatoon with a couple of us playing at once is going to be something that will strongly draw us towards owning multiple Switch purchases. My son already told me we need at least two (so all four of us could play).
I think it is good news that no 2nd screen will be running, but my reasoning is purely based on cpu / gpu power, and that it can concentrate on the 1 thing more.
Everything is a 'gimmick' until it catches on, and then it becomes normal. Touch screens were gimmicks, flat phones were gimmicks, power windows in cars were at one time a gimmick....
I wasn't arguing anything, just pointing out the fact you didn't seem to understand the meaning of the word, that's all!
"We realized that having something on the GamePad and looking back and forth between the TV screen and the GamePad actually disrupts the gameplay, and the concentration that the game player may be experiencing. You have your car’s GPS system on your dash. If you had it down in your lap, you’re going to get into an accident!”
So don't put the GPS on your lap like a moron. I actually find it far more disruptive to my "immersion" (using that term pretty loosely since it's Zelda), my focus, and my enjoyment, to have to interrupt the gameplay flow to switch items or have a quick glance at the map or whatever other information I need. If I really needed to stop the action, I'd still be able to do so. I don't look down at my crotch whenever I need to do something UI-related, I lift my arms to reduce the "workload" on my head/neck/eyes.
I also find it disruptive if something is hidden by the display on the HUD, but that rarely happens, thankfully. I'm a little concerned about this in Splatoon, though, if the map stays on screen during intense firefights. Hopefully they'll think of something, like the inkling needing to have their ink-phone out in order to view the map, I dunno. It'd be amusing to see someone get splatted because they couldn't keep their eyes off the damn phone.
Woah Woah woah.
I never said anything about the Wii U version of Zelda. Nothing.
I said I'd rather have the Switch functionality (HD console games seamlessly transitioned into a mobile system for play anywhere) than I would using a gamepad screen.
Settle down, nobody said about the Wii U version being gimped. I'm talking about Switch functionality vs Wii U functionality. In general. And in general I'd rather have Zelda, the real console Zelda, on the go with no cross save needed, with console graphics, I'd rather have Skyrim on the go, real console game with console graphics on the go, rather have all my games available to play in all their console glory anywhere, than have a touch menu on a gamepad. Or swipe cards in Paper Mario.
Not saying I dont like dual screens, I do! But I love this 1,000x more. And Ive been championing this hybrid concept since before NX was even a thing. It should be no surprise then that I love the concept
Wonderfull 101, fatal frame and Pikmin 3 after the update, were the best 2 screen gameplay experiences on the U, thats just 3 games, the other good feature was off tv play, which is done right on the switch, I wont miss Maps and inventor as I always played with the pro controller
My trigger right now is people who say the Nintendo Switch is "just a Wii U you can take with you" also that it was "dumb". I unleashed on a student (not too harsh but unprofessional) when he said that was his opinion of it. I apologized. The poor guy works at Game Stop and he'd been answering calls about it all day. lol. Me, I'd been discussing it here all day.
Here in this article we are seeing how very different it is from a Wii U. And, of course, it shows a great deal of thought in positioning and changing direction for Nintendo hardware. Not dumb. Not Wii U.
The "gimmick" thing, of course is usually used as a negative, but you even qualified it with "silly gimmick" in your initial post so the intent was clear. I feel for ya!
A step back into the stone age. Well done Nintendo. Not.
That's it. Since Iwata is gone, the company is led by bankers and shareholders, they don't care about innovation, only about money.
Soon, Nintendo will be nothing special anymore, just a normal company like all the others.
Oh yeah, someone mentioned Zelda. That settles it. I won't buy Breath of the Wild for Switch, only for Wii U. I don't want an inferior experience on the new console.
Not even sure whether I want to buy the Switch anymore. The console does have two screens, they could've easily continued the dual-screen experience. Why they choose not to is beyond reason.
But now I assume they will ditch touchscreen and motion controls too. Just because they're obviously too incompetent and uninspired.
At this point, the only reason to buy the Switch would be playing Splatoon whereever I go. But since that requires a stable internet connection - and where there's internet, there's probably a screen, too - I can just do the same with my Wii U.
This issue is that the Wii U version will lose the GamePad functionality to make it easier to match with the NS right? That is frustrating for those happy to stick with Wii U for now. I don't like it, myself. I do think Nintendo should direct all effort towards NS now, but that is a gimp that people who like the dual screen efforts have a right to be miffed about.
Depending on performance of the NS, I'm still considering the Wii U version of BotW myself. If it is basically the same... but then with GamePad features wiped away it makes it less attractive even if the performance is equal. See now I'm a bit annoyed. Lol.
Fortunately for me everything is pointing to significant performance increase in the NS especially when docked with the fan blowing and I'm getting at least one NS as fast and soon as possible.
@aaronsullivan "Expensive, though."
It all is, so I'm waiting for my Switch TV?
"I know Nintendo Land isn't your favorite"
I do hate it for several reasons, but I don't hate hate it.
Worst pack in ever. NSMBU, done.
Asynchronous and asymmetrical game play were the worst marketing buzz words of all time.
Call it "Mii Land". People loved Miis on Wii. Casuals who bought Wii sports dont 'know what Ntinedo Land means. "Mii Land", where your Mii's get to dress up as and enter worlds, either alone or with your friends Miis. Maybe "Miis in Nintendo Land".
12 games, only 6 were mutliplayer, several were garbage tablet games - balloon, F-Zero, DK tracks.
My kids still play co-op and Vs whenever they are with their cousins.
So on it's own it's not horrible. As a $20 digital only like Pokemon Rumble World, or a free throw away, it's fine. But it was horrible as THE Wii U selling point. that's why I hate it, the way it was presented and relied on to sell Wii U.
In a universe where Nintendo actually learns things from itself, they see a cheap $249 Wii sell gangbusters. They see a $89 Balance Board sell 40 million (you can google it) w/ Wii Fit. They see MS and Sony promoting HD. So they launch a $249 Wii HD w/ NSMBU promtoing HD and backwards compatibility w/ all Wii games. A year or 2 later they sell a $89 Gamepad w/ Nintendo Land included while they promote Splatoon, Super Mario Maker and SFZ. Maybe Gamepad doenst sell like gangbusters, but Wii HD sells much better.
And now store employees will be trying to sell a tablet deivce they can't see when the screen is in the toaster, and they can't use both screen for dual screen.
And finally, Fi-NuL-Lee, after 200 comments, you mentioned 2 player games that allow my kids to play all of those Lego games, 1 on the Gampead, 1 on the TV. Cant do that w/ Switch b/c the tablet has to be docked. That IS a step back. And that other stuff you said.
I'm going to Playstation now. Maybe I'll get to try out PSVR @JaxonH And I know you didn't mention Zelda U, but you compared open world map based Zelda to level based PMCS, that's even worse.
@shani This is partly Iwata's plan and even though I love the concepts introduced and possible with the GamePad, it didn't excite most people and did cause trade offs that would still be a problem.
Plus, I wouldn't ignore the awesome benefits coming. We should be getting almost twice as many first party games because there won't be a split between the two major platforms anymore. The traditional uncompromising controls, the NS being the only significant high performance portable dedicated gaming machine, and hopefully with performance in the ballpark of other home consoles mean it may be way more attractive for third parties than the Wii U ever was.
People a year ago: "Man, I hate how Nintendo shoves that second screen stuff down our throats! I just want to play with a normal controller! That second screen stuff has no use at all, other than off-tv play!"
Nintendo shows off the Switch, saids it got rid of the second screen stuff and is a portable to take your console game anywhere
People Now: "Ohh man Nintendo! What a step back! I'm really going to miss that second screen stuff! I don't know if I'm liking this Nintendo Switch thing anymore!"
Me: "Yay, I know right!?! How dare they listen to people and give us what we have been wanting basically since the Wii U launched and we thought the second screen stuff was pointless on games other than ZombiU! We should hate this system because Nintendo got rid of something most people never used!"
....yay...seriously people, wth...
I'll be supporting this system, I think it's a smart move on Nintendo to do this, because that inventory on the second screen was easily replaced by pausing the game for a second and quickly going through the inventory
Good. Hardly anything good came from having a second screen with the Wii U. Was never a big fan of having inventory on the second screen for games like Wind Waker and Shovel Knight. I'd much rather pause the gameplay, knowing I'm safe, and have time to pick my items. Radial pop up menus have also been a thing in games for a long time, for games that don't want to completely stop the action while you get your gear.
@Grumblevolcano I didn't mind the UI for single-screened Pokemon games.
They have enough room to make it better this time around as well. Could end up looking like Battle Revolution.
@hYdeks Who is "you"? Because you are ignoring at least two things: 1. Your point doesn't stand unless it's the exact same people saying both statements. 2. People change their minds which is good. Standing by something you said that you know is wrong to save face... that's something to call people out on.
Anyway, so far I'm happy to support this direction for Nintendo but I'm a bit worried about the performance of the Nintendo Switch and a couple other details. Very much looking forward to the games in an era where Nintendo seems to be targeting core gamers a bit more.
@aaronsullivan Yeah I know, he was involved in early planning. But I'm sure this didn't inlude details like continuing previously introduced features.
I think the only 'benefit' will be Nintendo making more money. Yes, a bigger install base leads to more games and yes, if they finally will concentrate on one platform, it would be great. But this step comes a bit late. They should've done that before the Wii U came out. It suffered from under-supply while the 3DS was treated like their favourite child.
And I don't care about twice as much first party games. The amount of first party games on Wii U was suffice for me. I still haven't finished them by a long shot.
And I wouldn't call the Switch high performance. It's still a mobile chip, no matter what architecture its based on. It's nothing but a bad compromise.
As I said before, the only thing that could lure me into buying the Switch eventually could be Splatoon, or really really good games. But I doubt the latter since the console has nothing special anymore, it's just a PS4/XB1 that you can play on the go. Wow, how unspectacular. I don't even want to play on the go. I want to play at home. With innovative concepts, not that boring stuff that everyone else is producing.
Focus on profit kills innovation and that's exactly what we're seeing here.
There were very few games that really took advantage of this on Wii U right? Other than inventory screens or maps it wasn't really anything groundbreaking. All the Wii U gamepad did was add cost to the system that could have been better spent on horsepower. Plus, it alienated developers because like every Nintendo system since the Wii, they had to do something special just to port their games over. Now with Switch, you have traditional controls and one screen. That means much more 3rd party support and that's a good thing. I would just about guarantee we will see replacement "joy-cons" for stuff like rockband/guitar hero and maybe... maybe a trackpad type device that could slot into the right side instead of the right analog for us PC guys who prefer the precision of a mouse in FPS games. Probably not from Nintendo but a 3rd party could easily do it.
@Anti-Matter Exactly. Wishful thinking.
Be positive. I'm sure Switch will be awesome even just only Single screen. Maybe there is a possibility to use Switch console as lower screen while TV monitor as main screen. Think Mario Kart 8.
Beside, it still first trailer. We don't know yet the details. I'm sure there will be some good features from Switch.
@rjejr I went to my local GAME store today and there were loads of people selling their Wii U consoles and games to get Xbox One S. It was a pretty large queue and all I wanted to do was buy some Xbox credit and ask for some advice regarding some slowdown with my Xbox One.
@Anti-Matter No, that won't be possible. What you're describing is dual-screen mode and that's exactly what Nintendo just confirmed to be not supported by the Switch.
