Comments 204

Re: New Nintendo 2DS XL Announced, Releases 28th July

shadow-wolf

Overall, I'm not happy with how Nintendo announced this. It should have been released a year ago, and if it is releasing this year it should have released at $99 or $129 with a game. $150 without a game is way too expensive for what this is. Also, I still don't understand why Nintendo stopped selling the regular-sized New 3DS. So if someone wants a more portable system, they have to pick a 2DS? That was a bad decision as well.

Re: Poll: What Do You Think of the New Nintendo 2DS XL?

shadow-wolf

Overall, I'm not happy with how Nintendo announced this. It should have been released a year ago, and if it is releasing this year it should have released at $99 or $129 with a game. $150 without a game is way too expensive for what this is. Also, I still don't understand why Nintendo stopped selling the regular-sized New 3DS. So if someone wants a more portable system, they have to pick a 2DS? That was a bad decision as well.

Re: Poll: Do You Think Call Of Duty: WWII Will Come To Switch, And Would You Want It If It Did?

shadow-wolf

Yep, no Switch version confirmed. This may not be a huge loss for many of us (personally I am not interested in Call of Duty and gritty FPS games so I could care less) BUT it is a huge blow towards not attracting the general crowd.

That being said, I feel Call of Duty has lost its previous luster in the casual gamer crowd. Battlefield seems to be the new occupant. But Nintendo really needs to make sure that at least the sports games like FIFA and NBA 2K come out next year again and Madden comes next year.

Re: Poll: Do You Think Call Of Duty: WWII Will Come To Switch, And Would You Want It If It Did?

shadow-wolf

I don't know. On one hand, most AAA Western games are skipping Switch, so by that logic this one should too.

On the other hand, there was a rumor a long time ago in which Activision was apparently interested in the Switch because Call of Duty games on it could reach new audiences, such as the audience interested in Pokemon.

We'll see I guess. They might skip it for this year and instead release a game for next year when many more people have Switches. Especially since there was a leaked Amazon listing for PC/Xbox One/PS4 but no mention of Switch.

I definitely wouldn't buy it, but I never bought a Call of Duty game, even when I had a PS3 and Modern Warfare 2 came out. Do I want it on the system? 100% YES. This game, Destiny, Madden, FIFA, NBA 2K ... these MUST be on Switch to attract a general audience.

Re: Talking Point: Nintendo Needs to Learn Lessons From Its NES Mini Mistakes

shadow-wolf

We'll probably never know why it was discontinued, but my gut feeling is that Nintendo didn't want it to compete with the Switch.

You're probably shaking your head at that statement, but hear me out.

Nintendo was probably thinking it didn't want two high-demand systems on the market at once and taking people's attention at the same time. Yes, two vastly different systems to put it lightly, but both are "Nintendo." Nintendo might have worried that people would buy the NES Mini and be satisfied with the purchase (i.e. no desire to purchase another "Nintendo," aka the Switch), resulting in a potential lost Switch sale. Also, profit margins on the device itself probably weren't too high, and it's also a dead-end in terms of profit (while the Switch can continue a stream of profit through games, accessories, etc.). So Nintendo might want people to associate the "new Nintendo machine that came out" with Switch, not NES Mini.

Plus manufacturing issues. Both are high-demand products that sell out immediately. Nintendo probably has to sacrifice one in order to meet demand for the other, so it chose to sacrifice the dead-end machine (profit-wise) for the system that is its future. If this was actually the case, quite frankly they made the right decision. If NES Mini production would hinder Switch production, NES Mini definitely should be stopped so that the Switch (aka Nintendo's future) can be produced more.

But don't be surprised if the NES Mini shows up again this Christmas or in the future.

Re: Review: The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild (Wii U)

shadow-wolf

So basically, from what I've heard from other people and Thomas's review:

Switch is undoubtedly the superior version of the game...BUT you can play it perfectly fine on Wii U

Occasional frame rate drops, but still definitely a playable experience

The biggest differences are the slightly more stable frame rate on Switch, 900p on Switch vs. Wii U, and portability of Switch. Most people say the resolution difference is noticeable but minor and definitely something you won't notice/miss if you play only the Wii U version. Frame rate drops are infrequent enough that they don't disrupt the gameplay experience. So unless playing BotW on the go is useful for you (which it definitely is for many people), the Wii U version is a perfectly capable experience.

