WhiteUmbrella

@sdelfin Ok, sorry, that was my misunderstanding. As I understand it, any modern ports of games with fixed camera angles tend to add 'full 3d movement' for players that dislike fixed camera angles, but as you intimate, these cause problems when the camera angle shifts. The addition of this system to modern ports of RE1 remake effectively allow zombie dodging to be broken. To the best of my knowledge, I'm not aware of many original releases of fixed camera angle games that used full 3d controls, outside of RE2 for N64, where they were an additional option in the menus. I think maybe Onimusha: Dawn of Dreams had them, but I can't remember, since I played it so long ago, and haven't returned to it since. It was so disappointing.

@sdelfin Scene transitions with fixed camera angles do not "screw up your ability to control things". The control scheme always relates to the player. Forward always moves the player character forward, left always turns the player character to his or her left, regardless of which angle the scene is being viewed from. It's really not that hard to understand, and yet people refusing to engage with anything other than 3rd person, over the shoulder has resulted in everything being homogenised. Too many people want every game to control in exactly the same way.

@Jeronan Yes, of course Valve want users of the Steam Deck to buy their games on Steam, but it's also worth noting that anyone having bought the device is free to modify it, install windows or whatever operating system they prefer, and also free to emulate or indeed purchase titles from an outside source, without the threat of having their device remotely bricked by Nintendo.

@Jeronan You are delving into hyperbole here. Many games have a day-one patch, but most of them do not require it. Even if that were the case, the game industry purposely eroding the physical market by compromising physical releases cannot and should not be a justification for eroding it even further.
I don't question that Gamepass represents value for the customer. Doubtless it does, but since I'm not interested in a gaming subscription service, it's not something I'm interested in. The idea that the majority of gamers who have been buying phyiscal releases can be coerced into buying downloads only, is yet to be tested. Many of them have backlogs, that they feel they should be delving into. A lack of physical releases on shelves represents one more push toward doing that.
While we're on the subject of downloads, pc gaming, Steam. I have a Steam Deck, which was in fact my first gaming pc. I don't really care about handheld though, so it's irrelevant to me. I've been thinking I should give it away, since I just use my desktop or mini pc and egpu anyway.
Yes, pc has only downloads almost exclusively, but they have something that console storefronts don't have, and is necessary for a healthy market. Competition. I have not only a Steam account, but a GOG account, where i have bought numerous games drm free. I can write them to disc, if I want. Even Steam games are available from numerous sellers outside of the Steam store itself. By contrast, Nintendo doesn't have competing stores on its hardware. Sony have sought to lock down their services over recent years, removing the third party market in game keys, removing the option to easily purchase PS Plus across different regions. Nintendo have removed the option to buy games on the Japanese e-shop, by preventing the use of payment sources from outside the region. This is something that Switch users were able to take advantage of before, and now no longer can. All in the name of greed. This is the wrong approach. As Gabe Newell once sagely stated "Piracy is a service problem."

@Jeronan Switch 2 is restricted to 10 watts while played handheld. If you really understand even half of the specs you're posting, then I don't need to explain to you why this means Steam Deck will outperform Switch 2, when not docked.

@WiltonRoots You have missed the point entirely. The purpose of Steam Deck isn't the number it can sell. It was designed to launch a product category, so that other manufacturers could take a similar design approach, and eventually incorporate Valve's software into their design. Nintendo games only run on Nintendo hardware, so they need to sell one specific hardware to expand their userbase. Valve owns Steam, which is accessed by innumerable different pieces of hardware.
Of course, Valve have other goals that they are achieving, for instance shifting pc gaming away from a Windows requirement, via their Proton compatibility layer, but also building a much more user-friendly front end for Steam, which allows for tinkering for those that desire it, while also creating something more enticing to a user more familiar with console gaming, removing some of the more traditional dividing lines between pc and console gaming, one of which is the availablity of physical games vs having download only. Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft are doing an excellent job of tearing that particular barrier down all by themselves, not to mention how unfavourable the prices on the console online marketplaces compare for the same games, vs the prices on Steam.
As the consoles abandon physical media and Steam becomes ever more user-friendly, perhaps incorporating more hardware, the abandonment of those dividing lines will see the console makers lose market share to pc gaming and Steam, but by all means, keep defending Nintendo and all their anti-consumer decisions in the comments sections. You're not doing them any favours, when what they really should do is listen to the complaints about the direction they're taking, and shift tack. I would argue that the people complaining about Nintendo's current trajectory care far more about the future of the company than those that are too busy massaging their every decision to see where they're headed.

Apparently, according to Nintendo, not only do you not own your games, you don't own your hardware either.
If Nintendo wins patents based on their new chat system, they'll soon be suing Discord, I feel. What has happened to this company?