Be positive about what? The switch offers no new exciting gameplay elements, no inspiration. Think about it:
-N64 introduced 3D games and the control stick, which offered tons of new gameplay elements
-Gamecube offered vastly improved graphics (which arguably didn't have a big effect on gameplay but on storytelling and creating emotions)
-Wii introduced motion controls, which offered tons of new gameplay elements
-Wii U introduced a second screen, which offered tons of new gameplay elements
-Switch introduces playing on the go, which offers exactly zero new gameplay elements
That's just boring. It doesn't affect or change the gameplay in any way. It's totally ordinary, not extraordinary. It's not what I expect from Nintendo.
With this, they're just becoming a regular company like the others, they're not special anymore.
@Anti-Matter I think this article is specifically a statement saying that won't happen. :-/
Maybe with two switches you can, but you have to dock it and obscure it to get it to play on the TV.
dual screen gaming--too far ahead of itself. so sad. I think the game that should be remembered for optimizing this experience was Arkham City
@iflywright Yeah? Did it utilize the second screen that well? Didn't know. I only started playing it recently on Steam.
I think I will always think of Affordable Space Adventures first regarding usage of the second screen. Although there were many other games where the second screen had a big impact too (ZombieU, Splatoon, Mario Maker, XCX etc).
oh snap, I didn't think about how a game like Mario Maker would be affected by no dual screen. Hopefully it will be a touch screen display, but dang.
@Kanppachi Actually I disagree on this one. The second screen on 3DS felt very tacked on for me, while it felt really useful and inspired on Wii U.
But what are you saying exactly? The Switch is a handheld.
Twice as many games generally means a higher chance that games you like will be made on the Nintendo platform. For instance, there were some games I thought looked great on the 3DS but the tiny cramped portable was no fun for me to play so they were lost to me. This way almost all the games will be accessible to me. Pokemon is another good example where it is traditionally tied to portables only, but now...
Not to mention that having as a base a similar set up to the others introduces a stronger possibility of third party support and the possibility of games tailored for your own tastes arriving on the system increase again.
My bet is that motion controls exist and will be utilized as well. Also touch screens. Also, local multiplayer is being pushed as a core feature which is a Nintendo mainstay. You can bet that the next iteration of Splatoon is going to be very heavily supported and pushed.
There's plenty more on the way as well. The detachable nature of the Joy-cons means that replacement controls for innovative control methods (as some have speculated long ago) will be there for some games as well.
There's plenty here already, and plenty yet to be shown.
I'm guessing close integration with the mobile games may open up possibilities for some second screen gaming like in affordable space adventures if third parties are willing, as well. That's a bit of a longshot though.
I think this will really damage the splatoon experience
It did. there really wasn't a reason to press pause. You could be perched on top a building on the tv while going through the map or items on the gamepad--just like batman when he checks his armband computer in comics. When people talked to you or thugs were around you heard it from your game pad not the tv. you could move the remote batarang with the gyro of the gamepad. It was a very immersive experience. I played the game on Xbox and i thought the wiiu version was more impressive.
"No more second screen gaming"
You mean, except on the 3DS and it's successors?
@aaronsullivan I hear you on the 3DS games on a cramped tiny screen! And I want you to be right about the rest as well.
But I highly doubt it. Nintendo doesn't look like wanting to incorporate that innovative stuff right now. It looks to me like they are streamlining their product, which would mean a classic controller (they already made it look more like the Xbox controller, a step back too) without motion controls or touchscreen.
I really doubt that there will be a more innovative alternative to the Joy-Cons, otherwise they would've shown it. And the Joy-Cons are just too integral for the new concept.
I think if they should keep the motion controls, the sole reason would be Splatoon. Because they don't want to alienate the existing userbase.
I really don't care about third party support, I can play those games on PC if I want. For all I care, releases on Nintendo consoles could solely consist of Nintendo and maybe indie games. I don't buy a Nintendo console for the third party games, that's just crazy. I buy it for the Nintendo games, because I can't play them anywhere else.
Most Wii U games were already tailored to my own taste (e.g. I don't like Pokemon).
@iflywright: Good to know! Maybe I'll buy it for Wii U then. And to continue my argument in reply to @aaronsullivan: Even games like Arkham City wouldn't have made me buy a Wii U. Only the Nintendo games. The indie games were an unexpected but welcome surprise.
I don't like to hate Nintendo, the one company I was always a fan of, and I was always the one who told others to hold their horses and not to be so negative. But I'm really disappointed now. They're taking it into the wrong direction if you ask me.
@LemonSlice Pretty sure the logic behind that comment was Switch being both the Wii U and 3DS replacement.
@Grumblevolcano Actually, based on Sun/Moon's changed battle UI, I could see it becoming a sidebar on Switch instead of reverting to GBA era UI.
Nintendo are going down the right lines here.
They're offering something that nobody else is and that hasn't been done before (I saw somebody on one forum compare it to the Vita as 'console gaming on the go'. Nearly wet myself laughing). Much better than copying Sony and MS.
It has a main innovation that facilitates gameplay without attempting to influence it (and in reality, hinder it) by forcing developers to use unnecessary gimmicks that even Nintendo didn't know what to do with.
Console manufacturers try new things all the time. The good innovations stick around and the unnecessary ones that add nothing fall by the wayside. It's just evolution.
@Bflury I don't see why the Wii U game pad couldn't be synced to the switch. Obviously they want to distance themselves from the Wii U and not show this feature but they could also sell a controller with a touchscreen similar to the game pad.
Um...third party developers doesn't always make their games for both PC and consoles or portables. There are some third party games that dedicated only for certain consoles or portables, never been released on PC. Try some third party games. I'm sure you can like it once you get into it. Btw, I have more third party games than first party for my Nintendo games, almost all of them can't be found on PC.
@Anti-Matter Yeah I know, but the only third party games that don't get released on PC and interest me are those from Rockstar Games (like RDR). And those games will never be on Nintendo consoles, so it doesn't matter.
There are just no other PS4/XB1 exclusives that interest me.
I know this because a friend of mine has all the consoles and I saw the games that he played. They were either PC games or games that are copies of other games (mostly shooters). There was not one game that you could call innovative or something new.
Just name me one good third party exclusive on Sony or MS platforms that don't get released on PC and are really good/worthwile. In my opinion all of those exlusives (except for Rockstar games) are just not that good or they are not for me (like Last of us, a terribly overestimated game - I played it and found it unimpressive).
The main difference is: Nintendo exclusive titles are truly unique, while exclusives on Sony and MS platforms are just similar to other games. They are not unique.
Now one game that I recently played and really liked, was Quantum Break. It was originally announced as an XB1 exclusive but then was made available for Windows. A really nice game and I'm glad I got to play it. It is something special, but still not as unique as a Zelda, Mario or Splatoon game, for example. It's essentially just a shooter with time manipulation powers, superb graphics (on PC, not XB1) and good acting. Overall It's a great cross-media experience and this is the only part where it's a bit innovative too. But I would never have played that on XB1 or a Nintendo console. I would play such a game only on PC.
Um... to be honest, my third party games are also for Nintendo machines. I have NDS, 3DS, Wii and Wii U. Some of my best or interesting enough third party games on Nintendo are: Harvest Moon Tree of Tranquility Wii, Go Vacation Wii, Style Savvy Fashion Forward 3DS, Lego City Undercover Wii U, The Sims 3 Pets 3DS, Fantasy Life 3DS, Final Fantasy 3 NDS, Ochaken no Heya 3 NDS, Final Fantasy Fable Chocobo Dungeon Wii, etc. Sorry, I don't play Sony games anymore (used to be play ps1 and ps2) nor even play any xbox games. But for Sony, The Sims Bustin' Out PS2, Dance Dance Revolution Extreme 2 PS2, K-1 World MAX 2005 PS2 Japan, Final Fantasy XII PS2, Kingdom Hearts 2 PS2 was the best PS2 games that I have ever played. Well, I hope you get some good references.
Disappointing!!! The dual screen worked well for so many games. Playing Pikmin 3 just now with my 7 yr old son ... who acts as navigator with the Wii U pad screen while I use the nunchuk combo to control.... i'll certainly miss that function. Really wanted more split multiplayer on Wii U ... nothing notable ever came out after Nintendoland... not even MarioKart had a gamepad/tele split screen mode.
@Anti-Matter Ah okay, I thought you meant third party games on other consoles. Well from those that you mentioned, only Lego City and Kingdom Hearts would interest me.
I tried Lego City on my friend's Wii U, it was interesting, but not enough for me to buy it (lack of shooting, poor performance/ low fps, among other things).
I have never played Kingdom Hearts and up until a few months ago I didn't even know that this game existed. I don't get why there is no Wii U version of it. But I think even this wouldn't make me want to buy a certain console.
I once bought a used Xbox360 (50€) just for GTA V (+ RDR) because I couldn't wait for the PC release. After finishing the story (in both games), I sold it immediately.
Now I'm thinking about getting a cheap used PS4 in the future when RDR2 will be released. Then I will sell the console again after I'm done with the game. And I really hate the PS-controllers, they don't have a decent d-pad.
Rockstar's games are something special at least, something I might consider buying a console for if it's an exclusive. But it's not enough to make me keep the console, that's for sure. I hope Rockstar will release RDR2 for PC someday, with good graphics and mouse&keyboard support. Not those crappy PS4 graphics and that awfulness called playing a shooter with a controller (unless I can use motion controls).
Uhm... yes of course the 3ds will be missed in that case but the wiiU? The only game using second screen feature i remember being splatoon: i prefer having motion control over second screen. do you want to jump on a specific area? push + button and it will display a map on the screen in a microsecond. The other microsecond will be used aiming with a cursor thanks to IR or motion plus controlling the zone you want to jump in; release + button and there you are. enough saying that original splatoon on the wiiU could be the perfect shooter with wiimote nunchuck config
@AzmoBaro There were lots of other games that nicely utilised the screen as well. Affordable Space Adventures, XCX, Mario Maker, Pikmin 3, Zombie U, Deus Ex, Arkham City and others.
Besides, the main benefit of the second screen in Splatoon is not superjumping. It's seeing the whole battlefield from above, you can basically see everything that happens (if you develop an eye for it), which makes voice chat unnecessary.
No, what I did was compare the benefits of Switch to the benefits of Wii U. It doesnt matter what examples are used. Its not "worse" than anything because its true.
Playing console games with console graphics on an HD screen anywhere by far trumps the dual screen implementations of Nintendo, such as flicking cards into the screen in Paper Mario. Such as tapping blocks to move them in 3D World, such as seeing a horn to honk in Mario Kart 8, such as seeing a map on a second screen in Zelda as opposed to seeing it on the main screen, such as swapping inventory on the second screen as opposed to swapping it on the first screen. Such as DKC Tropical Freeze and, oh wait nevermind.
Youve been missing the broader point. Second screen was cool. I liked second screen. Always have. But this far trumps it. Which comparison you make doesnt matter. It all results in the same overwhelming conclusion: HD console games anywhere is a far better proposition.
I can handle that, but would really like them to allow for tranferring of digital content over from WiiU or 3DS in some form, or discounted cross-buy for previous purchases if they re-release games. Also, what about a real d-pad on the con-joy? :-
@3MonthBeef A problem that many gamers share? I don't think so. I have never heard anyone say: "Oh damn, why can't I continue playing when I'm going to a party" or something like that.
Playing on the go is not the same as playing at home. On the go, you are limited to a small screen, you are limited by the battery charge, you are limited by your body (playing on a handheld leads to neck pain for me), you are constantly interrupted by your surroundings (exiting the train, watching out for traffic etc).
So why would any gamer want to pick up the game and continue it on the go when it doesn't offer the same comfortable experience?
I don't find that innovative, it's just a logical evolution from the Wii U (or in other words: they could've already done that with the Wii U, but they didn't so they could now say: "hey look, this is something new").
