$70 for a worthless bit of plastic? I knew Pokemon was scraping the bottom of the barrel when they advertised cut repurposed content as DLC and paywalled certain megas behind NSO. But now you quite literally are paying more for less. The game isn't even on the cart and they think this looks like it's worth $70? Gtfo.
I'll play Palfarm and support the indie developer over the giant corporation who is trying to patent game mechanics they had nothing to do with.
I would point out to people that this is Nintendo testing the waters. If they see people are willing to spend $70 on nothing? They won't hesitate to make the next Zelda, Mario, or DK game key card only. And if it gets to that point? Count me out. Im done.
"Let's talk about this plan of yours. I think it's good, except it sucks. So let me do the plan and that way, it might be really good.”
Get rid of the key card and you will probably see stronger sales. Because of the 6 million people that have a Switch 2? I'd wager a large portion of them also own another system. And if the choice is between a game key card on Switch 2 where performance will probably be worse than say PS5? Why not just get it on PS5 where you may have a disc copy?
Again if we are to believe speed is an issue? Why not just have the game data on cart and install to storage as the PS5 does? Seems like a better option. Key cards I feel are a nonstarter for many people. (Myself included). I don't want a worthless bit of e-waste when they inevitably decide to pull the plug.
Cyberpunk was the best performing title at launch despite carrying a $70 price tag. Why? Because it was all on cart. Meanwhile its suspected that Capcom was disappointed by the sales of SSFVI. So is what they are saving on the media worth the loss in sales overall?
@OrtadragoonX Not sure what you mean by that? Because Cyberpunk uses raytracing extensively as well. Cyberpunk also has Path tracing. (Not sure if the latter is on Switch 2). googles No. Path tracing is not on Switch 2. I'd also point out that Raytracing in Cyberpunk was on Steam Deck as is Indiana Jones.
And I don't think this day and date means much in the grand scheme of things on a system that has something like 6 million in the wild. Chances are people that are really interested in it that own multiple systems will get it on a different system, especially if that copy is on a disc.
This is exactly why I don't buy any company Ubisoft or otherwise that claim it's some altruistic decision for better loading speeds. It's greed and third parties cheaping out. Already have said how game key cards are a ticking time bomb and your use of them lasts only as long as the company keeps the servers. Ubisoft has already killed games on Steam. The same Ubisoft that has been on record saying "Gamers need to get comfortable not owning their games"
All I know is I won't touch game key cards. I won't even buy those titles digitally.
If speed is such a concern? I'd ask why then was CDPR able to put the entirety of Cyberpunk on Switch 2? That game streams it's assets too. Witcher 3 did as well on Switch 1. At the end of the day? That's not my problem. It's Nintendo's problem to solve.
And now we are supposed to believe Ubisoft (the same company that shipped Star Wars and countless other games broken) suddenly cares about the end user experience?
Give me a break. Some have said "would your rather the game key card or not have the game?" If the only alternative to a key card is to not have the game? I'd rather not have the game. We are also expected to pay a premium for storage (because Nintendo cheaped out). $200 for 1 TB that should have been what the system shipped with. And Sony meanwhile is cutting storage from PS5 while not lowering the price.
Sorry but this is a BS excuse. PS5 and Xbox had the game on disc but required internet to install. Did that make the game better? Did that SSD make the game any less of a busted mess? No, I didn't think so.
This is an Ubisoft employee that works for a company that quite literally said that "Gamers need to get comfortable not owning games." They are trying to condition you to give up ownership of your games.
And I don't want to hear any of these excuses when CDPR literally put the entirety of Cyberpunk on cart with it's DLC. And I would point out that Cyberpunk uses asset streaming to load its assets dynamically. Just as Witcher 3 did on Switch 1 via the Red Engine. @UndockedActionFemme See above.
If Ubisoft wanted to (they don't) they could have put the game on a proper cart. But that would have required some effort. Something Ubisoft seems allergic too with it's countless formulaic open world slop these days.
I see a lot of people saying "You can sell key cards." Yeah? Good luck with that. Who are you going to sell them too? Physical gamers don't want them. Digital gamers don't want them either. Gamestop won't give you much for them when they don't give you much for physical titles. And this is Ubisoft. The company that shut down the Crew (Hence Stop Killing games). They also killed servers for RUSE on Steam (a game my friends and I played multiplayer in). You may be able to sell them, but only for as long as Ubisoft feels like allowing you to do so until they pull the plug.
Pretty ridiculous that a $230 USD Collector's edition doesn't even have a physical game. The only way you get a physical copy is if you buy the Switch 1 version. The fact that they aren't even offering an upgrade is pathetic. Gives me no hope for FF7 remake on Switch 2. If I have to download 50-60gb or even 100 GB of data? I'll stick to the copy I have on Steam and play it on Steam Deck. I already own a physical deluxe edition on PS4/PS5 as well. Not paying $200 for an SD Express.
All I know is I will not buy a game key card. Period. I will not even buy said titles digital only on E-shop.
"work for the consumer, not your boss", ensuring that teams can produce games that will satisfy players.
So why then is Nintendo doing so many things that actively work against that end?
That's in response to what Miyamoto "actually said."
As to what the translation "thought" Miyamoto was getting at...
“Mr. Miyamoto studied industrial design at an art university, and he views games as ‘products,’ not ‘works of art.’ ...”
I could not disagree more. Games are products, yes. But it's this mentality that is all too prevalent in the industry, where so many publishers view games as disposable. And why people have increasingly become concerned with preservation. Would you think the same of films?
I studied art history in getting my Bachelor of Science in Graphic Design, and the commonly accepted definition of art is pretty broad...
"Art is a diverse range of human activities involving creative or imaginative expression, typically producing works appreciated for their beauty, emotional power, or conceptual ideas. It encompasses a wide spectrum of forms, including visual arts like painting and sculpture, performing arts like music and dance, and literary arts like poetry and writing. Ultimately, art is a form of communication and expression, often intended to evoke emotions, provoke thought, or challenge perceptions."
Games have evolved from the simplest storytelling (the Metroid sacrificing itself to save Samus), to completely cinematic experiences. Games often marry many different aspects of "the arts" into their production. You have the music, script/dialogue, CG Modeling, rigging, and animation, voice acting/performances that can go into a game. How can anyone not view games as art?
Look up the "How to Explain Pictures to a Dead Hare" by Joseph Beuys. "In this performance, Beuys covered his head in honey and gold leaf and explained artworks to a dead hare in an apparent dialogue". It's there in modern art history books.
Roger Ebert once said, "Video Games can never be art."
That in and of itself is rather short-sighted and narrow-minded. A lot of things weren't considered art...until they were.
Marcel Duchamp's "The Fountain" was a urinal upside down and it was denied exhibition, called "Not art." Yet his "readymade" is often considered one of the most influential works of modern art, as it challenged the preconceptions that art is for the sake of art and is concerned with technique or aesthetic. It placed greater emphasis on the "Idea".
The definition of art is constantly changing with us. Photography, too, was once cited as the harbinger of the death of traditional art. That clearly didn't happen. Instead, Photography has become an art form all its own. Especially if you look at the work of Jerry Eulsman.
Why you should always wait for the other side of the story. Helena's story never really sounded believable to me. But people immediately jumped to her defense. Did I like her as Bayonetta sure. But that won't cloud my judgement.
She also actively tried to hurt the sales of Bayonetta 3 as well. She even called for a boycott.
You can feel VA's should be paid more. And I wouldn't argue the point. I'd probably agree with you. But from what I remember reading Platinum had actually offered her above what was considered typical. She turned it down and lied by omission for sympathy.
A lot of people were left with egg on their face and felt foolish, betrayed, etc. And I have more sympathy for those people because their heart was in the right place and they were manipulated by someone who was self-serving.
At the end of the day? Jennifer Hale did a great job. My confidence in the future of the series or Platinum for that matter is kind of low atm.
No thanks, I'm good. I'll buy them on PC/Steam at steep discount and not have to worry about the paltry storage on Switch 2 or whether they are game key card.
