-Juice-

@ruinez Go play Skyrim/Morrowind, Witcher 3, or Fallout 3/NV/4 and come back and tell me just how "bad" DLC will be for Zelda. Only crappy companies make payed cosmetic DLC. Most just give you a totally new adventure.

@RickRau5 Where the heck did all of that come from? I think you misinterpreted what I said.

@BertoFlyingFox That was exactly by point. Fallout 3 rolls around, there are certain big criticisms people have with it. New Vegas comes from Obsidian, and for the most part it's hailed within the community as doing everything that Fallout 3 should have done. Then comes Fallout 4, Bethesda's second try at the franchise, and they completely overlook the main critiques they got with 3, and it fell completely flat in the eyes of the community. I think every community has a general sense of what they expect from a series, things that you just can't lose without it losing its own identity. For Zelda? It's the combination of action-based combat and puzzles. For Fallout? It's choices that impact the outcome of every quest, major or minor. It's being able to craft your own story and character personality with your own unchanging strengths and shortcomings.

@bolt05 That's exactly it. Customers have the right to know exactly what they're getting. Too many times in the past have manufacturers hid something awful or manipulated a little to seem like a lot. Eventually consumers found out about a lot of the dirty dealings, and now we have a really good defense mechanism: we wait for all the information to be out, or bust.

In my opinion, you should never buy a product until the whole thing is laid out bare to be judged by those who wish to buy it. Consumers were starting to get stupid again as of late. They started to pre-order based on excitement alone, I think now a lot of people have been burnt so badly time and time again they're weary of anything from the current games industry. Game corporations are going to have to do a lot more to win people over whenever they launch anything.

@gb_nes_gamer That dangerous type of thinking gives you lackluster things like Fallout 4, rather than Fallout New Vegas.

Criticism is important, and taking it into account is even more important.

This better mean we're getting a Monster Hunter title for the sytem.

The UI is superb, as always. It's just so elegant!

@BlueKnight07 If you ignore the fact that the Switch's lack of power equivalence with the other two consoles means that developers will have to waste resources to make hundreds-thousands of lower resolution textures for every game they try to port over, then yeah.

Developing a game for only the Switch won't be where the valid complaints will arise. It'll be from ambitious multi-platform game devs. Mainly because there'd be a lot of extra work involved, all while they're just trying to get the game working as good as possible on the two systems made by companies smart enough to understand that success in the gaming industry depends on having close to equal architecture, specifically SO your system doesn't miss out on massive games that become must-haves in the mainstream market.

"Switch will allow the users to bring their home console on the go, but this doesn't mean handheld game development like Nintendo 3DS will be discontinued."

Good job Nintendo. Despite all of your ads saying otherwise, you still continue to refuse to acknowledge your hybrid console as a hybrid console. Maybe instead of making two different types of games for two different consoles, you should take your hybrid console and make two different types of games for it solely. Nah, that'd make too much sense. At the end of the day, the 3DS is competition for the NX. Both rely on portability as their main draw, but you're not going to move Switch units if you keep going around saying that the 3DS will remain, and that it'll be supported substantially. You should be trying to get that audience to cross over, because they won't unless they know that the Switch is the future. You're letting them stay comfortable with what they have, and that's just an awful business decision. Why make a hybrid console if you don't plan on using it as a hybrid console? It's just plain stupid.

Some of you are idiots. The game has already went gold, they've finished up their work on it. All DLC will specifically be after thought ideas, much like how Bethesda DLC is always stuff the developers do afterwards.

In my opinion, DLC should always take you to a new place with a new quest separate from the main story, but rivaling it in terms of plot. Also, that's a really good price for a season pass.

@BigWhoady I criticize them because a lot of their decisions hurt the Switch's likelihood to succeed. If I didn't like Nintendo, I simply wouldn't care. It's because I want to see them stick around that I'm so critical of their missteps. I don't say anything when they're not doing anything wrong because there's nothing TO say. Of course my responses are going to be shorter and to the point.

@BigWhoady Fanboy? Hardly. I'm fairly open-minded, and I play all genres across all consoles and PC.