Besides, I can already do that with my Wii U. The only difference is that it needs a power supply. But the Switch also needs Wifi and where there is Wifi, there most likely is a power supply too.
Or let me explain it like this: The only allure Switch could have for me was playing Splatoon everywhere. But of course, I would need Wifi and a big screen for that. Which means I would have to take the dock with me as well. Which means: no advantage over taking the Wii U with me.
I'm not against the hybrid concept (I actually think it's long overdue, only not with low-performance mobile chipsets), I just think that concept is a given and not innovative. For me It's more of a side-aspect really (like the console having an internet browser). The new console should have some big innovation and the hybrid aspect on the side, not the other way around. They are trying to sell this as a new idea when in fact existing tablets already offer similar functionality. You can plug them into your TV at home and continue playing on the go. The only difference is: there are only shitty games for tablets and smartphones.
I'll agree with the seamless transition between TV play and off-TV play to be pretty spiffy, but I don't reasonably see why I have to lose the dual-screen option for it---I'd be okay with having to play on one screen, to play on the go, then get that extra screen back when returning to the dock. I'd also be okay with having to ditch games where that second screen were integral to the gameplay, if that's what it takes for great games to be made to be taken anywhere. And of course, if a game doesn't support that second screen simply because the devs weren't up to it, I'd be okay with making due without it (or more likely, just play it on PC). But losing a really nice, unique QOL option just because it'd only be usable at the dock feels unfair. It's like my console Monster Hunter will need to have a crap-filled HUD (ugh, that map) just because other people want to play anywhere, and yet their ability to play anywhere seems to have no real reason to hinder my at-home play.
It was convenient but not something I could live without. The game I think I've used it the most is Zenoblade Chronicles X
@SteamedSquid That really sums up my sentiment quite well, thanks.
@JaxonH: I don't get your point. Console games in HD (how do you know it is HD?) everywhere is already possible with the Wii U. You just need a screen and a power supply. Or do you really mean handheld (not console) gaming with the Switch? That's just something different and not an option for me. It has to be on the big screen and with an internet connection. Would you seriously want play to an enomous game like Breath of the Wild on that tiny Switch screen? That's just no fun. And how would you play a game like Splatoon without wifi?
meh, terrible and sad to see it go.
First of all, just loot at the image on thag screen. Thats HD. If that screen isnt HD I'll stuff my foot in my mouth and eat my workboots.
Secondly, really? "All you need is a Wii U and a power supply"? You're comparing lugging a stationary AC powered 8th generation home console and separate foot-long gamepad controller, with the ease of carrying a wireless portable tablet? Come now... thats like saying who needs a handheld when you can just lug your PS4 and Vita around, plug in the PS4 and stream to Vita...
"Seriously want to play Breath of the Wild on that tiny Switch screen"
Are you kidding me? Dang right I wanna play on that beautiful Switch screen! And its not so tiny either. That thing looks as big as a tablet. I love playing pixelated handheld games on 3DS 4.7" sub-HD screen, how much more then would I want to play real console games on a huge 6-7" HD tablet screen! Dang right!
"How would you play Splatoon without wifi"
How would you play it at all without a portable hybrid option??? I dont get this statement of yours. You can still play at home, on the TV, with wifi exactly how you would on any other system. But you can also play on the go anywhere. Maybe at a friends house and they have wifi. Or maybe you dont have wifi. At least you can play it on the metro bus, even without wifi. Certainly couldnt do that on Wii U.
And Splatoon is a mp focused game. If youre out and about with no wifi, do like you do with any other handheld (eh ehm... 3DS) and play something single player like Zelda or Mario or that Skyrim.
I can see it from your point of view. I'm guessing you might see some good things in the future that you'll like. One of your comments mentioned "they would have showed it" and I do want to add some context there. No, no they wouldn't have. This is a very calculated and targeted first look to express the features they think will gain the most initial excitement and interest from the larger-than-wii-U market they want. Even touch wouldn't be shown because the core gamers aren't looking for a tablet.
It's okay for Nintendo if that isn't you or me. There are hidden clues in there to suggest some of what wasn't shown. Amiibo support (one brief shot), motion controls (Splatoon movement on the new version moving around rapidly and waving like controlled by motion not stick).
Nintendo has months to gain momentum on the NS and will hold some aspects to itself. The games shown from Nintendo are intentionally the ones we've seen before plus Mario so that little would need explanation. They are suggestions not full reveals.
Also, those detachable joy-cons, I'd give it a 98% chance that there will be other controllers to slide in there for specific games or game types. It will be for fun and profit, which yes Nintendo needs right now especially. If I was making bets, one early attachment will be a left side with a proper d-pad instead of buttons.
There will be more, and you may like it. That's all I'm saying.
I don't mind because it DID NOT WORK at the console level. First of all, not many games used the second screen in a "could not work elsewhere" situation. Real time pause screens have existed before the Wii U, and they'll go on after. And that doesn't begin to touch the unpleasantness from the Gamepad's design. Oh, it was fine holding it up for a while, but it's mass eventually took it's toll. Then the best you could do was raise and lower your head.
@3MonthBeef You're seriously mentioning gaming on laptops as an example? I know there are so-called "gaming laptops", but that's just a marketing term for me. You can't properly play on laptops because they are a compromise in themselves. You either have less performance to have more battery life or more performance and ridiculously short battery life + a lot of heat. I know people play on laptops despite that, but they are always dependant on a power supply.
And maybe you haven't seen this video before:
As I said before, you can do all of that already with a Wii U, you only need a power supply, as does a laptop, as does a Nintendo Switch. We shouldn't fool ourselves, Nintendo didn't magically reinvent batteries. Battery life is always the achilles heel of any mobile or handheld product (that has a screen and is reliant on hardware performance). Recent chipsets have become better with managing energy, but they still have to compromise by delivering less performance. Or they slow down the CPU/GPU clock when the hardware gets too heated up. The Switch will face the same problems.
@aaronsullivan: I'm hoping you're right and I'm not a 100% giving up on them. I'm just basing my assumptions on their current behaviour and statements, like their statement regarding no dual screen. I mean, I don't get it, there are two screens present (TV and Switch), but they refuse to use them? Similarly, they could say: Yeah, the Switch could have a touchscreen and motion controls (as could the Joy-Cons). But we decided not to include that. Just because.
@JaxonH A tablet screen is still tiny. It's not the same as playing on a monitor, TV or projector. And are you really calling 6-7" inch huge? There are even bigger tablets and not even those are big enough to play a game like XCX, for example. That game displays so much text and other information on-screen, even a regular TV is too small to read it properly.
Yes, I'm comparing "lugging a stationary AC powered 8th generation home console and separate foot-long gamepad controller, with the ease of carrying a wireless portable tablet". Because there is a lot of ease in the former and not more ease in the latter. The Wii U (as was the Wii) is pretty small, you can easily fit it in any backpack or even a handbag. You have exactly one cable coming out of it and that's the power supply (which you can also store in your bag). Essentially, the only thing you have outside of your bag is the Wii U Gamepad.
I've actually done that numerous times and played with my Wii U in hotels or when I was visiting friends/family. It's really easy and comfortable.
So now let's say I want to take the Switch with me and play Splatoon somewhere. Obviously I would have to take the whole dock with me to enjoy it on a big screen. Where's the advantage over taking my Wii U with me?
Even if I would compromise to play it on that tiny screen, there's still no wifi in a bus, car, train or plane. That rules out most games (or limits their functionality), not just mp ones like Splatoon.
But I have another question regarding your previous post: Are you seriously telling me an HD handheld screen is an innovation in 2016? When every smartphone has Full HD or more and the tablets likewise?
I didn't like the Wii U second screen at all. The fundamental problem is that you can only look at one screen at once. It was ok on the 3DS because the screens are almost adjacent, but on the Wii U going from one screen to the other was too much of an adjustment. The only case where it was really useful was in hyper-casual games where it was used to give one player hidden information. That's not worth all the costs associated with maintaining a second screen.
Im honestly ok without the touch screen features. I don't really need them but, what i do need is the switch.
Who said anything about an HD screen being an "innovation"? No its not an innovation, but it's still an HD screen and it's cool to play console games on when youre out and about. It doesn't have to be an innovation to be something people want.
The console itself is an innovation though. The fact no other current-gen console is portable speaks to that fact.
And you can sit here all day and tell me how convenient it is to pack up a stationary AC powered console to play anywhere, but the fact that you'll never see anyone in public hooking up their PS4 or Wii U to play on the bus, or at college, or school, or work, just shuts out that entire argument. that might be how you roll but that's not what the rest of the world considers convenient. This is.
I believe we've basically seen all that can really be done with the dual-screen concept. I'm overall apathetic to seeing the concept go, since the Switch's concept is something I find more intriguing.
@JaxonH No I meant taking the Wii U with me to play in a hotel or at a friend's house, not on the go. I don't play on the go because it's just no fun for me.
Anyway, you won't see anyone do that with their PS4 because it's just too big. You would see more people do that with their Wii U (like in the video above) if the Wii U was a mainstream hit though. But Nintendo just failed to market it right. BTW the Wii U Gamepad could already have had an HD screen, Nintendo only didn't do it because it was either too expensive or they thought the streaming bandwidth wouldn't have been suffice. Guess what: Steam's inhome streaming allows Full HD games to be streamed without any noticable lag and it's even happening on wifi 2,4Ghz, not 5ghz. The same wifi signal that transports all the other data. Valve didn't even need new technology to accomplish that.
I still don't get why you're so impressed by the fact that the Switch is portable. It's a handheld (regarding to the tech built in it, like the tegra x2) with a TV-dock. Of course it's portable (Strictly speaking, it's not even a console).
If you're asking why no other console is portable, well that's because Sony and MS know that most of their customers want to play properly, not with awful compromises like a tiny screen, loud distractions, mobile chipsets (performance vs. battery life) and possibly no internet.
If it would've used cloud computing, with a stationary unit at home and a portable unit, now that would've been something new and innovative. But don't let yourself get fooled, it's just a tablet with TV-out and detachable controllers (a concept that already existed before), nothing new.
Still, although it doesn't appael to me, I do get the appeal for some other people. But that still doesn't make it an innovation. Because it's not something new. They basically took the Wii U and turned it into a tablet. There are already tablets with TV-out. What's so special or even innovative about the Switch? They didn't invent something new and exciting, nothing that will inspire developers to make new kinds of games or gameplay and nothing that will inspire competitors to do the same.
I'm sure MS and Sony could've done the same - even years ago - if they wanted, they just didn't want it. It's just not the same as playing a game properly on a big screen, in your home with no distractions, without being interrupted by an empty battery or being limited by not having internet.
@Bflury The last part you said, about using the processing power of multiple systems, I just wanted to comment on that.
I remember pretty recently reading a patent Nintendo filed that was basically exactly that-- the more items that are "connected" together, the more performance is increased. I don't know if that applies to using multiple Switch systems or even the Switch itself but Nintendo has a patent for something like that which implies it's on their minds. I suppose we'll just have to wait and see.
If you want to play on TV somewhere else, then no there's obviously no advantage to this console over any other because you're going to have to pack up the whole thing. But that's not the selling point here. The selling point isn't that you can play on a tv anywhere with Wi-Fi, the selling point is that it functions as a handheld also. What part about that aren't you understanding?
People play games on Tiny sub HD 3DS screens and enjoy it just as much as consoles. Yet you act like playing a true HD screen with true console games is so inferior? A lot of people actually prefer to play their games on smaller screens. My brother is one of those people. Loves handhelds, loves playing on a smaller screen.
