Nintendo Switch (Currently Plagued) - Here we shit post about the new Nintendo console, The Switch

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

What the fuck does it matter other than in the pissing contest that you two are having?

It doesn't matter at all, it's only video games. He's just suggesting that for some reason Switch is inadequate as a home console, but the fact that it's a portable (which his brain refuses to accept since it can connect to a TV) limits its power and by their very nature will always lag behind current gen systems.

 

[IDanceonTrannyGraves]

It doesn't matter at all, it's only video games. He's just suggesting that for some reason Switch is inadequate as a home console, but the fact that it's a portable (which his brain refuses to accept since it can connect to a TV) limits its power and by their very nature will always lag behind current gen systems.

The truth is, whether it's a portable or a home console, it's going to lag in power compared to MS and Sony - as they have done since the Wii.

So it doesn't actually matter which one it is because it would be lacking either way. As far as Switch being "inadequate" as a console, that's horseshit. It's very minimal compared to the Xbox and PS4/5 because *that's what a console is supposed to fucking be* - plug in and play.

I like the fact there are very few bells and whistles on the Switch. It harkens back to what proper consoles used to be like. And its library is better than the Xbox and PS5 combined.

 

[The Demon Pimp of Razgriz]

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.

It can't compete with the PS5 pound for pound, no. But it can play many of the exact same games as the PS5, just with lower graphical settings, and maybe worse FPS. Past Nintendo handhelds couldn't even be expected to do that much. They basically had to have their own completely separate libraries made for them alone; the Switch is getting direct ports of PS5 and Xbox games.

If they were making a regular home console it'd be stronger

While that would (probably) be true, it wouldn't really be relevant to my point. You're just dodging the question.

Switch is the 3DS' successor regardless of whatever Nintendo calls it.

The Switch is the successor of the 3DS and the Wii U. Its actually a more direct successor to the latter because the Wii U was outright replaced and discontinued immediately, while the 3DS limped on a little while longer. But its effectively a successor to both.

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.

Removing the TV connection also meant sacrificing its power and permanently downclocking the processor. It performs comparable to a Switch in handheld mode, but loses out on the dock based performance enhancement.

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.

No, it would have had around a 360/PS3 level of graphics.

GB: equal to 3rd gen
GBA: 4th gen
DS: 5th gen
3DS: 6th gen
3DS successor (hint: Switch): Big mystery!

I mean, we're probably splitting hairs here about a hypothetical console that doesn't even exist. We're just guestimating what it might have looked like based real roughly on what Nintendo did in the past, but its all guess work. We could argue till we're blue in the face and come to no real conclusion.

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.

Remember, PSP launched before PS3, so PSP looked nearly identical to the latest available PlayStation, the PS2.

The PSP launched in late 2004 (Japan), early 2005 (everywhere else). The PS3 launched in late 2006 (most of the world), early 2007 (Europe). We are talking a difference of 1 year and some change, depending on the region. The PS2 was on the way out by the time the PSP launched. For most of its life, the PSP was contemporary with the PS3, considering that it wasn't discontinued till 2014, while the PS3 lasted till 2017. Most of its better games didn't come out till after the PS3 launched, so no, its games didn't look as good as the home console ones for most of its existence.

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.

Wrong. Within that statement, you must recognize a difference in design philosophy, a difference in expectations that would be felt by the audience, and a difference in priorities. There is a lot locked up in that statement that would be very different if stated in the reverse.

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.

The difference is that the Switch 2 will be more capable of playing the same games the PS5 does. This will, ideally, lead to more parity in their libraries and allow releases that would have come regardless to look and better and perform better. The point isn't to match or surpass the PS5, but close the gap and make porting easier.

Then Sony will launch PS6 abd Nintendo will release some type of portable, likely Switch 3, which will be weaker than that.