I hope Nintendo loses. No company should have that kind of power.
Are there people that use the MIG Cart for piracy. Sure. But there are also people who dumped games they themselves purchased. Not only that? When a console gets bricked? That system then ends up on the secondary market where unsuspecting customers buy a bricked system in store.
That's not right either.
And what happens if someone buys a SD card online but it's a "Fake" SD card? Amazon and online marketplaces like that are full of these. And if someone sticks one of them in their Switch 2? Is the system going to brick?
There are now reports that Nintendo are rendering third party docks inoperable as well. The end result is a lot of this could be viewed as a way of Nintendo trying to force people to buy their overpriced peripherals and accessories (which is also why they probably couldn't be bothered to actually do anything meaningful about the sticks.) So people buy new joycons or drop $90 for a controller that doesn't suck.
I passed on Mario Kart World. Not worth $80. I also feel like I would find the open world as vapid and dull as that of BotW/TotK.
I bought Cyberpunk...a game I already played, as it was all on a cart. I won't touch game key cards.
Nintendo cheaped out on storage (and the sticks and screen as well, apparently), while pushing people towards all digital with game key carts. Seriously, 256 GB in 2025 when you want games like RDR2 and FF7 remake (Games I already own on PC/Steam no less) on Switch 2? Those two games alone will eat up your storage in no time at all. Unless you drop another $200 for a 1tb SD Express. They put the cost on the customer. Till you pay $500 for a bundle, and a $200 1tb SD Express? You are within shooting distance of a 1tb Steam Deck OLED where you can get many of those third-party games deeply discounted.
IF you own multiple systems? There is little incentive/reason to purchase a third-party game on Switch 2. Not when the games aren't on a cart. I bought Cyberpunk because I like the game, and also to vote with my wallet to show I want these games on the cart. Otherwise, if I have to download huge games? I may as well just get them on PC/Steam ...when they are $5-10. If publishers want to be cheap and only offer a game key card? I can be cheap too. And if there are new 3rd-party games that come to Switch 2 but are game key card only? Pass. I won't even buy them on e-shop.
Not at $80. Nor will I be playing DK at $70. I'll wait for a sale or buy them used.
Not buying any game that is on a game key card either. If I have to download the game anyway, I'll just buy them on Steam when they are on deep discount and play them on PC/Steam Deck. I'll play Switch 1 titles or Cyberpunk on Switch 2
@Wilverine64 It's not though. The problem with that argument is that the designs of the monsters aren't even what Nintendo is suing over. They are suing over mechanics. Two of the patent suits weren't even filed until Palworld had already released. This is just NIntendo being salty. Maybe if they spent half the time actually innovating within pokemon and not releasing half baked titles like Sword/Shield and Scarlet/Violet...
If you would actually play Palworld you would realize it's quite different from Pokemon in terms of it's structure and how the Pals even function. It has base building and the Pals I would say feel more like a part of the world than the pokemon ever had. Certain Pals have certain specialties and they can be put to work harvesting resources, building things, etc. A grass type Pal for example can plant seeds and a water type can then water them to grow plants. That's the kind of innovation you don't see from Gamefreak.
And I would point out that Nintendo and Gamefreak's patent suit over "gliding" and riding creatures isn't unique. People have been using flying mounts in games for decades now. World of Warcraft had flying mounts in Burning crusade in 2007 and before that ground mounts in 2006. Monster Hunter stories lets you ride a dragon. Oh no! Maybe Capcom should sue NIntendo! Maybe MS should sue Nintendo over Mario Kart's open world racing like Forza did. This is the kind of can of worms that you are asking for with such frivolous patent lawsuits. This stuff will stifle the industry.
If someone likes Pokemon that's fine. Great even. I like Pokemon too. But you can't let your love of something blind your judgement for something that is patently wrong.
The biggest detractors I wager never even played Palworld and if they did they would realize that it's quite different from Pokemon. Look past the superficial similarities in monster designs. That's not the key issue. If it were Nintendo would be suing over that. They aren't. They are suing over game mechanics and the justification is flimsy at best.
Countless other games have had throwing mechanics. Final Fantasy 7 you threw greens to capture Chocobos. You throw grenades in games like GTA. The list goes on.
Also the patent on mounting/gliding/riding on creatures is itself ridiculous too. I would point to World of Warcraft which had flying mounts way back in Burning Crusade in 2007. Dragonflight added Dragonriding with a 'glide' mechanic. MMOS have had flying mounts for ages long before Nintendo and Pokemon came along. Hogwarts Legacy had a flying mount. They changed it to a glider. So now is Nintendo going to try to sue them for a glider because BotW/ToTK did it? There are countless gliders/parachutes in other games. Ghost Recon, GTA, etc. The irony is Nintendo acts like it's unique, and yet Mario Kart World you could argue could be sued by MS for lifting open world racing from Forza Horizon.
This sets a dangerous precedent for the industry at large. This creates an environment where large publishers sue one another for the most trivial crap. Imagine how many games wouldn't even exist if this became normalized.
I think it's somewhat related since the comments on the article saying to support your favorite sites was disabled...
It is kind of tone deaf imo to suggest people support their favorite sites, given the current economic climate. People will already have less money to go around and the last thing I think they would be likely to "help" are media and game sites. Especially sites that have in the past attacked the very audience they are now trying to garner support from. (Not saying Nintendo Life is in that). But gamers have been called toxic and everything else under the sun.
And now that the industry is raising prices we are expected to keep media afloat? My habits already changed. I buy games dirt cheap on Steam. I won't be touching game key cards when I can get those games on Steam for $5 or so and play them on my Steam Deck. I realize I am not representative of the vast majority of people here. But Nintendo I think is in for a rude awakening. They are rapidly pricing out the very people that are their bread and butter. Families. How many here know someone who has multiple Switch systems? These are Nintendo's most loyal customers. And buying multiple systems isn't enough. Nintendo removed game sharing so now if a family wants to play Mario Kart on the same network in the same home? They need to shell out for two systems and two copies of the same game. Let's say you buy two Switch 2 systems for that? That's $1,000. Just to play Mario Kart. I am not spending $80 for any Nintendo game. I will wait for a sale, or buy used. And if that isn't an option? Guess I won't be playing that game. Plain and simple. I have a backlog already. Nintendo fired the first shot and MS followed suit. Supporting $80 games is a green light for every publisher to do the same. The gaming industry I feel though will find those prices are unsustainable. You can't get blood from a stone.
$70 for Cyberpunk here in the US. I am guessing that 79.99 is in Euro? And it comes with the expansion, which is normally $30 on top of the $60 base game. Meanwhile, Nintendo is selling an 8 year old wiiU game (BotW) for $70 without the $20 DLC/season pass.
And I do blame Nintendo. They should have offered carts in other sizes. And naturally, other devs/publishers are going to take the cheapest route (hence why they should have also had smaller carts). In the end all I know is that any game key card release is DoA for me. If I have to download 100+Gb of data? I may as well just do so on PS5/Steam. 256gb is anemic and they are already pushing you as a customer to spend $200 on a 1tb SD express. Another 256 or 512 are just as anemic when most of these games will consume that in short order.
Not at $70 or $80. They are DRM with a TBD expiration date when Nintendo decides to yank the servers/authentication. I do not trust Nintendo with digital media.
And with the vast majority of third parties going for game key cards? It's putting the cost on the customer. We are being asked to pay more than ever before.
And no using an inflation calculator isn't an argument. All that does is show you comparative buying power a particular point in time. People try to say well a wiiU copy of Mario Kart 8 would be $80 today. Except it isn't. You can buy a copy for WiiU for $24 on Amazon. How much a game cost then is frankly immaterial to what they cost today. What matters is...these games will cost you $80 today in an economy that is frankly in turmoil. (All I will say on that to avoid getting political).
So we are paying more for 5 year old hardware. Paying more for the games themselves. Paying more for subscriptions. Paying more for DLC (and yes Nintendo is being greedy not bundling the DLC for BotW which is an 8 year old game).