And it does not rule out most games. Look at the Wii U library and the 3DS library and tell me how many games are ruled out? The entire 3DS library is built around games that can be played anywhere. And despite the system not being portable most of the Wii U library is too. In fact I can't think of one single game you couldn't play without Wi-Fi
Xenoblade was built with TV in mind- all games for this console will probably have bigger text because they know people are going to be playing it anywhere. But even if it didn't it's still got a bigger and sharper screen than the GamePad ever had and as long as the resolution is sharp you should be able to read it fine.
Thole point of portable play is that you can enjoy games more often and in more places then just when you're confined to a television. Now you can play on your TV with your Wi-Fi at home just like you always could and you can still pack it up and take it to your friend's house and play on a TV with Wi-Fi just like you always could but now you can also play on the way to your friend's house and on the way back from your friend's house and when you're at school and when you're at work and when you're at the bus stop and when you're in your backyard or in your front yard or even when you're walking down the street.
And obviously concessions have to be made to play games portably. That's why handhelds are smaller and that's why they're less powerful and no you won't have Wi-Fi access when you're out and about. That is the nature of portable play.
But that's also why this is so huge. For the first time ever you can now play your console games literally anywhere, and not just when you're hooked up to a TV. in one specific location you have the console set up.
"...kiss those GamePad inventories and maps goodbye."
I'd rather throw them out of my trunk and into a ditch. Maps are capital-b Bad for level design. They become a crutch too easily (could you imagine what Ubisoft would have done with an Assassin's Creed map on the gamepad screen?).
"I still don't get why you're so impressed by the fact that the Switch is portable"
I'm not impressed as in " oh my gosh that's amazing new technology I have never seen before, how did they do it! Unfathomable!"
I'm impressed as in "Finally! a practical use that makes sense that I've been wanting for years! Finally I can play real actual console games on the go instead of just handheld games like on my 3DS and Vita. Finally I don't have to worry about cross-save or crossbow or buying two systems or buying the same game twice. Finally I don't have to boot up Monster Hunter on my 3DS and on my Wii U and load up the safe Transfer app and transfer my save data over to play for the one hour I'm going to be gone and then do it all over again to transfer when Im done. Finally, I could just take the system with me and keep on playing.
That's why I'm impressed- because it's something I will actually use and it's something that I've actually wanted for a long time.
and despite it being such a simple premise no one has offered this yet in the consumer market. there may have been attempts but those attempts didn't have the software or the design factor. either relied on wireless streaming or other inferior methods.
Switch nails it. Absolutely nails it. Are there other concerns to be addressed down the line when we get more information? Sure. But the concept nails it.
Just because you don't appreciate portable play doesn't mean there aren't a hundred million other people out there who do. And if you doubt that I would remind you that over 75 million handheld units were sold this generation.
Good. Gaming should be done only in 1 screen. Period!
There goes Super Mario Maker 2 and the best Pikmin control scheme.
No, it will be touch screen. Even if it wasnt you dont need it for creating levels, as evidenced by every other level creator on every other platform. But it will be touch screen.
And motion, I'm pretty sure that will be in also. The touchscreen I'm 100% certain. Motion... I'm not absolutely certain but I'd say odds are pretty good. At least for gyrometer and accelerometer. It may even have IR as well, with a sensor built in tje unit and a peripheral for docked play like Wii U had.
I'm pretty sure that excellent Pikmin control scheme is still going to be used. Of course, analog will be an option also, as it was for Wii U.
I kind of assumed it was more of a single screen experience. Either way, I was good with both single and dual screen configuration.
Not sure I get all of the eulogies for Super Mario Maker.
Disney Infinity and LittleBigPlanet before it successfully had popular level/world-building tools without requiring a touch screen (or 2nd screen) interface. Nintendo can figure it out just fine, if they want to.
Eh, didn't really care for the two screen gimmick, so I'm not annoyed by this.
Makes me wonder how they're going to handle Splatoon on it, though.
@JaxonH Comparing Paper Mario to Zelda is still wrong.
Try this - I gave up my car for a bicycle b/c my bike saves me gas money. B/c my bike doesn't need insurance. B/c nobody asks me to drive them places.
There are lots of reasons why a bike is a better mode of transportation than a car. But most people would say it's not an appropriate comparison.
On happier news. Tried out Rigs today. Not much of a game, and don't ever be on my team, I suck at it, but I did say "Woah" just like Keanu Reeves in the Matrix when the woman put the headset on and started it up. It really is virtual reality. You aren't just looking at a world on a screen, that headset somehow tricks your eyes and your mind into thinking there is a whole world around you. If humans from 1,000 years ago put this on I think they would believe they were transported somewhere. Well unless the human brain pre- motion pictures couldn't comprehend it at all? So the experience is unreal, but I'd still rather spend the money on a 65" 4k tv b/c I just don't like first person games, too disorienting. But it isn't Wonderbook, Move or 3D tv, it's the real deal, it's virtual reality. It isn't going away. It will get better and cheaper and everybody will want it. And then the human race will perish.
The guy who won the Playstation truck proposed to his girlfriend on the stage in front of everyone. That was true greatness. Love 》video games
@JaxonH I'm aware of the success of the 3DS, I just think Nintendo is catering too much to those users and disregarding the console users. It's as if they said to themselves: "Look, we sold ~60 million 3DS and only a fraction of that is buying the Wii U. Maybe we just concentrate on portable gaming". And that's what they're doing.
I understand the benefits for you and other handheld users. But why do we the console users have to suffer for that? Why not please both segments equally? That would've totally been possible.
Are you really playing the "handhelds sold more, so handheld users should dictate what Nintendo does" card? If it was all about majority and sales, Nintendo should've just blindly followed their competitors from the beginning and never invented anything new or ambitious. But sales numbers don't tell you anything about innovation or good product design. They only tell you how successful it was commercially and that's mostly down to marketing. You don't need a good product or innovation to be successful, just think about Apple.
I think it's a good thing for Nintendo to merge its portable and stationary sections. But they didn't deliver on that. A true hybrid would've had a stationary part that doesn't take away any advantages that a console in general or previous consoles specifically had, while adding all the advantages that the handhelds have + expanding on both. A true hybrid would've been a Gamepad with handheld tech in it (like the Switch Pad, only with confirmed touchscreen and motion controls), hooked up to a stationary device that boosts its performance with stationary tech, not mobile tech.
You said "The whole point of portable play is that you can enjoy games more often and in more places then just when you're confined to a television." You can already do that with the Wii U. You don't need a TV for that. And what do you mean by more often? If I want to play more often, I play more often. What does that have to do with the console? As I said before, the main difference between the Switch and other tablets are the Nintendo games. It's the software. The hardware is pretty unspectacular.
The other thing you mentioned: "In fact I can't think of one single game you couldn't play without Wi-Fi"
Well just to name the most famous examples, you can't play Splatoon or Mario Maker without Wifi. You can't play MK online and for me, that's the part of MK I played the most. And you can't play XCX with bigger text either. Because there's just not enough space for all that text as it is, there would be even less space if you make the text bigger. It would mean compromising the game.
I'm not saying the concept of Switch is totally wrong, and I'm happy for you and other 3DS users. But it's essentially a successor for the 3DS (with TV-out) while we Wii U users are left with nothing. The Switch is just missing so much! Why didn't they deliver a proper product that pleases both branches of Nintendo gaming, without any missing functions?
And from a technical perspective: Why are they trying to sell this as a new and innovative thing, when actually there have been tablets and smartphones with TV-out for years or even a decade?
Try to see it from my perspective. Imagine Nintendo releasing a 3DS-like device that can only be used at home with an external power supply, without 3D etc. Imagine them selling you a product that is a stationary device and telling you "hey, if you attach this big external battery pack, which is 3x bigger than the console and weighs 100 pounds, you can also use it on the go". Wouldn't you be pissed that they took away useful functions that you loved? Wouldn't you ask why they took out these functions without it being necessary?
But will the screen make doughnuts? I didn't see it in the trailer, but I still think there's a chance.
Will the screen only display black and white? I saw colors in the trailer, but Nintendo has previously made a handheld that only displays black and white.
Actually, I never compared Paper Mario to Zelda. I compared the systemic benefits of dual screen vs play anywhere, and those games just happened to be mentioned in the process. It was a systemic comparison, not a game to game comparison.
Glad you got to try VR. This:
"it isn't Wonderbook, Move or 3D tv, it's the real deal, it's virtual reality. It isn't going away. It will get better and cheaper and everybody will want it. And then the human race will perish"
says it all. The thing is in time there should be a full suite of games that are not just first person. 3D platformers and JRPG's and racing games and rhythm games and all kinds of other genres work beautifully. In fact I can't think of a single genre that wouldn't work in VR.
"disregarding console users"
It plays console games on a TV just like every other console [fails to see how that's disregarding console users]
You're basing your entire premise around the fact that a console absolutely positively must have dual screen gaming. And that's just a false assumption you should never make. Even if this wasn't a hybrid I doubt it would've had a second screen because the second screen concept was proven to be rejected by consumers. It's been rejected. I'm sorry, but nobody wants that. It's harsh I know but that's just the way it is. Don't blame the handheld functionality for lack of dual screen gaming. Blame the Wii U.
You say it's a 3DS-like device but I see no evidence of this. It has absolutely nothing in common with any handheld except for the fact that it can be played portably. Everything else about it is a console. It has its own separate controller (handhelds don't have that). It runs console games (handhelds don't do that). It connects directly to the TV (handhelds don't do that). You can repeat that it's not a console but it is a console. Everything about it is a console (and more). It just didn't have one simple feature that you wanted (yet that nobody else wanted).
And it is a new and innovative thing. Starting from generation one until now, name one console that seamlessly transitions from TV play to handheld play. I'll be waiting.... you won't find one. It doesn't exist. I don't care what tablets or phones do because tablets or phones aren't dedicated gaming devices. They aren't sold with their own exclusive controller and have their own exclusive libraries. That's like saying because my toaster can toast bread, it's not innovative when they finally invent a pencil that can toast bread. Yes it is. And even those non-gaming devices you speak of, they never had seamless transitions. They were never sold with the ability to seamlessly transition play from one to another.
I'm trying to see things from your perspective but your perspective is biased. This does everything any other console does- you are not missing any features. Dual screen console gaming is dead, and that's true whether this Switch does hybrid play or not. If there is only one thing that was an absolute guarantee with this generation it was that they were not doing dual screen play after the Wii U. Dual screen gameplay is not a standard console feature- it was an experimental feature on one console for one generation and it failed miserably. And even those that did buy into it complained about it constantly. And now it's ancient history.
You can't logically say this is like a 3DS simply because it doesn't do dual screen.
With the switch, Nintendo is making an effort to "switch" back to mainstream gaming. One screen. No touchscreen. Minimal crazy controls. Normal dev tools.
They want the 3rd parties back, and to be considered in the same breath as Xbox and PlayStation again. That is what killed the WiiU and commercially they can't let it happen again.
Depending on how well this goes, it may or may not replace the DS family. I'm guessing they hope it does?
This is why the reveal wasn't about kids or retro gaming. They want CoD, battlefield, skyrim, dishonoured, watch dogs, etc... On this.
I'm thinking if it does well, we'll see a handheld version of Switch that's smaller but can still dock to TV, maybe scale down games on the go or have its own games.
If it doesn't do well, I imagine they'll hit us with a prolonged 3DS generation and then maybe follow up with an HDS handheld.
That's what bothers me the most...I may not get Switch right away just because of the Wii U backlog.
