
The Joy-Con controllers are a key part of the Switch appeal. Though the core mechanic of 'switching' between the TV and portable play is right there in the name, Nintendo's messaging has put plenty of stock in the controllers and what they can bring to the party. As we outlined in our Hands On write-up on the Nintendo Switch, the controllers are very clever, intriguing bits of kit.
In fact, it all takes us back to the Wii days, in many respects, when a small controller in the hand became a source of tricks and treats - yet now, of course, technology has improved a great deal. The Joy-Cons have accurate motion controls, but a key feature is the 'HD Rumble', which is the most precise and fascinating force feedback we've encountered in any game controller. It can be remarkably precise, and is a vital part of the Joy-Con toolset.
1-2-Switch is the game to showcase this, though it'll be sold at mid-tier retail price - in the UK this translates to £39.99. While Wii had Wii Sports and Wii U had Nintendo Land in the box at launch - aside from the 'Basic' 8GB model - the Switch won't have such an equivalent; 1-2-Switch feels like the pack-in title the system needs. Does it have enough on offer to justify a launch purchase as a standalone game? We're far from sure, as even if it has around 20 minigames - as seems to be the case - it's a tricky sell.
We'll wrap up on that point, but first let's run through the six minigames that we got to play, all in two player.

Ball Count
If one moment typifies the incredible fidelity of HD Rumble, it's Ball Count. There are virtual marbles 'inside' the Joy-Con and you have to guess how many there are; you do this by simply moving and tilting the controller and guessing from the 'feel' of the balls moving. It's remarkably effective and clever technology, and was a true eye-opener as to what the Joy-Con controllers can do. One downside is that the hubbub of the room and vibrations on the table meant the game struggled to pick up when we'd set them down on a flat area, after making our guesses - that prompted much fiddling around.

Safe Crack
This takes a simple approach as you go all Ocean's 11 and try to break into a virtual safe quicker than your opponent. Starting with the Joy-Con held vertically, you rotate left and right while waiting for a 'tell' that you've hit the right combination in the lock; this is in the form of a more emphasized 'click' in the rumble. It's effective, for sure, though in our demo one of the Joy-Cons did start to mis-behave and lose its calibration at one point, bringing to mind Shigeru Miyamoto's woes demonstrating The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword at E3 all those years ago.

Samurai Training
Showcased in the Presentation, this is a simple game in which you're encouraged to look at your opponent rather than the screen. You take turns between swiping down with the sword and trying to trap it in your hands; the latter is done by 'clapping' your hands (one with the Joy-Con) together. It's nicely done, with the motion controls precise enough that you can try and trick your foe with fake-outs and half swipes. Fun, but of limited appeal beyond an initial game or two.

Quick Draw
This formed the crux of the game's reveal, as two players start with a Joy-Con at their side and face off. Again, the idea is to look at each other, not the screen, though the console does give the cue for you to 'draw' and shoot. It works nicely, with a replay after the showdown for those that want to dispute the results...

Copy Dance
A bit like the Just Dance series on Nintendo hardware, this one relies upon judging your movement based upon the Joy-Con in your hand, though we didn't get the chance to test whether you can 'cheat' it. That's hardly the point, though, as it's another dual face-off in which you both listen to some funky music and wait for a cue to improvise a 'pose'. One sets a pose, the other tries to copy, and you do this a couple of times each. At the end you're judged on things like accuracy and 'energy'; we lost to the Nintendo rep that had actual energy and rhythm.

Milk
How this game is received very much depends on the age of the player and their state of mind. You sit opposite each other, supposed to look each other in the eyes, while 'milking' a cow. To do this you hold the Joy-Con vertically and, through a combination of a button and a steady motion, work the virtual teats, with the Rumble HD providing feedback; the winner is the one with the most bottles of milk at the end.
Children will find it funny, grown-up friends after a a few refreshments at the local public house will likely find it hilarious, and two thirty-something game writers that have had minimal sleep will likely find it utterly peculiar, and slightly uncomfortable.

A Perfect Showcase, and an Opportunity Missed
After working our way around these six games, the general feeling was that 1-2-Switch is fun in short bursts, shows off what the controllers can do and, well, that's about it. The final package of minigames and the modes that will drive them will become clearer, but whatever the case it feels like an ideal bundled game. Now, Nintendo has said that the lack of a pack-in title is all down to cost, but let's be clear - it's still the company's choice. It could swallow a bit of a loss on the packaged hardware if it wanted to, or rather sacrifice the revenues it thinks 1-2-Switch will make at retail. The Wii, in particular, thrived from the positive impressions made by Wii Sports in pitching the concept, and 1-2-Switch feels like the closest thing to that for the new system. The lack of a concept-driven game in the box feels like a notable miss for the Nintendo Switch.
As a positive on 1-2-Switch, it's designed to support what you have in the box, a left and right Joy-Con, so you don't need any more controllers at a high cost. That said, Nintendo has tried to draw a comparison to Wii Play, as that was a pack of minigames to show off the Wii Remote. The difference, though, is that many people we knew bought Wii Play as it was a cheap way to get an extra Remote, with some minigames thrown in as incidental extras. Wii Play itself was fun for trying out the technology, but in our view lacked the replayability that full-on party games have; it was played for a short while and then it gathered dust.
Our fear for this game is that it lacks the hook to make it worth a standalone purchase; after playing each minigame once, for example, we'd had our fill. We'd experienced how clever the Joy-Cons were, and that was enough. If 1-2-Switch was packaged with the Switch, it'd be a fantastic way to show friends and family what it's about, a short play session in which they marvel at what the Joy-Cons can do. Then we'd play Mario Kart 8 Deluxe for a few hours and never look back.
Is 1-2-Switch truly a retail game, and can it justify its cost as software alone? We have severe doubts on that, though we'll reserve full judgement - of course - for when we've spent time with the full game.
Comments 187
Nintendo should've bundled it with the Switch as being a full priced title is highly off putting.
Buying it day one. Perfect for my non-gamer bf and me.
Very unique games.
I like it.
But better not so expensive because the gameplay for me like 3rd priority. (Played sometimes on short time)
yeah this game from what we've seen of it so far isn't really worth paying for. I'm hoping there's more to it than we've seen so far though.
Should be pack in, but Nintendo just loves to take as much money from its fans as possible. At best, this is something to show off what the console can do, shouldn't be a stand alone game.
It should of been packed in, still might sell but only because of the lack of games at launch.
This game has to have many more mini-games that we don't yet know about.... amirite?
Otherwise this looks like a classic 'try for 10 minutes then sling in the charity box' kind of froth we saw on the Wii.
"...sacrifice the revenues it thinks 1-2-Switch will make at retail" - this should have been the decision, because currently the revenues are looking less than 6 figures. And I'm talking in Yen.
This does look like a bad decision by Nintendo, as we see it now it's far too small to be a standalone game. As much as I have defending Nintendo in the lead up to the Switch reveal... not digitally bundling this with the Switch is just plain dumb.
I'm not interested at all in paying $50 for something that should get packed in with the system. I will just do without it until it's $20 or less.
Pack in game at best. At worst 30$ budget tech demo. Can we even call this a game?
The sad truth is many will buy it because it's 10$ less and won't like any of the other games on offer. This sends mixed messages to Nintendo though that we like this crap.
Say the system sells 2 million through the month. If even 5% of them pick this game up it tells Nintendo we want more. I can't even see this costing them much at all to make then alone charge 50$ for this. Release this a year from now and you'd be lucky to move 10k at least at that price.
Change your tune Nintendo and pack it in and don't use my dl space to do it either.
I definitely sensed some unadressed sexual uneasiness when they were playing the Milk game during the Treehouse thing. Kinda funny that no one could comment on it.
As others have stated this should have been a pack in, and I don't buy the excuse Reggie gave that it would have increased sales price as the Wii had no problems bundling in Wii Sports. Just pure greed.
At least in the UK it's not full price but still way too much. I'll pass.
I honestly would have a hard time trying to find a reason to buy a game like 1 2 Switch for 10 dollars, let alone 50
Honestly when I saw this game I immediately thought it was going to be a packaged deal. It'll be a game I buy when price drops to 10 or 20 bucks new.
There is a 0% chance I'm buying that game at that price. And by the time it's at a price I'd be willing to pay, I imagine I'll care even less than I do now. Nintendo's designers and developers are wonderfully creative, but the business side of Nintendo really doesn't seem particularly adept at supporting their hard work with smart business practices.
This does even look like the worst error from Nintendo... The system looks cool but it's still expensive and may seem a bit "cheap" to some people (low battery life, ridiculous memory size of 32 Gb, a single AAA title at launch, no charging with the included grip, poor graphics when on a big TV, small controllers... and overpriced additional controllers)... And knowing all that, they still think that they can make people pay 329€ for something they cannot play with right away... You need to pay at least an addition 50€ to play with it... Making it a 380€ system (same price as the PS4 Slim with a game)... I doubt it.
PS : don't be mad at me... I did preorder a system with aditionnal case and Zelda Botw limited edition (500€ order)... And I'm a big Nintendo fan (still playing the Wii U as myh main system today)... But I'm a sad fan as I see them do the same errors (or even worse) with the Switch than with the Wii U... I think they spent too much time with Apple IMO...
Can I ask a honest question, did the ps4 have a pack in game?
Should have preloaded it onto the console as a freebie. Silly shortsightedness from Nintendo.
Looking at the 2 nearly identical bundles - gray joycon or red blue joycon - makes me wonder if 1 2 Switch was meant to be bundled with the red blue joycon bundle for maybe $319, may even with extra storage, 64GB rather than 32GB, but then they decided, nah, just one $299 price.
B/c really, that's the only reason I can think of for the red/blue Joycon SKU. Why bother, just bundle it with gray, sell the red/blue for $80. Maybe even bundle 1 2 Switch with the red blue joycon. I don't think I've seen any video of 1 2 Switch being played with the gray joycon, it's always red and blue.
Personally I don't think 1 2 Switch is even worth it to be bundled with the $80 joycon, I'd rather see ARMS get bundled, but that game looks too hood to take that much of a loss. Maybe $99 for an ARMS joycon bundle?
Bundle something Nintendo, you're killing me here.
Judging by the very harsh reception 1, 2, Switch has had from many players, I think it's a very wise choice not to include it with the system.
Many would allow themselve to be upset that:
A) They can't opt out of paying for it. This kind of thing was a huge deal breaker with many for the Wii U.
B) The system is now unanimous with a game they have decided to despise. A big thing with the Wii in the western world, where some people couldn't bear the thought of owning a Wii Sports player.
Yes, Some casuals will be upset that they have to pay extra to get that fun game they saw on TV or at their friends' house, but the Switch is all about Nintendo reconnecting with huge parts of its fanbase.
Reading all the comments. We all know it should of come packaged as a launch bundle. Let's see how well this sells.
depending on the accuracy of the camera, they could've made a 'lie to me' game with facial recognition assisting in detecting truth or lies.
Looking at it i assume the production cost was low. its essentially a tech demo and should of definitely been packed with the game, hell raise the price to£300 but add the game. it would of made it so much better to have evrything needed in the box. this is in no way a 40-50 price range game and just another example of what Nintendo has done wrong thus far in this launch.
It might have sent out the wrong message packing a game of this nature.
It'll start looking like Wii 2
Heartedly agree with all the points raised in the article. Whilst I haven't played it myself, I feel as though, from everything I've seen, that this should be pre installed in the console. What would the cost be for Nintendo honestly?
Makes me wonder if Nintendo would try charging for Face Raiders if the 3DS were released in 2017.