I'm just smart enough to know that the people who buy the Switch for games and games alone won't be enough to make the console a success. At the most, you'd see it perform maybe a little better than the Wii U. It's important to offer choice and options to the consumer. The more ways you can use something, the more valuable it will be to families. Those are the consumers that matter. What gamers like all of us would be okay with doing without is completely irrelevant, and isn't something Nintendo should even think about in regards to making the Switch a success.

No one should defend a console that doesn't at least offer the bare minimum that other consoles offer. There are standards in the current industry, not meeting those standards makes a console a lot more worthless to the average consumer.

Also, don't go saying that extra media entertainment features get in the way of a console's potential when it comes to hardware. The PS4 has everything outlined in this article AND a bluray player for movies. It's also the same price as the Switch. Despite all of that, it's still vastly more powerful. If I'm the average consumer that works a middle class job and can only afford one console a generation, I'm picking the PS4 over the Nintendo Switch. It offers a whole lot more bang for my buck. These are the consumers that make up the majority of the gaming market, the group you need to buy a system to get it to be a success.

You may not need these things, you may just care about games. Thing is, your purchase won't be what makes or breaks the Switch. If the system is unsuccessful, it'll also come back to bite you. An unsuccessful system means a lot less games. So in a way, you do still need features that you call superfluous.

@MarcelRguez I was originally going to reply to two people, but typing on my phone is like fighting a bull, so I decided to only reply to one. Too bad I deleted the wrong user name, wish I would have caught it sooner.

@MarcelRguez

https://www.nintendolife.com/users/CircuitWrangler3
His comment:
"The Switch is a dedicated gaming device, not a smart device. Smart devices have gaming as a secondary feature. The Switch is not for anyone looking for a smart device, and Nintendo has made a wise decision not to pretend that it is. I'm sure that media apps like YouTube, and Netflix will come eventually, and a browser may come with a future update.
And Nintendo has always been ahead of the curve, they've just never went with the flow. There's a difference. I'm happy to see that they're finally adopting modern (gaming) traditions, nonetheless."

My comment:
"Literally every other dedicated gaming device has a browser, among other features. Nintendo isn't ahead of the curve, they're tripping on it as they try to catch up.
DON'T DEFEND LESS FEATURES. EVER. Fanboys, fanboys everywhere."

None of this is about you.

All of the people here saying that the 3DS has good visuals. Lol

The 3DS has awful screen resolution, and it becomes even more jarring on XL systems. The games on it just look bad because of this, plain and simple. It'd be a good system, if Nintendo didn't sacrifice screen resolution for a gimmick they couldn't even use in innovative ways.

I see a lot of comments suggesting this takes place in the adult Timeline. Aonuma confirmed early on that it didn't. The common hypothesis right now in the Zelda community is that it's in the decline timeline.

Also, to all the people constantly berating the timeline, what's officiall is official. You need to start appreciating franchises with lore and stop being debby downers. I find that the Zelda timeline enhances individual stories quite a bit, especially OoT, MM, TP, and SS. All of those are made specifically with the timeline in mind. Pretending it doesn't exist would render them (especially Skyward Sword) confusing from a narrative angle, since they clearly build off of previous and future events. Story is just as important as gameplay.

@MarcelRguez What's your problem man? I already told you that you weren't who I meant to debate with. No reason to hold a grudge.

Also, yes. Blindly defending the removal of standard optional features just because you don't use them is fanboyism. I meant it, and I still mean it. Luckily for you, you weren't being one, so there shouldn't be any reason to take offense.

Oh. My. Gosh, Nintendo.

WHICH IS IT? Is the Switch a bridge console, or is it a lackluster home console? Is the Switch the successor to both the 3DS and the Wii U, or is it just a Wii U successor? Do you even know what to do with the system?

You SHOULD be trying to make sure all handheld and console devs make games for this one console. Stop with the contradictory statements. One moment the Switch is meant to be an all in one console with you, next it's just a home console that can leave home and won't get the game franchises that actually sell your consoles. The same ones that appear on the 3DS right now. You should be doing everything in your power to bring that userbase to the Switch, because that's the userbase that could atleast keep you afloat and mildly successful with the system.

@MarcelRguez Woah man calm down a bit. I accidentally hit reply to the wrong person, no reason to become so ragey.

This is also a discussion section, so it's natural to have opinion-based debates.