@MitchVogel A lot of things aren't essential, but that doesn't mean they don't greatly enhance the experience. I felt like I went back a generation playing Witcher 3 after Xenoblade X. The problem is that a second screen can only be useful in slow-paced games like Xenoblade, Captain Toad, Mario Maker or in games like W101 where you didn't really have to look at the screen to use it for the touch controls
@Nintendian whether that is a good thing or bad thing... We shall soon find out
I understand your concern but Switch is very innovative for me. Well, who doesn't like to play on the go ? I can treat my Switch with two different treatment. When I want to go somewhere, I can bring it outside regardless has a wifi or not ( I treat it like 3DS), but when I want to play in bigger screen I will put my Switch inside the dock and using Joy Con grip or Pro controller to play plus sit down nicely on the couch (I treat it like Wii U). Oh, if you forgot I play both console and portable. Regardless of graphic quality, I like both of them as long the gameplay are interesting. I think Nintendo Switch is both Console and Portable at the same time. If I want to bring HD games on the go, I won't take my Wii U (Limited gamepad range connectivity, bulky gamepad, has to plugged in electricity to turn on my Wii U), I will take my Switch and showing to other people while i'm playing. About battery life inside Switch, we don't know yet if Switch has better battery life than Wii U. Don't be panic, I'm sure the next trailer will explain about battery life.
I think next trailer will shows some kids playing Switch. Remember, Nintendo is well known as kid-friendly branding.
@huxxny It has been confirmed that there will be no backward comp...
Yep i know... But Gamepad's most important use in splatoon i think Was aiming with motion controls. so i think mote and nunch could be a superior way to play this game. In the end wiiU second screen best feature is off tv playing. I think motion controls are a natural evolution of playing games and i hope switch has them. enough of dual analogue.
Off TV play is my most used feature on Wii u. The only game I bought that does not support it is costume quest 2 and I didn't know that when I bought it.
after reading most of the comments... look I understand most of you think the switch is a step back and I do agree to a certain degree but...
THE WII U DIDN'T SELL
So now we literally have a "Switch" in philosophy from Nintendo. Don't agree with bastardizing the Wii U version's Zelda BOW but it had to have been a marketing move...
If I actually get a higher probability of getting some third party games, then I'm definitely gonna make the "Switch" myself.
And this is coming from a happy Wii U owner who loved playing Mass Effect 3 and Arkam Asylum with the gamepad... but then annoyed/angry I didn't get any other Bio games after that...
@Nintendian I haven't played Zero yet but I played the demo and now I'm wanting it for Christmas alongside some other games.
It's just that people tend to throw around the word "gimmick" very haphazardly without ever really thinking about what the word actually means so other people can hate something they haven't even played yet (I know the Wii U sold horribly and had awful marketing) but I like that system for a good amount of reasons like a nice collection of quality games I own, eShop, Miiverse and online/multiplayer being free.
I don't expect everyone to like a system but I want them to at least give it a genuine try first before they judge.
I love my Wii U and 3DS and the dual screen access was a nice feature for a lot of reasons but it isn't something that I will miss enough to not give this new era of Nintendo a chance. The Switch excites me very much!
For the Wii U the second screen was good in Xenoblade and Monster Hunter. Good, but not great. I won't miss it.
blows a kiss of farewell to the second screen I knew this day would come.
Please stop concern trolling.
No, the footage you see on those screens is probably captured from dev kits, the Wii U or another source as a pre-recorded bit and mapped on later in most cases.
It's impractical for a number of reasons to show live gameplay when filming because screens have glare and other artifacts, may not sync well with various lighting set ups, and can be difficult to time for multiple takes.
I wish people like you would stop looking for reasons to undermine people's excitement, especially when your reasoning isn't sound.
You know what else? The "frame drops" I assume are when Link is hitting enemies and there is a momentary slo-mo effect.
I wish gaming and sites like this were free of people like you that have poor intentions and spread misinformation.
More people should call out your dishonest agenda.
@Action51 Hahaha!!! Do you really think I'm going to read your rant after your lie in the first sentence? Hahaha!!!
@jimi "i LOVE the miiverse drawings" what are you, 5 years old? Grow up.
@arrmixer Bioware have confirmed Mass Effect Andromeda is not coming to Switch.
That honestly suits me absolutely fine. One of the things I truly hated about the Vita was games like Uncharted that shoehorned in touch controls for fighting and stuff.... Really broke the fun for me.
You read it.
As @JaxonH says, if you want to play on a TV all the time then you can pack up the console just like any other, so nothing's really lost in that regard. But when it comes to playing pretty much ANYWHERE else, the comparison is: Packing up your console, wires, pad etc. from behind your cabinet/whatever, stuffing it all into a rucksack, then travelling somewhere, finding a power source, then setting it up again to play whilst requiring some actual space around you for the console, then packing it up again when you're finished and repeating the general process at home VS... Picking up the Switch and travelling with it. This difference cannot be overstated.
You need to appreciate that millions upon millions of people enjoy portable gaming on the small screens. This console is about what everyone wants, not just what you or I want, so the fact that you can use it like you (and many others I'm sure) want, AND how MILLIONS of others would want is extremely significant. How many of the millions of 2/3DS + other handheld gamers would enjoy this console? How many of them would relish the idea of playing games with the potential for being many orders of magnitude bigger, beautiful and more intricate than their previous libraries on a similarly portable console? The answer to those questions should be obvious.
But that's not the only partial rhetoric: How many Wii U gamers would relish having Off TV play anywhere on the planet as opposed to 15 feet away from their TV? How many potential X1 or PS4 gamers might be at least slightly interested in playing AAA games anywhere on the planet with no fuss. Maybe not that many based on the large dedicated online shooter player base, but even some would be a bonus.
The funny thing is, for me by far the most brilliant and underappreciated function of the Gamepad was indeed Off TV play. To play on the handheld while the TV is used for something entirely different is a godsend to many and to have it as standard rather than requiring a vita or some button-less windows 10 contraption that would need propping up was a huge deal in my opinion.... So you can see, in this instance, ditching the second screen does literally NOTHING to detract from this function, because by design Off TV it's what the Switch does anyway, and infinitely better to boot. The other benefits of the second screen, while convenient in a number of games, to me, serve as a worthy trade off 1,000 times over for what the Switch will do instead.
@JaxonH Then Nintendo's marketing has obviously fooled you. My premise is not based on the fact that a console must have dual screen gaming. My premise is based on the fact that the switch is built with tablet hardware.
You're just ignoring the facts or you don't want to know them. The Switch is a classic tablet. A tablet is a handheld. And furthermore, because you don't seem know the facts, you're totally wrong about a lot of things:
-It has its own separate controller (tablets do have that - just to show you a few: #1 #2 #3 - and the same is available for smartphones)
-It runs console games (tablets do that - via emulation)
-It connects directly to the TV (tablets do that, smartphones too)
-it's a tablet, not a console. Just look at the hardware (nvidia tegra) its running on. The hardware sits in the controller, not in the dock. If the hardware was in the dock and had not-mobile chips, it would be indeed a console)
You can repeat that it's a console but it's not. It's built as a tablet and therefore a handheld.
It doesn't have anything to do with "one simple feature that I wanted that nobody else wanted". It's about the facts, about how the Switch is built. I don't even get why you're attacking me now. There are lots of people who want a second screen but you're obviously ignoring that too. You're ignoring all the other users here that are saying the same, the 15 million Wii U buyers and all of their friends who didn't buy a Wii U but still came to appreciate the dual screen gaming. And from my experience these are many people. As I stated before, I showed it to a lot of people and all of them were sold on the concept. They just didn't knew the console existed. Plus there is a small fraction of PS4 users who use their Vita for dual screen gaming.
But what exactly makes you feel so entitled to just ignore the facts and diminish the opinions and needs of all the other people? Just because the 3DS has sold more than the Wii U? Is that it? Do you really believe sales numbers should dictate everything?
This sentence made it clear for me, you don't care about the facts, you just see things the way you want to see them:
"I don't care what tablets or phones do because tablets or phones aren't dedicated gaming devices."
a) nVidia Shield (the predecessor of the Switch)
b) the Switch is a tablet, therefore - following your argument - the Switch would not count as a dedicated gaming device
@TearTheRoofOff I'm not against the Switch's concept of making it portable, I just don't understand why everything else about the device has to suffer for that. Why such a bad compromise? They could've easily kept the portable part but also made it a proper console, not a tablet with TV-out. And they could've kept all the parts that made the previous consoles great.
They're ditching all those perks for no reason. Maybe there is a misunderstanding here (although I made it clear several times now). Why are you seeing this as black and white? Why can't it be grey? I'm not saying the Switch shouldn't be portable. That's fine. Why are you arguing like I want to take that feature away? I'm just saying it should also be a console. It should be a handheld and a console (and keep previous perks). A real hybrid. But it's just a handheld/tablet, not a console (because of the hardware and the fact that the hardware sits in the portable controller).
You're asking "How many Wii U gamers would relish having Off TV play anywhere on the planet as opposed to 15 feet away from their TV?" The answer is simple: All of those who also have a 3DS.
"How many potential X1 or PS4 gamers might be at least slightly interested in playing AAA games anywhere on the planet with no fuss"? The answer is zero. Otherwise they would've bought a 3DS. Besides, "no fuss" doesn't apply here. There is fuss involved, because the screen is tiny, there is no internet and you're limited by the battery.
I think all you 3DS-players are overestimating the appeal of the Switch. It may appeal to people who already have been playing on a console and a handheld, because now they only have one device and can continue their game.
But for pure console users, which make up the vast majority of PS4, XB1 and maybe Wii U users (not sure about the last part), there is no appeal. Because those users want to play a game properly, on a big screen, in their home, without distractions from outside or battery limitations. That's the appeal of gaming. You get immersed and can play for many hours, maybe even a whole day. That's just not possible with a handheld and neither with the Switch.
Well, and regarding off-TV play: I rarely used that function. Only to play a few Mario Maker levels while I was surfing the web on my PC. I think this feature was only useful for families or people who live in a shared flat. Which means it wasn't that useful for me, but useful for many others. I'm not just seeing this from my perspective, I can see other's perspectives too. I can see the benefit for others and that's not what I'm criticising. What I'm criticisin is that they took away everything that made their previous consoles great and that they're only producing tablets/handhelds now. Nintendo essentially ditched console gaming without any need to do it. They could've made a real hybrid.
Thanks for info.. I'm sad 😭 now 😕
Wrong, wrong wrong wrong.
1 No, tablets do not run current console games. Just because you can emulate 5th or 6th generation games, that does not mean it is running PS4 games or Xbox One games or Wii U games. That is NOT "running console games". When Witcher 3 is releasing on every single tablet across the board with its own standard controller across the board and it was built to work with a controller and not shoehorned in after touch controls across the board, then you can tell me that it's running console games. Until then, no, it is simply emulating old games with third-party workaround controllers
2 Tablets do not come with their own controllers. You have to buy a separate third-party controller and connect it, via Mfi blutooth or whatever. And everyone is different and every tablet requires a different way to connect and there's no guarantee a certain controller will connect with a certain tablet. That is not "coming with a controller". That is a third-party work around for something that is not sold with its own controller.
3 Sure, it connects to a TV. By buying a separate cord and having to plug it in to output it every time you want to play on the TV. Because it wasn't built with seamless transition. That's the whole point. Nobody wants to go buy third-party cables and run their laptops and iPads into the TV every time they want to get TV play. Nobody wants to do that. It's not seamless and it's not something that was built into the system.