As the article above notes? There are some games that do require a download. But I would point out there are also games that have the entirety of the game on the disc. You have FF7 remake and Rebirth all on disc and playable without even needing any update. Check out the site does it play. While it is true these games are huge and require "pre-allocation" where the game is installed? These consoles also come with far more storage. That's the other issue at hand here.
Switch 2 comes with a paltry 256gb. You try installing FF7 Remake (100gb) and you've used half your storage by default.
So not only are game key cards worse for physical collectors. They also make digital worse too in that they are less convenient. Couple that with Nintendo removing the ability to share one copy of a game with family on the same network.
I'm not opposed to digital (I am almost all digital on PC/Steam as is). But game key cards offer neither physical owners or digital owners something that they will be inclined to want.
If they wanted to go this route with game key cards? The system should have come with 500gb at least. Regardless of if you opt for game key cards or digital? You will need to buy additional storage. And with these being SD Express? another 256 or 512 probably won't get you very far and the 1tb micro SD Express is another $200.
If I have to download 100-odd gigs putting a piece of plastic into a system? I may as well just download said 100 gigs on my PC or Steam Deck where I have far more storage. I have a 10 tb drive on my PC and 2tb of storage on my steam deck. I don't expect a console to come with that much. But 256gb is paltry and feels like Nintendo is just being cheap.
@Duncanballs We also don't owe them anything either. They aren't entitled to our wallet. And actually, these companies wouldn't be where they are if not for the people buying their products. It's telling when a company is desperate they will put on a show of caring about you. Look at Nintend with the 3DS struggling. Or the WiiU. But when they are doing incredibly well? They become arrogant.
Ironic you talk about “Misinforming people’s perceptions.”
First, as to the matter of power? I find it kind of interesting that Nintendo fans had long been saying that “It’s not the power it’s the gameplay. 1080 also means greater battery drain in portable too. People have said battery life drains faster than the OG Switch.
To go back to misinforming people’s perceptions…You are factoring in the cost of a Dock at 69 pounds or $80 USD. Did you realize you don’t need a Dock? You can use a HDMI adapter that costs all of $20 on Amazon. JSAUX 2-in-1 USB C to HDMI Adapter, 4K@60Hz Type-C to HDMI 2.0 Adapter.
As far as Hogwarts Legacy? Congrats. It only took another iteration of hardware to run the game as it should have. Those $10 upgrades should be an inherent part of buying new hardware for $450.
As to hardware? It seems silly to bang on about Steam Deck’s cost? When you will have Joycons and a pro controller that cost you $90 a pop. Heaven forbid one of those sticks drifts.
The Switch 2 with Mario Kart is $500. 1tb SD Express is $200 (Needed with the anemic 256gb storage and game key cards requiring download). NSO is also required if you want to play online. That’s $300-$350 for 6-7 years of NSO over the long term. That means over the life span of the system you will have spent over $1000. At that point you could just get a PC.
You can spend $700 or so on a 1tb Steam Deck OLED and with it get more titles and far more regular sales. Cloud saves, online multiplayer, lobbies, steam workshop/mods all out of the box and it costs nothing as part of Steam. Nintendo? Give us $10 for a system demo you pleb.
If anything, I think Nintendo fans are overestimating the Switch 2. The hardcore will pick it up and might be willing to drop $80 for Mario Kart (and in so doing give the green light to the rest of the industry to gouge us even more. But that’s not going to be true of the “normies.” I say that as someone who owns both a Steam Deck and Switch. I’ve had a Nintendo system every gen. My “hype” is far more muted for Switch 2. I loathe game key cards (and I am someone that is all digital on Steam Deck and PC already!). And I am not paying $80 for Mario Kart. If I buy it at all, it will be used. I do not trust Nintendo with digital content. I have games on Steam that I purchased as far back as 2009. I largely bought physical on Switch because I still prefer physical. But that one thing that made Switch my main console (even over the PS5 I own), is rapidly shifting to a draconian hellscape where you will own none of the games you bought. Where your entire library of games has an indefinite point of expiration where if the servers are killed? Those key cards become useless bits of plastic.
No. The Switch 2 still has a steep hill to climb. Especially with regards to pricing. I am sure the die hard faithful will have no issue plunking down $80 for Mario Kart even if it hurts gaming at large by giving other publishers the green light to charge more.
There are more things than just pure hardware to take into account.
For me what really remains as an albatross around Switch 2 is the pricing. The system I kind of expected to hit $400-$450. What I didn't expect and what I don't like are $80 games. And the justification Bowser gives doesn't exactly sit well with me. It read an awful lot like "Don't ask questions. Just consume product and get excited for next product." And then saying "We have the Switch 1" just gave me Don Matrick vibes. And that would be maybe somewhat believable if the Switch 1 and it's games ever received a price cut.
IF the price was so justified? Why did they hide it from the presentation? They didn't even have enough respect for their fans to be up front with the pricing. And that is before tariffs were even taken into account.
Add to that they are charging $10 for a system demo, gating voice chat and an entire button behind a paywall. The paid upgrades are like charging for patches. They are like charging a PC gamer to use graphics options to take advantage of the couple hundred dollar GPU they just bought. BotW itself is $70 ...for an 8 year old WiiU game.
The game key cards are only slightly better than a code in a box. But they have an undefined expiration date when Nintendo decides to kill the servers. (As they have done for Wii. And as will be the case for WiiU/3DS even preventing you from redownloading those titles.
Add on top of that the cost for a Micro SD express (Lexar's 1TB Express is $200). Switch 2 with all it's hidden costs is far more expensive than the deck and IMO at this point offering less even if it may be technically more capable than the Deck.
And will these joycons drift? I would hope not at $90 a pop. (is that for a set or a single joycon?) No Hall effect joysticks either.
Meanwhile, I have had my Steam account since 2009. I don't have the concerns I do with my digital library that I do with digital Nintendo content. Steam OS and the Deck are open source and not a closed ecosystem. I can access battlenet, GOG, etc. on Deck. I can emulate far more legacy Nintendo titles than I could on NSO.
Steam has a far larger library with frequent and regular sales. I don't pay for online or for cloud saves either on Steam.
I feel that the price of Switch 2 is going to put off a lot of families that are Nintendo's bread and butter. And I do not want to see this normalized because once the prices become normalized? That's where they remain. Especially with Nintendo.
With all of the other (to put it mildly) bungles Bethesda has made recently i.e. Fallout 76, etc; they have eroded a lot of the goodwill they had.
I am sorry but while this practice isn't exactly new? It doesn't make it any less frustrating.
PC gamers are used to this for quite a while now. EA released boxed codes for Battlefront. (Not that I care what EA does because I don't buy their games). But the thing is; why would you waste the time, and gas to actually travel to a store to buy a pseudo physical copy that you have to download anyway, when you can just download said game from a digital store and be done with it.
The problem lies in that Bethesda should have been more forthcoming with fans. But asking that of a company who have misled fans several times over the past few months is perhaps asking too much. Need I remind people of the Nuka Dark Rum and the Fallout 76 power armor with the 'nylon' bag instead of the canvas bag that was advertised. That is on top of the disaster that was Fallout 76.
To some this may not be a big deal. As I've seen some suggest, they feel it's a non-issue. That doesn't mean it isn't an issue for others though and it doesn't make their criticism any less valid.
The reasons people like buying physical are varied.
First not everyone has a good internet connection and many face data caps that make downloading large games somewhat of a huge chore. Especially if you live in a rural area like me where your choice of ISP is limited. We only had a speed upgrade ourselves a few years ago. This problem is magnified by the storage limitations of the Switch itself.