@Skunkfish Nintendo knew that the Wii U was a failure, two years out from launch, in 2014. While internally working to replace it, and scaling back any and all Wii U development, they pledged continued support. The next two years were barren, and then Switch was launched. They clearly pulled support internally, while externally denying they had done so.

It seems quite clear to me that the intention of game keys is to replace physical carts, not downloads. If Nintendo wanted game keys to replace code in a box releases, they could have barred code in a box releases entirely.
Looking at it from a publishers perspective, and as has been stated even by those that defend game key releases, they want to make the most money they can, with the lowest outlay possible. I guess that's just business. Bearing this in mind, which do you think they would find preferable?
Option A: Game keys replacing download titles, supposedly introducing a second-hand market for digital games while also increasing expenditure, or ...
Option B: Game keys replacing physical releases, reducing outlay and therefore increasing profits.

I agree with those saying they would pay $10 more for a proper physical release. The problem is, to the publisher, the proposition is still the same. No matter what you're paying, they can make more money from you by giving you less, and they would still want to do that if they could get away with it, even were you to pay double.

Nintendo always say this about every outgoing platform. Anyone else remember when Nintendo swore blind they weren't dropping support for Wii U?

Digital only? If not, I can't see why the same account would be required.

What next? Will pocketpair be forced to downgrade the graphics?
Of course, it's completely fine for Nintendo to plagiarise Discord ...

@Olmectron I have a large collection of consoles hooked up, including a PS5. I installed a 4tb ssd in the expansion bay, with no games being installed to the internal storage. I have another external drive connected, for PS4 games. I don't juggle storage like that, because the weakness of ssd drives is being rewritten. As long as you don't do that, they will last a long time. Being read doesn't put wear on them at all. Yes, PS5 games are a mandatory install, but this isn't a problem when there are so many options for storage. 256gb on a system that requires mandatory installs is just ridiculous, and the decision to restrict additional storage to sd express, baffling.

I am aware of the statement that Switch 2 cartridges can be inserted into any system. Give me a link to someone from Nintendo specifically stating that the key cards can be borrowed, rented or even resold.

So many defences of these key cards, based on what is nothing more than speculation. Nintendo are absolutely the ones most responsible for the existence and use of these key-cards. They created them, and I would imagine they are effectively providing a financial incentive for using them, unless anyone wants to suggest that third parties are paying more for key-card than physical releases.

'At least key card releases can be traded on or sold'. This is a common defence of the format, even from writers on Nintendo Life, as well as comment sections. Where, in Nintendo's official documentation, is there a statement that key-cards can be 'freely traded and sold'? I've seen no such declaration. All I have seen is an assertion that it's possible to insert them into another Switch 2 console. While it is certainly possible that key-cards can be sold on freely, this is just pure speculation. It's worth noting that Nintendo's virtual cart system could also be applied to these key-cards, meaning that it would be possible to lend a game to someone else, insert the key card into another console, but selling on would just be impossible.

From what we have already seen, the idea that these key cards will allow larger games to come to Switch 2, that might otherwise have not got a release, while certainly with some merit, well ... that's just not what we're seeing. It's clear that key cards have replaced what would otherwise have been proper physical releases. Especially when compared to the launch line-up of the original Switch, the contrast is stark.

Really, to me, one of the biggest problems with key cards is that they pass additional expense on to the consumer. Switch 2, hybrid or not, is also meant to serve as a home console, isn't it? 256gb may be an increase on the original console, but for a home console it is laughable, especially if the buyer of said console is expected to install each and every game they play. Micro sd express smells like a financial backroom deal, to drive take- up of a fledgling format. It's just too expensive right now, even compared to ssd tech.
People are also suggesting that the sd express tech is the reason why the physical cartridges aren't being used, because they're pricy, but there has been no statement from Nintendo or anyone, about the speed of the actual physical Switch 2 cartridges. I guess we'll see when the first teardown happens, but it's worth noting that on the original Switch, internal storage was fastest, followed by a standard sd card. The Switch carts were the slowest loading of all three options.
There just isn't really much positive that I can say, but there's a lot of misinformation out there, both positive and negative.

@N00BiSH Steam Deck power budget is 25watts, vs Switch 2 and 10 watts. This means, to anyone that knows anything about hardware, Switch 2 won't outperform Steam Deck as a handheld, in direct comparison, in the majority of titles.