So no. You're absolutely wrong. IPads run old ass games with 3rd party controllers that all connect differently and all have to have a separate cord connected to them to run it into the TV.
Which is exactly why nobody does it.
It has nothing to do with marketing, it has to do with cold hard facts, and you are seriously brainwashed into thinking that because tablets can run 5th generation games, or touch games with garbage controls shoehorned in with 3rd party controllers you have to buy separately that may or may not connect to the tablet you have, and because a work-around exists to get those games on the TV, well I guess nobody needs a seamless transition that plays real console games without having to hook up separate controllers and separate cords every time you want to play.
Thats such a puerile statement it just dizzies me.
He just doesnt get it.
He thinks because you can emulate PS2 games on a tablet and play it with a Mad Catz controller and a third-party cable running it into the back of the TV, that that's the same thing as a current-gen console with its own dedicated gaming library of current gen games and its own dedicated controller that seamlessly transitions between portable and TV play.
He just doesn't get it and it's a waste of time trying to reason. Anyone who thinks that disconnecting your PS4 and lugging it around with you, that thinks connecting tablets with 3rd party controllers and connecting cables and an emulated library of millenial games is the same thing as having a current gen console with current gen library with a dedicated controller and built as a hybrid to seamlessly transition... there's really nothing more say.
@TearTheRoofOff Nope. I honestly only read the first and last line. They're not worth my time.
Pardon me for bothering you but I still don't get it, why are you complaining Switch so much. Switch clearly not a tablet, looks like tablet but with powerful engine inside. If you think Switch is a tablet, so Joy Con can control IPad because Ipad is tablet. And what are you concerning about ? Playing Ultra HD games with no Portability, no Tablet shape with Nintendo brand ?
Come on. We Don't know 100% yet about Switch. Our job is just wait for next trailer for further details. Calm down. I'm sure there will be surprising features from Switch.
""How many potential X1 or PS4 gamers might be at least slightly interested in playing AAA games anywhere on the planet with no fuss"? The answer is zero. Otherwise they would've bought a 3DS"
This statement is so wrong on so many levels it completely embodies the fallacy of everything you've been saying up to this point.
Just because someone didn't buy a 3DS does not mean they have zero interest in portability. Maybe they didn't have money at the time. Maybe it didn't have the kind of games they wanted. Maybe the price was out of their range at the time. Maybe they were waiting for the next handheld. Maybe they just never gave it much thought. Maybe they didn't want a portable device at the time, but now they do. Maybe they didn't like dual screens. Maybe they didn't like the resolution. Maybe they just never heard of it.
You have a clear disconnect from reality if you think out of 70 million PS4 and X1 owners, zero have interest in portability simply because they didn't buy a 3DS. That kind of thinking is so far fetched from reality. And maybe they didn't have interest in playing out and about but maybe they do have interest in playing downstairs or on the back porch or in the other room.
And lastly, the word "tablet" should have never even come out of your mouth in this discussion. Tablets are not consoles and do not play console games. Period. I don't care if you can emulate old games, I don't care if you can buy 3rd party controllers and connect through an app, I don't care if you can run a cord to output it to TV... tablets are not dedicated gaming devices. Period.
When you start arguing that a tablet can do everything consoles can do you might as well argue that a tablet can do everything a PS4 can do, or an Xbox One. If tablets truly offered what consoles could offer nobody would buy consoles! You could use this tablet comparison to any console because you're basically saying it offers the same thing when it doesn't. And everyone knows this, which is why gamers don't go out to buy the new iPad for the coming generation, they buy a dedicated gaming device.
Leave "tablets" out of the discussion. If you want to argue tablets are as good as consoles do it somewhere else. Nobody here buys into that nonsense. Nobody wants to go out and buy a new iPad instead of a PS4 or instead of a 3DS or instead of a Switch. Because tablets aren't gaming devices. People want the exclusive libraries and they want games that are exclusively tailored to controllers, they want a system that is solely designed for running games so that it can make the most of the architecture, they want one dedicated controller that comes with the system and works for every single game on the system.
And with Switch, people want those exclusive brand new console games to be playable on the go by virtue of simply grabbing the system and taking it with them and then setting it down in the dock afterward. They don't want to hook up a cord every time they need to play it on the TV. They don't want to sync a third-party controller every time they want to play a game. They don't want to have to buy a separate controller or cord- they want that functionality built-in out of the box. And they don't want to emulate PS2 games or play touch games with shoehorned controller support. They want new games. Console games. Not the cream of the Google Play crop.
@JaxonH You just don't want to see it, do you? The Switch is a tablet. There's nothing to debate about that. The form factor, the built-in hardware, everything about it is 100% tablet. Whether it's a tablet or not doesn't depend on the software. There are tablets with Android, Windows, IOS and other OS. Switch is just another one. It doesn't matter what software it is running or which games it can play. Only the hardware matters.
But why am I even writing this, you aren't even listening/reading what I'm saying. In your mind, I'm probably a tablet enthousiast or something. Well guess what, I'm not. I hate the whole tablet/smartphone game market and I think all those app stores are full of crap.
And stop putting words in my mouth. Or at least start reading what I wrote instead of fantasizing.
I never argued "that a tablet can do everything consoles can do". I argued that tablets can do what the Switch can do. And the Switch is not a console. I'm tired of repeating why it isn't, I think I have made that clear numerous times. It should be apparent. But you're denying this reality as if someone told you a car is a car but you're insisting that it's a plane.
You're going off on something I never wrote and are writing paragraphs about why I'm wrong, only you seem to be arguing with an imaginary person. Because I never said tablets could do the same as consoles (which are just PCs, btw) do. In fact, that's my whole point. The Switch is a tablet and therefore can't do what a console can do. That's the core of my criticism. So in fact, if you're against tablet gaming like I am, you should be agreeing with me. But obviously you're content with playing on a tablet.
So I don't think there's anything more to say. I delivered you reasonable arguments and evidence for why the Switch is a tablet and not a console. But at this point, I could tell you the sky is blue and you would still insist that it's red. So I guess it's pointless, have fun living in your imaginary world where the Switch counts as a console.
"not a console"
Why are you so short sighted?
I'm male. Now what if I told I also have brown hair. What does that make me? A male with brown hair. Having brown hair also doesn't take away the fact the fact I'm male.
Switch is a console. Everything that defines what console is applies to the Switch. Now what if I told you it was also portable. Does that make it any less of a console? Do added features take away what it is?
You clearly lack the definition of what a multi-purpose device is. Of what a hybrid is. And clearly lack the wisdom to discern the difference between something that actually is a tablet and something that has the form factor of a tablet.
By definition a console is a dedicated gaming device with its own library and own controller and plays games on a TV out of the box. Switch is a dedicated gaming device. With its own library. And it's own controller. And it plays games on the TV out of the box.
That is what a console is. Being portable also doesn't make it any less a console. Having a screen on it doesn't make it a tablet. Tablets use touch as primary user interface. By official definition.The fact there are buttons on it which are used as primary interface automatically disqualifies it as being a tablet. By definition. Yes it has a tablet form factor. But that does not make it a tablet! That does not mean it is not a console!
But you are so hell-bent on calling this thing a tablet and saying it's not a console, you defy all logic and reason.
My iPod Touch has a screen. Therefore it's not an mp3 player... no! It's a phone. Because phones have small screens. Therefore it must be a phone.
Switch has a screen. Tablets have screens. Therefore it must be a tablet. Nevermind the fact it uses buttons and analogs. Nevermind the fact it's a dedicated gaming device. Nevermind all that. Screen = tablet
Don't be an idgit. iPod touch has the form factor of a phone. But it's not a phone. Switch has the form factor of a tablet. But it's not a tablet.
You're like my grandmother. Thinks every small handheld device with a screen is a Gameboy. No grandma, I know it looks like a Gameboy but it's actually a GPS. No Shani, I know it looks like a tablet but it's actually a dedicated gaming console with portable form factor.
Um...sorry for bothering you again but how did you know if Switch was a tablet ? You even haven't played yet and justify Switch is a tablet. You can't make a Pre-mature comments like that. That still first trailer. Be patience, okay ?
Btw...do you hate portable games just because can't deliver Ultra HD graphic? I have NDS and 3DS games, 45 games altogether right now. I don'tcomplain even NDS have 2D graphics ala Cooking Mama or Kuikin NDS. That's called artistic, even on 2D. And what are you afraid from 3DS ? People will not buy console because can play the games on rhe go ? Wrong.
I have Wii and Wii U also, they are CONSOLES, not PORTABLE games. And I still play them, treat my all Nintendo games from NDS, 3DS, Wii and Wii U equally. So, what are you afraid of ? The world is not die just because people prefer 3DS. I think you need a cold shower to refresh your mind.
@JaxonH Lol. I do understand what a hybrid is. But the Switch is not a hybrid. To be a hybrid, it would have to incorporate both worlds. Stationary tech and mobile/handheld/tablet tech. But the switch only has the latter. If the Switch dock contained its own stationary chipset, it would be a true hybrid. But the Switch dock is only an adaptor for TV-out and power supply.
"By definition a console is a dedicated gaming device with its own library and own controller and plays games on a TV out of the box. Switch is a dedicated gaming device. With its own library. And it's own controller. And it plays games on the TV out of the box."
Well, if that's your definition of a console, then every device is a console. A smartphone, a tablet, a PC, a laptop. Because all of them can be used as a dedicated gaming device with their own library and own controller and they can play games on a TV. Who cares about out-of-the-box or not? Is your whole argument really hinging on the fact that you might have to buy a separate 5€ cable by yourself?
Then tell me, what is the nvidia Shield? A tablet or a console?
What if I take a Windows tablet, connect it to the power supply, run Steam Big picture on it, connect a Steam controller to it and connect the tablet to the TV via HDMI or Displayport. Does that really make it a console? Because it has all the requirements you listed above.
Just because Nintendo is marketing the Switch as a stationary console, doesn't mean it is truly one. The dock is nothing more than powersupply + TV-out, it's even bulkier than using two cables. The dock itself doesn't contain any dedicated hardware that would suggest its a console (which is a PC, again).
And you're still ignoring the fact that the Switch is running on tablet hardware like the Tegra chip. It's not a graphics chip like they build them into consoles and PCs. It's a compromise between performance and energy consumption, born out of the necessities of tablets and smartphones.
My argument was never based on the screen or the form factor alone, they're only part of it.
Besides, you can easily use a tablet without the touchscreen. Just connect a mouse and keyboard to it. Does that make it a PC? No, still a tablet.
"The fact there are buttons on it which are used as primary interface automatically disqualifies it as being a tablet." Since when? For example, the Wii U Gamepad has a touchscreen AND buttons. You can choose both as a primary interface. Still, the Wii U Gamepad is not a tablet, it's only a controller. Why? Because it doesn't have the main hardware built in it. The hardware is in the Wii U itself. The Gamepad is only a controlling device, only an extension of the console.
And that's the main difference with the Switch. The main hardware sits in the "Gamepad". Therefore it's not a stationary device, because the dock is just an empty shell.
After every post, I swear to myself to let it be and not reply anymore. But then I read the reply and find it at least partly preposterous (and I imagine you feel the same when you read mine) or something else makes me write another reply. But I think this is pointless and a waste of energy, it doesn't seem like we can reach an agreement regarding the matter (and we don't have to). Agree to disagree?
@Anti-Matter Because it runs on tablet hardware and because the hardware is built in the portable device, not in the dock.
No the doc doesn't need its own chip. Where do you come up with this stuff?
It is stationary. Hook it up and done! Being portable also doesn't make it less stationary. It's only portable when you want it to be.
