topsekret

@Max_the_German Yeah, I'm also disappointed by the lack of a 60 FPS option for handheld. My only guess is maybe they disabled it due to battery life concerns. But that would still be a bit silly since it's already an optional feature when docked, so users that are concerned about battery could stick with the 30 FPS mode.

Yet another reminder that Nintendo and Sony have traded places from where they started at the beginning of the Switch gen with regards to censorship.

@HalBailman Virtually every indie game that gets a physical release costs more at retail compared to on the eShop.

Here's some more Switch 1 examples:
*Touhou Luna Nights ($17.99 eShop, $39.99 retail)
*Chronicles of the Wolf ($19.99 eShop, $29.99 retail)
*Steamworld Heist II ($29.99 eShop, $34.99 retail)
*Class of Heroes I & II Complete Edition ($34.99 eShop, $39.99 retail)
*Gal Guardians: Servants of the Dark ($29.99 eShop, $34.99 retail)
*The House of the Dead 2: Remake ($24.99 eShop, $39.99 retail)
*Pepper Grinder ($14.99 eShop, $29.99 retail)
*Tevi ($34.99 eShop, $39.99 retail)
*Balatro ($14.99 eShop, $29.99 retail)
*Antonblast ($19.99 eShop, $34.99 retail)

I could keep going. And I haven't even touched games that get physical releases through limited print companies like Limited Run Games.

If Nintendo has a "rule" that retail prices have to be the same as eShop prices, it sure seems like a lot of unrelated devs found ways around that "rule."

I can't believe Nintendo's letting them remake Project M! I wonder if Sakurai will be involved?

They should have an option for 40 FPS. Would be smoother than 30 FPS, and there wouldn't be any drops below the target like they still have at 60 FPS. Might even be able to hit 40 FPS in handheld mode.

@HalBailman So you essentially believe that the rule is that AAA games have to have the same MSRP at retail as they do on the eShop, but AA and indie games are allowed to have different MSRP for retail vs. eShop?

I don't have any proof that that's not the case, but to me it seems more logical that it's just up to the publisher.

@HalBailman Lol, your rant is way longer than mine.

I'm sorry I misrepresented your belief. You mentioned a "requirement of a standardised price," so I assumed you thought it was retailers mandating this. I have seen other people claim this. It seems you believe the requirement is from Nintendo. Fine, but it doesn't really change anything that I said, simply swap "retailers" with "Nintendo" in my original post and everything still stands.

Did they have to get permission from Nintendo to do that? I dunno, and neither do you. But the point is, they did it, so it doesn't really matter to me as a consumer. The MSRP for physical games can be higher than it is for digital games. End of story.

Also, this isn't a new thing, I can give you several more examples of Switch 1 indie games that cost more physically than they do digitally if you don't believe me.

C'mon Nintendo, why is it taking so long to fix Raiden III & IV?!

@HalBailman The theory about retailers forcing digital games to be the same price as physical games needs to die. It is patently false as there are multiple counter examples:

*No Sleep for Kaname Date ($40 digital, $50 physical (both the real physical Switch 1 version and the fake physical Switch 2 GKC LMAO))
*Hades II ($30 digital, $50 physical)
*Yooka-Replaylee ($30 digital, $50 physical)

Many publishers do choose to make them the same price, but retailers are not forcing them too. Cause if that were the case, how did the above games get away with making digital cheaper? It is simply a publisher choice.

Also, some turbo-***** publishers like NISA are increasing their prices on Switch 2 compared to all other platforms by $10 while still using GKCs for physical! Look at Trails Beyond the Horizon: $60 on all other platforms (Switch 1, PS4, PS5, PC), but $70 on Switch 2 for no reason.

Kinda funny how Inin confirmed this and had to quickly alter their statement after they clearly received a firm email from Nintendo's lawyers regarding NDA.

Unfortunately, this doesn't really bode well for the widespread adoption of the smaller card sizes. When 64 GB was the only option, Inin said they'd have to increase the price by €15. Now, they're presumably using the smallest of the available new card sizes, and despite this, they still need to charge a €10 premium.

