thedevilsjester

I loved the first XC, but XC2 is a bit rough. I stopped playing it because of the awkwardness of interacting with the map and the lack of decent navigation or description for side quest goals. I want to love it, but I just can't. I hope they update that part!

@electrolite77 I never said that it didn't run better on the Switch. Why do people keep reading things that are not there into my posts and the try and argue with me about these imagined slights?

I said that it struggles to run at full speed on the Switch at all times. This means it's pushing the Switch to it's limits if the Switch cannot maintain it's framerate. I also said that the game doesn't have any dramatic differences between the platforms it's on. All this is to say that the WiiU was capable of having a fully featured version of a game that pushed the Switch to it's limits.

@MsgBoardGamer it's clear that you don't actually know how a game is developed. A "game engine" is nothing more than a term to mean "a chunk of reusable code". There is no such thing as a game engine that's not possible on this or that platform. Having developed software for nearly two decades (commercially for one) and designed numerous game engines and worked with different consoles (mostly handhelds and PC, though I have friends that develop on the consoles) I would say that I have a pretty good understanding about this field. Every game engine is possible. Of course back porting them is much much harder than designing them for the platform to begin with.

As for back tracking, not at all. Simply clarifying because you seem to be under false impressions about what I mean or say. For example, TECHNICALLY dropping the resolution by 1 pixel would be something that technically makes the game less than it's 1 pixel better. You would be hard pressed to find someone that actually cares about that difference. Where is the line between "a minor change and a change that changes the entire game?" I argue that between the WiiU and the Switch that the line is close enough to not matter. The game would still be the same game and still be just as fun, without a few shadows.

It's clear that you don't want to have a meaningful discussion, and you think you know how everything works, and no amount of logic is going to dissuade you, so this conversation is pointless.

It's even more pointless because I don't actually care. The Switch could be 1000x more powerful than the PS4, or half as powerful as the NES and I don't really care. I have no dog in this fight. I got pulled into this argument because...well I don't know why.

@NinNin If I have to watch a DF video to notice the difference, its not really a difference thats worth anything in my opinion.

@MsgBoardGamer
I never made the claim that the WiiU has better games than the Switch.

As for the other point, it is not objectively false, its still pure opinion. I will explain this by separating the fact from opinion.

Fact: You can make any game thats made on the Switch on the WiiU.

Opinion: The differences that would be required to make the game on said platform are immaterial or wouldn't impact the playability or enjoyment provided by the game.

We differ on the opinion portion. When I play PC games (for example), the first thing I do is turn off shadows, and turn reflections to their lowest setting. I never really notice (nor care) about these things. If a game has to drop the resolution, lower shadows, reflections, etc..., this doesn't make any difference to me at all. I hardly notice. In fact most people won't really notice unless you point it out to them. So if these were the "sacrifices", they are not really sacrifices in my opinion.

@NabbitFan730 @MsgBoardGamer I say the WiiU is capable of doing almost everything the Switch is, you say its not. When did this become the argument?

I love the Switch hardware and I think the software will get there eventually (thats why I bought it, to support its future). You should save your argument effort for people that have not taken a drink of the Switch kool aid because I am firmly in the "I love the Switch" camp.

We can go back and forth, but its an argument without end and without a definitive answer, just opinions. Neither of us is going to change the others mind, and I dont want to argue with you all just to argue. I like these communities. I don't think this topic really matters in the grand scheme of things, so agree to disagree?

@NabbitFan730 Sure, you gave a list, and I disagree with every one on that list. It really it doesn't matter if you had just copy and pasted the List of Switch Games from Wikipedia, I still disagree with your assertion that they are significantly better on the Switch than they would have been on the WiiU. I called out a few specific examples that happen to have direct parallels on the WiiU. The rest just fall into the "and everything else", since its hard to compare without parallels. As a developer though, I am 100% certain that they could have made each of those games on the WiiU, and they would still be just as enjoyable.

Look at my reply directly above yours. Breath of the Wild has some serious frame rate drops on the Switch (so its all the Switch can handle and then some), yet it looks/plays no different on the WiiU, and this is from the developer that knows the Switch better than anyone. The WiiU can clearly handle a game that the Switch struggles to maintain a stable framerate on. The proof is in the pudding.

