Floki

@swoose I wouldn't say that Nintendo was about power when both the DS and 3DS couldn't even remotely come close spec wise to the PSP or Vita...

@Ravenmaster So you're asking for something that not even the Series X or PS5 can fully do from Nintendo?

At most... 1080P dock is all we can really look forward since even the Series S, a $300 console and 100 watt system is struggling to do 1440P as promised.

Also considering that the battery life in still not the greatest handheld on a 720P screen. 1080P is in handheld is still a ways off... Maybe the Switch 4?

@Casco And Alien Isolation would have been a better choice than both Donkey Kong and BotW.

It was the writers choice on what would appear in the list. If they didn't want to include BotW than fine.

@Casco They didn't pick BotW cause they figured that game had enough time in the spot light, and it was finally time for the other Zelda game to have their time.

@Imerion You do know Link's Awakening Remake runs at 60FPS vs the 30FPS of Animal Crossing... Which is a lower framerate then what every other Animal Crossing game ran on a home console.

It also one of the only few first party game from Nintendo to not run at Nintendo patented 60FPS besides Breath of the Wild on the Switch.

Both games exhibits slow down and stuttering. But Animal Crossing choosed resolution over performance. Link's Awakening picked performance over resolution.

@Kirgo I know it a term that is being used because the effect is comparable with the burn in seen on plasma panels.

But I don't think of ever hearing about that self repair you're mentioning.

EDIT: Do you by chance have any website that explains that?

@NTELLIGENTMAN Alot of people will turn off the dimmer; or turn up the brightness super high which is what a lot of guides online are already telling people to do. Since the OLED Switch does not look better out of the box in comparison to the LCD Switch until you turn off these features.

@Kirgo You may be thinking about image retention and not specifically burn-in. Both are kinda the same thing but very different things. Imagine retention is not permanent, and can be fixed which is what things like "Panel refresh" and "Pixel Refresher" does. Some thing like this has to be programed into the software which most mobile dont have aka Switch. Burn-in is permanent and can't be fixed without replacing the whole panel. Imagine retention is what most people will run into with "ghost" images of HUD/logos appearing.

OLED will also self heal image retention if you leave the screen off for a couple of days.

@Kirgo On any thing from smart phones, to tablet, to VR headsets, to TVs. We mainly experience it on the smart phones and tablets. These are all devices from 2016-2021. My LG OLED TV from 2020 recently start experiencing small burn-in, but that due to my father having a bad habit of leaving the TV on if he can't manage to turn it off.

The Switch is a mobile device, so it would be strange to mainly compare that to TV OLED Tech anyway since most people are gonna treat it like any smart phone or tablet.

With OLED it isn't the matter of IF the screen will get burn-in, it the matter of WHEN it will get burn in. I've had 10+ OLED devices over the last 5 or so years, and half of them have experience some type burn-in or some type image persistence/retention... Granted image persistence/retention isn't nearly as bad as burn-in.

Most people don't particularly keep devices long enough that burn-in becomes an issue, and some don't miss treat their devices to the point that burn-in occurs quickly

I can see burn-in being a big problem on Switch compared to the Vita mainly due to the fact Nintendo devices are still aimed heavily at children. Hopefully Nintendo put enough safe precautions to avoid this being a big problem... But don't be surprised if in 4 years places like Gamestop is full of OLED switchs with burn-in.

@Conangiga Most didn't know that Vita used OLED since most didn't buy a Vita until the silm released, and switched to a LCD to drop the price.

Some part of me wish for there to be a serect massive DK animatronic behind the door waiting be let lose. Other part of me would be extremely terrified if this was true.

@Ralek85 With how cheap Funko pops sell for they may as well be free. If you look around you can easily find them for $2-4 a pop instead of the normal $10-13.

@Yorumi That depends on what you expect from a flagship title. Not all flapship title have to push a system graphical. A flagship game should makes use of the features offered by the system. BOTW and XC2 was a graphical master pieces for the system. But imagine quality, performance, and battery life in handheld mode suffered heavily for it.

Pokemon SW/SH have found a balance in image quality, graphical fidelity, performance, battery life cough should be the main focus of all games made for switch cough. While using the online capabilities, HD Rumble, and motion controls features of the switch. The game even take in account the color of joy cons connected to switch by changing the color of joy cons on the switch in the players room.

@Yorumi "the games look like upscaled 3ds games"

I don't know what upscale 3ds games you were playing. The 3DS games even on a PC emulator with AA and 4x time the resolution of even a the switch doesn't look as good. As for performance issues. The game runs at console quality 30fps with small dips in the wild area when connected to multiplayer. The game even runs at a high resolution than majority of games on switch.

@Kalmaro So basically you are mad about model issue. It still haven't been proven that they lied. And I'm talkin' actually proven, not just pulled wire mesh of pokemon models cause that isn't telling the whole truth.

After 15 hours in the game while I agree that some model and animation do look bad. There are also a set of animations and model that look really good,and better than the 3DS ones. This is coming from someone who only played the 3DS game through an emulator with with AA and at higher resolution cause the pixelated mess that was the 3DS made me sick to my stomach.

@Kalmaro @Yorumi Are y'all that upset over some models to completely ignore 95% of the comment.