What amazes me is that Switch and Wii U versions have exactly the same graphics (besides resolution difference), same amount of pop-in, same amount of draw distance, etc. despite the differences in RAM, processor, and graphics. Plus the frame rate drops aren't too frequent so that's good. I'll be happy to play the Wii U version come May!

Nintendo might have not supported Wii U that well, but at least it gave Wii U the greatest and highest-scoring swan song of any console ever!

Re: Feature: First Impressions of The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild on Wii U

shadow-wolf

@Dpishere Thanks! I am thinking of sticking with the GamePad then since I value the easier aiming with the gyro.

@tedko Okay thanks for letting me know! That's a relief it doesn't just mirror the TV.

@Alshain01 Based on what you said, it does sound like motion controls would be very useful in the game, and streamline control. I'll stick to the GamePad then. Thank you for letting me know!

Re: Feature: First Impressions of The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild on Wii U

shadow-wolf

@Anti-Matter That's actually due to the time of day and weather differences, . In the Wii U version the weather is cloudy while in the Switch version it is sunny.

@samumarisuro thanks for your input! I was suspecting it'd be important enough to prefer the GamePad over the Pro controller

@LiberatedAnimal do you feel aiming with weapons like the bow is harder without motion controls?

Re: Feature: First Impressions of The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild on Wii U

shadow-wolf

@LegendOfPokemon

True although the last set of images has me surprised in just how dull the Wii U version's grass is compared to the Switch version's. Is it because of a time of day difference, or is the color really that much better on Switch?

EDIT:
I looked closer at the time of day, and saw it was different between the two pictures after all. Plus, the Wii U version's weather was cloudy while the Switch version's weather was sunny. So that's probably the reason for the duller-looking grass.

Re: Feature: First Impressions of The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild on Wii U

shadow-wolf

@thomasbw84

Thanks for the first impressions! When you cover it more in detail, could you share a picture of how the GamePad looks while playing on TV (is it nothing more than a simple text bubble asking to touch to play on the GamePad)?

Also, I'd appreciate it if you could test out the Pro controller as well and see if you'd recommend using the GamePad over the Pro controller (due to motion controls) or not.

Re: Talking Point: Is the Nintendo Switch a Handheld or Console? Does it Matter?

shadow-wolf

Great article Thomas! I feel the same way as you, and feel Nintendo isn't marketing the Switch to its full potential or as attractive to potential buyers as possible. Currently they are marketing Switch as the most versatile home gaming console and a home console you can also play on the go. Which is fine ... except calling it solely a home console draws comparisons to the PS4 and Xbox One, both of which are more powerful and cheaper than the Switch. Yes, calling it a home console you can take on the go is attractive to some people, but I feel that most potential buyers will shrug and say that the convenience of playing on the go is not worth sacrificing power, graphics, and more third-party games, not to mention the extra cost to playing on the go in addition to aforementioned sacrifices. And the average Joe will see a $250 PS4 or Xbox One with a game, compared to a $300 Switch with no games included, and probably pick up the PS4 or Xbone cause his/her friends have one.

I'm not saying the Switch is a poor machine; it seems to be an amazing console. And in this case I'm not arguing about the price (though I do think the cost should be lower for both the console and accessories to really drive adoption). In this case, what I'm saying is that if Nintendo could market the Switch as "the most powerful handheld ever made, and the most versatile home console ever made, all in one device, for only $299," that could be far more appealing, and also tell people that this isn't just a GameCube/Wii/Wii U (or simply a Nintendo home console) that can be played anywhere on the go, but a GameCube/Wii/Wii U PLUS a Game Boy/DS/3DS (or simply a Nintendo handheld system) all in one device for just $299. That I feel could really attract the average person into buying a Switch. The average Joe would then think, "I remember buying a DS for $150 and then a Wii for $250 for the kids. Now we can get both a DS and a Wii for $300, WITH two controllers! Perfect for the family!"

I know Nintendo isn't doing what I said in the previous paragraph because they're afraid of cannibalizing 3DS sales, but they need to wake up and realize that if they're too concerned with protecting the 3DS, they're going to hinder the Switch right from day one. They should still make games for the 3DS and sell the 3DS, but they should also talk about the Switch as their most powerful handheld ever and, yes, the successor to the 3DS. 3DS will have a market regardless due to its cheaper entry point and mature library, so losing a couple extra sales of the 3DS in return for making the Switch more attractive to potential buyers is much better, IMHO.