@MsgBoardGamer I grow tired of scrolling down all of these comments to get to the bottom to read/respond (its a pain on the phone), so I am going to stop replying to these and leave you with this. It doesn't matter what the technical specs are (though 5x GPU and 2x RAM is hardly a generational bump), what matters is how/if they are used. Breath of the Wild on WiiU doesnt really look any different than Breath of the Wild on the Switch. It plays the same, it has the same frame rate drops in the same areas. This is Nintendos flagship title, the title that has supposedly over a 110% attachment rate, and it really doesn't have anything in the Switch version that is not in the WiiU version.

The fact that the Switch (undocked) has some serious frame rate issues with Breath of the Wild shows that its pushing the Switch to its limits. The fact that it doesnt play or look much different on the WiiU shows that there really isnt much the Switch can do (realistically) that the WiiU couldnt have.

@NabbitFan730 Do you understand what hyping something means? I don't think the WiiU is impressive at all. In fact I think its a poor excuse for a console. How is that hyping, or over hyping something? What I said was that the Switch isn't capable of making something that the WiiU couldn't have. Not because the WiiU is some great machine, its not, but because the Switch is also not very technically impressive. Not for a console its not. Its the best handheld that has ever been made, but its a pretty poor console.

I don't care what some developer said (I have been a software engineer for over a decade, and developed many games), what I care about is results. Those results are on the store shelves. Its that simple.

@MsgBoardGamer I didn't really read your latest post because you don't really seem to read mine, just skim them for points you want to try and argue against. Whatever you choose to beleive, I have looked at (most) of the major titles on the WiiU (like Smash, Splatoon, MK, etc...) and I have looked at most of the major titles on my Switch (hooked up to the same TV), and damned if I could find any real differences. Oh I am sure if you analze the still images frame by frame you could point out where the lighting works better, or when zoomed in at full range the texture is slightly less blurry, but that doesn't mean that the game could not have been made on the WiiU, and unless you compare them side by side, no one would really notice or care. It would still be the same game, it would still be just as enjoyable for those that enjoy those games. It would just be a little less graphically impressive, and lets be honest, Nintendo fans don't care about technical specs, they care about results.

@NabbitFan730 Not answering your question for every single game you listed, is not cherry picking, its not wasting my time.

You misunderstand, I hate the WiiU (to be honest, I dont like any Nintendo home console since the SNES, but I love the Switch), I am not trying to White Knight that machine, far from it. I am trying to say that the Switch isn't really more capable. Not in any degree that matters. Sure you can have some extra shadows here, slightly better water shaders there, and a small resolution bump while docked, but you can also drop all of those things (or not include them in the first place) and the games will not lose any of their fun. You could still make those games, make them visually impressive, and enjoyable, on the WiiU.

@MsgBoardGamer You don't seem to understand what a "generation" is in terms of console specs. 8x-16x the performance and capacity of the previous hardware is what generally constitutes a generation. In a previous discussion (maybe on pushsquare?) I outlined some of these specs to show what a console generation is. The Switch is not a generational jump, its more like the WiiU's version of the "PS4 Pro". Better specs, not really capable of much more than its predecessor, but it can add a cherry on top.

@Anti-Matter Never once did I say the Switch is less powerful than the PSP or Vita.

To be clear I think the Switch is far superior in every way to the PSP and Vita, and I love Playstation so much that I have a Playstation Tattoo. That should tell you what I think about the Switch as a hardware device. I love it. My only arguments have been that the software is not there yet (and I don't expect it to be at 6 months), and that the idea of console quality games on a handheld is not a new one, its the very idea that the PSP and Vita were running on. Thats it. Anything else, you read into it because you either skimmed my posts, confused them with someone else, or have poor reading comprehension.

@NabbitFan730 Absolutely. The Switch is more powerful than the WiiU (and has double the RAM), but the difference doesn't really amount to much. Mario+Rabbids was originally in development for the WiiU (or at least, a game by Ubi with Mario and Rabbids in it, may not have turned out to be the same game in the end, who knows), and MarioKart 8 Deluxe doesn't look much different than MarioKart 8, and Breath of the Wild IS on the WiiU, and Splatoon 2 doesn't do anything that couldn't have been done as a WiiU title like Splatoon. Skyrim was on the PS3, and the WiiU is capable of making almost anything the PS3 was capable of. So yes, the WiiU is capable of any game that the Switch is, with little to no sacrifices/differences.