With a paltry 32gb of storage to begin with the user then has to consider investing in additional storage when a game requires a larger download. This isn't quite as big of an issue on the PS4 Pro where you have 1TB to work with. Even then, with games taking 50gb or so a pop and preallocated installs that can be used pretty quickly. Let's pretend for a moment that someone has just bought a Switch and decided for some reason not to get Mario or Zelda but wants Wolfentstein Youngblood. Official file size hasn't been revealed. But Wolfenstein New Blood clocked in at 36gb. This means that someone is in all likelihood going to need additional storage.
Some like having an actual physical collection. As a collector? You wouldn't want just the case would you. Certainly not. Imagine if you were trying to collect an entire library of NES games complete with manuals, cartridge and box. Missing the cartridge your missing value in having a physical item that has a tangible monetary value.
As a result? This is why people can buy, sell and trade their games and do with their games what they like. Once you redeem that download code? It's spent and you essentially lose your right to resell that game or trade it in which is true of any digital game. This is often why people opt to buy physical in the first place. So as I said...certainly not a 'non-issue' for many. Myself included.
Not only do I own a Switch but I am a PC gamer as well. So here is another thing to consider. Bethesda's decision has made me decide that I very likely will pass on the Switch version. If I do buy the game? It will probably be on Steam during a steam sale when it's heavily discounted. So Bethesda rather than seeing the return from the sale of the game at full price is now looking at making a fraction of what they may have made otherwise.
I also have to wonder why they bother with the costs to print the box art for the cases when there is no physical cart. It's an extra cost they would not have had they just opted for a straight up digital release.
Hellblade for instance has only ever been a digital title. And that title was quite successful.
I say all this as someone who supported Bethesda titles on Switch. I bought DOOM and Skyrim both despite owning them on PC already. I also bought Wolfenstein 2. I am now questioning whether I will support Doom Eternal now as well if they take a similar approach. It's a shame too because part of the reason 3rd party support suffered on the WiiU was because of 3rd parties shooting themselves in the foot with the decisions they made.
@BarFooToo I will be right there continuing to complain along with you man. You don't like something? You don't just stand on the sidelines. You complain and vote with your wallet. It's the only way things change. Imagine if people didn't complain about Battlefront 2. For once gamers stood up for themselves and now EA is facing legal trouble and that is good for us.
Apathy is dangerous, and these companies love the folks who just stay silent and hand them money. It's our money and we work hard for it. These companies should have to work even harder to earn it from us.
It's little wonder why the gaming community at large sees traditional games media and so called journalists as jokes.
Could this article be any more condescending? It says "we like to grumble but Nintendo Switch online is actually a very generous offer...so quit your complaining" says the author who somehow has become the arbiter of how we should feel about our money that we work for.
What is really ironic is that the author of that article points to the flaws that many have criticized. The fact your cloud saves are deleted the moment your sub lapses and the fact you have to check in once every 7 days to use those NES games. Generous my ***.
He continues...
"But is it enough of a reason to write off the service entirely? Absolutely not, I say – particularly when you actually stop and think about just what a terrific offer it actually is."
Well golly gee, if only everyone was willing to let a company take advantage of them.
"It's also so cheap when compared to its competitors, and I'd even argue that it offers way more – or at least has the potential to in the long term."
He only compares it to xbox and PS. And while it is cheaper? Those other platforms at least offer local save backups and the cloud saves aren't a matter of working only for some games. The fact Splatoon 2's online rankings are saved locally instead of on a server is stupid and that's on Nintendo. He also fails to compare it to the PC where you get cloud saves, local saves, Online multiplayer, voice chat, dedicated servers, and lobbies all at no additional cost to your monthly internet bill.
"The best part is, it doesn't really offer anything less. All three provide access to free games, cloud saves, and exclusive deals on top of the online multiplayer we largely pay it for."
Here is where he gets it wrong...again. It is offering less by default because the Switch itself has no alternative for saves. Those free games aren't free if you pay $20 a year to access them. This is the thing I don't understand about idiots that constantly tout the so called free games. And I am sorry but are exclusive deals something to really brag about when you have to pay for said deals? I get deals all the time on Steam and I spend nothing for that platform.
He concludes by saying...
"I am saying that no matter how you look at it, this is an incredibly generous offer that Nintendo should be applauded for."
Yeah, no. You don't reward a dog for bad behavior and you sure as hell don't applaud a company for doing stuff that is anti-consumer. And I am not paying $20 a year in the hopes that it gets better. The way you get a company to make changes or provide a better service is to vote with your wallet and not give them money! And if people think it's only ever going to be $20 a year. They are incredibly naive. Sony raised the price of their subscription, not because they had too...but because "give me more money."
But wait! You can use gold coins to pay for the "service" how generous right? Until you realize that a single gold coin is worth roughly 1 cent. You get roughly 300 gold coins for purchasing a $60 game at retail because buying physical offers 1% in gold coins for every dollar. Whereas digitally you get 5% for every dollar spent. So if you do the math? You would need about 2,000 gold coins to afford the $20 for a year's sub. That means if you were to buy physical titles? You would need to buy about six or 7, $60 games to accrue enough gold coins. That means you will have spent $360-$400 or so on games before you have enough gold coins to pay for Switch online. How generous...
Apathy is a dangerous thing. The author of this article shows exactly why traditional media can't be trusted anymore. Too many are in the bed of major publishers. They aren't looking out for us anymore.
When more first party games reach the system there will be more reason for people to purchase the system and when more people invest in WiiU so too will 3rd party Devs.
While mobile games aren't all bad there is certainly a big difference between quality. You get what you pay for. Angry Birds has run the gamut from the original to a Star Wars spin on Angry Birds. Angry Birds simply doesn't compare to a 3DS game like Mario 3D land. And it could also be said that mobile phones themselves are jacks of all trades master of none. Alot of these devices are designed to be multifunctional which is fine. You can browse the internet, make a phone call, text etc. But the majority of games on the app store are in a similar vein as Angry Birds and Candy Crush. Nintendo's handhelds are dedicated gaming platforms. And I highly doubt that a mobile phone would offer the same kind of experiences Ocarina of Time 3D, Mario 3D land, Fire Emblem Awakening offer.
Comments 33
Re: Pokémon Pokopia Gets March 2026 Release Date, Brand New Trailer Coming This Week
$70 for a worthless bit of plastic? I knew Pokemon was scraping the bottom of the barrel when they advertised cut repurposed content as DLC and paywalled certain megas behind NSO. But now you quite literally are paying more for less. The game isn't even on the cart and they think this looks like it's worth $70? Gtfo.
I'll play Palfarm and support the indie developer over the giant corporation who is trying to patent game mechanics they had nothing to do with.
I would point out to people that this is Nintendo testing the waters. If they see people are willing to spend $70 on nothing? They won't hesitate to make the next Zelda, Mario, or DK game key card only. And if it gets to that point? Count me out. Im done.
Re: Game-Key Cards A "Sales Strategy Decision", Says Resident Evil Requiem Director
They certainly are a sales strategy decision...
"Let's talk about this plan of yours. I think it's good, except it sucks. So let me do the plan and that way, it might be really good.”
Get rid of the key card and you will probably see stronger sales. Because of the 6 million people that have a Switch 2? I'd wager a large portion of them also own another system. And if the choice is between a game key card on Switch 2 where performance will probably be worse than say PS5? Why not just get it on PS5 where you may have a disc copy?
Again if we are to believe speed is an issue? Why not just have the game data on cart and install to storage as the PS5 does? Seems like a better option. Key cards I feel are a nonstarter for many people. (Myself included). I don't want a worthless bit of e-waste when they inevitably decide to pull the plug.
Cyberpunk was the best performing title at launch despite carrying a $70 price tag. Why? Because it was all on cart. Meanwhile its suspected that Capcom was disappointed by the sales of SSFVI. So is what they are saving on the media worth the loss in sales overall?
Re: Opinion: Resident Evil Requiem Represents A Turning Point For Switch 2
@OrtadragoonX Not sure what you mean by that? Because Cyberpunk uses raytracing extensively as well. Cyberpunk also has Path tracing. (Not sure if the latter is on Switch 2). googles No. Path tracing is not on Switch 2. I'd also point out that Raytracing in Cyberpunk was on Steam Deck as is Indiana Jones.