Re: Poll: A Week On, How Do You Feel About the Nintendo Switch?

shadow-wolf

Does anyone else feel like Nintendo isn't marketing the Switch to its full potential or as attractive to potential buyers as possible? Currently they are marketing Switch as the most versatile home gaming console and a home console you can also play on the go. Which is fine ... except calling it solely a home console draws comparisons to the PS4 and Xbox One, both of which are more powerful and cheaper than the Switch. Yes, calling it a home console you can take on the go is attractive to some people, but I feel that most potential buyers will shrug and say that the convenience of playing on the go is not worth sacrificing power, graphics, and more third-party games, not to mention the extra cost to playing on the go in addition to aforementioned sacrifices. And the average Joe will see a $250 PS4 or Xbox One with a game, compared to a $300 Switch with no games included, and probably pick up the PS4 or Xbone cause his/her friends have one.

I'm not saying the Switch is a poor machine; it seems to be an amazing console. And in this case I'm not arguing about the price (though I do think the cost should be lower for both the console and accessories to really drive adoption). In this case, what I'm saying is that if Nintendo could market the Switch as "the most powerful handheld ever made, and the most versatile home console ever made, all in one device, for only $299," that could be far more appealing, and also tell people that this isn't just a GameCube/Wii/Wii U (or simply a Nintendo home console) that can be played anywhere on the go, but a GameCube/Wii/Wii U PLUS a Game Boy/DS/3DS (or simply a Nintendo handheld system) all in one device for just $299. That I feel could really attract the average person into buying a Switch.

I know Nintendo isn't doing what I said in the previous paragraph because they're afraid of cannibalizing 3DS sales, but they need to wake up and realize that if they're too concerned with protecting the 3DS, they're going to hinder the Switch right from day one. They should still make games for the 3DS and sell the 3DS, but they should also talk about the Switch as their most powerful handheld ever and, yes, the successor to the 3DS. 3DS will have a market regardless due to its cheaper entry point and mature library, so losing a couple extra sales of the 3DS in return for making the Switch more attractive to potential buyers is much better, IMHO.

Re: Zelda: Breath Of The Wild Confirmed For Nintendo Switch Launch Day

shadow-wolf

Hi everyone, I was hoping you could help me with this. I heard back when Twilight Princess came out that the GameCube version was limited in stock and quickly became hard to find. Do you guys happen to know if something similar will happen to the Wii U version? I'm planning on playing the game on Wii U in July or August (career stuff doesn't give me much time before then), so would it be okay to buy the game in July or August, or do you guys think by then Wii U versions could potentially be hard to find (and so I should pre-order and get the game now)? Thanks for your help!

Re: Soapbox: The Switch Presentation Was Good, but Not Perfect

shadow-wolf

@DanteSolablood

You're right, I did err on the negative in my post. I didn't mention the positives, like how amazing Super Mario Odyssey was (IMHO much better than the Galaxy games), and how awesome Breath of the Wild was. Plus, the HD rumble feature looks pretty cool, and battery life seems decent (more than 6 hours possible, with 3 if using Breath of the Wild).

But I do agree and disagree with your post in some ways. Yeah, the Joy-Cons have more tech than the PS4 controller. But the Pro controller has virtually the same tech as the PS4 controller (actually technically less without the trackpad) and yet it costs about $15 more.
And personally like you I would be happy to pay for better online, but it's hard to deny that it's one more cost on top of other costs.
And actually I think the 3DS launched at a cheaper price. In the U.S. at least, it launched at $250 and then was brought down to $170 by holiday 2011. The Switch will be launching at $300 in the U.S., $50 more than the 3DS.

Re: Poll: What Did You Think of the Nintendo Switch Presentation?