"smartphone, a tablet, a PC, a laptop. Because all of them can be used as a dedicated gaming device with their own library and own controller and they can play games on a TV"
Used as is not the same thing as being. I can use my car as a skateboard if I want. I could use my pencil to throw darts. Using it as a dart doesn't make it a dart.
And a tablets own library is not it's own. It was not developed exclusively for that Hardware. It was developed for iOS or Android which runs on multiple pieces of hardware. And it's not its primary purpose either.
Gosh you are so freaking dense.
Things are not black and white to where, "Der her the dock doesn't have the hardware therefore it's a tablet". Of course it doesn't have the hardware you idgit, that's why it's called the dock! Because it docks the hardware.
That has absolutely nothing to do with being a tablet. A tablet is a multi-purpose device with a touch interface that runs mobile OS. A console or handheld is a dedicated gaming device that has one purpose and uses a dedicated control scheme with buttons and they gave me library created solely for this one piece of hardware.
I can buy a game on my Samsung tablet and have it play on my Asus tablet and have it play on my Lenovo tablet. Because it doesn't have its own games. The OS has its own games and it runs OS.
You lost this argument like a day ago dude. Go try to convince someone else this isn't a console cause nobody here wants to hear it and I know I dont.
Oh, wait. Is that your your definition about Console ? Must be STAY on the table, No Portability ? Gosh...!
Just because it have portability, it doesn't mean make Switch SUDDENLY lose their definition as a console. Are you expecting Switch MUST be like Wii U ?
Btw, if you want Switch stay on your table, simple. Put in the dock, use Pro controller, enjoy your games and DON'T ever take your Switch go out. Got it ?
He absolutely rejects handheld gaming and thinks the entire world hates portable play. Said not one PS4 or X1 gamer who didn't buy 3DS will be interested in Switch. Said it's just as easy to pack up your PS4, cables and all, to play anywhere.
For real... you can't make this stuff up.
Says it's a tablet simply because it's portable. Failing to grasp the notion of a portable console.
Is desperately attempting to marginalize the Switch by categorizing it with a broad label of "tablet" because then it works to his argument that Nintendo has "neglected console gamers"
And one can't make such an argument if they admitted it was a console and functions as a console and does everything a normal console would do. So he ignores the console aspect of it and uses the sole fact it's portable to trivialize it as "just a tablet"
You can see the agenda. Soured about Nintendo ditching 2 screens, and now he wants to blame the fact it's portable and paint it as the scapegoat, and marginalize the system as just another tablet, touting the false claim that any tablet can do what it does (says you can play console games on them with their own controller and have portable play). Because playing mobile games with a Madcatz controller and cable connecting to the TV clearly offers everything you can get with a dedicated gaming device like Switch [rolls eyes]
Tell ya what then buddy, you go and buy a tablet for this next generation and forego all dedicated consoles. Since they offer everything consoles offer. And don't even think about buying Switch. I don't wanna come on this website next year and read about you playing Switch games. No sir. Tablets offer everything it does? It neglects console gamers? OK then, fine. You go out and find you the best tablet you can find and you enjoy that for the next 5-6 years you game. And you can come here every week and tell everyone how great it is and how we all were foolish enough to buy a Switch when we could have been playing our iPads.
Let me know how that works out for ya.
@Anti-Matter No no, I mean it has to be both from a technical side. I don't mean the portability, that's fine. And I don't mean a console does have to stay in the house on the table. I mean it has to have dedicated hardware, not mobile hardware. And the Switch only has mobile chipsets.
Even the Switch stays at home for its entire lifetime, it's still a handheld/tablet connected to a TV, nothing more. That's what I mean. The tech that's inside and how it's built in.
@JaxonH Oh so you mean a console is a dedicated gaming device and can't be used for other things? For surfing the web or watching videos? Wake up, dude, we're not living in the 90's anymore. Consoles are just PCs without hardware upgrades. Consoles aren't a single-use device anymore. Yes, their main focus is playing games. But that's not an exclusive to "consoles".
"And a tablets own library is not it's own." How can you say that? Of course the games are developed for that hardware, otherwise they wouldn't run on it. Every Android game is developed for devices with compatible hardware. And some Android devices aren't even compatible. Since Android devices and the Switch seem to run on the same hardware, one could even suggest that Android games would run on the Switch. The thing is, no one wants to play those games because they're crap. ^^ But maybe some hackers will one day make it work, just as a proof of concept.
"I can buy a game on my Samsung tablet and have it play on my Asus tablet and have it play on my Lenovo tablet. Because it doesn't have its own games. The OS has its own games and it runs OS." Wow, you clearly don't grasp how this works. Yes, the OS has a role to play in this, but ultimately it's the hardware running the games, not the OS. Some Android games and apps are not compatible because of the hardware.
"It was not developed exclusively for that Hardware." But it was developed for that platform. And that's why OS's like Android dictate some of the hardware to manufacturers. To make sure they have similar hardware.
And you're saying a console has a "library created solely for this one piece of hardware"? So what about all those third party games that run on different consoles?
And just hooking the Switch up doesn't make it stationary. Or would you call an Android tablet hooked up to a TV stationary?
But it seems that the term "tablet" is angering you. So I'll use the term "handheld" instead. Because it's basically the same hardware-wise. And don't tell me there is a difference. The 3DS does run apps that are not games and it has a web browser.
Reiterate again. Primary. Purpose.
It's primary purpose is one thing- to play games.
Third party games run on different consoles but were developed separately for each one.
They didn't just make one version and spit it out on 3 different consoles.
@JaxonH Who cares about primary purpose? These devices are multipurpose devices (when my PC mainboard was broken, the primary purpose of my Wii U actually shifted to the web browser and Netflix). And my argument was never about the purpose but about the hardware.
No thanks, why should I buy a tablet? Playing games on them just isn't fun.
And again, I didn't say tablets offer everything consoles offer (why are you repeating this imaginary statement?). I said from a technical side, tablets offer everything that the Switch offers (mobile hardware, screen, buttons, TV-out, power supply). Games are not hardware, they are software. But then again, you don't seem to have a deep understanding of tech or software development in general.
And regarding the Switch: I'm not sure whether I'll buy it or not. Based on the device, the hardware: No buy. But if there will be awesome games (new Mario, Splatoon) that might compell me to buy it, I will buy it. But probably not on day one.
Until then, I'll continue playing Wii U and PC.
I don't understand what is your definition about "dedicated hardware" ? Should it HAVE to STRONG as PS4 or PC to be called dedicated? When everything weaker than PC = worst thing in the world, doesn't deserve to be played ? Are you so Fanatic with HYPER STRONG POWER hardware with very OMG Ultra HD Graphic ? Gosh...!
"Who cares about primary purpose? These devices are multipurpose devices"
Hook. Line. Sinker.
I'll just leave your quote there for you to chew on. Perhaps then you'll grasp the notion of the switch being a multi-purpose device. Your words exactly "who cares, it's a multipurpose device".
Exactly. It's a multipurpose device. So even if handheld was it's primary purpose, who gives a dang about primary purpose being portable play as long as it functions as a console?
Your words, not mine.
3DS is a handheld video game. Of course the main job is playing 3DS games with some side jobs like playing NDS too and some applications like Youtube, Camera, NetFlix,etc. What are afraid of ? 3DS clearly NOT a tablet. Do you HATE to watch Youtube from tablet but not hate watch Youtube from Wii U ?
"As the second screen aspect did add to the gameplay experience in many cases." It didn't really though did it, let's be honest.
@Turniplord... Growing up in my household we always had 2 handheld systems. We had 2 gameboys, 2 game gears, 2 virtual boys, 2 game boy colors, and 2 game boy advances. Not only that, but we frequently would bring them over to our friends house (who also had 1 per child) having even more systems in the room.
I was clear that not every one will have this setup. But we certainly did, as did plenty of our friends. Even though it's positioned as a console, this is a handheld system. I'm not suggesting 50% of the owners will have 2+ in their household, but I think 20% is a reasonable guess especially when bought for the kids.
Also I had forgotten, but another user reminded me that Nintendo did in fact have a patent for this exact setup. You have to understand this isn't nearly as uncommon as your suggesting there...
I don't think it is likely to be used in a way where two systems are REQUIRED, but I could see it being done as an added bonus where it would be easy to implement and only serve to improve (not add to) existing gameplay. For example, Mario Maker currently would make most sense if the levels were built using a touchscreen in handheld mode, limiting the tv mode to playback only. The setup I describe could be an easy bonus to emulate gameplay of the Wii U for households where they have the hardware.
@KoopaTheGamer That is correct... and it's true those are second (and third, etc.) screens when playing online multiplayer. The key difference here is the system is portable making it more likely that 2 of these systems might be in the same room at once.
@Turniplord Another idea... Nintendo loves accessories. They have one shown where it connects the two joycons with a square box in the middle to make a controller.
HERES A THOUGHT: They make an attachment that connects to the base unit in portrait mode (rotated 90 degrees) and attaches the joycons on each side. The portrait mode could then emulate the DS system by cutting the screen in half on the top and bottom.
@Bflury the quality would be crap as the standard ds/3ds resolution is so low, and again - possibly no touch screen. Plus it's something else to buy and the kickstand wouldn't work - meaning there is a 100% chance it won't happen.
All these 'theories' you are coming up with are just that, Nintendo have released a small amount of info, but none of it seems to be what you want it to do. You are going to be disappointed if you actually believe what you are saying.
The base station is a tv out dock - so you can't use the tablet and TVs at the same time, the patent for cloud processing of other units is about 3 years old and wasn't used, they won't release add ons to allow playing ds style games as no confirmed touch screen, the device is technically a console, not a hand held and previous handhelds didn't cost £300-350 so I doubt they will develop functions which would require the same person to have 2 of them etc....
Why not just stop making up imaginary things and wait for Nintendo to tell you what's it can actually do??
I'm not at all disappointed. The Wii U had a great deal of potential for the second screen feature; however, it was severely underused. It's also being less and less effectively used on the 3DS. I just won't miss it.
I don't think the NS is going to be a 3DS killer, though, so I'm going to safely assume that I can still have whatever dual-screen experiences there are to be had on my n3DS.
Who said the switch doesn't feature motion controls? Do you really think nintendo would feature a control configuration where a dude's holding 2 j-con controllers in each hand, Wii remote nunchuk style, and omit motion control capabilities?
No second screen isn't bad for me. It was nice to have. I've played Wind Waker mostly on the gamepad and have been fine with going from the main screen to the map and back. Sorry if this was already mentioned, but maybe an option can be implemented for the Switch where a simple button press can go from the main screen to a sub screen. For example, you can press and hold the Select/minus button to show a map, and then let go to show the main screen again. I'll be happy with single screen.
@Turniplord You really are the argumentive type, aren't you? I'm clearly saying in theory the hardware can support these features, nothing more and nothing less.
I'm also sure the kick stand isn't a deal breaker, but god forbid it was couldn't a kickstand be built into the "proposed" attachment?
We have no idea if they dumped the cloud computing idea... although I'll agree it would be ludicrous to develope a game requiring it as that would definitely be a niche market, but technically speaking it wouldn't be nonexistent as you implied since several households would likely have two of these handhelds. I also never suggested the TV and gamepad of a SINGLE system could be done.
I'm just pointing out what's technically possible, and nothing more. I'm not buying the system expecting these features, I am just pointing out that they can exist later on if the demand was there. Honestly, other than Mario Maker and that launch title I never saw a game that made good use of the second screen anyway...
@ToneDeath The Switch Pro controller has d-pads
@aaronsullivan "and I'm getting at least one NS as fast and soon as possible."