I am sure you could push the Switch to its limits and get a bit of extra shine that you couldnt have gotten on the WiiU, but not only are developers hesitant to do that on the Switch (because the more you push the Switch, the worse your battery life is) but having a few extra shaders, or a little bit more draw distance, is not why people buy Nintendo. If they wanted or cared about that, they would have a PS4, and Xbox One, or a PC.

@MsgBoardGamer You don't get it.

You cannot make the comparisons you are making because Nintendo doesn't have two current generation devices to compare. Imagine if Sony didn't make a PS3. Would that have made the PSP "console quality" by the simple fact that there wasn't another current generation Sony device to compare with? This is the argument you seem to be making.

You can, however, compare this generation (the Switch) with Nintendo's last generation (the WiiU). When you do, however, it doesn't look good. The Switch is not capable of much more than the WiiU was (just like the PSP wasn't capable of much more than the PS2, or the Vita much more than the PS3) and if we draw those comparisons, the Switch is still just a dockable handheld. There are no games made on the Switch, that could not have been made on last generations WiiU. By your own metric, by your own logic, the Switch doesn't have console quality games.

To be clear, I do not use your artificial metric to determine if a game is "console quality" or not. If a game is of the same size, scope and scale as major titles released on the consoles, then its a console quality title. Thats it. I don't care if you could have made the game on the Atari 2600, thats not what defines a console quality title. The Switch has a dozen or so of these games, sure. It will also likely have many more over its life, absolutely. That doesn't mean that its any different than the PSP or Vita though. They both strived for the same thing. Console quality titles on a portable. And achieved this, time and time again, just as the Switch will.

The Switch is better hardware, and its easier to play it in console mode, and for this reason it will be much more successful in its goal than the PSP and Vita were; but to ignore the PSP and Vita and pretend like the Switch is the first handheld to make console quality titles is just willful ignorance.

@MsgBoardGamer the main point of this article is about what the switch is now. 6 months in. Not what you think it might be in the future. I cannot play announced titles, or titles that you think might eventually be made. I can only play what is our right now, and that selection is garbage.

6 months in my Switch is gathering dust, and doesn't really have a "console" feel to it. Just a portable with a spattering of AAAs.

Also I am not sure what you are arguing. All of my posts have talked about the fact that I bought it because I think it has a great future ahead.

@MsgBoardGamer yes it's only 6 months old and we are discussing what it is at it's 6 months mark, not what you think it might be in a year or two. What it is now.

So console quality to you means that it's equal to the major AAAs on this generations console? By that metric Switch has no real console quality games. MK8 is just a port of last generations WiiU with a few extras,. Breath of the Wild on Switch is no different than it's last generation WiiU counterpart. How many Switch games are there that are not on Nintendo last generation console?

To be fair this is your metric on what a Console quality title is not my metric. I consider games that were on last generations console, like Mario kart and Breath of the Wild to be console quality.

@MsgBoardGamer the percentage of "console quality games" on the Switch is very small, most of the games are ports, small indie titles, or virtual titles for Neo Geo. You choose to ignore the fact that the PSP and Vita had a huge number of full console quality titles to try and make your argument. You are the one cherry picking.

The Switch is a great machine, I love the hardware so much better than I did my PSP and Vita (and that's saying a lot because I am a Sony fan through and through), but it's still just a mobile gaming device with an occasional console quality title.

@MsgBoardGamer not true. The PSP had PS2 size and quality of games, and included a digital store for PS1 (that's a home console) games. The Vita had/has PS3 level (as in size and scale) and quality of games. They have "console quality games" just as much as the Switch does. In fact they have had had many of the same titles as the Switch.

For example the console game series Disgaea, which is one of the Switches biggest games as far as content and play time go, had PSP and PSVita ports. Not mini versions of the games mind you, but full definitive editions with all the DLC of their console brethren.

@NinNin No, I bought it because the more people that buy a console, the more developers will consider it as a target platform, and the Switch is a great peice of hardware that I want to see succeed.