Oh well, Zelda is releasing at launch, and that's all that matters to me.
I could see this being a part of a Switch Bundle down the road
@Pod Great points. I think Nintendo, like a lot of the times lately, can't win in this situation. It's bundled in, people would complain about it being forced upon them. And then you possibly run the risk of the first impression of the console being this game and then we are back to where we were with the Wii (and to an extent, the Wii U with Nintendoland).
What I would like to know is are these same kind of expectations expected for Microsoft and Sony?
like everything else with the switch launch it all seems expensive.
I agree this should have been the bundled software either that or release it at a budget price perhaps say £20 max. That may have been more of a tempter for a purchase but £40 seems way too expensive.
@ElGrego agreed.
It's dumb and cheap from Nintendo not to pack this in with the system. They have been cheap with the non-charging grip as well. I'm starting to see a pattern here 🤔
My shock that this wasn't a pack-in title was only surpassed by the shock that its a $50 game.
@Arehexes Don't think PS4 had a pack in game, they had something better. After talking about it for months as if it were going to be bundled with the system, Sony left the PS4 camera out of the box so they could sell it for $399. A few hours later, Microsoft announced the Xbox One with Kinect for $499, $100 more than the PS4. Microsoft did more to sell the PS4 than Sony did.
Also, PS3 launched 2 SKU, $500 or $600. People expected the PS4 with its 8GB of DDR5 memory to be $500. So the $400 looked like a bargain.
Nintendo launched Wii Sports bundle for $249, it sold over 100 million.
Nintendo launched Wii U for $299 without a game which didn't sell at all.
Nintendo launched a Wii U for $349 with a game that sold poorly.
Nintendo announces to the world they've learned from their mistakes, so people assume $249 Switch with a game.
Nintendo launches Switch for $299, no game.
People have expectations based on past events and what companies say. Nothing Nintendo has done or said makes a $299 Switch without a game look like it's going to sell well.
That's the difference between Switch and PS4, past experiences and expectations.
As it is right now, 1-2-Switch is being firmly set up for utter failure.
It's amazing in a way...
This would be fun for about a day.
From what I can see in the comments here, that we are mostly nintendo fans, most of the people think this is too expensive, the console and the accesories are too expensive. For the first time ever I hope they wont sell, I really hope they sell the console because of hype but no games just Zelda, so they will re think their crazy strategy and lower the prices.. only then I will buy a Switch and start collecting for it!
I'd probably play this a little bit if, as many suggest, it was a pack in. As it stands, I'd probably forget about it's existence until I happen to come across it in retail or while browsing the Eshop.
Originally I was going to pick this up retail day off when I pick up my Switch. After Treehouse and reading various articles I think I am going to make this my first download game.
I think people are underestimating the other 14 games that will come with this release.
I personally will want this readily available to play at home or take to friends to show off or to take to comic conventions to make a fool of myself as I am dressed as Mario.
Right about now it's time to say that this game should be in a bundle! Bump to the bump to the bump to the bass, bump to the bump in a bundle!
Are super casuals really going to to even know this game exists?
@Paperboy what do you mean Paperboy?
I don't understand
😁
"please understand.. 1,2 switch is $50 because we can't just put the game on console.."
hopefully Nintendo rethink this decision..
I agree with another post. I have yet to see the gray Joycons played with 1,2 Switch..maybe it was supposed to be bundled with the red/blue variation?
$249 no game gray. $299 1,2 Switch Bundle Red/Blue.
No thanks
I think it looks fun. It should be packed in! That or Mario Kart 8 Deluxe.....or both.
Honestly, this looks like a fun party game and takes full advantage of the Joy-Cons but with such a price and march being already packed outside the whole Switch stuff, I think I'll be holding off from a purchase for the time being. Maybe wait for a discount, maybe a month where nothing comes out but not at launch.
This looks like a game that will not do too well at launch, and eventually (probably a year or two down the line) be a $20 game or even cheaper used. It looks fun and seems like it would be a fun multiplayer game, but after the library of games begin to pile up for the Switch, it will get lost. It may be something like Wii Play, where it will get a nice sequel, but who knows...nintendo does things too differently.
@rjejr
Your mistake is directly attributing price to sales. It's a part of it, but so is alot of other stuff. Wii and Wii U sales are irrelevant because they were different systems with different values and different appeals. Sometimes a console can sell at $600 and other times it won't sell at $250.
Gotta stop thinking just because Wii sold at $250 and Wii U didn't sell at $300 that automatically translates to Switch. Wii U also had a $250 bundle and still didn't sell. Proving price isn't everything. And PS4 and X1 prove at $400-500 price isn't everything
Nothing is cut and dry like you try to make it seem. No console has ever blazed into this new territory before. No console has ever offered the value of a $300 Wii U and $200 3DS combined (and the $200 3DS is actually more like a $300 portable Wii U)
And nobody even remotely expected $250 until a rumor suggested it. Before that people were saying $250 would never happen and if it did it would be a knockout. Which it would. But that doesn't mean $300 is too much. Free $300 portable 3DS on part with Wii U or free $50 1-2 Switch... exactly
@Spoony_Tech
"This sends mixed messages to Nintendo though that we like this crap"
If people buy it, then that means there really are people that like it. It's not a mixed signal, it's just a signal. Keep in mind not everyone buys Nintendo for big enthralling games. Alot of Nintendo's appeal, especially among the less avid gamers, is weird and fun ways to have fun socially. Not necessarily constrained to just core video games. These are the people that play beer pong and
I was watching gameplay of this last night, and I've done a complete 180 on it. I was planning to buy anyways just out of curiosity (plus 20% Off GCU at BB coupled with VISA checkout $25 off $100 purchase) but now I'm genuinely excited to try it.
Wii Sports and Nintendo Land seem way better than this. Even for a party game, it looks passable at best.
To be honest I am glad this game is not included in a bundle. I doubt I would play this for more than 5 minutes. If this becomes a digital download at it is free or offered at a low price I might pick it up.
When I found out that The Switch did not come bundled with a game I just decided to preorder Bomberman and Zelda. Both of these games are something I truly want to play. I like the idea of 1 2 Switch but im not sure how it will sell as a standalone title.
In some ways I can understand this not being a pack-in due to not wanting to send off too purely casual a first-impression of the console, and even if it was free with the console some people may still believe they'd be paying for a game they can't opt out of. However, Nintendo is wild to think that the majority of consumers would pay the 50 bucks this costs. Should be 20, maaaybe 30 bucks at the most- nothing more. It's exactly the type of game you'd show to people the first time they use the Switch and then never play again, outside of maybe select minigames at the start of a party session. They even describe it as an "icebreaker" in the presentation and nothing more, while they revealed ARMS right after it and described that as having "depth, challenge, and replayability", which sends a relative message about 1-2 Switch. They know it's a meager offering- so why is it $50 USD...?
I just gotta say the concept behind this game is not worth 50 dollars when you think about it. Imagine playing something like Quick Draw with a stopwatch and a 3rd person. That's kinda how easy it is to recreate these games without paying for the game which is why I'm having a hard time seeing it being sold well. I'd rather save that money to buy any other game on the console, although it would be nice have some pack in game to start with the console.
The existence of this game and its distribution are just an extension of Nintendo's sometimes apparent obliviousness to the world outside their living-roof offices and the role of their products in that world.
It's not a bad minigame collection on it's own, but it seems more like a product designed for public exhibition in a semi-permanent installation than a consumer product. Something like the Love Tester, meant for sale to bars and such. Maybe that's what it's really for! And somewhere they mixed it with a tech demo.
It might be meant for Japan's karaoke culture like I said in a thread yesterday. Maybe it really is meant for sale to public spaces. Jim's Pub featuring 1, 2, Switch on Thursdays at 9:00, Quick Draw Happy Hour! I can see that on a movable letter marquee.
But short of that, who is buying this? The Wii era party game environment vanished in 2010, and that customer base moved to phone games. They're Mario Run's audience now, chronically complaining about a $10 barrier to entry. That crowd will not be spending $300 on a console. And surely not $50 on a party game. And the crowd that WILL be spending $300 on a console is buying Zelda, Xeonoblade, Splatoon, and Skyrim. There's certainly an intersection somewhere in those audiences, but a small one.
1, 2, Switch will not likely make money where that audience intersects, and will therefore be seen little in public, not spreading brand awareness. Reggie's odd explanation that they couldn't bundle it because they needed to hit $299 is weird. Why not pre-install it like the AR games on 3DS? It costs, physically nothing to pre-image the OS ROM with the game. The entire cost to Nintendo would have involved on staffer setting up the ROM image for a day or so. What, $80 total company spending on that? Were they afraid that releasing the game for free would expend the R&D costs on the game as a loss? Did nobody see the value in taking that from the marketing budget? Switch markets itself as a mobile device. Getting reasons to have customers put it in front of non-customers should be a marketing expense at every turn. They missed a big boat on that one.
If I were to guess the real intention was to not risk duplicating the Wii effect to their investors. I.E. lots of people bought the $199 Wii with Wii Sports, and then never bought anything else ever again. Wii was sold for a profit. Switch, I bet, is definitely sold at a loss until you buy a game (and dare I say, accessories), so the sale of a game, ANY game, was essential to plug the subsidy hole and make the real cost of the system higher. The result is the unfortunate situation where they couldn't bundle a game to make sure you buy ANY game (but you can pick from any game for that required purchase) and few would end up picking 1, 2, Switch. But it's a better situation than, if they're really subsidizing consoles and selling at a loss, if people bought the hardware just for entertaining with 1, 2, Switch like they did with Wii, Nintendo would basically be paying you to take a switch.
If that's all true, then I'd say the missed opportunity is Arms not being a pack-in, where proper play requires a significant install base to buy another set of $80 controllers....
@UmbreonsPapa
Both are historically very careful with bundling their systems with any game outside of limited releases.
Microsoft even opted out of forcing the Kinect on people with Xbox One, because some people were already making fun of it, which arguably robbed the system of any hope of offering a unique experience.
These guys are a lot more bold with money than Nintendo, but considerably less bold concerning statements about what constitues a fun game.
To avoid the problem of bundling a game that some don't want I would have loved to see Nintendo include a maybe $20 gift card with the Switch that could be used for anything in the eShop or exchanged for a physical copy of 1-2 Switch.
If they were that adamant on not having a pack in title in the $300 / £280 pack, the least they could have done is:
1) Offer a more expensive bundle that is still cheaper than buying separately.
2) Have a demo version with only like 5-6 mini games pre-installed on the system, which also throws up adverts of the full version.
I'm always up for trying new stuff and unique gameplay but this seems a bit too out there for me and not something I'd drop £40 unless I had nothing else to buy and didn't need to save it (let's just say I'm very unlikely to buy this unless it's like £20).
I wonder if it's quirkiness will prove more successful in Japan.
@NintonicGamer
I'd pay that if there is enough of those ideas in there, and they all are executed extremely well.
@FX102A
I think a free 1, 2, Switch demo is a rather likely thing to be available on release day.
Unless after experimenting with demos on Wii U, Nintendo are back to their old stance about demos diminishing sales rather than fostering it.
Which could conceivable be true in case of a game like 1, 2, Switch.
Sorry, I didn't read the article. Because I already agree, and there is no way I will be buying this. The most I would pay for a physical copy of this game is $20, and $10 for a download. HD rumble is either just there for a future VR configuration, or Nintendo has officially lost it's damn mind.
I don't know; I'm still not sold on this game. People keep comparing it to a Wii Sports or Nintendo Land, but it actually looks (and I do admit looks can be deceiving) more on the level of Face Raiders.
