It was there but I would say outside of Bluray, rendering at 1080p was mostly a pipe dream when it came to games, even compared to Switch, given the minuscule amount of games that actually ran at 1080p. At no point during its lifetime did I ever see people expect games to be rendered at Full HD as standard on PS3. If anything, people had less expectation over time of the PS3 actually rendering at 1080p.
I mean, if we're being absolutely frank, the freaking PS5 and Xbox Series X can't render games as freaking 1080p, 60fps, in 20-Goddang-24. These gaming companies suck, in other words. 1080p should be the industry standard at this point, and its a dark mark against the entire industry that we still can't hit that, and yet these companies still keep trying to find ways to nickel and dime us, claiming that development costs are going up.
Composite's not even that bad on a CRT, if the NTSC encoding is good and you have a decent comb filter on the TV you won't have much of an issue, it arguably helps the aesthetic for old consoles in some ways especially with dither. It's just that a comb filter blurs things out a bit and doesn't fix rainbow artifacting around high contrast black/white lines like in subtitles.
You implied it. You say hybrids rightly bring up people's expectations, and I agree it does for some but that it's unwarranted. Go to Steam Deck's subreddit, you'll see people disappointed in it because of heightened expectations in the vein you're describing.
A big problem here is that you seem to have some inconsistent notion of what even constitutes a "home console gaming experience". For example:
Okay, if you insist, then Switch is already an HD console and there's no problem, most games output at 720p on this HD console and is providing a home console experience. Of course, you simultaneously insist that it's not, so you can't have it both ways.
That's exactly what Switch is doing. In a slightly different timeline where the Wii U was successful, the Switch would be called Game Boy Ultra and would release identically to Switch Lite.
You're not adequately explaining why, merely making assertions and pointing to the fact Switch is a hybrid, which just means a portable that connects to a TV, as has been done before and isn't unprecedented nor has it ever changed expectations.
Then what exactly do you think "the general public" expects, abd why is it correct over what I'm saying?
There is a difference in saying that hybrids have higher expectations put on them and saying that everybody expects them to be the equivalent of desktop PCs. I argued the former, but never argued the latter. That's you putting words in my mouth and trying to argue a point I never made.
That is how you choose to read "hybrid" but that's clearly not how the general public or, more importantly, Nintendo themselves, choose to read "hybrid". No one had the same expectations for the Switch that they had for the 3DS and to argue that is asinine. Its self-evident both in basic facts of the differences in performance and design philosophy between the two systems, and how both the public perceived them and how they were marketed.
Clarification is simple: the Switch is an HD console. Period. Its a hybrid designed to blend the portability of a handheld with the capability of home console, hoping to be decently adequate at both. In actuality, it's okay as a handheld, but loses a lot of the portability of older, true handheld models that sacrificed power for portability. And while it tries its best as a home console, its severely underpowered compared to its contemporaries in the PC and console market, able to give only an okay home console experience. In other words, its a jack of all trades, and a master of none. It can function as a home console or as a handheld, but does not particularly excel in either direction, but its ability to seamlessly transition from one form to another makes up for its apparent short comings, and its "good enough" that its glaring issues were ultimately not fatal to it. This plays into the reasoning behind my original argument of why I think the Switch 2 will ultimately be iterative in nature; mobile technology has vastly improved in the years since Nintendo launched the Switch, allowing Nintendo to both increase the power enough to make it a better home console and refine the form factor to make it function better as a handheld, alleviating some of the concerns of the hybrid nature. Steam Deck shows us what that could look like from a purely portable perspective, and Nintendo should use it as, if nothing else, a benchmark to meet, if not necessarily exceed.
The Switch is more powerful than the Wii U, even if not by a large margin, so it can probably do better than PS3 graphics, though, once again, not by a wide margin. I also doubt that had the Wii U been successful (or something else entirely), that the Nintendo's next handheld would look anything like the Switch or be as graphically capable. Of course, now we are getting into arguing hypotheticals, and that's a fool's errand if there ever was one.
Yes, the idea of connecting a handheld to the TV is not new. Nintendo themselves played around with the idea by allowing you to connect your Gameboy to your Gamecube. But Nintendo's hybrid approach was actually novel. In all those other cases, it was clear they were in fact "portable first" with the TV connection usually an ancillary, underdeveloped feature. Here, the TV connection is the selling point and front and center, and the whole console is dedicated to it.
But clearly something about the Switch is unprecedented, considering its unprecedented runaway success, and how much the general populace has latched on to it. The Switch is succeeding where those other portables failed, and there is a reason for it.
What the general public expects is a device they can take on the go that can still perform reasonably well as a home console; a "hybrid", in other words. It isn't that the general public is more "correct" than you. Its that you are but one person, and they are the Switch's general audience. Their opinion carries more weight, to Nintendo especially, than yours. Hence, your opinion is "irrelevant" in the grand scheme of things.