The original rumor was that the 64 GB cards cost about $16. And it was pretty common to see the few multi-plat Switch 2 real physical games cost $10 more compared to other platforms, which implies that those publishers were still eating about $6 of cost and passing $10 to consumers. So with the new smaller cards, it looks like for sufficiently small games, publishers won't have to eat any cost, but consumers will still need to pay a $10 premium.

This might be enough of an incentive for smaller publishers of more niche games that target the hardcore to do real physical releases since they won't have to decrease their margins, which is what we are seeing with Inin. But I think mainstream publishers with more mass-market games are probably gonna stick with GKCs, unfortunately.

@Repete Cool, glad we solved the mystery!

@AussieMcBucket *With whom do you spend the holidays?

What's the point of watching a "first impressions" video from the developer/publisher itself? You think they're actually gonna put anything critical of the game in there?

It's just gonna be "game is awesome." There, saved you the trouble of watching the video.

@Jeronan That's the reason it's so big?! Wow, such a stupid design decision.

@Repete Are you sure you downloaded the upgrade pack? According to the NoA site, 11.3 GB is the exact size of the Switch 1 version and the Switch 2 version is 30.1 GB.

Do you have the physical version on Switch 1? In that case, I'd expect the download to be around 18.8 GB.

Nice, glad they aren't dropping Switch 1 so we can get a proper physical version! And they'll likely offer a $1 Switch 2 upgrade again.

About time. Can't believe it took Nintendo this long to do this, but here we are.

Obviously, this does nothing to address games bigger than 32 GB, but there's a lot of Switch 2 games less than 32 GB that went the way of the GKC.

Wonder how much these will cost though, as that will dictate how often they're are used. Probably big greedy corporations like Crapcom will stick with GKCs no matter what. But hopefully at least AA devs and indies will take advantage of this.

Square soured me on this with their GKC shenanigans and lack of an upgrade path. So I'm waiting for a sale on the Switch 1 physical before I pick it up.

@Drago201 Then I guess most people won't buy the Switch 2 version anyways cause it costs $40 on Switch 2, yet it regularly goes on sale for $15 on PS5 and just recently it started going on sale for $20 on PC.

Hmm... I guess $7 per character lines up with their pricing on other platforms. But I thought for sure they'd at least give us a bundle to get all three characters at a slightly reduced rate. Might just wait for a sale then.

Also the exclusion of the 2 new stages leaves a sour taste in my mouth. Why, Arc Sys?

Still, I'm glad to finally have frame data in training mode. And I'll definitely check out the new ranked mode. I wasn't too fond of the tower system cause I think I lucked into too high of a floor and the hard cap preventing you from ranking below 2 levels of your all time high makes it really difficult to learn characters you suck with online.

@PikminMarioKirby Yep, you hit the nail on the head. Nintendo spent so much time this year absolutely pissing away all the good will they built up during the Switch generation:

*$450 base console price
*Despite the premium price, several obvious technical flaws in the console (ex: slower screen response time than Switch 1, no VRR support when docked, poor battery life, still fairly underpowered and unable to run many 3rd party games well)
*$80 Mario Kart World
*$10 Welcome Tour
*Game-Key Cards (and they're gonna start using them on 1st party games like Pokopia now)
*Forcing you to buy $10-$20 DLC if you want technical upgrades for select Switch 1 games.
*Requiring you to buy a $100 or $25 shell to play Virtual Boy games on the most expensive tier of their subscription service.
*Ignoring player feedback about Mario Kart World and forcing people to play intermission tracks online
*Releasing another trash-tier low-effort Pokemon game
*"Cut content"-style DLC for DK Bananza and Pokemon released right after launch

There may be tough economic times, but PS5 outsold the Switch 2 by a wide margin in both the US (~2:1) and UK (~3:1) over Black Friday. Not a good look for an old console like that to be outselling a brand new one in its first holiday sales period when the Switch 2 isn't even supply-constrained. The problem is, demand for Switch 2 just isn't that high now that all the hardcore fans already got theirs. The only place where Switch 2 is doing really well is Japan, where it is actually priced competitively.