There might be something I'm missing here, but after reading this article, 1,2 Switch still looks brutal as a standalone launch title.
If they say it is comparable to Wii Play, then why does it cost almost tripple? Instead of being a nice introduction to the Joy-Cons this will be forgotten in no time. Shame.
@UmbreonsPapa - They could win by selling the game separately for £19.99. I've played the six games mentioned and I agree that it's fun once but I felt no need to play again. Arms however, demands a rematch!
This is a casual title which should be packed with the console, this will not sell as a stand alone.
As with arms which should be bundled with a second set of joy cons.
@JaxonH Price is a big factor for what you get, and I'm afraid, for better or worse, Nintendo did cement their position as the less expensive 2nd console with the Wii. I don't recall a $250 Wii U bundle, unless you mean that BF bundle that disappeared after the weekend was over, but I do recall the GameCube selling for $99 for awhile, and even that console didn't sell all that well. So no, it isn't cut and dry about price, but I'm doing the best I can on a 7" tablet typing with questions finger not trying to spend my entire day on here. Somebody asked a question and I answered it best I could.
And I think a lot of people on here were saying $250 all along. Some people were saying $199 when talk was of the old X1 chip powering this rather than the newer X2. Very few people were going to be happy with a $299 console without a game bundled in and only 5 games at launch. Those weren't the expectations for a console releasing in March that Nintendo told us they delayed from the holiday so that it could have a strong launch line up.
I don't know if Switch will sell well. I think a lot of it has to do with marketing and advertising. I watched a lot of NFL this weekend and I saw that PS4 commercial a lot. I still have the Sweet Dreams song in my head. Wii U should have sold better than it did, it had a lot of great games, and a lot more exclusive great games. I think it's possible Wii U has a better exclusive library than PS4 - SSB, MK8, W101, B2, HW, XCX, SM3DW - but 1 PS4 multiplat game like CoD or Destiny gets more advertising then all of those combined. FFXV pretty much is XCX, just exchange chocobo for skells, but FFXV is everywhere, XCX came out Dec 3rd then quickly disappeared. It's like they don't even try.
So what's going to happen with Switch? Are they going to dump 3DS and market Switch, or are they going to keep making Monster Hunter and Pokémon on 3DS and let Switch become Wii U2? B/c it isn't clear cut, there are other factors than price, but right now that's all we know. I can only work with what I have. I don't know their markeyingnpkan, I don't know their 3DS plan, I only know $299, no game bubdled, 5 fames at launch and the biggest one Zelda is also available on Wii U on the same day. None of that says runaway success to me. The potential is there, the hybrid is a great idea, it's my idea from 3 years ago, but they need to execute, and so far they aren't.
@rjejr
Let me stop you right there. I said price is a factor, but more than price is VALUE. Value is what makes or breaks it, not price. They could slap a $1000 price but if you get a $25,000 car for it, people are gonna find a way to buy it cause it's great value.
Don't confuse price with being the same as value.
Mathematically, it's a ratio. You're only looking at the numerator and ignoring the denominator. It's (what you pay) ÷ (what you get) = Value
And the value of getting a Wii U and 3DS combined into one, where the 3DS is as strong as Wii U and the Wii U is 3-5X as strong as Wii U... crossbuy and cross save eliminated... that's alot of value
@TbobB That's good idea. If I agree on anything, this game should not be priced higher then $39.99 (I'm in the US). And even that would be too high. $29.99 is about as much I'd consider, depending on its depth ultimately.
Just a dumb decision by Nintendo. For $50, this game will probably sell no more than 200k. Either drop the price to better match demand or pack it in to sell more switches
@JaxonH exactly, and value (or rather the lack thereof) is why Nintendo is struggling to succeed anymore.
Value was exactly why Wii was such a hit. Switch couldn't be any further from a 'Wii-like value'.
Another solid take on 1, 2 Switch: https://arcadegirl64.wordpress.com/2017/01/17/who-is-1-2-switch-for/
Don't get me wrong, I can enjoy lighthearted, fun games just as much as anybody, but for some reason 1-2-Switch just looks stupid to me. No chance I'll be buying this, not at $20, and certainly not at $50 or $60.
@Pod: Excellent point. People would SCREAM at the $300 price tag even more if 1, 2 Switch was included. The real problems I see are:
1. 1, 2 Switch looks to be nothing more than a clever demo, not worthy of the label "standalone game".
2. Big N needed a $300, in part b/c it overshot with the technology packed into the Joy Cons, much like it overshot with the tech packed into the Wii U gamepad. 1, 2 Switch seems to be a defense of this decision . . . but, ugh, no thanks.
Put it in the system and take the hit, Nintendo.
I don't understand the insistence that this should be a pack in. Even barring that fact that not every region has gotten a pack in anyway (Japan had to pay for wii sports) this is a poor choice for a starter game. The Switch is billed as a hybrid home console and portable, meaning it is viable for single player use out of the box. As far as I can tell 1 2 Switch is multiplayer only. Why would you put a game with no single player functionality in box? Anyone buying a Switch as a personal system is now stuck with a paperweight (that will likely up the price as is) and there is NO way Nintendo is going to toss Zelda in a bundle day one and take a loss on the software price.
Wii Sports, Nintendoland, SMB/Duck Hunt, LttP (that was the SNES bundle I got as a kid) are all games that can be played day one with one person. It is great that 1 2 Switch demos the hardware, but unless EVERY buyer of the NS could play it as is, it does nothing but make a divisive launch title and an unwanted financial burden on the consumer. If ARMS was coming out at launch it would be a better pack in (if you HAVE to have one). Most systems don't launch with bundles, and Nintendo isn't required to do so (and they don't even it do it equally as is) so I don't understand why this is viewed as a negative. I have yet to buy a launch system and NOT expect to have to buy software as well day one.
If you are that desperate to play 1 2 Switch...buy it. Half the people hollering about it needing to be a pack in are deriding it as a game anyway. If it is just about needing a bundle, wait a year. Sounds like some people want an excuse to do so anyway.
milk best minigame confirmed
I would like it in the bundle. It is not going to effect my purchase, but this game shows off the functionality of the system. It would behoove Nintendo to put it in there. Maybe they will at a later date. I don't think it is worth $50. It would have been nice to show this off to my family and friends but I'm not going to buy it. It is just not my type of game. Wii Sports wasn't my type of game and I loved it. It made me purchase the sequels and the upgrades for the WiiU. So this is kind of Nintendos bad.
No, it's a good thing this crap wasn't a pack in title. It is utter garbage, which should be making us wish that the tech demo title was, at the very least, something like another Wii Sports/Resort or Nintendo Land, perhaps even with online multiplayer. Honestly, even Wii Play and Wii Music were better than this.
"How this game is received very much depends on the age of the player and their state of mind."
I think this statement inadvertantly says it all about how this "game" could negatively affect the NS's public perception at launch. Hopefully, this trash will be forgotten as quickly as it comes. (In more ways than one!) Well, at least we got to see Alex pretend to jerk off an imaginary cow. That moment will live on in our hearts forever.
...FOREVER.
@PlywoodStick It does look like garbage. Maybe it was the Wii's novelty that sold me with Wii sports, but they could of made it a hidden demo like the vita did.
@gatorboi352 That link was spot on.
The biggest reason this should be a pack-in? Because 1-2 Switch should be on the hard drive.
The biggest (initial) appeal of the Switch is its portability. Take it to a friends house. Play it in the car. Sneak a game during lunch break. As much fun as A 100hr Zelda adventure may be, having a quick portable gaming session is going to convert a lot of people. But without the game being internal then most people won't see it and therefore will assume "My iPad is better for portable gaming".
I cannot even count how many people I've seen that say 1-2-Switch not being packed in is a missed opportunity, and they couldn't be more right. Reggie fired back and said "no game is packed in with Switch to keep the cost down" but come on - 1-2-Switch is NOT a system seller and is NOT worth $50. Do you think the Wii would've sold as well if Wii Sports didn't come with it and cost $50? I highly doubt it. Wii Sports was a system seller and it convinced people to buy the system and try out the new technology. $50 for a tech demo is a very steep asking price. HUGE missed opportunity Nintendo.
@PlaytendoGuy Agreed! When I watched the presentation, I thought this would be the pack in. I would play it as that, but no way I'm spending more than $10 on it as additional software.
Fascinating that Reggie compared this to Wii Play, which was essentially a $10 game that came with a controller.
@NEStalgia Agreed, ARMS should have been a free pack in title to showcase the JoyCons.
Neither 1-2 Switch nor ARMS feel like complete games. I'm curious if Nintendo is planning holiday bundles for these games aimed at casual gamers. I'm still convinced that the March launch is meant to spread out the sales over the first year. Most hardcore Nintendo fans, who they expect to drum up enthusiasm for the system, will be early adopters, while general consumers likely won't hear much about it or care about it until Christmas season. That would be a better time to release bundles with 1-2 Switch, when more people who would be interested in that bundle would be shopping.
Being a Nintendo fan coincides so much with being an Arsenal fan.
What would possess the management to not package the one title they've designed to showcase the strengths of the console's local co-op motion controls with the console, especially with the Switch's high price point in comparison to competitors (not even taking no bundled game into consideration).
Nintendo once again snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
@River3636 I think the culmination of Wii Sports Resort and Nintendo Land was actually well done. If they had online multiplayer, it would be even better. It's a shame that their control concepts rarely, almost never got used.
Honestly, even Wii Play and Wii Music was better than 1, 2, Switch (Fail). At least those games had just enough effort put into them to not greatly affect the perception of the Wii. Even if 1, 2, Switch (Fail) were free, it would be too expensive. The risk for it to color first impressions of the NS in a bad light is too great, even as a hidden pack-in. ARMS would be an astronomically more respectable choice for a pack-in title.
This machine needs this and more to judge that price tag. I think they should at least throw a nice compilation of past games like say a Super Mario All stars 2 to encourage people to blow $300 on it.
@gatorboi352
Agree about Wii, disagree about Switch.
Switch offers more value than any console I've ever seen.
@bluedogrulez
I totally get this viewpoint, even if I am myself quite hooked on the game.
@PlywoodStick You might be right and the Vita didn't do well. It is just laughable. That Milk was so stupid it was funny. I don't eat many carbs so that sandwich one made me want to vomit. Arms does looks like a better packed in title. At least it shows some of the functionality.
"Is 1-2-Switch truly a retail game, and can it justify its cost as software alone? "
Nope. Should've packed it in.
Should just come installed on the Switch like the Mii Plaza and the games it has within it. Allow us the opportunity to delete it if we don't want it taking up any storage space (or move it to a micro sd card). Seems like a real simple solution, I mean development of the game couldn't have cost too much. Certainly not worth a full retail price. Though I do like the overall idea of it.
@River3636 Yeah, at least Milk is a hilarious scandalfest waiting to happen. But there's no way Nintendo will be able to convince most people to pretend to quickly chomp a controller in public. I wouldn't be surprised if that one even has the potential to singlehandedly make millions of people think that people who use an NS are all crazy. The mainstream/tabloid media loves spreading ideas like that.
It goes to show how cheap Nintendo are, thay cannot even bundle a tech demo. Which would show what the system can do, give it until November and you'll be seeing bundle's anyway.
@PlywoodStick And who knows what the other 14 games are. Were they show cased? It would be an OK drinking game though, but it would have to be in the privacy of your home where only the people you love can make fun of you. It could bring a bad stigma to the Switch. Maybe Nintendo should offer this as a free download to first time adopters.
They'll probably bundle it next holiday season
This is one of the most baffling decisions Nintendo made. This really should have been included like Wii Sports and Nintendo Land.