It was Nintendo who emphasized calling it a hybrid and focused on the hybrid nature as a differentiator. It was Nintendo who pivoted back to trying to draw back in a more hardcore audience and went out of their way to get traditional third parties back on board. It was Nintendo that dropped the intrusive gimmicks for a more passive one. It was Nintendo themselves, through their marketing, their actions, and their investments that made it clear that this would be a more traditional console that offered a new to play in combining the best ideas of their handheld line with the power and capability of their home console line. It isn't hard to see what Nintendo was trying to do; its self-evident.
Then articulate that difference because that's how it seems.
What does this even mean? You're too vague, never explaining exactly what you mean. Define hybrid then if I didn't do so correctly.
Most reasonably intelligent people had similar expectations because it's literally about as strong as you'd expect of next gen handhelds.
I disagree, but even by this definition it actually does that. The vast majority of games run in "HD" on this "HD console", as you defined it. So what's the problem if it actually meets your own criteria?
It does, but there have always been big and small handhelds, it's not that much larger than some others were. Might even be smaller than Lynx and Game Gear in some respects, certainly comparable. The Switch Lite is smaller and somewhat alleviates this, though we haven't had a truly comfortably pocketable handhelds since DS Lite/PSP Go.
Which is to be expected of a
I don't think we really disagree much here, our only difference is that I think on top of what you said they'll also attempt to innovate in some safe, small way too.
Why do you say that? It would be the next logical step. It'd certainly be within its range graphically, give or take.
Nintendo streamlined the hybrid concept and prioritized it in marketing, sure. They did it best.
Agreed, the above is what was unprecedented, and of course, it's Nintendo who have always performed well with portables. It essentially couldn't fail, especially with Sony basically stepping out of the portable sector entirely by that point, leaving Nintendo with the market to itself.
Then in that case, considering its success, I'd say mission accomplished. Seems you disagree with general public more than me, but as you've established "their opinion carries more weight, to Nintendo especially, than yours."
They officially referred to it as a home console, actually.
Ones, plural, but yes.
What's self-evident is it's essentially a portable Wii U that can connect to a TV, and they marketed it as such minus the Wii U branding and gimmicks. "Here's our new portable that connects to a TV, and has a few nifty gimmicks" is what they said, basically, or at the very least is how the average gamer perceived.
I'll take function over form any day of the week.
I don't need to articulate a difference because I never claimed that the expectation was that these consoles operate on a level similar to gaming rigs or need to; YOU brought that into discussion, not me.
Do I need to spell it out to you like we're in fifth grade? I've already defined "hybrid" in the very post you quoted:
I pointed out specifically how this was how Nintendo themselves marketed the console. I can't really boil it down any more than that.
How do you even define what constitutes a reasonably intelligent person? Where was it ever established that the Switch was their expectation in terms of power? Nintendo handhelds up to this point had been nowhere close to meeting the graphical capability of the contemporary home consoles, so how could that be an expectation? You are projecting your own thoughts and feelings on the matter onto everybody else and assuming that everybody felt the same way you do or did. You lack perspective.
The Switch Lite is just a fully portable version of the Switch. If the Switch had come out as a purely home console and they later released the portable Switch Lite that could play all the same games, just on the go, would you make the same argument? The Switch Lite, being a pure portable consoles, makes concessions in terms of graphics because it specifically can't be used as a home console. It isn't a one to one Switch model. Its a different product with a different demographic. Which is why it was released in the first place.
You are right in that Nintendo has never specifically used the term hybrid, but literally everybody else, from the News Media, to Youtube personalities, to Wikipedia, to the general public use the term "hybrid console". And Nintendo themselves have never corrected or discouraged usage of that term. Nintendo themselves officially refer to the Switch as "a home video game system that can also be used as a handheld". They have never referred to it as portable or handheld console. They don't use the term "hybrid", but they call it one in spirit with more words. The effect is the same, and the general public has latched onto referring to it as a hybrid console.
If the Wii U had been successful, there wouldn't have been a strong drive to combine their handheld and home console divisions to make a hybrid in the first place. They would have produced another traditional home console and another separate handheld to follow up the 3DS. The new handheld would have been a leap graphically, but probably only to Wii level or between a Wii and a Wii U; doubtful it would have been HD because there would have been no point because Nintendo would have had an HD home console.
It wasn't that they prioritized it in marketing and streamlined it. Past handhelds had tv connections sure, but that's all it was; you connecting your handheld to a TV's AV In and playing some games there, usually in the handhelds same lower resolution. They were just handhelds at the end of the day. The Switch was a full on home console that you could take on the go. It played console level games, not "mobile" games. It could function just as well as a home console as it could as a handheld. The connection wasn't just an afterthought. That's why this is a hybrid, not a "portable". The Steam Deck is still a portable in the traditional sense. Nintendo flipped the script and sold the Switch first and foremost as a home console you could take on the go, not a portable you could occasionally connect to a TV.