Have y'all even actual tried the game? Or y'all just going of the information from angry people online?

@Yorumi @Kalmaro "All they did was upscale models"

Y'all do realize that they are completely developing for a new system. This game started development after Sun and Moon, and would have required a entire rework of tools for a completely different architecture

"But-but Let's Go Pikachu and Eevee"

Was a way test the redone engine before the Sword and Shield released, but from the digital foundry analysis they redone the lighting, and unless they planned for the wild area early in development. They would have need to do more engine Back-end work to support the wild area online MMO raid area

"Costs are related to total content delivered and the quality of the effects, not the console it's made for."

Unfortunately that not how it works. Game cost also take into consideration the type of platform that game is being developed for and that can reflected back in cost.

@Yorumi MMOs are long term profit. Of course the $60 cost of GW2 would pay for the servers for decades cause the operational cost would decease over time. As for that other game which isn't out, so we don't know if there is gonna be in game market place.

XC2 was created not cause XCX was successful. It was created cause XC and Xeno games as a whole are successful. I' not dismissing the quality of the games. Those game are the product of a team with experience in what they do.

This goes back to what i said earlier as consumers we have gotten lucky that the prices of game have stayed $60 for so long. Developers are delivering content on massive scale. But we are still paying the same $60 that we've been paying for several decade

Sure the quality of the new pokemon isn't the leaps and bounds that people want. But the work and cost have increased 50% simply from the jump from a handheld to console cause that how technology works unfortunately

@Yorumi There is a lot that we have to take in consideration when talking about how much a game need make to be successful, and to at least break even.

XCX wasn't successful, and you can tell that from the answer the developers gave when people asked about a sequel or a port. The main answer was money. They didn't make enough from the game to warrant a sequel or even a port.

A lot of those games you mention are $60 or at one point was $60. Warframe is free, but the developer is making revenue from the in game purchases. MMO doesn't make their profit from the initial game price, but the from the in game market. Even if the game is niche. There will be whales that will spend millions in the market place

If a $60 Pokemon game sell 1 million that revenue is split between Nintendo, Game freak, Creatures Inc. the retailers (Walmart, Gamestop...etc), the companies they worked with to bring the game to the market place. The more the game sells the larger the cut per share.

Games like Subnautica only have to deal with the 30% cut that steam, Microsoft, sony.. etc gets

@Kalmaro We're actually really lucky that it only an $20 increase in price. Game development as a whole have become really big bloated and expensive, and game prices should increased years ago

You do realize that the money they make back from these games aren't all pure profit. A lot of it goes back into development cost, paying for all the advertising/PR, paying employees...etc

EDIT: Also $60 game is also shared between retailers, publishers, the companies that handle distribution... etc

@Kalmaro Even with the "cut corner" overall development cost would have increased simply from the move to a home console like the switch vs the 3DS cause they would have redo all the their tools, engine, get new devs kits... etc

@Kalmaro The $20 increase is from an increase in development cost for developing for a home console instead of under powered handheld and switch cartridges prices being a lot more than the 3DS

@sixrings If they bring back MW2. They would likely do the a proper remaster like MW 2016, so we'll properly never see it on the switch.

@TheMisterManGuy That what happens when you use a modern architecture, and let the teams at NVIDIA handle the APIs. If Nintendo had to done the groundwork. We wouldn't be getting the port that we're been getting.

@Nintendo_Thumb The game on Oculus was Lucky's Tail which the first game. This game is a deluxe version of the sequel Super Lucky Tail that only released on PC/Xbox. That's why none of the footage you seen look familiar.

@carlos82 If MS didn't buy Rare. Activation, Disney... etc would have just bought them instead, or they would have went out of business.

Nintendo obliviously didn't care about supporting Rare financially or they would have them bought years ago, or would have offered more when trying purchase them ( Nintendo declined to offer more than a fraction of the value Rare was asking)

@Wavey84 I doubt we'll see any type of update for 1080/60fps for the PS4 Pro. This is still an online, and they still have balance the play for both the base PS4 and PS4 Pro.

@Onion The game was probably was able to hit 60fps, but it mostly likely it wasn't able hold 60fps especially on the base Xbox One and PS4. So they probably decided drop the framerate to 30fps to keep visual parity.

@Starcakes This is the Complete Edition (all the patches, dlc, etc...) which is only 42.23GB on PS4. If you bought the original then you have to count 40GB + patches.

@graysoncharles People didn't complain about the batman not looking like christian bale cause the popularity for him no near matches the popularity Robert being Iron man or Chris being Capt.

Even as reader of the original comic books. It hard to look at the comic book versions of Tony Stark and not think picture Robert because he embodied the character. It same with Mark Hamill's Joker or Kevin Conroy as the batman. They will always be the definitive batman and Joker no matter who voice them... Which bring up the point that people did riot when they wasn't the voices in Origins.

This isn't surprising considering that FIFA on the Switch isn't using Frostbite. All the new features and game modes things are created in Frostbite. They would have port the modes to the Ignite engine, an engine that isn't being used any more.

@GrailUK Resident Evil alone is 14.4 GB. No sane company is gonna spend the money for a 32GB cartage for old ports especially when consumer aren't gonna wanna pay extra money for it.