I would never buy this for the Switch
I think Reggie is completely out of touch if he thinks that the Wii Play comparison is justified. I like many others, bought Wii Play because it came with the Wii Remote.
Then I suggest to you all, to wait for a bundle, probably this Christmas, as Shy_Guy just said above me. If Nintendo packs in a game, especially in the NS's first year, this will probably be the chosen title. Currently, I think as Ryu_Niiyama mentioned, Nintendo won't pack-in Zelda:BoTW. At least i don't think they would bundle it, just yet. I feel as Nintendo's thinking is, as always, The Legend of Zelda is a showstopper, showpiece, & almost-guarantee profit-maker, while the the Super Mario franchise is their go-to for a pack-in title, with down-the-road bundles.
@rjejr As someone who's owned every Sony system, I'll just say the PS4 is the worst console I ever owned. There is hardly anything on it that appeals to me that is PS4 only to play. Everything it can do is really gimped compared to my PC. Which I built in 2011, and minus the video card (which I thought was busted) it hasn't been upgraded and still runs current games great. If it wasn't for the miku game that just came out being PS4 only I would have gladly traded it in after I beat Persona 5.
And honestly the lack of a pack in game doesn't bother me. I hardly owned a console with a pack in game. The only two was a Gameboy and the Wii (My halo 360 didn't even have halo 3. I mean by all the hate here Microsoft is cheap for having me pay full price for a game related console with no game).
I wish it were bundled — or cheaper.
But buying it for fun with my non-gaming wife.
Baffling that this costs $50. I'd argue that it might work as a standalone title at, say, $30, but yeah. It should be a pack-in.
The only one that sounds cool is the first one with the marbles
Don't know if anyone's mentioned it before but I reckon this should have come as a pack in with the console.
@Ryu_Niiyama In my opinion it shouldnt even be packed in, but built in like the AR Games on the 3ds.. thats the value I see for this game or tech demo.. charging $60 for it is insane in my opinion, its one of those games that you show to your friends to show them how "cool" the console is.. so its basically marketing.. and thats why it should be free with every console..
@Arehexes To be fair, every PlayStation has had a relatively weak launch year. The next couple of years afterwards, though, it usually takes off into pure greatness. Not so with the PS4, it just doesn't have the magic of it's forebears, for some reason...
@FreakFerrett Friend 1: "Hey guys, check out Nintendo's new console and game! It lets you fulfill all of your wildest milking fantasies! And you can do it... anytime, anywhere, with anyone. Isn't that cool!?"
Friend 2: "...I can milk those-"
Friend 3: "NO. NO, YOU CAN'T."
No way I'm paying $50 for a tech demo. Maybe I'll grab it when it's inevitably in the bargain bin, but not for more than $10. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in this. The game will probably flop, they should have done it a favor and packed it in. It would have moved more Switch's.
@Ryu_Niiyama
Good point about a lack of single player value in 1, 2, Switch, I hadn't thought of that, even as someone who values single player first and foremost. You're right that alone disqualifies it as a pack-in in the traditional sense. Though making it a "part of the Switch" like the Face Raiders games and such still would have worked (Street Pass Games come to mind). Arms on the other hand...
I think Wii made everyone obsess with pack-ins in general. Most consoles don't include a pack-in at launch. I think a lot of the older folks just remember our bundles because we got them after launch but didn't know we did back in the pre-internet days, and post WiiU, everyone things consoles come bundled. The bundles arrive LATER when initial sales slow.
@rjejr
RE Switch sales and XBCX, I don't think Nintendo aims to be the "second console". They explicitly did for Wii, and it had a price and feature set to match. It was never going to be a gamer's console, and they set out so that it wasn't targeted to gamers. But that's the only console they've intentionally positioned that way. Still $299 surprises me given Miyamoto's frequent comments that price is what hurt WiiU most. Still, it's 25% cheaper than WiiU and if successful will almost certainly be $250 within a few years. With the X2 based platform it certainly is genuine bleeding edge tech, and that doesn't come cheap. It's a full scale 6" tablet with performance gaming hardware (and a cooling solution to match.) Joycon aside, if it has hardware like a high end tablet it's going to have to be priced like a high end tablet. This was never going to be the "cheaper second console" but it's portability could make it the "expensive second console." I dont really get all the complaints about the $299 price tag. It's 25% cheaper than WiiU launch, it's 20% more expensive than 3DS launch. It's a hybrid console that serves the role of both of them and it boasts bleeding edge tech. How could it not be $300. I think consumer expectations are skewed and for all the wrong reasons. "Nintendo is the cheap console!" But the Switch is the cheaper console versus PS4 Pro (and tied with PS4). "But it doesn't even do as much as my smartphone does" Your smartphone costs $500-$800 at retail, your telephone company paid for part of it for your and worked the rest into 2+ years of payments provided you commit to spend several thousand with them over years. Switch is a bargain. "But my tablet..." Your tablet doesn't have the kind of GPU the Switch has. Half the people in the US seriously think an iPhone costs $99. People don't understand tech pricing because, frankly, most people are clueless. $300 for the hardware in here is very likely below cost. Even the WiiU was below cost. 3DS was briefly below cost. PS4 was sold MASSIVELY below cost. But people still complain it's too expensive. The rumors telling the internet it would be $250 also harmed expectations. I hope those rumor mongers who are fortunately out of the spotlight now can return to their holes of shame in whatever caves they may have emerged from.
3DS strategy is pretty clear. Switch is the monoplatform replacement for all Nintendo platforms, but they're going to sunset 3DS very slowly given it's huge market share, and continue to manufacture and sell them, along with a handful of new content. 3DS will be with us for a few years, but beyond the remainder of 2017 it will be a "legacy" platform from a new game perspective. Pokemon MAY have one more go depending on install base on Switch, but whether sooner or later, Pokemon is moving to Switch. Game Freak more or less said as much regarding their Switch intentions.
@Pod
I don't think this is the kind of game a demo does well for. The game mostly is a demo.
What worries me is that they pushed Zelda back more than a year and didn't release anything for Wii U in 2 yrs and all their focus was on SWITCH and they only release with a 5 games. 2 of which they didn't create. Sky landers and just dance. So sad.
@Galactus_33
I think their delays for Switch games was for launch window not for launch day. If you look at what they've shown up through December there's a big assortment of heavy hitting titles. And keep in mind western AAA publishers make their announcements in June, not January, so short of Skyrim most 3rd party support will remain unannounced until E3. I suspect, learning from the dreary E3 where Iwata apologized to fans for no big reveals they want to save some big guns for E3 themselves AND keep Switch hype strong at E3. Remember WiiU launched with a bunch of 3rd party games, no major 1st party games, and then....nothing...for months...nothing, until Lego City and MH3U. And then months again, with nothing. They seem to be planning the Switch schedule to keep a stream of releases up to avoid "it's been 3 months since the last game....let's post more rumor news about something nasty some anonymous dev at EA said about WiiU!" Launch day is launch day. Who but the faithful buy on launch day? Who among the faithful wouldn't buy on launch day regardless of the games? Preorders sold out in 2 days in the US. They didn't need more than they had. BUT they need to keep a steady drip of new games coming, and it looks like they've planned that out including with 3rd parties. They're sitting on announcements they don't need yet.
If we look at 3DS launch it was dreadful in March, perked up with Ocarina in July, and went into overdrive with Mario and a price cut in November, and from there, a legendary console.
Switch is less than dreadful in March (launching with the E3 GOTY isn't a bad start by any measure), Splatoon in the summer time table, and Mario in November/December. It all seems familiar somehow. They may be aping their own past TOO closely, but that seems to be the plan.
@PlywoodStick Greatness Awaits is apparently not a marketing slogan, it was simply an observation You're right about a lack of PS4 magic. I like my PS4. In fact I like it a lot. But it feels like it has this random mishmash of games thrown at it, lacking almost any 1st party flavor short of Uncharted, at least until next year. It's just a cheap PC in a small plastic box and you can pick from the games flung at the market. There's no curated "this is what playing on a PS4 should be like" culture to it. Though I'm not sure PS3 really had that after the first 2-3 years either.
Oh dear, I worry about what Nintendo's image online is going to be like by the time 4Chan and Kotaku are done dragging Milk imagery though the mud. On the other hand maybe Nintendo will finally be "cool" after that? Part me me thinks Nintendo clearly did not think that through. The other part of me, thinks maybe it was viral marketing genius? Perhaps it was subversively designed as "spin the bottle" for the jelly bracelet generation?
The Switch has more advanced tech in it than the Wii did. Different times yes but the Wii was running on old Gamecube architecture. Thats why Wii Sports could be packed in at $250. So if either Arms or 1-2 Switch was packed in we would of been paying $350 and all the haters would be complaining because of that. It was reported today that 1-2 Switch will have over 20 mini games on it so I believe that $1.50 - $2.00 per mini game is a good value proposition(1-2 Switch is $49.99). I think the casual gamer and Nintendo fans alike who are buying a Switch and want to see what the HD Rumble is all about will agree with me.
@Megas Wii U Party U was a thousand legues better than this, IMHO.
I don't know how can people defend this game. All reviewers that had some time with it thought the same: a tech demo of the joycons. Period.
Hope it doesn't sell, not even 200k copies so Nintendo (Regis) gets the message.
@capitalism The game cost of a pack-in isn't an expense, it doesn't cost them to digitally pack a game in other than the R&D for the game itself not producing an ROI. That's why such things should come from the marketing budget however. It's an outflow that produces its return via raising brand image and product awareness & appeal, an expense that is easily justifiable. OTOH like others, that would associate the Switch brand with Wii-like party games which could have the opposite effect with 1, 2, Switch. Arms would do that so well though.
I'll say, though, Nintendo's communication is still terrible if it indeed has 20 games. The presentation made it seem like 1-3 games, the Treehouse made it seem like 8 or 10.
It honestly looks like it could be lots of fun with a sizeable crowd, particularly of somewhat inebriated adults, or a school crowd. I just have doubts that the party hosts will spend $350 on the package, or that the Zelda nerds at the party will spend $50 as an excuse to bring their consoles with them to "share the joy." I think we're more like the "Karen" meme....if we bring our consoles with us we'd be playing Zelda in the corner
I'd feel better about it if theye said they were gonna treat it like a platform. U are paying £40 now but in 3 months we will add 10 more games and then maybe some Xmas themed ones over the holidays. I guess I could buy it get my fill and then trade it if it holds its value
@capitalism hmm that is much more content than I expected. I may have to pay a bit more attention to this game now.
@rjejr yep mark my words 1_2 switch will be a pack in.. probably Holiday 2017
when do we get Nintendo Land 2? that should have been a built in game!
I feel like, based on the almost tech demo-ish nature of it, it could have been packed in and/or pre-loaded onto the Switch itself, I won't lie. But part of me feels strangely that if they did, it might send the message that "Hey! Remember the Wii?! The Switch is a casual party system too!" all over again a la the Wii, and I DON'T want that anymore, nor do I think that hook/schtick/gimmick will move Switch systems anyway. I feel like, Nintendo is basically saying "we're hardcore with this system first, but oh hey, if any of you casuals are watching out there, we have a game for you!", and that's that's the way I take Nintendo not bundling it. I for one am not going out of my way to get this game. As a more-so hardcore gamer, I'm much more interested in most of the other games coming down the pipeline. Just my two cents.
@PlaytendoGuy it's over-priced, but not full-priced
@banacheck It's not a tech demo
@KrakenSoup If you don't think 1-2-Switch is a system seller, why should it be a pack-in? Saying that is supporting Nintendo's argument.