@CircutWrangler3 Literally every other dedicated gaming device has a browser, among other features. Nintendo isn't ahead of the curve, they're tripping on it as they try to catch up.

DON'T DEFEND LESS FEATURES. EVER.

@BigWhoady So did people who bought the Wii U. That is the type of failure you get from a console that only offers things to Nintendo fanboys. If you ask me, Nintendo fanboys need to expand their horizons and be open minded to different games made by other devs.

@Marshi It cannot be a success without necessary third party support. The demagraphic this best appeals to are adults who have a busy life. These adults also most likely don't have a disposable imcome and can only afford one system. No one wants a system that only gives great Nintendo styled games. They want a system that gives them great games of every style and genre.

I want people here to understand why this is a problem. The less powerful a console is, the harder to develop for it is. You can't just say, port over Fallout 4 to the system. You'd have to completely redo textures and make changes to lighting and shadows as well as view distance in order to compensate for the lack of power. That's a lot of work to do. Now take that, and apply it to every game out on the PS4 and XBOX ONE.

Nintendo doesn't seem to know what the Switch is. They should be going all in, saying that all future home console and handheld games will show up on this one machine. That it is, without a doubt the successor of both the Wii U and the 3DS.

Instead, we get statements like this, contradicted by other statements like "oh it's the successor of the Wii U" and "It's a portable home console". Their userbase is mostly handheld, so focusing on this machine like it's a home console first and a handheld second, rather than as something that's both would put those consumers off. It also raises the question of whether we'll truly see a main line Pokemon game on the system, because of the "home console first" marketing. Marketing like that would surely deter Game Freak from developing anything other than a stupid spin-off for it. If there is no main line Pokemon, you can be sure you're not going to make the bucks you need to.

@aaronsullivan Just use a backpack. Be innovative. You don't have to carry it in your coat pocket.

No more small screens. That age has passed.

That's a very, very good price. I'll pay that.

@Embassy If they were to allow Game Freak to do that, they'd be damning the Switch. It needs a main series Pokemon game this year if Nintendo wishes to avoid the same catastrophe that almost took place with the 3DS. They got really lucky that time.

No. No more support for the 3DS. Look, I love mine, but even five years ago when the system came out the 3DS screen resolution was outdated. I just can't do it anymore. It's 2017, those jagged edges and pixelated visuals look even worse now than they did in comparison to everything else we had back then.

Either make a brand new handheld, or move all support to the Switch. I don't think I can buy anymore games for a system that has such awful screen resolution. Npc faces almost always look like they got chopped up by a maul.

@ZurapiiYohane64 You'll get stories, worldbuilding, and character growth from npcs. All of these are way more important than little heart pieces. There's nothing to say that you won't get rewards for helping people anyway.

I'm not really interested in any of these... I only care about certain types of games. I'd be much more excited for larger, more ambitious projects.

@yannah21 Exactly. It's Fallout 4's biggest problem compared to every Bethesda/Obsidian/Interplay game prior. Too much quantity, and because of that they didn't have time to focus on making those quests quality. Instead you end up with what every gamer hates most: radiant fetch quests.

Skyrim, Oblivion, Morrowind, Fallout NV, Fallout 3, and Fallout 2 all had great quests, because time was taken to make the world feel alive, rather than to fill the world with stuff to see. Fallout 4 had too much to see, and too little to actually DO.

@LiberatedAnimal I prefer side quests to be on-par with the main story, otherwise there's no reason for them to exist. They need to have their own stand alone importance to them.

@Turbo857 Gimmicks just don't sell anymore. If you want Nintendo's company identity to remain being about desperately trying to come up with off-the-wall ideas in an effort to stay viable because they burnt a lot of bridges back during the N64 era and before, then fine. That can be the Nintendo you dream of seeing, and it's the one you've seen for the past few years. It's the one that led to the 3DS having a very close call, and the one that led to the failure that was the Wii U. If that's your Nintendo, then I'm sure you're fine with the dire straights its in, floundering around in the water because it just doesn't know how to swim.

Me? I want to go back to classic Nintendo. I want to see aggressive tactics to make a console superior in every shape and form to their competitors, and extreme tactics to raise awareness of that console and why everyone should choose it over every other console. That would make them relevant again in a modern day conversation with friends.