shadow-wolf

Overall, the presentation was a little disappointing. There are two big reasons:
1. Price. The system is $300. IMHO it should have been $250 (especially if it's packing the Tegra Maxwell X1 processor, which it probably is).
On top of that, online multiplayer is paid, and will be presumably $40-$60 per year (about equivalent to PS Plus or Xbox Live, but without all the additional free games benefits).
On top of that, an additional controller will set you back a whopping $70 (for the Pro controller) or $80 (for another set of two Joy-Cons).
All of this on top of buying $60 games. This isn't even including a microSD card that you'll need to buy if you're planning to go digital.
2. Games
Considering Nintendo hasn't announced anything major since 2015 for the Wii U, I expected there to be a good number of games planned throughout this year. But in terms of major first-party games, all we have are Breath of the Wild, Super Mario Odyssey, Splatoon 2, Arms, and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe (yes, there's also 1,2 Switch but it doesn't look like an in-depth experience). Two of the aforementioned games are ports of Wii U games.
Are there other first-party games for 2017? Nintendo might have more planned to show during E3, but IMHO they should have shown all first-party games coming out in 2017 during this presentation, and save E3 for 2018 and beyond. Where's Smash Bros.? Where are the rumored remastered versions of Xenoblade X and Bayonetta 1&2? Where is the rumored Pikmin 4? If the rumored games are true, they should have been presented. AND the launch lineup is pitiful, essentially featuring just Breath of the Wild, a game that could be bought on the Wii U instead. Not much justification for all the costs for the console, online multiplayer, and additional controllers.
So it seems, unfortunately, that Nintendo may stumble on price and games a bit with Switch, which is disappointing considering the two years they sacrificed Wii U game development. To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if a 3DS-like scenario plays out, with the Switch receiving a price drop of at least $50 by holiday 2017 if sales aren't that much.
The system itself is excellent, and I'm sure the games that come out will be really good and much more than the Wii U ever had, but Nintendo didn't handle this presentation well at all (spending a lot of time on two games that are Wii-esque is not a good message to send to gamers).

Re: Soapbox: The Switch Presentation Was Good, but Not Perfect

shadow-wolf

Overall, the presentation was a little disappointing. There are two big reasons:
1. Price. The system is $300. IMHO it should have been $250 (especially if it's packing the Tegra Maxwell X1 processor, which it probably is).
On top of that, online multiplayer is paid, and will be presumably $40-$60 per year (about equivalent to PS Plus or Xbox Live, but without all the additional free games benefits).
On top of that, an additional controller will set you back a whopping $70 (for the Pro controller) or $80 (for another set of two Joy-Cons).
All of this on top of buying $60 games. This isn't even including a microSD card that you'll need to buy if you're planning to go digital.
2. Games
Considering Nintendo hasn't announced anything major since 2015 for the Wii U, I expected there to be a good number of games planned throughout this year. But in terms of major first-party games, all we have are Breath of the Wild, Super Mario Odyssey, Splatoon 2, Arms, and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe (yes, there's also 1,2 Switch but it doesn't look like an in-depth experience). Two of the aforementioned games are ports of Wii U games.
Are there other first-party games for 2017? Nintendo might have more planned to show during E3, but IMHO they should have shown all first-party games coming out in 2017 during this presentation, and save E3 for 2018 and beyond. Where's Smash Bros.? Where are the rumored remastered versions of Xenoblade X and Bayonetta 1&2? Where is the rumored Pikmin 4? If the rumored games are true, they should have been presented. AND the launch lineup is pitiful, essentially featuring just Breath of the Wild, a game that could be bought on the Wii U instead. Not much justification for all the costs for the console, online multiplayer, and additional controllers.
So it seems, unfortunately, that Nintendo may stumble on price and games a bit with Switch, which is disappointing considering the two years they sacrificed Wii U game development. To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if a 3DS-like scenario plays out, with the Switch receiving a price drop of at least $50 by holiday 2017 if sales aren't that much.
The system itself is excellent, and I'm sure the games that come out will be really good and much more than the Wii U ever had, but Nintendo didn't handle this presentation well at all (spending a lot of time on two games that are Wii-esque is not a good message to send to gamers).

Re: Feature: The Big Nintendo Switch Presentation Summary

shadow-wolf

Overall, the presentation was a little disappointing. There are two big reasons:

1. Price. The system is $300. IMHO it should have been $250 (especially if it's packing the Tegra Maxwell X1 processor, which it probably is).
On top of that, online multiplayer is paid, and will be presumably $40-$60 per year (about equivalent to PS Plus or Xbox Live, but without all the additional free games benefits).
On top of that, an additional controller will set you back a whopping $70 (for the Pro controller) or $80 (for another set of two Joy-Cons).
All of this on top of buying $60 games. This isn't even including a microSD card that you'll need to buy if you're planning to go digital.