Re: Opinion: Resident Evil Requiem Represents A Turning Point For Switch 2
Game Key card = No buy.
And I don't think this day and date means much in the grand scheme of things on a system that has something like 6 million in the wild. Chances are people that are really interested in it that own multiple systems will get it on a different system, especially if that copy is on a disc.
Re: Game-Key Cards A "Sales Strategy Decision", Says Resident Evil Requiem Director
This is exactly why I don't buy any company Ubisoft or otherwise that claim it's some altruistic decision for better loading speeds. It's greed and third parties cheaping out. Already have said how game key cards are a ticking time bomb and your use of them lasts only as long as the company keeps the servers. Ubisoft has already killed games on Steam. The same Ubisoft that has been on record saying "Gamers need to get comfortable not owning their games"
All I know is I won't touch game key cards. I won't even buy those titles digitally.
If speed is such a concern? I'd ask why then was CDPR able to put the entirety of Cyberpunk on Switch 2? That game streams it's assets too. Witcher 3 did as well on Switch 1. At the end of the day? That's not my problem. It's Nintendo's problem to solve.
And now we are supposed to believe Ubisoft (the same company that shipped Star Wars and countless other games broken) suddenly cares about the end user experience?
Give me a break. Some have said "would your rather the game key card or not have the game?" If the only alternative to a key card is to not have the game? I'd rather not have the game. We are also expected to pay a premium for storage (because Nintendo cheaped out). $200 for 1 TB that should have been what the system shipped with. And Sony meanwhile is cutting storage from PS5 while not lowering the price.
Re: Ubisoft Employee Explains Why Star Wars Outlaws Is A Game-Key Card
Sorry but this is a BS excuse. PS5 and Xbox had the game on disc but required internet to install. Did that make the game better? Did that SSD make the game any less of a busted mess? No, I didn't think so.
This is an Ubisoft employee that works for a company that quite literally said that "Gamers need to get comfortable not owning games." They are trying to condition you to give up ownership of your games.
And I don't want to hear any of these excuses when CDPR literally put the entirety of Cyberpunk on cart with it's DLC. And I would point out that Cyberpunk uses asset streaming to load its assets dynamically. Just as Witcher 3 did on Switch 1 via the Red Engine.
@UndockedActionFemme See above.
If Ubisoft wanted to (they don't) they could have put the game on a proper cart. But that would have required some effort. Something Ubisoft seems allergic too with it's countless formulaic open world slop these days.
I see a lot of people saying "You can sell key cards." Yeah? Good luck with that. Who are you going to sell them too? Physical gamers don't want them. Digital gamers don't want them either. Gamestop won't give you much for them when they don't give you much for physical titles. And this is Ubisoft. The company that shut down the Crew (Hence Stop Killing games). They also killed servers for RUSE on Steam (a game my friends and I played multiplayer in). You may be able to sell them, but only for as long as Ubisoft feels like allowing you to do so until they pull the plug.
Re: Poll: So, Will You Be Getting The Switch 2's Next Exclusive 'Drag x Drive'?
Looks like a tech demo/pack in that itself was carved off from the $10 Welcome tour. Neither of which I feel justify their price tag.
Re: Hands On: Forget The Name, Square Enix's New Action RPG Is A Lovely HD-2D Take On SNES-Era Zelda
If it's on a key card I'll pass.
Re: Nintendo Sends Out Second Game-Key Card & Physical Game Survey
I did my part. I took the survey. Carts not Key Cards.
Re: Octopath 0 Is A Game-Key Card On Switch 2, And Square Enix Has "No Plans" For A Switch 1 Upgrade Option
Pretty ridiculous that a $230 USD Collector's edition doesn't even have a physical game. The only way you get a physical copy is if you buy the Switch 1 version. The fact that they aren't even offering an upgrade is pathetic. Gives me no hope for FF7 remake on Switch 2. If I have to download 50-60gb or even 100 GB of data? I'll stick to the copy I have on Steam and play it on Steam Deck. I already own a physical deluxe edition on PS4/PS5 as well. Not paying $200 for an SD Express.
All I know is I will not buy a game key card. Period. I will not even buy said titles digital only on E-shop.
Re: Miyamoto Views Games As 'Products', Not 'Works Of Art', Says Ex-Nintendo Dev
"work for the consumer, not your boss", ensuring that teams can produce games that will satisfy players.
So why then is Nintendo doing so many things that actively work against that end?
That's in response to what Miyamoto "actually said."
As to what the translation "thought" Miyamoto was getting at...
“Mr. Miyamoto studied industrial design at an art university, and he views games as ‘products,’ not ‘works of art.’ ...”
I could not disagree more. Games are products, yes. But it's this mentality that is all too prevalent in the industry, where so many publishers view games as disposable. And why people have increasingly become concerned with preservation. Would you think the same of films?
I studied art history in getting my Bachelor of Science in Graphic Design, and the commonly accepted definition of art is pretty broad...
"Art is a diverse range of human activities involving creative or imaginative expression, typically producing works appreciated for their beauty, emotional power, or conceptual ideas. It encompasses a wide spectrum of forms, including visual arts like painting and sculpture, performing arts like music and dance, and literary arts like poetry and writing. Ultimately, art is a form of communication and expression, often intended to evoke emotions, provoke thought, or challenge perceptions."
Games have evolved from the simplest storytelling (the Metroid sacrificing itself to save Samus), to completely cinematic experiences. Games often marry many different aspects of "the arts" into their production. You have the music, script/dialogue, CG Modeling, rigging, and animation, voice acting/performances that can go into a game. How can anyone not view games as art?
Look up the "How to Explain Pictures to a Dead Hare" by Joseph Beuys. "In this performance, Beuys covered his head in honey and gold leaf and explained artworks to a dead hare in an apparent dialogue". It's there in modern art history books.
Roger Ebert once said, "Video Games can never be art."
That in and of itself is rather short-sighted and narrow-minded. A lot of things weren't considered art...until they were.
Marcel Duchamp's "The Fountain" was a urinal upside down and it was denied exhibition, called "Not art." Yet his "readymade" is often considered one of the most influential works of modern art, as it challenged the preconceptions that art is for the sake of art and is concerned with technique or aesthetic. It placed greater emphasis on the "Idea".
The definition of art is constantly changing with us. Photography, too, was once cited as the harbinger of the death of traditional art. That clearly didn't happen. Instead, Photography has become an art form all its own. Especially if you look at the work of Jerry Eulsman.
Re: "That's Some Real Coward S***" - Hideki Kamiya Discusses The Fallout From The Bayonetta 3 Voiceover Controversy
Why you should always wait for the other side of the story. Helena's story never really sounded believable to me. But people immediately jumped to her defense. Did I like her as Bayonetta sure. But that won't cloud my judgement.
She also actively tried to hurt the sales of Bayonetta 3 as well. She even called for a boycott.
You can feel VA's should be paid more. And I wouldn't argue the point. I'd probably agree with you. But from what I remember reading Platinum had actually offered her above what was considered typical. She turned it down and lied by omission for sympathy.
A lot of people were left with egg on their face and felt foolish, betrayed, etc. And I have more sympathy for those people because their heart was in the right place and they were manipulated by someone who was self-serving.
At the end of the day? Jennifer Hale did a great job. My confidence in the future of the series or Platinum for that matter is kind of low atm.
Re: 97 Games You Should Pick Up In Nintendo's Switch eShop Summer Sale (North America)
No thanks, I'm good. I'll buy them on PC/Steam at steep discount and not have to worry about the paltry storage on Switch 2 or whether they are game key card.
Not dropping $200 on a 1tb SD Express.
Re: Nintendo's Ability To Ban Switch 2 Consoles Has Landed It In Hot Water
I hope Nintendo loses. No company should have that kind of power.
Are there people that use the MIG Cart for piracy. Sure. But there are also people who dumped games they themselves purchased. Not only that? When a console gets bricked? That system then ends up on the secondary market where unsuspecting customers buy a bricked system in store.