I want to start "Playing with Power" again.

I'm tired of "Playing with hit or miss gimmicks that end up detracting from a budget that would be better spent on making a machine that can handle five years worth of big noteworthy third party titles and make Nintendo a viable console manufacturer to make a purchase from as an open minded consumer that likes several game genres"

Make Nintendo Powerful Again

@LetsGoRetro Some people like him. Don't be such a stuck up jerk.

@PlywoodStick Not that they already didn't if they were already planning on it. If an organization is out to get you, chances they already have everything they need on you, and they wouldn't need a fun little app in order to get it done. No need to be paranoid about it. You didn't honestly think that your information was safe before this, right?

I support punishing pirating, but doesn't this method also affect people who may have gotten their copy early by legitimate means? I personally support the consumer over the business, so if consumers who've received their copies early are also getting punished, then I'm against this wholeheartedly. I don't believe in punishing masses if there's even one innocent among them. That's just who I am, as unreasonable as that is.

@Tlink7 I mean, most guns are designed for hunting though, not people. The ones that are made specifically to shoot other people are made with defense (from robbers and serial killers) in mind. Doesn't stop people from being stupid. That's why the majority of people in the U.S. would like tighter restrictions.

Today is poop posting day in /r/pokemon. It's a fun day where you purposefully post crap that's against the rules. No one is getting tricked, the upvotes are from everyone participating in the chaos today.

Everyone needs to stop jumping to conclusion without doing research.

How can people preorder Sun and Moon before they even know what features are version exclusive? You guys should all hold out first.

Also, because of this, comparing Sun and Moon to ORAS is illogical because preordering was something you could actually do without worrying about losing out on features, because they were remakes. We all knew what would be exclusive and what wouldn't be.

@blinder2 It better be a replacement for both. The whole selling point of the NS is that it's an all in one console. That gets taken away if Nintendo decides to release a desicated handheld with it. The whole selling point of the NS is that you're buying two Nintendo consoles in one, meanin you don't have to buy two consoles to play games exclusive to each Nintendo console.

@rjejr They're not going to release a "Switch mini", and they're definitely not going to release it without the dock. Taking the dock out wouldn't even lower the price like you're probably hoping. At most it might cost $20 less.

The original games are superior to Pokemon GO, and they were made 20 years ago!

I can't believe people actually liked having dual screens. It was unsightly and useless from my perspective.

@kenrulei That's probably the main reason. On a side note, Nintendo themselves don't seem to be wanting to talk about games coming for the system either.

@hmmnotsure I'd suggest looking at what the Bethesda community has to say about it, since we're a bit more aware of what Bethesda means when they say their (no)things.

https://www.reddit.com/r/skyrim/comments/58jlih/skyrim_not_confirmed_for_nintendo_switch_despite/

The general opinion is that they wouldn't acknowledge it either way, and that they also didn't say it didn't exist at all. They did the same with Fallout 4. I'm already getting the SE for free so it's not that big a deal to me, but I know beating around the bush from Bethesda when I see it.

@hmmnotsure I literally did the research, and the quote above is all that I found from Bethesda, and I know how Bethesda PR works. They're basically saying that they can't talk about it at this point because it isn't time for them to. They even did the same thing with Fallout 4. Todd Howard has been quoted recently saying that their new policy is to only reveal games close to the time they launch. If they did have the port being worked on, they wouldn't admit it.

"While we are not confirming any specific titles at this time, we are pleased to announce our partnership with Nintendo and support of the Switch. We look forward to revealing specific games and details in the future."

^ That is essentially Bethesda PR for "It exists, but we haven't confirmed it officially yet and we're not ready to because we only like to do that on the years our games release". The port would likely done by their studio in Montreal, which handled the creation of Skyrim: SE.

@rjejr I mean, why would you need to see a screen that's not in use though? The dock is meant to connect the system to the TV and most likely boost its power/charge it. All they're doing is keeping a blank screen from being view able, because it's honestly a distraction for some people.

It also keeps the system from falling out if you accidentally do something clumsy.

@rjejr Touch screens are stupid. Why would anyone want to put smudges on the screen that they view their games with? I hate smudges.