2. Games
Considering Nintendo hasn't announced anything major since 2015 for the Wii U, I expected there to be a good number of games planned throughout this year. But in terms of major first-party games, all we have are Breath of the Wild, Super Mario Odyssey, Splatoon 2, Arms, and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe (yes, there's also 1,2 Switch but it doesn't look like an in-depth experience). Two of the aforementioned games are ports of Wii U games.
Are there other first-party games for 2017? Nintendo might have more planned to show during E3, but IMHO they should have shown all first-party games coming out in 2017 during this presentation, and save E3 for 2018 and beyond. Where's Smash Bros.? Where are the rumored remastered versions of Xenoblade X and Bayonetta 1&2? Where is the rumored Pikmin 4? If the rumored games are true, they should have been presented. AND the launch lineup is pitiful, essentially featuring just Breath of the Wild, a game that could be bought on the Wii U instead. Not much justification for all the costs for the console, online multiplayer, and additional controllers.

So it seems, unfortunately, that Nintendo may stumble on price and games a bit with Switch, which is disappointing considering the two years they sacrificed Wii U game development. To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if a 3DS-like scenario plays out, with the Switch receiving a price drop of at least $50 by holiday 2017 if sales aren't that much.

The system itself is excellent, and I'm sure the games that come out will be really good and much more than the Wii U ever had, but Nintendo didn't handle this presentation well at all (spending a lot of time on two games that are Wii-esque is not a good message to send to gamers).

Re: Nintendo Declines to Comment On Touchscreen Enquiry but Confirms Switch Dock and amiibo Features

shadow-wolf

@gcunit

Be careful what you promise. While everyone is taking the touchscreen for granted (and that makes sense looking at DS, 3DS, and Wii U), remember that the Nintendo Switch is looking to provide the same experience while playing on the TV or on the go. Therefore, having touchscreen input would provide difficulties since you won't have touchscreen input while playing on the TV, so you would have different controls when playing on TV vs playing on the Switch.

Re: Pokémon Sun and Moon Demo Coming on 18th October, Starter Evolutions and More are Confirmed

shadow-wolf

@MetaRyan

I agree, it's a shame people are pointing to the league final and saying XYZ is not worth watching. That's basically one of the very few mistakes XYZ ever made, and people conveniently ignore all of the amazing things the XY/XYZ anime did, like the character development with Ash in XYZ028, the entire Team Flare arc, that near-masterpiece of a Team Flare finale (blows anything similar that the Pokemon anime attempted previously out of the water), the Ash-Greninja vs Mega Sceptile fight, the Mega Evolution specials, etc.

Re: Feature: The Big Nintendo Direct Summary - 1st September

shadow-wolf

@rjejr

They just really really do not want to sell any Wii U systems. As @Dakt said if people buy the Wii U now they would be less likely to purchase an NX. Nintendo wants as many people as possible to purchase an NX, so they would rather people not buy the Wii U (to the point of basically sabotaging the Wii U) so that they can start off with a strong NX user base.

Re: Feature: The Big Nintendo Direct Summary - 1st September

shadow-wolf

@Dakt
I have the same thoughts as well. This could also be why Wii U hasn't seen price drops or new bundles. They are actively sabotaging (for lack of a better term) the Wii U so that all the people who would buy one at $250 or $200 would instead wait to buy the NX at probably the same price as the Wii U is now, if not lower (depending on what it is).

Re: Feature: The Big Nintendo Direct Summary - 1st September

shadow-wolf

For the 3DS, this was a great direct. Lots of surprises and a good steady stream of games, despite it being almost 5.5 years since the 3DS came out.

For Wii U owners, especially those with only a Wii U (like myself)? It's pretty disappointing to see Nintendo not only show nothing for the Wii U (despite the Skyward Sword port) but announce that two of the biggest Wii U games of last year will be ported over to 3DS. I get that it doesn't affect the Wii U releases in any way, but it is still disappointing considering Wii U isn't getting any new games or 3DS ports. All would (almost) be forgiven if Nintendo releases a 3DS player that connects to the Wii U haha. This was a 3DS direct so of course there would be mostly 3DS stuff, but I highly doubt Nintendo would host a Wii U direct or announce some new Wii U games in the future.

I really don't understand how Nintendo expects to have most of the Wii U crowd upgrade to NX. I will eventually, as will many on this site, but many others will probably be burned by Nintendo's complete lack of caring for the Wii U. Frankly even ports of last gen games in HD would be fine. It also doesn't send a good message to potential buyers of the NX, as they see how Nintendo treats its current home console once it doesn't meet expectations.