Keeping an eye on 1-2-Switch. I have it preordered currently and I really think people will have a blast with it at gatherings, but I really need to see more to justify that price even at 20% off through Amazon Prime video game preorder.
I just don't understand what the thinking is with the price. Is there something else we haven't seen yet? You'd think Treehouse would have covered it. I mean I do like that it lives in your imagination between you and the other player — reminds me of the first times playing Wii Sports Tennis — but more games like Table Tennis are needed so that it's not just that sort of flip of the coin, one person wins and one loses based on pretty much reflexes only.
I'll probably find out first hand, knowing me. I'd prefer not to regret paying so much for it, though.
@NEStalgia
Yep over 20 games was confirmed on the official Nintendo desktop website for 1-2 Switch. With that amount of mini games I have no problem forking over $50, especially for the HD Rumble and drinking game value. To each their own though
@BiasedSonyFan
Couldn't agree more
Agreed. i could understand if it had a lot of development behind it- NintendoLand looked like there were considerable resources put into it. This looks like "betaware" at best. This looks overpriced at $20.
I actually completely disagree that this should be the pack-in title. It may help 1-2-Switch, but it certainly wouldn't help the console's image in the long-run.
(By not being a pack-in will 1-2-Switch bomb? Possibly. But who cares? It's 1-2-Switch. I don't think anyone's going to going to lose any sleep over it).
By packing this game with the Switch however, the console becomes defined by this game forevermore and will shape the perception of the Switch as a console and what kind of software support it gets. I don't think anyone wants that.
Nintendo says they didn't bundle it in for cost and profit reasons? Well, given that I bet very few people will splash out £40 on it, they won't be making any profit anyway so they might as well have given it away for "free" with their £280 console...
Out of the box, the Switch will literally have nothing to play on it - it'll be an empty console waiting for a slow drip feed of overpriced games. The Wii came with a game, the 3DS came with various games and 3D apps and the Wii U came with Nintendo Land.
I've got one on order, but I'm seriously considering cancelling it. Everything about Nintendo's approach to this console launch screams longterm failure.
@alasdair91 I totally agree with you. For the first time I just hope they only sell Zelda and all those other games to FLOP!! That will show them that we wont pay whatever they want for tech demos that have no real value but just to show the console to others/ help them marketing the console..
@Haywired It shouldnt even be a pack in, it should be built in.. Like AR GAMES- that was only to show the 3D capabilities of the 3ds.. this is just to show the HD Rumble.. nothing more than that... asking $60 for it is insane...
Expect this to be a pack in at some point in the future, possibly Christmas.
By doing a hybrid pack in / non-pack in, the game should become the new Wii play and will end up with mega sales assuming the Switch does OK...
Yeah... my preorder is probably going to get flipped. I no longer want to be a part of this farce of a launch. There's exciting tech here, but Nintendo's greed, ego and self-worth are destroying any chance of a viable launch.
All of this gouging after ignoring the NA market completely for a couple of years... and NOW they want us to buy, hype and then carry yet another system through poop sales for them?
Paid online service with chat they control and must be handed through a mobile device, borrowed games you lose at the end of the month, over-priced controllers, no charger grip in the box, no pack-in game when the perfect one already exists, pricing said tech demo at a full retail cost, piss-poor launch (and launch window) lineup, middling 3RD party support, and $299 for a system set to go up against 2 established systems with larger games libraries, impressive budget lines and upgraded systems...
Screw you Nintendo! Your greed is out of hand and your megalomania out of control.
@Tsusasi Astanding ovation to your comment. I totally agree with you. Ive been hyped for months.. I defended them on other forums expecting a killer launch line up ( to comepensate for the lack of 3ds and wii u games) and they give us a tech demo and a 1/10 of Wii sports a.k.a ARMS at full retail price.. compared to games like Zelda, Uncharted.. thats how much they think their games value is? really?
Oh why didn't they have it as a pack-in title, not even pre-installed on the measly flash memory?
The 380€ ($407 US) that the Switch costs in my country (yes you read right...) wouldn't feel as bad if there was something more to it.
To me it should be a pack-in game but only if it's alongside a proper game that's also packed-in too (like Breath of the Wild)—1-2 Switch is just not strong enough or the right kind of experience to sell what's actually great about the Switch imo—or an eShop game that costs maybe $15. Basically, it's a finger-food-nibble to chuck in alongside something properly meaty. But I think this being the only pack-in game would actually do the Switch harm ultimately. It would paint it as some kind of gimmicky, casual machine with an emphasis on "Wii-style" games, which it actually isn't; and the pack-in game (or bundled game) really should basically tell you what the system is all about in a nutshell: Super Mario Bros. for NES, Tetris for Game Boy, Sonic The Hedgehog for Genesis, Super Mario World for SNES, Super Mario 64 for N64, Wii Sports for Wii, Halo for Xbox, etc.
This should definitely be a pack in. The fact that is isn't could affect how the game is shared between friends and result in less buy ins long term.
I have it preordered, but it really should be included at $299.
@BiasedSonyFan
Many internet gamers are young people who don't really have an understanding of business concepts beyond consumption. Others are fools. Although that's not entirely what's happening with 1, 2, Switch. Not many are screaming entitled brats that just want Zelda and Metroid ad infinitum (some are but most aren't.) While not well articulated in a lot of cases, most of the complaints center around Nintendo offering what they perceive as a poor value proposition. And that is, indeed, an important business concept.
I disagree with the complaints about the hardware price, the accessories prices are indeed not well aligned (which I suspect is a short duration situation), and the value proposition on 1, 2, Switch, is dubious to be sure. Though I also think it's baked into a longer term plan of price drops and the used market. But however inarticulate, it's not unfair for people to be citing a poor value on offer in terms of accessories and individual games. There is certainly an argument to be made regarding the value of these items in both directions.
After the discussion here I'm torn on whether it should be a pack-in title. On one hand they lost a large opportunity for social marketing the machine and improving the appearance of value, on the other hand there's a good point to be made that Nintendo wants this game's image to be inextricably linked with the Switch hardware just about as much as the internet gamers do.
@alasdair91 "an empty console waiting for a slow drip feed of overpriced games. The Wii came with a game, the 3DS came with various games and 3D apps and the Wii U came with Nintendo Land"
Pretty much every console launches as an empty console waiting for a drip feed of games. I don't think the $40-$60 range is "overpriced" compared to any other console including the WiiU. It looks the same to me. (Yes the value of some of the games is not what they're charging, but the sticker price on retail games is the same.)
Wii was unique. It came with a game and at only $200, but it was just a rebadged GameCube with a motion controller designed to sell to a whole new market than existing customers. It was successful, but it's an unfair comparison to other consoles. Imagine if the "PS3" was just a PS2 sold with PS Move. That's what the Wii was. Yes it was slightly more powerful than the GCN but was more or less the same hardware.
3DS did come with a variety of games and apps, that was a neat little bundle. But WiiU did not come with a game, that was the deluxe bundle with a game and some accessories, larger storage, and it cost more money. That would be a $349 Switch package (at least) that they're not offering. You can buy 1, 2, Switch as your Nintendo Land and get a Switch at the very same price point as WiiU (and it's a better system too!) It even comes with the charging dock!
PS4 did not launch with a game, nor did XBox One, XBox 360, PS3, PS2, Vita, PSP. Bundles happen later in the sales life cycle of a console. Vita came with the delightful luxury of requiring you to buy a very overpriced memory card to be able to play the separate game you also had to buy. Console launch prices are never quite the sticker price you see on the box.
@impurekind
Exactly. Having 1-2-Switch as THE pack-in game, it would be seen as the definitive Switch game, the game that represents what the console is all about. It would therefore potentially do way more harm than good to the perception of the Switch as a console and may set an unwanted precedent for what kind of support it would get.
@Priceless_Spork Wait... There would be a right person to milk!?!? 😱😵😍
@PlywoodStick ...And just like that, Nintendo's family image fades away...
Had the Switch launched last Christmas, this would have been packed this in...
@NEStalgia Hey, that's what a lot of people wanted, right? They should have been careful what they wished for... There weren't any guarantees about how it would be done... 😈
The motion controls circle is now complete... Their true purpose has been unveiled. There's no way Nintendo can Swiip this under the rug now! The memes are coming... THE MEMES ARE COMING!
i dunno. a lot of people had wii sports as a pack-in but had to buy an extra controller, as well as nunchuks and pro controllers it they wanted different control options.
this one comes with the two controllers and the grip to turn them into a sort of pro controller, though with a compromised d-pad. and people have the freedom to use that extra 60 bucks on zelda instead of the minigames.
@Pod It should've been preinstalled as a tech demo without any price increase, like the miiplaza games, AR cards and face raiders on 3DS. Nintendo wouldn't be losing any money on it anyway as very very few people will buy this as a standalone game, (at least not at full price, maybe when it's 5$ in the bargain bin.)
As a free tech demo preinstalled anyone not interested in playing it could just ignore it but anyone who tries it out gets to see what the controllers can do and some might really enjoy it. And no one could complain about paying for it as it had no effect on the price of the system.
Idiotic move by Nintendo on this one.
I find it telling that everyone who tried out 1, 2 Switch has come to the conclusion that in no way is it worth what Nintendo is charging for it but will stop short of telling it like it is, it's a cash grab that Nintendo in all their misguided ways thought would sell a la Amiibo Festival. This game has the depth of a puddle and will probably be fun for about 2-3 minutes before the novelty quickly wears off. If they were smart they'd include it with a joy con or something so that at least people get some bang for their buck.
Nintendo is woefully unprepared to deal with how the market has changed. These "video game parties," don't really happen anymore and when they do people would rather play something more substantial like Smash or Mario Kart.
By Christmas you'll be able to get the Switch bundled with Mario Odyssey for £200. Nintendo will have panicked and will accept a huge loss, one much bigger than if they had simply sold the console at £250 bundled with 1 2 Switch at launch.
Biggest error since the Virtual Boy? Possibly, time will tell.
1, 2, Switch would be awesome on something like HTC Vive, not Switch.
@JpGamerGuy90 My brother has over 20 parties/get togethers a year. I do about 4. When we have them we have real ping pong, beer pong, corn husk throw, and yes video games like MK8, and Smash. There is no doubt that this one would work too. You lose, you take a shot. I just know about this and the stigma of having it on the console.
I'm with the other who say packing this would have created the wrong image for the Switch.It's way over priced for what it is though.It should be an Eshop download only costing no more than $30 or even better,come bundled with the an extra set of Joy-cons.That will be its eventual fate I think.
I was appalled by Nintendo's pivot towards the Joycons during the presentation. In fact, watchting said presentation one could have almost forgotten that the central initial pitch for the Switch was that for an easy-to-use, flexible hybrid gaming machine.
They pulled a 180 and basically repeated the Wii presentation, at least in spirit. That would be fine from their perspective, if one were to assume that lighting will indeed strike twice, but that is an assumption that could only be born out of foolishness or desperation. For the rest of us, nothing about this was fine, because even so the Wii was a big commercial hit, it's hardly the system with the most memorable library of great Nintendo games (or for that matter 3rd party games).
Anyways, "fun in short bursts" is exactly right, it was right for Wii Sports/Play and Sports Resort, and even Nintendo Land ... but not every situation is a "short burst" situation. Sometimes players are looking for something more substantial and this is where the Wii failed - outside of proving pointer controls in say Metroid Trilogy (tellingly a GC games) or the odd-title-out like Red Steel 2.