Hopefully this will be the wake up call Nintendo needs.

@Dm9982 The Skyrim Switch 2 update is basically the coal that Santa puts in naughty children's stockings.

@Drago201 Absolutely! $60 for the complete game on a cartridge is significantly more appealing to me than a $40 GKC.

@Skunkfish I don't mind downloading the occasional game from the eShop, but it has to be cheap (<$10) and small in file size (ideally less than 1 GB, but maybe up to 10 GB if I really want it). FFVIIR is too far above both my price and file size thresholds to consider a digital purchase.

@SBandy1 Yep, that's the plan. In a way, it's a good thing: Nintendo has cured my game purchasing addiction. Now I can focus on my backlog.

@jfp Lol, good one! Perhaps "on" was a poor choice of words since the reason we dislike GKCs is that there's nothing actually on them. 😂

@Jeronan Wow, that's insane! How is the Switch 2 version of Skyrim the largest, and by that much?! Devs have forgotten how to optimize.

From what I hear, the Switch 2 version of Skyrim also adds a bunch of input lag.

Some of these 3rd parties are really dropping the ball with these updates. These should be the easiest possible layups.

Nope, I'm not interested in picking this up since it's on a Game-Key Card.

So it adds 20 GB to the file size, and the graphics don't even look that much better? I guess it's free but, I'm not sure I'd wanna download it in that case lol

Really surprising to see the Baroque spinoffs get brought over, but what about Baroque itself?!

@HotGoomba Umm, actually you should be using the Whitebeard image to go with that caption! 🤓

Anyways, hope the Switch 1 port is good since we know that the Switch 2 version will be GKC trash.

More like South of Midnight

Capcom pandering to Nintendo fans with all these Amiibo feels so hollow when they won't put any of their games on the damn cartridge.

Oh well, this game looks mid to me, so I don't really care that it'll be on a GKC as I wouldn't buy it either way.

Why are they adding the Leon S. Kennedy skin from Fortnite before John Wick??

Wow, surprised people are getting so defensive over Welcome Tour. There are way better ways to spend $10 on the eShop than on a glorified instruction manual.

Oh, looks like the article's been updated and confirms that Octopath Traveler 0 did, in fact, sell more on Switch 1 than Switch 2.

It's interesting because MP4 sold a little over 4 times as much on Switch 2 compared to Switch 1, yet OT0 sold around 1.5 times more on Switch 1 compared to Switch 2.

Both games target a pretty niche, hardcore audience, the very same audience that is likely to be early Switch 2 adopters.

So with MP4, it makes sense for the sales to be skewed in favor of Switch 2 (as opposed to a more casual, mass-market game like Pokemon Z-A).

Under normal circumstances, I'd expect OT0 to also sell more on Switch 2, but I think the main reason it didn't is that the niche, hardcore audience generally doesn't like GKCs, so even though many of them do own a Switch 2, they'd rather pick up the real physical version on Switch 1. I know I fall in that camp at least.

Also, I'm gonna overanalyze Dring's statement to estimate Dread and MP4's launch week physical sales.

MP4 sold 15% less than Dread.
So:
(MP4's sales) = (Dread's sales) - (Dread's sales) * 0.15

We can re-arrange the expression as follows:
(Dread's sales) * 0.15 = (Dread's sales) - (MP4's sales)

The difference in sales is only a few thousand units.
While "a few" doesn't have a precise definition, a common interpretation is 3 to 4. So let's assume MP4 sold between 3,000 to 4,000 fewer units than Dread.

So:
(Dread's sales) - (MP4's sales) ∈ [3000, 4000]

Substituting 3000 and 4000 in for the difference and solving for Dread's sales results in a range of 20,000 to 26,667 units.

Which would then imply that MP4's sales are roughly in the range of 17,000 to 22,667 units.

@AlexHarford I noticed that as well, so I tried finding the original source of this data, but I can't. Would be nice if Nintendo Life included a link to the original source.

@Olliemar28 Can you clarify whether Octopath Traveler 0 sold more on Switch or Switch 2? The body text of the article contradicts the data in the table.