Re: Rumour: Concept Art Reveals the Final Evolutions of the Alola Starters

shadow-wolf

@artswaifu
You make a valid point. I forgot about Dratini and Dragonite, and Exeggcute and Exeggutor.

I guess a better criticism would be that thematically-wise Popplio and its supposed final evolution are different (Popplio is associated with the circus, and its final evolution is associated with singing). Though even then that's hardly a rock-solid criticism.

After giving these some more thought I think that these may actually be correct, but there may be more forms of the final evolutions. It could be that each gender gets a different form, or maybe that each island gets a different form. So if this theory is true, and if these evolutions are true, these may be some of multiple final evolution forms.

Re: Rumour: Concept Art Reveals the Final Evolutions of the Alola Starters

shadow-wolf

I doubt these are true. I highly doubt Game Freak would have a Fire-Fighting final evolution after having them three times in a row and drawing plenty of criticism for it.

Also, Popplio's final evolution looks nothing like Popplio itself coloration-wise.

Tbh I'm a little biased because I dislike everything except for Rowlett's supposed final evolution, but I still think this is unlikely.

Re: Multiple Sources Outline a Portable NX With Detachable Controllers, Including a 'Base Station' for TV

shadow-wolf

@JaxonH

You made an excellent point. Quite frankly you exactly pinpointed the rebuttal to everyone who says if NX were PS4-level it'd get third-party games (admittedly, including me until I read your post). The Wii U IS PS3 and Xbox 360 level, and yet it does not get games that those systems continue to receive. Granted, the biggest problem is the architecture and the use of the GamePad, but if PS3 had the complex Cell architecture and Wii U uses PowerPC like Xbox 360 did, surely it wouldn't be too much of a hassle to port it over in spite of the GamePad? Nintendo surely realized this and hence went in this direction. This wasn't my preferred choice for NX, but it certainly makes the most logical sense for Nintendo as a business, and it's definitely something I could warm up to eventually. (Pokemon on a home console!!!)

Re: Talking Point: Considering the Angles of a Portable and Dynamic Nintendo NX

shadow-wolf

I actually think this rumor explains why Nintendo hasn't dropped the price of the Wii U yet, even as the rest of 2016 has virtually no Wii U games. Assuming this rumor is correct, NX may be roughly the same power and graphics level as Wii U. If Wii U was say $200 when NX launches, more than likely NX, or at least the portable NX plus the home base, would be more expensive. Since both would roughly be the same power level, people would choose the cheaper system with an already existent and great library of games (Wii U). But if Wii U and NX were at the same price, then people would choose the system with a future (NX). And of course they want as many people as possible to choose NX to make it a viable platform, so that may have made them decide to not lower the Wii U price since 2013.

Re: Talking Point: Considering the Angles of a Portable and Dynamic Nintendo NX

shadow-wolf

@BiasedSonyFan

I agree, $400 cannot be the entry price. It could be the premium tier, but it definitely cannot be the entry level.

And actually, I would disagree with your prediction that Nintendo would discount the Wii U. They may, but so far despite even a lack of games in late 2016 they still kept the $300 price. If the rumors about NX are correct, that could be because they want to DISSUADE anyone from buying the Wii U when the NX launches. For example, if Wii U was $200 when NX portable was $200 and NX portable + home was $350 or so, and both were roughly the same power level, people would choose the cheaper system with an already existent and great library of games (Wii U). But if Wii U and NX were at the same price, then people would choose the system with a future (NX). And of course they want as many people as possible to choose NX, so they'd rather not lower the Wii U price.

Re: Talking Point: Considering the Angles of a Portable and Dynamic Nintendo NX

shadow-wolf

@Bolt_Strike

I agree with your points, except for the cost of the home console bundle. It should be $400 at most and frankly $300 or $350, after all the highest a Nintendo home console ever launched at was $350 (and said console is Nintendo's worst-selling home console ever), and Nintendo after all isn't associated with a premium price for better or worse.

Re: Talking Point: Considering the Angles of a Portable and Dynamic Nintendo NX

shadow-wolf

@BiasedSonyFan

You make a good point. It's possible that the issue could be somewhat avoided by having the power-boosting base act to the basic model like PS Neo acts to PS4 or Xbox Scorpio acts to Xbox One; the basic model plays all games in 720p 30fps, but with the power-boosting base you get 1080p 60fps and some added graphics capabilities. That way everyone who buys an NX (basic or with the power-boosting base) can play the same games.