W/ as little as we know about it I have zero time frame on a NS purchase. Price and games. I don't really care about touchscreen and battery life, but price and games. Pikmin 4, where art thou?
PS4 this holiday. I'm considering the Pro now as 4k HDR tvs drop in price. I'm thinking $500 for 60" when the NFL playoffs start. As much as I liked PSVR its limited use, w/ a tv I get sports, movies, tv and games.
I'm sure my kids will want a NS someday, but I'm not impressed.
@Grumblevolcano "Wii U consoles and games to get Xbox One S"
I traded in my PS2 many years ago thinking PS3 or PS4 would have bc, I'll probably never trade in another conosle. Not even the deader than dead Wii U, my kids will keep playing on it w/ their friends probably until it dies.
I have traded in my thoughts on getting a Switch anytime near launch, unless they sell it at a huge loss and Pikmin 4 is bundled in.
@huxxny Its already been stated it cannot and will not be backwards compatible with anything. its not physically possible.
I find it more comfortable to press a button and instantly see a map/inventory appear in front of me on the screen I am already looking at than to move my focus away from that screen to look at a second screen. When you see visions of the future in TV/film you see heads up display type maps and info not a physical map in your hands that you have to look down at.
More than that : I'll miss the 3D !!!!
@Captain_Gonru That's why I was searching for E3 footage of motion control aiming
@ziffy Don't see how it can be a touch screen since at home you will be playing on the TV (probably). There would be no point making it a touch screen then hiding it in the dock while you play on tv.
@gatorboi352 One comment by one developer working on a very specific usage of the second screen opining about alternate uses that probably would distract from the IP he's working on doesn't negate all of the other uses and gameplay that do work nor does it address the fact that having no touch screen (and no motion controls, for that matter) breaks several (actually more) Nintendo IPS, such as Mario Maker. Nor does it address the fact that for social interaction such as Mii Verse, use of browsers, use of search on any app and similar UX/UI experiences, the removal of a touch screen very much negatively impacts the myriad ways with which it allows interaction and input of data.
And the second screen HAS been utilized in ways that have enhanced gameplay. Is it harder to do and require more imagination and planning? Sure. You have to been smart about the implementation. But nothing about removing menus, item inventory, maps and the like off of the main screen detracts, distracts or otherwise disrupts gameplay. With regard to Zelda that, imho, is where he may be wrong. But that's my opinion. I do not like HUDs and the like for RPGs (or most games, really). I have come to love a clean screen and - if you want to talk disruption - having to pause or otherwise interrupt gameplay to access menus, sub-menus, etc - THAT is a disruption and takes me out of the experience.
A well designed second screen that is aesthetically in line with the world of the game and with it's purpose can enhance and further build on the illusion and the immersion. You need a really skilled AND creative UX/UI team. But if done in a smart and thoughtful manner, the convenience and the advantage of removing clutter and organizing resources and maps at your fingertips can transcend it's utilitarian core and become a living breathing part of the game.
Fine by me at this point. I still got the 3DS, and the Wii U proved that it just doesn't work that well for a TV setup.
@JaxonH See, I don't get where we gain anything. The design and philosophy of the Switch - if it still incorporated touch screen - does not create an environment where second screen gaming is the focus. Rather, it would only be one option... and one that there would no longer be pressure to implement. More importantly, it gives developers other options should they feel 'saucy' and have a game idea they think would work. Lastly, it provides an alternate - and in this era of mobile tech - natural and intuitive interface. If it included the logical evolution of the Nintendo approach to touch screen thus far ( move to capacitive) and allowed for multitouch, it would allow for a nearly universal and instinctive UX for the market they were tapping in the trailer. And it breaks an IP like Mario Maker. For social interaction such as Mii Verse and use of browsers, use of search on any app and similar UX/UI experiences, the removal of a touch screen very much negatively impacts the myriad ways with which it allows interaction and input of data. I see more as five steps back and one step forward that is more appeasement and a calculated business move than the innovation we've come to expect from Nintendo. But much has;t been revealed and maybe this is all taken out of some context that we aren't even aware of yet, so I'll wait to pass judgement. But sans details and more info, I'm still disappointed at the moment.
Switch integrated with mobile, like previous rumour. There is no way to make Switch console has NO touchscreen feature while smartphones have. That will utterly useless.
I imagine the screen isn't a touch screen then, because the only reason the gamepad had single touch was for inventory/map management. If there is no dual screen play, there's no point to have touch controls. Which in the end would probably make it a little cheaper anyways.
I have my gamepad with still a backlog of games so I won't be missing the dual screen gameplay anytime soon. I'll probably be picking up the switch late next year.
@Tsusasi That's all well and good, but I think the overall feeling about the second screen experience at the end of the day (referring to Wii U specifically here) is that it's a novelty at best and not really a thing many people can't live without. Often times Nintendo themselves struggled to implement anything worth while with it.
What's the point in having a map/hud on the GamePad instead of inside a paused menu system when you basically have to "pause" what you're doing in game to look down at the second screen anyways?
@MrGuinea My theory on Nintendo remaining quite about the touch capabilities of the portable screen is that, behind the scenes, they are feverishly trying to rectify this oversight. Somehow somewhere I find it totally plausible someone(s) at Nintendo started hearing the feedback from the reveal trailer about touch capabilities and where like "um, yeah we should probably make that a thing after all. Oh, and tell everyone no comment in the mean time."
Are you honestly equating the 3DS to the Switch, just because both are portable? That's absurd. The 3DS is vastly less powerful and isn't something that can output to a TV like, you know, a home console. That's like saying if the 3DS could connect to the TV you wouldn't need a Wii U... Playing Wii U titles on the go would be a vastly different experience to 3DS.
You're saying you don't want to take the portability away and that you want it to also be a home console. Well, we can infer from that that your definition of a home console isn't dependent on its portability... So with that in mind, THIS IS A PORTABLE HOME CONSOLE. It will do EVERYTHING a home console does when it's at home. The only thing it WON'T do, is have a dedicated second screen, which only one home console ever really did; a console that was vastly outsold by the other home consoles and a handheld from the same company. I mean, how is this not also a home console? What has you so spooked that this somehow doesn't work as a home console? Your concerns seem unfounded.
And what else are you suggesting the Switch should be able to do when it's on the go? Battery Life? Small screen? These are unavoidable characteristics of anything that can operate as a reasonably sized handheld. A truly portable console NEEDS a battery, end of story, so that's hardly a system specific compromise, and anything above a 7 inch screen or so is going to be one unwieldy handheld unit. Both completely reasonable 'compromises'.
What exactly have they taken away? This is a home console with a dedicated library including AAA games that you can seamlessly take with you and play ANYWHERE. How is this concept (the games themselves and the power will be important in practice) not brilliant? Imagine being in the middle of Xenoblade X or something, then being able to pick it up and play it as a self sufficient handheld. That's insane. A 2DS that can play freaking Wii U GAMES would be bonkers, and this looks like it will be able to do the equivalent of that and then some. Then add in the fact that this can seamlessly transfer to the TV.
Just let that settle in. A 2DS with 4 times the screen area that can play games more demanding than Wii U games, that you can seamlessly output to your home setup.
For the record, your comments are of course completely welcome. I don't want my strenuous disagreement with you to come across as personal in any way; I just really like the Switch concept and want to explain why in the face of perspectives that I feel are misguided or biased. There's nothing stopping you from still thinking the idea stinks for your own reasons.
@gatorboi352 Because instead of an insipid and often times ugly and/or unintuitive HUD, you can have a more immersive and interactive experience (If you're not holding the screen in your lap, there's no need to look down. Look ahead just under your view of the main screen}. That's just one example of how touch screen/second screen gameplay can enhance, but let's run with it.
Let me just say up front, it won't take more development resources, just talented ones; the same people would be designing the HUD. A great UX/UI team could build an experience that mimicked the bag items are in or book of spells or map through well designed, integrated interfaces. Include audio effects through the touch control speakers and haptic feedback. You wouldn't be reaching down to check a screen, but to look in your bag or open your journal, map or spell book. And that's just addressing one use for the touch interface. Use the second screen to search areas as a scanner or telescopic/magnifying device. I would have loved a Metroid game that used the Gamepad as your scanner. Or a proper, GOOD game using the Aliens franchise. I feel like people are losing imagination while Nintendo is in appeasement mode. It's disappointing.
"The only thing it WON'T do, is have a dedicated second screen"
But it does have a second screen, the Switch's screen. But it will be just sitting there, unused. Why? What a waste.
"Imagine being in the middle of Xenoblade X or something, then being able to pick it up and play it as a self sufficient handheld. That's insane."
For me, that's useless. If I want to continue playing the game, I will stay at home and do that. Outside, it's loud and full of distractions. Inside, I have the big screen, which is 100 times more fun. Playing on the small screen also means risking to ruin my day because of neck pain (which means I can't continue playing) because of constantly staring downwards. Finally, I think it's very antisocial to be playing while visiting friends, getting something to eat, buying groceries or going to a party.
I do understand the benefit for others though. But those others are people who are comfortable with handheld gaming and already own a handheld. But not every gamer (e.g. people who only own a Wii U, PS4 or PC) is comfortable with handheld gaming.
So in that regard, Nintendo is exclusively catering to handheld fans and penalizes console fans (mobile hardware, unused second screen). Still, I wouldn't want to take away that feature of playing whereever you go. I just wished Nintendo would cater to both customer branches equally instead of favouring one over the other.
My disregard of the Switch as a stationary console stems only from the used hardware. If the dock contained additional, not-mobile (=more powerful) hardware, I would call it a true hybrid. A device that is a console and a handheld. Instead, from a purely technical view, we get a handheld which holds all the hardware + a dock that functions solely as a connector for TV-out and powersupply, similar to docks that are available for tablets and smartphones.
Yes, it is possible to use the Switch on a TV. But the same can be said about tablets and smartphones. That doesn't make them a stationary device.
EDIT: Ok, again my reply got longer than I wanted. Still I wanted to add that I highly appreciate you accepting other opinions and not making this personal (unlike others...). I think that's the way it should be.
@Tsusasi I mean, I guess so. I think both developers and the gaming population have largely spoke, through their actions, on how they feel about second screen implementation in gaming (Again, referring to Wii U here). I think at the end of the day it's simply a feature the masses, by and large, have shrugged their collective shoulders at. Sure it can be cool, just look at how ZombiU utilized it, but experiences that were worthwhile were too few and far in between.
Wii U's sales struggles are not by accident. The GamePad is a big reason why.
@gatorboi352 I think the Gamepad is only an issue because Nintendo first dropped the ball with Wii U launch marketing, kneecapped it with it's naming convention and then totally borked their messaging afterwards. On top of that, they failed miserably for all but the very last moments of the Wii U's life at evangelizing, positioning and simply explaining the Wii U and in particular the Gamepad. And as they screwed the Wii U further with inept branding, marketing and a lack of concise messaging, they failed to develop enough compelling content for the Gamepad that demonstrated all of the benefits and fun touch screen, two screen and asymmetric gameplay could provide. So in that respect I do believe the Gamepad became albatross for the system, although I also believe it didn't have to go down that way. With better vision and messaging (and honestly a name without Wii in it) and more software utilizing the gamepad in unique and intuitive ways, I believe it would have been received better and better understood. Who knows... maybe we would have still wound up where we are, but at least the Wii U and the Gamepad would have had a fighting chance.
I was never talking about a touch screen, just dual-screen gaming. Of course I hope it's a touch screen
@DadOfFour1972 I was think for browsing on the internet and other services. The mobile games theyr are making could played too.
Tap here to load 354 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...