That's not right either.
And what happens if someone buys a SD card online but it's a "Fake" SD card? Amazon and online marketplaces like that are full of these. And if someone sticks one of them in their Switch 2? Is the system going to brick?
There are now reports that Nintendo are rendering third party docks inoperable as well. The end result is a lot of this could be viewed as a way of Nintendo trying to force people to buy their overpriced peripherals and accessories (which is also why they probably couldn't be bothered to actually do anything meaningful about the sticks.) So people buy new joycons or drop $90 for a controller that doesn't suck.
Re: Third-Party Launch Games On Switch 2 Reportedly Sold "Very Low Numbers"
I passed on Mario Kart World. Not worth $80. I also feel like I would find the open world as vapid and dull as that of BotW/TotK.
I bought Cyberpunk...a game I already played, as it was all on a cart. I won't touch game key cards.
Nintendo cheaped out on storage (and the sticks and screen as well, apparently), while pushing people towards all digital with game key carts. Seriously, 256 GB in 2025 when you want games like RDR2 and FF7 remake (Games I already own on PC/Steam no less) on Switch 2? Those two games alone will eat up your storage in no time at all. Unless you drop another $200 for a 1tb SD Express. They put the cost on the customer. Till you pay $500 for a bundle, and a $200 1tb SD Express? You are within shooting distance of a 1tb Steam Deck OLED where you can get many of those third-party games deeply discounted.
IF you own multiple systems? There is little incentive/reason to purchase a third-party game on Switch 2. Not when the games aren't on a cart. I bought Cyberpunk because I like the game, and also to vote with my wallet to show I want these games on the cart. Otherwise, if I have to download huge games? I may as well just get them on PC/Steam ...when they are $5-10. If publishers want to be cheap and only offer a game key card? I can be cheap too. And if there are new 3rd-party games that come to Switch 2 but are game key card only? Pass. I won't even buy them on e-shop.
Re: Poll: With One Week To Go, What Are Your Switch 2 Launch-Day Plans?
Not playing Mario Kart World.
Not at $80. Nor will I be playing DK at $70. I'll wait for a sale or buy them used.
Not buying any game that is on a game key card either.
If I have to download the game anyway, I'll just buy them on Steam when they are on deep discount and play them on PC/Steam Deck. I'll play Switch 1 titles or Cyberpunk on Switch 2
Re: Nintendo May Record Video And Audio From GameChat Sessions On Switch 2
Yup that's reason enough not to use their paywalled button on the system. I'll just use Discord.
Re: Palworld Dev Announces "Disappointing" Game Changes Resulting From Nintendo's Lawsuit
@Wilverine64 It's not though. The problem with that argument is that the designs of the monsters aren't even what Nintendo is suing over. They are suing over mechanics. Two of the patent suits weren't even filed until Palworld had already released. This is just NIntendo being salty. Maybe if they spent half the time actually innovating within pokemon and not releasing half baked titles like Sword/Shield and Scarlet/Violet...
If you would actually play Palworld you would realize it's quite different from Pokemon in terms of it's structure and how the Pals even function. It has base building and the Pals I would say feel more like a part of the world than the pokemon ever had. Certain Pals have certain specialties and they can be put to work harvesting resources, building things, etc. A grass type Pal for example can plant seeds and a water type can then water them to grow plants. That's the kind of innovation you don't see from Gamefreak.
And I would point out that Nintendo and Gamefreak's patent suit over "gliding" and riding creatures isn't unique. People have been using flying mounts in games for decades now. World of Warcraft had flying mounts in Burning crusade in 2007 and before that ground mounts in 2006. Monster Hunter stories lets you ride a dragon. Oh no! Maybe Capcom should sue NIntendo! Maybe MS should sue Nintendo over Mario Kart's open world racing like Forza did. This is the kind of can of worms that you are asking for with such frivolous patent lawsuits. This stuff will stifle the industry.
Re: Palworld Dev Announces "Disappointing" Game Changes Resulting From Nintendo's Lawsuit
If someone likes Pokemon that's fine. Great even. I like Pokemon too. But you can't let your love of something blind your judgement for something that is patently wrong.
The biggest detractors I wager never even played Palworld and if they did they would realize that it's quite different from Pokemon. Look past the superficial similarities in monster designs. That's not the key issue. If it were Nintendo would be suing over that. They aren't. They are suing over game mechanics and the justification is flimsy at best.
Countless other games have had throwing mechanics. Final Fantasy 7 you threw greens to capture Chocobos. You throw grenades in games like GTA. The list goes on.
Also the patent on mounting/gliding/riding on creatures is itself ridiculous too. I would point to World of Warcraft which had flying mounts way back in Burning Crusade in 2007. Dragonflight added Dragonriding with a 'glide' mechanic. MMOS have had flying mounts for ages long before Nintendo and Pokemon came along. Hogwarts Legacy had a flying mount. They changed it to a glider. So now is Nintendo going to try to sue them for a glider because BotW/ToTK did it? There are countless gliders/parachutes in other games. Ghost Recon, GTA, etc. The irony is Nintendo acts like it's unique, and yet Mario Kart World you could argue could be sued by MS for lifting open world racing from Forza Horizon.
This sets a dangerous precedent for the industry at large. This creates an environment where large publishers sue one another for the most trivial crap. Imagine how many games wouldn't even exist if this became normalized.
Re: Another Switch 2 "Code-In-Box" Physical Release Appears Online
Oh joy! Something even worse than game key cards which are themselves ridiculous. Pass. Next!
Code in a box and game key card titles are DoA as far as I am concerned.
Re: Talking Point: With Prices Rising, Are Your Gaming Habits Changing?
I think it's somewhat related since the comments on the article saying to support your favorite sites was disabled...
It is kind of tone deaf imo to suggest people support their favorite sites, given the current economic climate. People will already have less money to go around and the last thing I think they would be likely to "help" are media and game sites. Especially sites that have in the past attacked the very audience they are now trying to garner support from. (Not saying Nintendo Life is in that). But gamers have been called toxic and everything else under the sun.
And now that the industry is raising prices we are expected to keep media afloat? My habits already changed. I buy games dirt cheap on Steam. I won't be touching game key cards when I can get those games on Steam for $5 or so and play them on my Steam Deck. I realize I am not representative of the vast majority of people here. But Nintendo I think is in for a rude awakening. They are rapidly pricing out the very people that are their bread and butter. Families. How many here know someone who has multiple Switch systems? These are Nintendo's most loyal customers. And buying multiple systems isn't enough. Nintendo removed game sharing so now if a family wants to play Mario Kart on the same network in the same home? They need to shell out for two systems and two copies of the same game. Let's say you buy two Switch 2 systems for that? That's $1,000. Just to play Mario Kart. I am not spending $80 for any Nintendo game. I will wait for a sale, or buy used. And if that isn't an option? Guess I won't be playing that game. Plain and simple. I have a backlog already. Nintendo fired the first shot and MS followed suit. Supporting $80 games is a green light for every publisher to do the same. The gaming industry I feel though will find those prices are unsustainable. You can't get blood from a stone.
Re: Limited Run's Atlus Switch 2 Collector's Edition Is A 'Game-Key Card' Release
@RasandeRose
$70 for Cyberpunk here in the US. I am guessing that 79.99 is in Euro? And it comes with the expansion, which is normally $30 on top of the $60 base game. Meanwhile, Nintendo is selling an 8 year old wiiU game (BotW) for $70 without the $20 DLC/season pass.
And I do blame Nintendo. They should have offered carts in other sizes. And naturally, other devs/publishers are going to take the cheapest route (hence why they should have also had smaller carts). In the end all I know is that any game key card release is DoA for me. If I have to download 100+Gb of data? I may as well just do so on PS5/Steam. 256gb is anemic and they are already pushing you as a customer to spend $200 on a 1tb SD express. Another 256 or 512 are just as anemic when most of these games will consume that in short order.