The equation here is simple enough: Developers have to overcame the hurdle of new and unique controls, which takes effort, only to realize that they can only sell the game they just developed on one platform ... unsurprisingly, this rarely happens. On top of that, developers have to downsize and downscale any game to make it work on the Wii/WiiU and now the Switch, which also takes effort, only to realize that they then cannot take advantage of most if not all the 'benefits' that system provides - plus, of course, in case of the WiiU, reach only a small additional audience ... unsurprisingly, this rarely happens.
Nintendo is setting the Switch up for a failure very similar, if not identical to that of the WiiU. The fact, that the same games are supposed to carry the system, that failed to carry it the last time, and the fact that launch line-up is at least as bad as last time, with the only major differences being a Zelda game (not sure that'll be enough, once people realize it's also on WiiU and it's really the only card they have to play).
@Franklin The reason it's seems expensive is because of our weak currency.If the pound was at its pre-Brexit value it would have an RRP under £240. Currently £279 is $345,Pre-Brexit $300 would have been around £210 but we've never got a direct conversion to the dollar for games or consoles,it's always been a little more,so compared to the US Switch price,it's about right.
I love Wii Play, and party games in general, but I am just not seeing the appeal of this game yet. I'll be watching to see what the full game entails, though. I may even give it a rental just to see.
@tedko
I think some people would absolutely complain if it was included.
And I think more people will be willing to pay for it than you imagine. Whether or not it's dumb to do so.
And I think it'll be more than just a tech demo, just like Wii Sports turned out to be.
tbh this game looks fun, IF it's pulled off anywhere as well as the WarioWare for Wii, which got a hell of a lot of playtime at my house. but yeah, I'm with everyone else. Should be a pack-in. Would maybe consider it if it was $30 or less.
Yes I can see me and my friends spending hours guessing whether there are 2 or 3 balls in my joy con...
This game will fail, as it is pretty much designed to be a pack in party game. Wii sports was the biggest reason for the success of the Wii; it appealed to everyone. This does too. It wasn't the best game, not by a mile, but it got people talking. It's too bad this isn't included, HUGE missed opportunity.
@BiasedSonyFan
"Newsflash, most internet gamers: Nintendo is not selling the 1-2-Switch to you. You cannot possibly talk about value when you continue to read your own expectations of video games into 1-2-Switch. Even if you do, there's still no denying that 1-2-Switch is a low-risk, high-reward business proposition for Nintendo. It either fails and they easily move on from it, or they put money in the bank"
While you're right that it's low risk high reward in terms of capital expenditure, I think the point that a lot here are trying to make is that the capital risk is immaterial. Nintendo is in a position of brand image revaluation after the destructive Wii era (it was a success in terms of net gain, but that camouflaged the long term brand image damage among the stable part of the market that manifested as the WiiU situation.) I disagree with your basis that they're not marketing it to "internet gamers." Marketing it to internet gamers is precisely what they're doing, and that's the problem. The game can exist. But at $50 + $300 console, they're not reaching their target market, they're aiming it at the gaming market. The target market was not watching that presentation. The launch presentation, the day of treehouse coverage, the 5 launch day titles are all pointed squarely and exclusively at the early adopters: the "internet gamers". The messaging is entirely wrong, to the wrong part of the market, and putting this game in its current spotlight for the market they're presently advertising to, and the risk of further alienating their most stable market while they've been struggling to solidify that market as their fundamental hurdle is about as high risk as risk can get. Loss of investment is recoverable. Loss of good will is not. Lost marketing potential is not.
To clarify, I'm not railing against 1, 2, Switch. The can sell it at whatever bad value they want. But right now they're selling the wrong game, very hard, to the wrong market, and pricing it at a point that it is unlikely to penetrate its intended market, in an ill advised move to try to win back a market they lost to emerging technologies almost a decade ago that proved to be very unreliable.
The "game" is fine, the value is debatable across the board, but I'd side with the "poor value" crowd given the overall spending habits of the intended market for this game (see: Super Mario Run.) Opportunity lost from marketing potential is debatable (as is the possibility that including the game would have been a liability). Risk of further alienating a core market with poor messaging, one of their admitted failures in their prior product, is significant.
Like I said to Ryu_Niiyama earlier, if they had placed the 1, 2, Switch intro anywhere in the presentation other than first, I think the messaging would not have seemed as inappropriate or risked the flashbacks to Wii among the live audience. The rest of the presentation was on-message. But first impressions made this game a target of contention. They did walk into that one by appearing tone-deaf to the market.
@PlywoodStick
You're a bad person, and you should feel bad.
Part of me thinks that 1, 2, Switch will become the #1 game on sales charts due expressly to Milk once the memes catch on to the high school and college crowd. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not, though I'm leaning toward not. But on the other hand look what "arrow to the knee" did for Skyrim and that wasn't HALF as viral as this will be....
@Ralek85 Like I said to BiasedSonyFan, I think the problem there was messaging (again.) The wrong message at the wrong time to the wrong group during the wrong presentation. The Joycons themselves are fine and were introduced fine. The core market asks about backward compatibility and ports from older systems. The Joycons addressed Wii & Wii U compatibility potential. They're stuck with "wiimotes" of one form or another forever now. And the Joycons ARE a core feature of the hybrid nature of the console. Starting with a party game that uses the motion controls as the LEAD IN to this very critical presentation trying specifically to get the core back on board (they had Skyrim for crying out loud) was silly, and the lasting first impression is the "oh no, it's Wii again!" panic. The REST of the presentation was actually excellent and entirely dedicated to core gamers. If they removed 1, 2, Switch from the presentation, the take away would be "wow what a gamer focused Nintendo console, this is such a Switch snap", if they put it in the middle it would have been remembered as a snooze alert between awesome games. LEADING with it just painted an ugly, and largely inaccurate picture of what they're positioning Switch to be.
1-2 Switch I hope is fun...when it's not so absurdly expensive. I might get it but when the price drop occurs. This game feels like a missed opportunity. Great pack-in game potential. All that wasted.
Agree with the article. Looks like a massively missed opportunity that everyone except Nintendo thinks is a good idea...
@feelinsupersonic Its not like hae that extra 60 buck.. you really think that the development of a game like 1,2 Switch costs as much as other games that retail for 60 at launch.. Final Fantasy, Mass Effect, Zelda, etc.. you are buying their lie.. this is not even a game.. its a tech demo.. something used to show the controllers capabilities.. it would be free marketing for them if they packet it in, everyone would show this game to their relatives and friends.. and they would see how fun it is to play on the console and would want one... I honestly think that this game, developed internally didnt cost much than 200.000USD and thats a stretch.. waaay lees than what other companies spend on marketing one game... and we are talking about a console here where they desperatly need to do everything to market it well.. bad marketing was 50% why the Wii U failed. So yes, the price of the console should be what it is with this game for free...
@NEStalgia You think this is a game? No... You don't understand! Nintendo doesn't know how to control the Meme Genie. They couldn't even control the Game Genie! That power is much more difficult to handle than those virtual, bounteous udders that Nintendo wants us to fondle. None have gone this far before. All the memes of interweb past have known their limits. But Nintendo is trying to break the glass ceiling in all the wrong ways! The result of such overwhelming memes would be... udder chaos!
And that's just from one minigame. Just think about it... There's a "chomping" minigame... A "quick shot" minigame... A "synchronized movements" minigame... A "ball feeling" minigame... And there's more... More where that came from! With all of them put together, in one pent up, concentrated blast... That could destroy the internet as we know it!
@NEStalgia Even if that were all there is to this, we are stil left - as you rightfully say again - with really bad communications.
That in itself has the potential to be devastating in and off itself.
As for Skyrim, I'm not sure how that is really that relevant. It's a game from 2011, probably without mod support even ... hardly enticing to the so-called "core". Frankly, the only interesting thing about it, was the fact that it was not 100% in line with the whole "Wii2 - this time not for kids, but for millennials" pitch.
If that wasn't the pitch indeed, I must have been blind and deaf =(
@BiasedSonyFan Care to elaborate?, because I did watch the whole thing. If you have an argument, I'd love to hear it!
@FreakFerrett i'm not buying anything. it costs what it costs, and i'm glad there's some profit in there for nintendo in every unit. the wii u made no profit whatsoever; this is already a better start.
@feelinsupersonic Do you really bought the story that the wii u did not make any profit in every unit sold?? the console was a powered up Wii and the controller which everyone loved to say how expensive it was was a regular controller with a tiny batery and a touch screen completely obsolete for the time of the release. I mean, only thing I can think could be expensive was the technology to transmit the audio and video to the controller from the console, thats it.. nothing more. It was not expensive, Nintendo knowing it wasnt going to sell, wanted to profit the more they could in the few units they were going to sell.. otherwise the packed in games wouldnt make sense compared to what reggie is saying now about the switch.. I love my Wii U and my almost 40 retail games for it.. but that thing is noot expensive and never was... same with the switch.. Im fine with the 300 price, what makes me mad is the accesories price and the games being $60 when they are at most tech-demos or games fit to be digital only like bomberman (same game from the 90s with 3d graphics).. and the lack of built in games like the 3ds had.. its like they wanna charge you for everything they can instead of saying, "here, buy our console get this "free/cheap" with it.. adopt it early so I will make awesome games for you".. that should be their message..
@NEStalgia "Still $299 surprises me given Miyamoto's frequent comments that price is what hurt WiiU most. Still, it's 25% cheaper than WiiU"
Wii U launched at $299 and no game, Switch is launching at $299 and no game. That's not 25% cheaper, it's the same price. And Wii U has been that same price the past 3 years, $299, so Switch is not 25% or any other % cheaper than Wii U, it's the same price.
"With the X2 based platform it certainly is genuine bleeding edge tech"
But it almost certainly is NOT X2, it's likely a modified version of X1. X2 is too expensive. Nvidia just released it's own Shield TV 2 and even that is using X1. If X2 were cheap enough Nvidia wouldn't be using X1 in it's own console, it would be using X2.
Nvidia Shield TV 2 Kodi Box Specs
SoC: Tegra X1
http://koditips.com/new-nvidia-shield-tv-2-kodi-specs-buy/
"I hope those rumor mongers who are fortunately out of the spotlight now can return to their holes of shame in whatever caves they may have emerged from."
The so called "rumour monger" was an employee at a well respected Japanese investment newspaper. It was sites like this, and the people who comment on them, that misinterpreted that report. That guy was just doing the job he was paid for.
@Arehexes "I'll just say the PS4 is the worst console I ever owned."
Well I've only owned my for about 3 weeks now, and we own about 7 or 8 games for it, so I'm not sure it will be the worst I've ever owned, but it might be. I did wait 3 years to buy 1 b/c of the lack of games though, so I understand your point. But I also got it on sale for $218 including Uncharted 4, so I don't think it will ever be a waste of money. I paid $350 for Wii U w/ Nintendo Land and have about 22 games for that system.
Not sure when we'll get Switch, Christmas probably, but even if 1 2 Switch was free I doubt we'd play it more than 20 minutes.
@TruenoGT "Even just as a digital code"
In the weeks leading up to the event last week I thought Ninteod might have 2 bundles like Wii U had, both bundles would have a game like 1 2 Switch, then the higher priced bundle would also include a "game" game like Zelda or MK8D and more storage.
If you are right and Ntinedo didn't want to bundle 1 2 Switch b/c then it makes Switch look like a casual gamer console then they probably should have had more games promoted last week than this, ARMS, Just Dance, Bomberman R and Zelda, b/c it sort of looks like a casual console to me. Ok, a Zelda console, and a casual console for everybody else. It would work better as a Zelda console if Wii U had gotten Breath of the Wild in 2015 like Nintneod said, twice, and this was an enhanced and expanded sequel like either Splatoon 2 or MK8D. But now, 13.4 million people can just buy Zelda on Wii U, making Switch perhaps preferred, but not mandatory.