I'm not going to say that it couldn't fail. It very well could have, if Nintendo didn't have good games, or market it properly, or waited a while to release it and ran into COVID supply issues like Sony and Microsoft, or any number of other things. Nintendo themselves seemed to be hedging their bets, which is why they didn't kill the 3DS immediately, even though it was largely redundant.
I never said the Switch wasn't successful. On the contrary, I specifically pointed out how the console overcame its perceived short comings to become one of the most successful consoles ever made. The only thing I've pointed out is that those weaknesses do remain and Nintendo will most like address them with the next console.
While you are correct in that they never used the term "hybrid", they essentially call it one using more words as a "home video game system that can be used as a handheld". Everyone else just says hybrid because that's easier to say.
Once again, Nintendo has always referred to it as a home console that can simply be used as a handheld; they never called it a portable or emphasized the Portability over the home console capability. They've always emphasized it can do both. Hence, everybody, including the "average gamer" have always called it a hybrid console. You are literally the only person I've met who emphasizes it being a portable.
Splitting hairs over who brought what up is irrelevant, you're saying things and not being clear.
You acknowledged that's not how they marketed it though, that they never used the term hybrid. It's officially a "home console", not a "hybrid". But neither of us agree with that because it's clearly a hybrid, as you pointed out, everyone calls it that.
It's called the "reasonable person" standard, a hypothetical person used in law who is what constitutes a reasonable person. I've linked it to you in the past but you probably ignored it. It defines what most people consider a reasonable person.
And that's still the case, so it was never their expectation with 3DS, Switch, or any other portable by Nintendo. I never heard of a single person who was expecting it to compete with PS4 or PS5. Such a person may exist but they're not the average gamer.
That would not happen, it's a ridiculous scenario. If they were making a regular home console it'd be stronger, not just the Wii U minus Gamepad essentially. Wii U was a generational leap ahead of Wii, there's no reason to assume its successor wouldn't be.
No, it literally is just a Switch, it has the same internal components, just no way to connect to a TV because they removed the port. They didn't diminish its internals, they removed a feature. It's the same as if your regular Switch had a faulty port abd couldn't connect to a TV anymore.
No, Wii is very close to GC's graphical ability as it is, which 3DS was comparable to. I'm not sure which is stronger between Wii & 3DS, probably Wii by a tad bit, but they are comparable and that would not be enough to be considered a next gen portable.
It would only lack its specific gimmicks, it's power would be comparable. This is exactly what their portables have done, predictable jumps. You have zero pattern recognition if you disagree, simple as that.
PSP wasn't just playing "mobile" games. It shared many games with PS2 with very few concessions, and its comparable games like God of War: Ghost of Sparta looked nearly as good as the home console ones.
Talk about a "distinction without a difference", that's one if there's ever been. Those are literally the same thing, just saying them in reverse.
I doubt it. At worst it just wouldn't have been as successful as it was. If they screwed up or some circumstances got in their way it would still be a modest success because there's no direct competition in the portable market and people want Nintendo games, meaning with dwindling 3DS support and virtually no Wii U support, Switch is what people would need to get, at least eventually.
I mean, it'll still be in the same boat. Switch was weaker than PS4. Then Sony dropped PS5, now Switch 2 will be weaker than PS5. Then Sony will launch PS6 abd Nintendo will release some type of portable, likely Switch 3, which will be weaker than that.
Doesn't matter what they call it, matters what it is. As for what they emphasized, they emphasized neither mode of play in the commercial, what they did was show a portable console that can connect to a TV. That's what it is, that's what they showed.
I'm not emphasizing it as anything. It is LITERALLY a portable and nothing more, it just has a audio/video out. You can mod any old handheld to have this ability, it doesn't magically make them hybrids or home consoles, they're portables...that you can connect to TVs if you so choose. You can then call it a hybrid, sure, but that just means "portable that connects to a TV". That's all that word means, objectively.
Here's hoping.
I use a big honkin 8bitdo arcade stick, when called for.
It looks like a man-man horror beyond my comprehension
I got my joycon customized and I kind of hate it. The gaudy 1337 gamer LEDs make the buttons harder to push. I got it specifically because it was the most boring-looking option the seller was hawking, and honestly, I still think it looks pretty gay, on top of being a pain in the thumbs.
well then don't get gamer leds. mine was a simple color swap
Flat out disagree with this. The library on the Switch is markedly different from the PS5/XB and that's what gives it its advantage. Part of the experience of a console is the library. The games that run like shit on it are the ports of higher end games from the PS4/XB, and a lot of people already own those anyway. There are a ton of great, unique titles that make the Switch a great experience, even if you have to import half the fucking games - but I'd argue that's at least partly because of SJWs who can't handle the fact that straight males like tits.
I'm just microwaving some popcorn and scrolling through this thread. Does anyone else want any? No? More for me, then.
Do we have an arcade stick thread? I have uh more than a few really nice ones despite not being into fighting games, plus theres a lot of really shit arcade stick cringe especially on Reddit to make fun of.