@BynoShadow I don't think anybody seriously thinks that Switch 2 could fail like Wii U, least of all me. The Switch consolidated Nintendo's handheld and home console sales into one figure, so it should easily make the combined Wii U and 3DS sales, as long as consumer sentiment remains positive. The point is more that initial sales aren't really a good indicator of longevity, especially now that scalping distorts the success of every launch. I'm confident it won't touch the first Switch's numbers, and it's possible Nintendo bumping the software costs and eroding the physical market could hurt them badly.

Over the course of the first three months after launch, Wii U was Nintendo's fastest ever selling console. Let that sink in.

@Gamer666 We actually do know that there will be games that use that analogue triggers on Switch 2. There are already Gamecube titles announced for NSO that specifically were built to use the analogue triggers of the Gamecube controller.
Additionally, many racing game fans like to use analogue triggers for acceleration and braking. The rumoured possibility of a Forza Horizon 5 port would benefit from them. PlayStation and Xbox have used analogue triggers for multiple console releases. Nintendo could have included them in the design of their pro controller at least, but chose not to, and yet they knew they were releasing Gamecube titles that would benefit from them, but have chosen to put them behind the paywall of an additional controller. Any one decision Nintendo has been making of late doesn't amount to a smoking gun, but the sum of all of them paints a picture of a company that has lost its way and now focuses solely on the bottom line. This deserves criticism, and evryone who reads your "don't like it, don't buy it" mantra knows the message it is intended to convey. You are fine with others not buying, but you want to discourage others from criticising them, even when the criticism is certainly warranted.

@Gamer666 Don't cry just because someone dared to criticise your beloved Nintendo.
Also, the article was about Switch 2, and pertained to the Switch 2 exclusive Gamecube controller, so your statements about no Switch games requiring analogue triggers and games that can be "played without issue" are entirely irrelevant. How's that boot tasting?

@DaniPooo "I don't know why we expected VRR via the dock."
Maybe, because Nintendo promised it, and then retroactively erased the mention. Let's not pretend it's technically impossible. The usb-c ports could have hit the usb-4 specification, if Nintendo had the intention. That caps out at 40gb bandwidth, sufficient for 4k/120hz. There are already cables available that can connect USB4 to hdmi 2.1. Nintendo wouldn't have had to invent anything to make it happen, and the port, if it is only hdmi 2.0, obviously should have been 2.1, if Nintendo genuinely intended to provide vrr to external displays. They have literally no excuse, outside of incompetence or bad faith marketing. None.

How much point is there in 120hz/vrr being restricted to handheld only, when Steam Deck will likely outperform Switch 2 as a handheld, anyway? Did Nintendo not put a full bandwidth hdmi 2.1 port in the dock? Thay should have, they're certainly charging for it.

Is it anyone's fantasy to be in a wheelchair, and feel excruciating pain in their arms? I don't think this will sell.

Someone, please give Damian McFerren a raise. Apparently he's the only one to understand that, in order to compare the size of two objects accurately, it's best that they both be the same distance from the camera.

@Clyde_Radcliffe What are you talking about? A normal human wrist has a very limited range of lateral motion, the maximum for any given person falls somewhere between 45-60 degrees counting both directions, and using all that range routinely would lead to RSI.

@Alcea So ... you're claiming that the Joycon 2 will perform the functions of a mouse equally, and yet be superior because it will have additional controls? Well, if you're correct, we should expect that Nintendo will shake-up the entire mouse industry, but somehow I doubt it. Ergonomic design in mice is there for a very good reason, to prevent repetitive strain injury. It may be possible to broadly hold a Joycon 2 as if it is a mouse, but it's surely not going to be or feel as ergonomic as one.

The best way to use a mouse, is with a desk. If I'm sitting at a desk, wouldn't a usb for mouse support have been a better and much simpler route? I doubt Joycon 2 are better as a mouse than using an actual mouse, or am I missing something?

@Gamer666 Nintendo released a Gamecube adaptor for the Switch, and reissued Gamecube controllers, complete with their analogue triggers, subsequent to release of the console. Nintendo therefore did actually leave out analogue triggers and then sell a solution to add them back in, later on down the line, the exact thing you're claiming they did not do.

I'm not going to believe that these keys result in digital games that can be freely traded or sold, by the end user, with no restrictions, until Nintendo themselves unequivocally state this. At this point, stating that this is how they function is just as much misinformation as anything else out there.

Do Switch 1 carts require a mandatory install? There are a few reasons to question this. Nintendo Japan have a list of 140 Switch titles that have compatibilty issues, meaning that backwards compatibility is being achieved by emulation. Unless Nintendo are using FPGA, I'm pretty sure all physical Switch titles would require an install to run, certainly if they have an upgrade patch. Perhaps even Switch 2 games also require an install, although I would hope not, given the 256gb of space.
Original Switch carts have slower loading times on the first gen hardware, compared to games running from the internal memory, and yet micro express sd has been mandated, more evidence pointing to installation. I would also question choosing micro express sd over an M2 2230 ssd, which could have delivered faster read and write times, plus more space, for less expenditure for the end user. For reference, Steam Deck supports 2230 M2 ssd (single sided), plus micro sd cards up to ultra, and micro sd express.