@JaxonH "crossbuy and cross save eliminated... that's alot of value"
I think Nintendo should have spent more on that aspect, less on 1 2 Switch and ARMS and Rumble HD. Play all your favorite home console games on the go, play all your favorite portable games on the big screen TV. I guess they coudln't really do that yet though as all of the good portable games are still on 3DS. Has there been 1 3DS type game - Pokemon, Monster Hunter, Animal Crossing - announced for Switch yet, where they can promote your favorite portable game also on your big screen tv? I didn't really see that anywhere, mostly just Splatoon 2 and MK8D and Zelda on the go.
Part of percived value is what you value. As I've said, $300 is a great deal for people who want to take their home games on the go or play their portable games on the TV - I would have purchased a New 3DS XL a long time ago if it had HDMI out for the top screen. But some adults don't play on the go, some kids dont get to play on a TV. For those groups there is no value in buying a $300 console which can do both if you only want a $200 console that can do 1 or the either. I think at $250 people would have bene or ewilling to say - well I only wanted a $200 console to play on the tv or play on the go, for an extra $50 for a $250 hybrid console that's ok. For an extra $100 at $300 that maybe isn't ok.
A $25,000 car isn't a a good value even at $1,000 for someone who doesn't have a drivers license or wants a $100 bicycle. Nintnedo needs to show all that Switch can do. For some people ARMS and 1 2 Switch aren't worth purchasing a $300 console for. And Zelda isn't worth purchasing a $300 console for if you already own a Wii U. Yes, some people will buy it for Zelda or Sapltoon 2 or MK8D or Skyrim, bu twill it be enough? Seems like right now the momentum isn't there, they aren't off to a god start but a rocky one.
Good thing for Ntineod though, they have time to recover. Microsoft had it's Xbox One called Xbox 180 by a lot of people after they made so many changes to their "no used games" policy ideas. And they dropped the Kinect and the price. If Switch dons' tsell in Japan dropping the dock and the price will be much easier than dropping the Wii U Gamepad, I just don't see the dock as necessary for any game. Might make life easier w/ a big screen, but every single game on Switch seems playable w/ 1 or 2 people on the tablet. So where's the "value" in the dock? Pokemon, MH and AC on the TV is where the value is, but we aren't there yet.
@TruenoGT I really hated ARMS in the live event but it grew on me during the Treehosue. But my problem w/ ARMS bundled is the same as Nintnedo LAnd bundled. You want to bundle the game that makes people want to buy the system. PS4 gets Uncharted 4, most Sony fans are going to want that game. You bundle Halo w/ Xbox, most Xbox fans are going to want that game. You bundle a Nitneod console w/ Mario or Zelda. I think WiiU could have had a better start if they bundled Nintnedo Land as a "freebie" w/ both Wii U, $299 and $349, then the $349 bundle also gets NSMBU. Which is pretty much what I said before about 1 2 Switch and Zelda so sorry for repeating myself.
You don't bundle ARMS b/c nobody is spending $300 on a new console for ARMS. You bundle ARMS w/ an $80 Joycon dual pack b/c people who already spent $300 on a Switch for Zelda, MK8D or Splatoon 2 will probably need a 2nd set of Joycon, and ARMS is a nice incentive. Even if ARMS is $60 then make the Joycon bundle $99. Wii Play was $50 w/ a $40 Wiimote, making the game $10.
I guess what I'm looking for from Nintneod is a gesture of good faith. Like, sorry Wii U owners for only supporting your system for 3 years w/ hardly any 3rd party support, here's some nice Switch offers. Instead we have a $300 system, no packed in game, an $80 pair of Joycon, a $70 Pro controller, a $90 dock, and a $30 Charging Grip b/c the one in the bundle doesn't charge.
I just don't see any good news there. Yes they are a business and need to make money, but sometimes you have to give stuff away now to make money later. Sell the hardware cheap, make the money on the games. Paid online isn't helping either, not enough games to justify it. The initial trailer in October was good, news coming out of the event, besides Zelda 3/3 on Wii U, was kind of meh. They could have been meh after 100 million Wii and 150 million DS sales, but not after 13m Wii U and 60mil 3DS. They needed something to win fans back, b/c they're mostly gone.
@rjejr
I don't think Switch nends to recover though. The only people who aren't impressed that I've seen are people who stalk fansites and live, breath Nintendo and obsess about every little detail. That and fanboy from other consoles who are always trying to spin everything they do as a disaster. But the vast majority of level headed press love it. Normal people I've spoken with love it. People who maybe don't buy a console every gen. So just normal people and onlookers seem excited like me. We'll see how many sales that translated into, but I think everyone on fans ites live in a bubble and haven't the slightest clue what the silent majority thinks. Watching Angry Joe who really lays into Nintendo sometimes, and even he wants one day one. That's the sort of "non-fanboy don't care about the BS just gimme the cool console and games" gamers who may not exactly see things like some people here.
In any case, Shin Megami Tensei. There's the first 3DS game coming to Switch. And Octopath Travelers (from Bravely Default developers). And Dragon Quest XI, although it's getting the console version because it's strong enough. No sprites for Switch, full console glory baby. And I'm confident more are coming. Monster Hunter, check. Fire Emblem, check. Atlus and Pokémon... I would be shocked if they weren't on the way as we speak.
The least likely to buy in are console only gamers. 3DS gamers will almost surely all eventually buy in. And there's alot of em. People who want the value of both, those are a definite. But even console only gamers, once the games start rolling in and a nice bundle shows its face, I'm betting at least as many people buy Switch just for console use as people bought Wii U. Cause it's just flat out a cooler console with better games coming.
@JaxonH I know I saw 1 article in my newspaper, the only one, talking about the $300 price being to high, people were expecting less. And of course the stock price fell, no word recently on it's recovery.
It will sell better than Wii U, no doubt in my mind. It can't fail that badly, it's launching w/ Zelda and 3D Mario is coming, and Spaltoon and MK8D. It's a great first year. Of course I always thought Wii U would hit 50mil after a few price cuts and some games, but that never happened. I still can't figure out how Wii U sold that poorly after Wii sold over 100 million, 13% of the previous gen isn't something anyone can predict, so who knows.
@rjejr
As a gamer, Wii U was a great console. It had lots of great games and as a gamer, to me, that's what counts.
But for the people at large and less avid gamers, it wasn't appealing. I had a hard time convincing people why I liked it so much aside from "I like the games. Being HD was it's biggest selling point and for most people, simply being HD wasn't enough to impress.
Switch already feels different. I don't have to actually try to convince people why I like it. They can just immediately see why, cause they see it too. Even with 3DS I kinda had to show people the games on the system and the 3D, and they'd be like oh that's cool. But for the first time in a long time, when I've been going on and on about this new Nintendo console I'm hyped for, they see right away like, oh that thing looks slick. Oh it can dock and go anywhere. Oh the controllers have cool tech. It's subtle things like that which tell me people are gonna be alot more receptive to it.
Totally agree - I'm interested in the game but at that price point I'll certainly pass. Maybe if it was around the £15-20 Mark I might consider picking it up. If it was a pack in I'd be very happy and would show it off to everyone I know. If I were them I'd pack it with the console. I can't see them making much from it at full price.
@rjejr
My mistake, I was thinking it was $399 at launch, I was confusing it with PS4 I think. Ugh, then Miyamoto is almost certainly the voice that was calling for lower end hardware than this to sell it cheaper.
I thought for sure I read reports after the presser on other more tech oriented sites that it was X2. To be fair, it is CUSTOM, but I find it a little hard to believe it's just X1 given what we're seeing from it. It might be less like either X and more truly custom than we're giving it credit for.
@TruenoGT
I think so too!
@PlywoodStick Those are some mooving ideas. If I didn't mind dealing with the internet backlash I'd just grab the bull by the horns and give the the meme train a kick in the calves myself! But I don't have a beef with Nintendo over it.
@BiasedSonyFan I generally agree with most of your points, in fact you're making many of the same points I've been making to folks. We're generally on the same page. I think we might have overlap in how we're applying definitions for things. I don't think the "internet gamer" is specifically the people who wanted Nintendo to make a powerful third party system. That is and always has been a silly notion on a broad many levels, and I realize there's whining from that camp but I don't generally see that as the broader "internet gamer" or at least "internet nintendo gamer" crowd. They are indeed squarely marketing (for now) at the internet (nintendo) gamer. Everything they've presented so far short of Fallon has been aimed at the internet gamers. Nobody else (short of insiders and financiers) is watching the presentation, the directs, the treehouse, etc. That's not pointed at the general audience, that's pointed right at the rabid fans to get the ball rolling. As is every major console release. 1, 2, Switch is still being pointed at the wrong crowd with excessive attention. And Switch is very deliberately being marketed at a more electronics-enthused, if not gaming enthused market than the Wii. They're going to great lengths, GREAT lengths to separate their current image from the image of the Wii years with the Switch. From re-branding, re-coloring, modified messaging, all new display language, packaging, everything they're doing is a very concerted attempt to distance themselves from what they recognize as a now-negative image of the Wii brand. 1, 2, Switch is like putting a giant gray-on-white (Wii display language) banner with a Wii Fit Trainer silhouette on it in the middle of Best Buy. It reassociates the Nintendo brand with what they're actively messaging away from. I don't mean it can't be a game they sell, I just mean they should NOT be focusing on it.
Not sure if your in the US or not, if not others will know what I mean, but you know the Saturday Night Live Christmas skit with Alec Baldwin as Pete Schwetty? Every time they show an image of 1, 2, Switch there's some producer in Nintendo acting like the imagined producer in that skit every time they talked about Pete's product.
@NEStalgia Oh God, not the cow puns! Not the...
...Wait. Maybe that's not so bad. Maybe that can be the antidote...!
@Ralek85 I think Skyrim is significant, or potentially significant. Bethesda is infamously PC-bound. Even their efforts on PSXBox have been so-so. They're the company one would least expect on Nintendo ever, and as the Remaster on PS4/XBOne shows, like Minecraft there's an evergreen interest in it. This is the first time it's on a portable machine, and the Skyrim audience is...erm...obsessive with it. There's a fair chance many will buy it for portable play. More interestingly, though I think it's a game that aligns with Nintendo players very well. I think the Bethsoft team has mentioned an interest in Zelda, and I know Aonuma said he had played Skyrim and may have subconsciously be influenced by it for BotW, so the two games are cut from the same cloth. Platforms tend to be defined by the genres that succeed at launch, so Skyrim (launch window) and Zelda (almost a Zelda mod for Skyrim in approach) early on, are similar game types that appeal to similar players, and could yield to Switch being the epic open world sandbox platform of choice. And it could lead to further Bethsoft games. A strong Bethsoft presence would send a HUUGE beacon to other devs that it's a valid platform the same way EA abandoning WiiU signaled it wasn't. No guarantees it all works out but it's as promising as one could hope. (and as BiasedSonyFan is fond of pointing out, it's very low risk for them.)
FWIW I was never too interested in Skyrim. I tried it on X360, and despite being a big Morrowind and Oblivion fan, something just felt flavorless about Skyrim to me....I never made it past the first two or three towns. I'm willing to try again on Switch though. Being portable makes it more agreeable to give it a chance. I WANT to like it as an Elder Scrolls fan.
@PlywoodStick That would be bovi...err...devine! Every time you talk about the game my brain thinks of worse and worse memes that I hope will not emerge for it. On the other hand, calling it now: 1, 2, Switch x Senran Kagura crossover!