Also I don't think Breath of the Wild is a good game at all. I cannot understand the hype around it.

@MsgBoardGamer one of the models of Sony's PSP had an official TV connector built in. No one ever classified it as a hybrid console. It was just as much of a console as the Switch. Not sure what my point is, other than having a handheld that connects to your TV is nothing new.

Amazing hardware with a terrible software lineup. It's been gathering dust since I bought it at launch.

I occasionally pull it out for some MK8, and when I am waiting at the Doctor's office I might play a few mins of an indie title, but that's about it. I love the hardware, but I am truly disappointed in the software.

@IceClimbers The fact that they both use parts of the FreeBSD kernel has absolutely no bearing on their UI design.

@NEStalgia The dock is perfect for in home use. It could actually be a little heavier IMO, but its way too bulky for on-the-go.

@ThanosReXXX Thank you for the information, and the images that you posted make it clear what its purpose and design is.

@stylon @Urameshi If thats the case, what kind of market is there for that? I think a more portable dock (one that actually connects to a TV) would be huge seller (I know I would buy one), but just a hunk of plastic that doesn't do anything useful? I'll pass.

@OorWullie This is exactly what I am thinking. I am trying to figureout how exactly it would fit in or on that thing, and I am drawing a blank. A picture of it docked, in the dock, would probably be helpful.

I cannot resist interesting new tech, so I got a Switch. There are a lot of problems with it (bad software and hardware design choices most) but overall its a very sleek device and I am happy to have purchased it. My wife even fell in love with it right out of the box.

Unfortunately there is almost nothing enjoyable to play on it yet. Zelda is enjoyable for short bursts, and most of the good indies I already have on other platforms. I knew this going in though, so its less of a complaint and more of a current state of things.

@NintySnesMan I absolutely love HD remasters/remakes and "definitive" editions of games. Let me play all of the gems from yesteryear in one nice convenient package. If thats all the Switch ever did, ports of existing games from Nintendo's long history, I would be a happy gamer.

Blaster Master Zero is the title that pushed me over the edge to get a Switch. At the time I wasn't aware that it was launching on the 3DS as well and I had to have me some nostalgic goodness.

I cannot wait to play this game! The NES version is in my top 10 NES games, and is always one of my first go-to games when I load up an emulator.

@davidevoid while I agree fully, having a solo mode where you can control each character, saves the day and I think this game will be fun.

I like the idea of the console stores getting in on humble bundles like this, unfortunately this bundle is mostly bleh, and the few gems on it, I already have on another console, so its not worth buying. I do hope that Nintendo does this again in the future, maybe with some bigger(ish) eShop titles (there are quite a few exclusive bite size titles that I would want off the eShop) as the "pay at least this much" rewards.

The 3D on Xenoblade Chronicles makes the game look absolutely hideous. Not all games that were designed without 3D in mind, will look good when you add 3D. Its a waste of time and effort on ports like this, and I am glad that SE is not including it, whatever their reasoning.

@Operative @kamoetahbingo I am not a fan of video game related collectables, I want games from a game system (and its related services), not brick-a-brack and would be much happier with digital freebies. There is no reason that both solutions can't exist though, to make everyone happy, since Nintendo loves its toys (and its what CN already does/did).

@ZenTurtle in so far as (almost) every single collectible or museum item is "useless", yes. But it has more value than simply being "used".

"Though the DS days of mass hacking and playable ROMS through common R4 cards are a thing of the past".

I am not sure what to take from this, since Sky3ds and Gateway exist, and in the case of the former, work on the latest firmware versions, with no hacks of any kind needed, and they are not much different in price than the DS cards were in their hayday.

@Ryno when we are talking about songs, absolutely. If you bought a new iPod and it couldnt play your music from 5 years ago, after you spent hundreds of dollars on buying songs, you would poopitypoopoop a brick. I can understand physical goods like the controllers, but not this. Even considering the fact that the songs have to be reformated for a different guitar layout, is no excuse (I would even understand a bulk upgrade fee). It makes it unlikely that I will buy GH songs because they have already shown they are willing to throw them all away. Ill stick with RB, although the new GH guitar is interesting.