Re: Limited Run's Atlus Switch 2 Collector's Edition Is A 'Game-Key Card' Release
Limited Run Games.
"Forever Physical"
Smells like a load of BS to me. $250 for a game key card with a TBD point of expiration and some added tat? No thanks.
Re: Talking Point: Will You Be Buying Any Game-Key Card Switch 2 Games?
Not at $70 or $80. They are DRM with a TBD expiration date when Nintendo decides to yank the servers/authentication. I do not trust Nintendo with digital media.
And with the vast majority of third parties going for game key cards? It's putting the cost on the customer. We are being asked to pay more than ever before.
And no using an inflation calculator isn't an argument. All that does is show you comparative buying power a particular point in time. People try to say well a wiiU copy of Mario Kart 8 would be $80 today. Except it isn't. You can buy a copy for WiiU for $24 on Amazon. How much a game cost then is frankly immaterial to what they cost today. What matters is...these games will cost you $80 today in an economy that is frankly in turmoil. (All I will say on that to avoid getting political).
So we are paying more for 5 year old hardware. Paying more for the games themselves. Paying more for subscriptions. Paying more for DLC (and yes Nintendo is being greedy not bundling the DLC for BotW which is an 8 year old game).
As the article above notes? There are some games that do require a download. But I would point out there are also games that have the entirety of the game on the disc. You have FF7 remake and Rebirth all on disc and playable without even needing any update. Check out the site does it play. While it is true these games are huge and require "pre-allocation" where the game is installed? These consoles also come with far more storage. That's the other issue at hand here.
Switch 2 comes with a paltry 256gb. You try installing FF7 Remake (100gb) and you've used half your storage by default.
So not only are game key cards worse for physical collectors. They also make digital worse too in that they are less convenient. Couple that with Nintendo removing the ability to share one copy of a game with family on the same network.
I'm not opposed to digital (I am almost all digital on PC/Steam as is). But game key cards offer neither physical owners or digital owners something that they will be inclined to want.
If they wanted to go this route with game key cards? The system should have come with 500gb at least. Regardless of if you opt for game key cards or digital? You will need to buy additional storage. And with these being SD Express? another 256 or 512 probably won't get you very far and the 1tb micro SD Express is another $200.
If I have to download 100-odd gigs putting a piece of plastic into a system? I may as well just download said 100 gigs on my PC or Steam Deck where I have far more storage. I have a 10 tb drive on my PC and 2tb of storage on my steam deck. I don't expect a console to come with that much. But 256gb is paltry and feels like Nintendo is just being cheap.
Re: "We MUST Resist Buying These Game-Key Releases", Says GamesMaster Host
@Duncanballs We also don't owe them anything either. They aren't entitled to our wallet. And actually, these companies wouldn't be where they are if not for the people buying their products. It's telling when a company is desperate they will put on a show of caring about you. Look at Nintend with the 3DS struggling. Or the WiiU. But when they are doing incredibly well? They become arrogant.
Re: Opinion: Steam Deck Fans Are Seriously Underestimating The Switch 2
Ironic you talk about “Misinforming people’s perceptions.”
First, as to the matter of power? I find it kind of interesting that Nintendo fans had long been saying that “It’s not the power it’s the gameplay. 1080 also means greater battery drain in portable too. People have said battery life drains faster than the OG Switch.
To go back to misinforming people’s perceptions…You are factoring in the cost of a Dock at 69 pounds or $80 USD. Did you realize you don’t need a Dock? You can use a HDMI adapter that costs all of $20 on Amazon. JSAUX 2-in-1 USB C to HDMI Adapter, 4K@60Hz Type-C to HDMI 2.0 Adapter.
As far as Hogwarts Legacy? Congrats. It only took another iteration of hardware to run the game as it should have. Those $10 upgrades should be an inherent part of buying new hardware for $450.
As to hardware? It seems silly to bang on about Steam Deck’s cost? When you will have Joycons and a pro controller that cost you $90 a pop. Heaven forbid one of those sticks drifts.
The Switch 2 with Mario Kart is $500. 1tb SD Express is $200 (Needed with the anemic 256gb storage and game key cards requiring download). NSO is also required if you want to play online. That’s $300-$350 for 6-7 years of NSO over the long term. That means over the life span of the system you will have spent over $1000. At that point you could just get a PC.
You can spend $700 or so on a 1tb Steam Deck OLED and with it get more titles and far more regular sales. Cloud saves, online multiplayer, lobbies, steam workshop/mods all out of the box and it costs nothing as part of Steam. Nintendo? Give us $10 for a system demo you pleb.
If anything, I think Nintendo fans are overestimating the Switch 2. The hardcore will pick it up and might be willing to drop $80 for Mario Kart (and in so doing give the green light to the rest of the industry to gouge us even more. But that’s not going to be true of the “normies.” I say that as someone who owns both a Steam Deck and Switch. I’ve had a Nintendo system every gen. My “hype” is far more muted for Switch 2. I loathe game key cards (and I am someone that is all digital on Steam Deck and PC already!). And I am not paying $80 for Mario Kart. If I buy it at all, it will be used. I do not trust Nintendo with digital content. I have games on Steam that I purchased as far back as 2009. I largely bought physical on Switch because I still prefer physical. But that one thing that made Switch my main console (even over the PS5 I own), is rapidly shifting to a draconian hellscape where you will own none of the games you bought. Where your entire library of games has an indefinite point of expiration where if the servers are killed? Those key cards become useless bits of plastic.
Re: Is The Switch 2 A Steam Deck Killer? Digital Foundry Dives Deep
No. The Switch 2 still has a steep hill to climb. Especially with regards to pricing. I am sure the die hard faithful will have no issue plunking down $80 for Mario Kart even if it hurts gaming at large by giving other publishers the green light to charge more.
There are more things than just pure hardware to take into account.
For me what really remains as an albatross around Switch 2 is the pricing. The system I kind of expected to hit $400-$450. What I didn't expect and what I don't like are $80 games. And the justification Bowser gives doesn't exactly sit well with me. It read an awful lot like "Don't ask questions. Just consume product and get excited for next product." And then saying "We have the Switch 1" just gave me Don Matrick vibes. And that would be maybe somewhat believable if the Switch 1 and it's games ever received a price cut.
IF the price was so justified? Why did they hide it from the presentation? They didn't even have enough respect for their fans to be up front with the pricing. And that is before tariffs were even taken into account.
Add to that they are charging $10 for a system demo, gating voice chat and an entire button behind a paywall. The paid upgrades are like charging for patches. They are like charging a PC gamer to use graphics options to take advantage of the couple hundred dollar GPU they just bought. BotW itself is $70 ...for an 8 year old WiiU game.
The game key cards are only slightly better than a code in a box. But they have an undefined expiration date when Nintendo decides to kill the servers. (As they have done for Wii. And as will be the case for WiiU/3DS even preventing you from redownloading those titles.
Add on top of that the cost for a Micro SD express (Lexar's 1TB Express is $200). Switch 2 with all it's hidden costs is far more expensive than the deck and IMO at this point offering less even if it may be technically more capable than the Deck.
And will these joycons drift? I would hope not at $90 a pop. (is that for a set or a single joycon?) No Hall effect joysticks either.
Meanwhile, I have had my Steam account since 2009. I don't have the concerns I do with my digital library that I do with digital Nintendo content. Steam OS and the Deck are open source and not a closed ecosystem. I can access battlenet, GOG, etc. on Deck. I can emulate far more legacy Nintendo titles than I could on NSO.
Steam has a far larger library with frequent and regular sales. I don't pay for online or for cloud saves either on Steam.
I feel that the price of Switch 2 is going to put off a lot of families that are Nintendo's bread and butter. And I do not want to see this normalized because once the prices become normalized? That's where they remain. Especially with Nintendo.
Re: Bethesda Confirms Wolfenstein: Youngblood Will Include A Download Code Instead Of A Game Card
With all of the other (to put it mildly) bungles Bethesda has made recently i.e. Fallout 76, etc; they have eroded a lot of the goodwill they had.