@NEStalgia Just look at what happened the last time the memes became too real, over 2000 years ago:
@NEStalgia First off, I'm not big on Skyrim (or TES in general) either, but my former roommate was obsessed with the game for like 2 years or so, hence I'm for better or worse acquainted with it.
The reason I'm bringing this up is, that out of all the people I know who really like it, or downright obsessively love it, few - if any - care all that much about the vanilla version.
Therefore, Nintendo would need to offer a complete version of the game, with at least some barebones MOD support. Now, I know that my buddy did not take long to push his MOD folder to dozens of GBs in size, with total conversion mods and whatnot.
That would probably be a problem on the Switch, with it very limited (or at least very expensive memory). Then again, I doubt anyone expects MOD support to happen on the Switch - ever, which will not help drawing in the obsessed.
While I don't disagree about the mutual influences of TES and Zelda, I for one always loved Zelda for being a focused experience, not diluted into an open, empty world. That is just me though, and I know "sandbox"/ "open-world" is all the rage now, so it's definitely significant for the Switch, but imho because that could mean Zelda could fill that gap on Nintendo consoles in the future, rather than Bethesda doing it.
Why? Because that beacon you mentioned will shine only so bright, seeing as Skyrim is a 2006 game. It's not like we have reason to jump from Skyrim to the next TES game or say, Prey appearing on the Switch. THAT would really have been a big deal.
Anyways, yeah, it's a form of toe-tipping, and that implies a potential for more stuff in the future, but it's also a form of further monetizing Skyrim - something Bethesda is rather fond of these days Again, there is no doubt theoretical potential here, but for now, I would not read to much into it. It's also worth keeping in mind, that Skyrim would probably amount to those 2.5 hours battery life they mentioned ... not exactly mind-blowing either ^^ Fair points though overall!
@PlywoodStick
1,2,Switch is just so odd that they're focusing so much advertising on that one game, despite burying it in a pool of gamer-games. "low risk high reward" or not, it smacks of despiration of trying to recapture a lost audience. Including it as a game for all audiences in the lineup is one thing. Promoting it like "Remember how fun 2008 was? IT CAN BE 2008 AGAIN! Only on Nintendo Switch (snap!)" Gamers didn't care the first time, and the general public is sooo over that fad. It's "uncool". It's seen as something soccer moms and geriatrics played a decade ago. The younger set wants to avoid THAT, and the older set is over it.
Milk, and at least one other game in this collection which I will not highlight the off-color meme potential of here, COULD virally make it popular in all the wrong ways though
@Ralek85 One thing of interest is we don't actually know which version of Skyrim is coming to Switch, and they specifically don't have a release date. However, Bethesda is making a very big deal out of this (I'm guessing there's heavy nVidia involvement in linking Bethesda to Nintendo given Bethesda's involvment with Shield early on.) They're front page even includes their own twitter mentions of Skyrim on Switch. They're treating this as an important launch. If we remove Nintendo from the equation and just look as though this was Bethesda's own conference at E3, their emphasis on this is very encouraging relative to their usual content releases (I remember watching 2015 E2 when they announced Doom and Fallout 4 and there were several jokes from the audience "What about WiiU!!!?!" and the presenters just kind of laughed somewhat insultingly. A front-page focus on Switch for them for Skyrim means they intend for it to succeed and to fully back it (not like EA's half hearted launches.) It's almost a given that it's the "remastered edition" despite internet doubters. Remastered was a complete code optimization, so the game runs much more efficiently even at the same graphics settings. A must for Switch. The lack of release date despite being a launch partner in the initial teaser trailer in Oct. suggests they may be waiting for the paid online to kick in or at least close. That means mods might indeed be a thing. It's possible it won't, but I'm not sure Bethsoft would be putting much emphasis on it if it didn't have near parity with the other consoles. That's not their style. But I could be wrong.
Look on the bright side, it's not Fallout 4! Speaking of Milk....that's a franchise that has played Milk on Hero mode I agree with you about Sandboxes. I dont' get them. Elder Scrolls was never a "sandbox" but a very very big world, with typical RPG side quests and an overarching quest. Unlike Zelda it's an RPG not an adventure series, complete with stats and skill trees and the types of quests that go with it. But to me that's what's wrong in Skyrim. It feels EMPTY. The fact that "mods" are required to make the game, it feels like a "build your own game kit". I'm hoping I just never made it far enough in and there's a real game in there I missed. I love wandering the towns and stumbling into the laundry list of crazy quests that Oblivion and Morrowind had and often wish Zelda had MORE actual questing from the characters (picture Twilight Princess Castle Town where all those people walking around were likely to give you unique quests (not Xenoblades "kill 50 of x enemy" MMO quests.) That's Elder Scrolls when it's good.
Heh, battery life...yeah that's an issue. Zelda is 3 hours...not great. But it sounds like Zelda doesn't scale back enough in handheld mode (and is probably running some WiiU optimized code) and Skyrim...well...it's Gamebryo...that thing grinds ANY system to tears.
@NEStalgia I can't argue with current state of affairs as far as Bethesda's apparent commitment goes, but I won't pretend we've not seen developers/publishers pronouncing their undying support only to drop it completely within like 6 months before ...
Like I said, I'm not big on most of their games, not just Skyrim in particular, but I also feel that would they truely support the Switch in a sustained manner, it would send an important message to consumers and the industry at large alike.
I'm still sceptical though, no matter what is currently happening, because front pages change quickly, and tweets are as temporary in the general consciousness as it gets.
I could not get back into Fallout after Fallout 2. Didn't really matter if it was 3, New Vegas or 4. All these games have - imho - in common, that they are true time-suckers, without much return in terms of emotional payout or gameplay depth/challenge. Helluva lot of stuff to keep you occupied, but also really repetive and shallow - at least in my experience sofar.
I agree about Zelda Quests, as long - as you say - it's actual QUESTS, not busy work. The least thing I want in Zelda is MMO'esque busy work to pad out the play time and give the illusion of a big, interconnected, lived-in world. In fact, I loved the exploration in XCX, but the actual quests were mostly horrid. Never managed to finish it, I just got bored of all that stuff.
Looking at the Zelda footage, the game seems to hardly be able to hold those 30 fps, so obviously something is definitely still amiss in terms of optimization - 900p or not. I wonder how the WiiU version will fare.
@Ralek85 I think we're in pretty similar places regarding bethesda and their games. Fallout...ugh. I know people that adore FO3 and 4. 1 and 2 were amazing RPGs and 3 felt like it missed the entire concept of 1 & 2. It was supposed to be a satire on humanity in the rebuilding after the wastes. FO3 and 4 focused on the emptiness of the wastes. Elder scrolls in the Fallout world without any of the charm. Yuck. "Time suckers" sounds about right, and I hate the time suck genre. I think that's what's wrong with them. Oblivion felt dense. There wasn't much open expanse, just paths to get from town to town to actually do stuff. You were always on a mission for someone that needed something. Not just wandering to go stack rocks into a sandcastle "because." Fallout became stacking rocks "because". I'm HOPING Skyrim has a real Oblivion-like quest system of towns once I get past the boring beginning.
I haven't opened XCX yet but I feel the same way about XC1. The MMO quests bored me. I ignored almost all of them unless I had to do it. The real game was fun. But the quests...those weren't fun. Older Elder scrolls games had very well scripted lengthy quests that would send you on adventures and meeting quirky characters or discovering dark rituals in the woods, etc. Memorable unique quests. Not sure about Skyrim. I got too bored early on last time to find out
I wouldn't go by internet footage unless it's a 60fps video. 30fps games and 30fps video tend to have some vsync issues where whole frames get dropped. Can't judge it until I see it running live.
I read an article recently which gave the opinion that bundling it with Switch would give the buyer the impression that this is the sort of game the console is for, and therefore the market they're aiming at. This was great for Wii, because they were going for that family friendly approach. The Switch seems to be aimed more at the core Nintendo fans it seems. So while I do think this does belong in the box, it could hurt the overall image of the console at launch if people think it's just a party game kind of console.
It's exactly like Wii Play, however. They need to give people a reason to buy this, such as bundling it with an extra pair of Joy-Cons...but then you don't NEED another pair because you have all you need with the console. Wii Play had 2 player games on it which made sense to buy an additional controller for in order to play it in the first place. This is going to be a tricky sell. Personally I think it needs to be a free download already on the system when you boot it up, like with the 3DS console + game packages that come out. Much in the same way that we got the AR games built into 3DS to start with, to show off the 3D and the AR technology. They were fun but quickly forgotten. If I was making the decisions at Nintendo, I would put the game on the console with no extra cost and not really advertise it as a "full game" to avoid sending out the message that it's not a console for core gamers. It just needs to be treated as a tech demo to show off what Switch can do, but can be fired up when you're with friends and fancy a bit of silly 2 player action for 10 minutes.
I couldn't agree more.
I was at the Switch event in UK, and played some of the games on 1 2 switch. They were fun, but not that fun, as you said you will play them 2-3 times and move on to the next games. They are fun as mini games, but not that fun as a standalone game and definitely not 40 pounds fun.
All I couldn't stop thinking about was that after almost 40 years of gaming evolution, we've reached to the point where we are using HD rumble controllers to milk a virtual cow
@NEStalgia
"It was supposed to be a satire on humanity in the rebuilding after the wastes. FO3 and 4 focused on the emptiness of the wastes. Elder scrolls in the Fallout world without any of the charm. Yuck."
Exactly, I agree about the satire part especially. There was this ... well, for the lack of a better term Monty-Python-esque feeling to the world and it's inhabitants. I didn't really perceive it so much as humorous, but it certainly had this kind of entertaining subtext thing going, sometimes more prevalent than others.
One thing, I would add is that with the 'switch' ^^ to 3D the world of Fallout became ugly. I liked the 2D isotmetric look of the old games, the new ones are just ... ugly and buggy as far as I can tell.
Yeah, the quest in XCX are for the most part not great, there are some that were elevated above your average MMO, but overall, not really all that amazing. The 'bonding' quests and story quests are fine for the most part - wouldn't necessarily say memorable though^^
Still, I really liked just exploring that alien world, that was very well done, and the combat was also enjoyable.
I think most of the Nintendo footage was actually provided in 60fps on Youtube btw - I mean the footage Nintendo itself uploaded, not necessarily every coverage by all the tubers of course.
I think Bethesda either didn't understand the Fallout idea, or intentionally wanted to reinvent it. Both Skyrim and Fallout3/4 seem to take themselves very seriously, which strikes me odd since Todd Howard has been the producer for a good while, and Oblivion and Morrowind had a more memorable subtle humorous feel. Unfortunately, short of New Vegas, it's created a fan base rift that identifies the new ones as Fallout and has jaded the old fans from the first two. New Vegas was made largely by former Black Isle team members who did make the first two, so it stuck more to the original feel. It still fell short though. I personally love the isometric games and overall format, but I realize that's a throwback to tech limitations that, especially with Switch replacing 3DS by and large, won't have much of a presence anymore. Heck, I still want another top-down Zelda. I love top-down or isometric Zelda. 3D definitely is ugly for Fallout, and seems designed to be an ugly realistic post-apocalypse world.... I'm not sure why anyone actually wants that world in their spare time. Which I suppose is why I'm non a Nintendo forum rather than an XBox one
Nintendo footage may be 60fps but Youtube still has brutal compression that doesn't play very nicely with Nintendo art styles. It compresses the similar color blobs together and makes everything look kind of odd and probably chopping depending on how it's deinterlacing.
For the more money than sense crowd.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...