@Flugen Can you point to a verifiable source, or are you just assuming this?

I'm not so sure that it will be possible to trade these 'key carts'. I would imagine there are some security features or restrictions that we don't know about. There's an initial online check. What's that checking? A unique code on the key, against a database of all these codes, that Nintendo has? If this is how it operates, trading doesn't seem likely. It's possible that the download will be tied to system, not an account, like on the Wii. One thing's for sure, along with the mandatory installs for Switch carts, yet to be announced, that 256gb is looking really paltry. Micro sd express is so expensive, Nintendo should have just opted for ssd, because for the same money, it would be faster and cost less, for the end user. I smell a deal with Sandisk for branded sd express cards, also yet to be revealed.

@luisterr There are achievements for Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom, via the mobile app. No sign of a broad achievement system as yet.

From the SNES to Wii U, I owned all the home consoles that Nintendo put out. I didn't buy a Switch, but I have a collection of Switch games (over 150 boxed titles, at last count). Sadly, the home console iteration I was waiting for never happened.
Despite not being interested in Switch, I continued to support them, but they have lost me with Switch 2.
The more I learn, the less I like. Business decisions that make it seem as if Nintendo would charge you for the very air you breathe, if they thought people would pay for it. What is effectively a paywalled button on a controller, a world first? What happens beyond March 2026, if you press it accidentally while playing, without an active subscription. Perhaps it does nothing, but if it interrupted the game and to the player to a store page, I wouldn't be shocked.
What else? A glorified tutorial, sold when it clearly should be a pack-in, which looks mean and petty when compared to Astro's Playroom.
The introduction of carts that are nothing more than a key to a download, normalising further erosion of the physical game market. There are still questions about this. Will the download be linked to the account, or locked to one console?
Switch 2 releases that appear to be original Switch cartridges in Switch 2 packaging, with likely a one-time download code. This in itself raises more questions. I am now wondering if any Switch 2 games, including original Switch titles, run from the cart, or if they require an install. The reason I would question this, is because Nintendo have mandated micro sd express for Switch 2, a faster format, but one that will leave buyers of expansion storage paying 1tb prices for 256gb. Can we really expect Switch games to run from original carts, in light of this?
A further issue is, if Switch 2 versions of original Switch titles are just a Switch 1 cart with a download, this leaves a question about the price disparity between the newer release and original. Players could potentially save money by buying the original Switch 1 release, and purchasing the upgrade separately. History tells us that Nintendo will likely deal with this issue by raising the price of Switch 1 titles.
The game price hikes across the board are just one more slap in the face, plus considering the region locking of a console for the Japanese market, I'm thinking the return of region locked games can't be far behind. In fact, I've been anticipating a return to region locking, ever since Nintendo decided to block foreign payment methods from the Japanese eshop, some months back.

I have been with Nintendo since SNES, but I'm not supporting them anymore. To me, Switch 2 is a disgrace. The moves that Nintendo are trying to pull are disgraceful, and they deserve to fail because of it. Wii U, in the initial stages, was Nintendo's fastest ever selling console to date, and look where it ended up. It's time for a repeat of that, so that Nintendo can learn an obviously much needed lesson.

There's no excuse for having re-released these games in a state that requires so many patches. I was considering a physical copy, but I think I'll skip these entirely

Being the first to have a teardown and benchmarks might just be worth it to someone. Being the first gets you a lot of views. Could even jumpstart a new channel.

@Markatron84 I suggested the additional port wouldn't be used for charging, and you reacted as if I had accused you of being wrong. I think you're a little too sensitive to be using the internet.

@Markatron84 I find it unlikely that the secondary usb-c port is capable of charging the device, which would also be a pretty good reason to shift the port off-centre, to prevent someone from making the mistake of docking it via the wrong port.

While obviously not being as successful as Switch, handheld PC hardware with detatchable controllers existed before Switch was ever announced. Also, it's a little weird to level criticism based on the size, from the same site that has published articles, promoting using 10"+ portable screens, with the original Switch.

Switch Pro will be unveiled soon, finally.

I have misgivings about this new hardware, that it might be disappointing. If not, why is Nintendo trying to sneak it out, like a fart in an elevator? Sadly, Nintendo's efforts have resulted in some pretty heavy leakage. They need to clean this up, asap.