I am sorry but while this practice isn't exactly new? It doesn't make it any less frustrating.
PC gamers are used to this for quite a while now. EA released boxed codes for Battlefront. (Not that I care what EA does because I don't buy their games). But the thing is; why would you waste the time, and gas to actually travel to a store to buy a pseudo physical copy that you have to download anyway, when you can just download said game from a digital store and be done with it.
The problem lies in that Bethesda should have been more forthcoming with fans. But asking that of a company who have misled fans several times over the past few months is perhaps asking too much. Need I remind people of the Nuka Dark Rum and the Fallout 76 power armor with the 'nylon' bag instead of the canvas bag that was advertised. That is on top of the disaster that was Fallout 76.
To some this may not be a big deal. As I've seen some suggest, they feel it's a non-issue. That doesn't mean it isn't an issue for others though and it doesn't make their criticism any less valid.
The reasons people like buying physical are varied.
First not everyone has a good internet connection and many face data caps that make downloading large games somewhat of a huge chore. Especially if you live in a rural area like me where your choice of ISP is limited. We only had a speed upgrade ourselves a few years ago. This problem is magnified by the storage limitations of the Switch itself.
With a paltry 32gb of storage to begin with the user then has to consider investing in additional storage when a game requires a larger download. This isn't quite as big of an issue on the PS4 Pro where you have 1TB to work with. Even then, with games taking 50gb or so a pop and preallocated installs that can be used pretty quickly. Let's pretend for a moment that someone has just bought a Switch and decided for some reason not to get Mario or Zelda but wants Wolfentstein Youngblood. Official file size hasn't been revealed. But Wolfenstein New Blood clocked in at 36gb. This means that someone is in all likelihood going to need additional storage.
Some like having an actual physical collection. As a collector? You wouldn't want just the case would you. Certainly not. Imagine if you were trying to collect an entire library of NES games complete with manuals, cartridge and box. Missing the cartridge your missing value in having a physical item that has a tangible monetary value.
As a result? This is why people can buy, sell and trade their games and do with their games what they like. Once you redeem that download code? It's spent and you essentially lose your right to resell that game or trade it in which is true of any digital game. This is often why people opt to buy physical in the first place. So as I said...certainly not a 'non-issue' for many. Myself included.
Not only do I own a Switch but I am a PC gamer as well. So here is another thing to consider. Bethesda's decision has made me decide that I very likely will pass on the Switch version. If I do buy the game? It will probably be on Steam during a steam sale when it's heavily discounted. So Bethesda rather than seeing the return from the sale of the game at full price is now looking at making a fraction of what they may have made otherwise.
I also have to wonder why they bother with the costs to print the box art for the cases when there is no physical cart. It's an extra cost they would not have had they just opted for a straight up digital release.
Hellblade for instance has only ever been a digital title. And that title was quite successful.
I say all this as someone who supported Bethesda titles on Switch. I bought DOOM and Skyrim both despite owning them on PC already. I also bought Wolfenstein 2. I am now questioning whether I will support Doom Eternal now as well if they take a similar approach. It's a shame too because part of the reason 3rd party support suffered on the WiiU was because of 3rd parties shooting themselves in the foot with the decisions they made.
Re: Soapbox: We Like To Grumble, But Nintendo Switch Online Is Actually A Very Generous Offer
@BarFooToo I will be right there continuing to complain along with you man. You don't like something? You don't just stand on the sidelines. You complain and vote with your wallet. It's the only way things change. Imagine if people didn't complain about Battlefront 2. For once gamers stood up for themselves and now EA is facing legal trouble and that is good for us.
Apathy is dangerous, and these companies love the folks who just stay silent and hand them money. It's our money and we work hard for it. These companies should have to work even harder to earn it from us.
Re: Soapbox: We Like To Grumble, But Nintendo Switch Online Is Actually A Very Generous Offer
There is so much wrong with this article....
It's little wonder why the gaming community at large sees traditional games media and so called journalists as jokes.
Could this article be any more condescending? It says "we like to grumble but Nintendo Switch online is actually a very generous offer...so quit your complaining" says the author who somehow has become the arbiter of how we should feel about our money that we work for.
What is really ironic is that the author of that article points to the flaws that many have criticized. The fact your cloud saves are deleted the moment your sub lapses and the fact you have to check in once every 7 days to use those NES games. Generous my ***.
He continues...
"But is it enough of a reason to write off the service entirely? Absolutely not, I say – particularly when you actually stop and think about just what a terrific offer it actually is."
Well golly gee, if only everyone was willing to let a company take advantage of them.
"It's also so cheap when compared to its competitors, and I'd even argue that it offers way more – or at least has the potential to in the long term."
He only compares it to xbox and PS. And while it is cheaper? Those other platforms at least offer local save backups and the cloud saves aren't a matter of working only for some games. The fact Splatoon 2's online rankings are saved locally instead of on a server is stupid and that's on Nintendo. He also fails to compare it to the PC where you get cloud saves, local saves, Online multiplayer, voice chat, dedicated servers, and lobbies all at no additional cost to your monthly internet bill.
"The best part is, it doesn't really offer anything less. All three provide access to free games, cloud saves, and exclusive deals on top of the online multiplayer we largely pay it for."
Here is where he gets it wrong...again. It is offering less by default because the Switch itself has no alternative for saves. Those free games aren't free if you pay $20 a year to access them. This is the thing I don't understand about idiots that constantly tout the so called free games. And I am sorry but are exclusive deals something to really brag about when you have to pay for said deals? I get deals all the time on Steam and I spend nothing for that platform.
He concludes by saying...
"I am saying that no matter how you look at it, this is an incredibly generous offer that Nintendo should be applauded for."
Yeah, no. You don't reward a dog for bad behavior and you sure as hell don't applaud a company for doing stuff that is anti-consumer. And I am not paying $20 a year in the hopes that it gets better. The way you get a company to make changes or provide a better service is to vote with your wallet and not give them money! And if people think it's only ever going to be $20 a year. They are incredibly naive. Sony raised the price of their subscription, not because they had too...but because "give me more money."
But wait! You can use gold coins to pay for the "service" how generous right? Until you realize that a single gold coin is worth roughly 1 cent. You get roughly 300 gold coins for purchasing a $60 game at retail because buying physical offers 1% in gold coins for every dollar. Whereas digitally you get 5% for every dollar spent. So if you do the math? You would need about 2,000 gold coins to afford the $20 for a year's sub. That means if you were to buy physical titles? You would need to buy about six or 7, $60 games to accrue enough gold coins. That means you will have spent $360-$400 or so on games before you have enough gold coins to pay for Switch online. How generous...
Apathy is a dangerous thing. The author of this article shows exactly why traditional media can't be trusted anymore. Too many are in the bed of major publishers. They aren't looking out for us anymore.
Re: Consumers Go Crazy For Wii U Following Xbox One Reveal
@RADencker Wii supported Gamecube even.
Re: Shigeru Miyamoto: People Need To Be Patient With Wii U
When more first party games reach the system there will be more reason for people to purchase the system and when more people invest in WiiU so too will 3rd party Devs.
Re: Angry Birds Dev Calls Nintendo Games "$49 Pieces of Plastic"
While mobile games aren't all bad there is certainly a big difference between quality. You get what you pay for. Angry Birds has run the gamut from the original to a Star Wars spin on Angry Birds. Angry Birds simply doesn't compare to a 3DS game like Mario 3D land. And it could also be said that mobile phones themselves are jacks of all trades master of none. Alot of these devices are designed to be multifunctional which is fine. You can browse the internet, make a phone call, text etc. But the majority of games on the app store are in a similar vein as Angry Birds and Candy Crush. Nintendo's handhelds are dedicated gaming platforms. And I highly doubt that a mobile phone would offer the same kind of experiences Ocarina of Time 3D, Mario 3D land, Fire Emblem Awakening offer.