Yeah, this upgrade isn't worth $20 and 53 GB. I'd much rather just have a free upgrade to boost the rendering resolution (not texture resolution) and frame rate.

Appreciate Nintendo Life clearly identifying the GKC games--makes it easy to know what to skip.

Please Nintendo, fix Raiden III & IV! They've been broken ever since the launch of Switch 2!

I'm feeling around a 5/10. Maybe 6/10 if I'm being generous.

Pros:
*Backwards compatibility improves performance for most Switch 1 games that had issues.
*OS is noticeably faster.
*The finish on the console & accessories feels nice.
*120 Hz support.
*Pro Controller 2 analog stick feels really smooth.
*Nice to finally have built-in voice chat.
*The few free enhancement patches for Switch 1 games are nice.
*The kickstand and ethernet are nice (though the OLED already had these improvements).

Cons
*Almost all 3rd party games are on GKCs. (And Nintendo may be heading in this direction, as demonstrated by Pokopia.)
*Several games I own have BC issues. And Nintendo seems to be breaking new games almost as fast as they are fixing others with updates.
*Nintendo forces you to pay $10 to $20 to get performance upgrades for key software titles by including them as part of a DLC bundle. Performance upgrades should be free. Let the DLC stand on its own.
*Proper performance patches are arriving at a much slower rate than I expected.
*Many 3rd party games don't have upgrade paths at all for their Switch 1 games, forcing you to re-buy the entire game on Switch 2, despite offering free upgrade paths for those same games in Sony's ecosystem.
*1st party lineup feels a bit underwhelming. A lot of the heavy hitters have some noticeable flaws:
*MKW: Boring intermission tracks you are forced to play online
*DKB: Dig and sonar trivializes much of the level design
*MP4: Filler open world bike sections
*PLZA: Absolute dumpster fire
*I don't feel like Age of Imprisonment or Air Riders have any major flaws, but they also don't really feel like system sellers to justify why you would drop $450 on a new console.
*Console feels really bulky and un-ergonomic in handheld mode. It feels like a 3rd party grip is practically required now.
*Battery life is very poor, even when playing Switch 1 games.
*Nintendo did not address the hardware-level input lag issue. Switch games still generally have about 1 more frame of input lag compared to Playstation.
*VRR is extremely underutilized, probably because the hardware doesn't support it when docked.
*Screen has subpar HDR and lower response time than even the Switch 1 screen.
*3rd party ports still seem to struggle, even games like P3R that seem like they should be flawless on Switch 2.

I don't necessarily regret my purchase--having a "Switch Pro" is kinda cool. But it definitely feels like a disappointment. Even after getting the Switch 2, I've been spending more time playing Switch 1 games, so I probably could have waited, but I let myself get swept up in the hype. I'm sure eventually there will be more must-have 1st party games, but the only games I'm really looking forward to at the moment are Splatoon Raiders and Fire Emblem: Fortune's Weave.

@Anti-Matter Three-legged Sonic isn't real, it can't hurt you.

Three-legged Sonic:

From the moment those desert bike sections were revealed, I had a sinking feeling that they were going to detract from the game.

Nice, looks like Spike Chunsoft may have learned that people don't like GKCs after No Sleep for Kaname Date bombed on Switch 2.

Though I'm not sure if I really wanna get this game. I'm kinda on the fence about it and the Metacritic 69 isn't doing much to really push me over the edge.

Still, the fact that it's on a real cartridge means I'll consider it. If it were a GKC it would be a super easy pass.

Please Nintendo, fix Raiden III & IV next!

But what about Doomguy's bff, Isabelle from Animal Crossing? Did he bring her with him?

@Froid12 Does that impact the RPG gameplay in any way? Like you can't get certain items or characters? If it's purely cosmetic, like decorating an Animal Crossing island, then I don't really care.

Also would still be nice to confirm the Switch 1 version resolution and frame rate when running on Switch 2. I'd assume FPS will hit 30, but some games have BC issues that make them struggle when they shouldn't.

Any word on how the Switch 1 version runs when played on Switch 2 for those of us who prefer real physical games over GKCs?