The PS5 isn't coming for a while yet, judging by everything currently going on with Sony. The Switch 2 will have plenty of time to breath. By the time the Switch 3 comes out, handheld technology will have improved once again and the gaps between the Switch and Playstation will only get smaller. Meanwhile, there really hasn't been any meaningful improvement in console/desktop PC tech, and even if there is, Sony's need to sell their consoles as more reasonable prices since they can't really afford another PS3 scenario, means that Sony will only make incremental improvements regardless. Time is on Nintendo's side, in other words, not Sony's. The more time passes, the more the tech gaps will close.

So they're not addressing anything in a special way, they're just making the next gen jump as they always have, and naturally their portables will never match home console competition (nor even portable competition for that matter; each generation they were behind something else in power, so if Sony dropped Vita 2 it would've in all likelihood been stronger than Switch).

Any handheld attempting to chase power would have to raise its pricing proportionally, like the Steam Deck. Sony attempted that in the past, twice, and it failed both times. Sony would never produce a hybrid like the Switch because it would essentially be seen as copying Nintendo, except without Nintendo's games or popularity, and would only undermine their own home consoles. In other words, Nintendo won't face any competition in the hybrid space from Sony or Microsoft because they know they can't really compete, and Steam Deck already controls the premium handheld market, effectively shutting out competition, while Nintendo are producing "strong enough" capable systems that could undercut any opponent on price and familiarity. Its really a perfect situation for Nintendo.

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.

You can try to emphasize it as a home console, Nintendo themselves technically do by calling it a "home console", but it doesn't interfere with reality.

Reality is Nintendo considers it a home console. Everybody else calls it a hybrid which means they consider it at least as much of a home console as it is a portable, if not more, since not everybody uses it as a handheld. It is what is, so we are just going to have to agree to disagree here.

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.

Not really. I mean, other than the obvious presence of Nintendo games, its basically the less demanding games of the PS5/Xbox/PC libraries. Only games the Switch doesn't get are the ones it can't handle. Maybe in indie games, the Switch has a truly unique library, but its third party library isn't really unique, barring maybe a few scattered exclusives, like Shin Megami Tensei.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

Past Nintendo handhelds couldn't even be expected to do that much. They basically had to have their own completely separate libraries made for them alone

What? That's just plain false

Capcom managed to get Resident Evil 5 to run on the Nintendo 3DS while it was developing Resident Evil: The Mercenaries 3D, according to its developers in an Iwata Asks Q&A.

As for stuff that actually released, there's several such as Tekken 3D (port of Tekken 6) and Sonic Racing: Transformed. It not only coukd be expected to do that much, it DID that much, because it was capable of that much. Vita also receivedhome console ports. You gotta go back to the GBA gen to find handhelds that couldn't play home console games, after that it was fully possible.

You're just dodging the question.

I don't see how.

The Switch is the successor of the 3DS and the Wii U.

Nintendo can market it that way, and you can think of it that way, but it's just pretty much exactly what their 3DS successor would be, minus perhaps docking. You can talk around that but it's true.

It performs comparable to a Switch in handheld mode, but loses out on the dock based performance enhancement.

If you watch Digital Foundry, the difference is negligible and they even found instances where for whatever reason games play more smoothly in handheld mode. It's trivial at best, this is grasping at straws.

The PS2 was on the way out by the time the PSP launched.

So what? PS2 actually received support well after PS3 released too, and the fact remains PSP launched pre-PS3 by over a year, not just some technicality of a matter of days. You have a problem conceding basic points,

There is a lot locked up in that statement that would be very different if stated in the reverse.

I disagree with that fundamentally.

The difference is that the Switch 2 will be more capable of playing the same games the PS5 does

It'll play PS5 games as well as Switch plays PS4 games, most likely. If it's as strong as Steam Deck, then yeah, same boat.

By the time the Switch 3 comes out, handheld technology will have improved once again and the gaps between the Switch and Playstation will only get smaller. Meanwhile, there really hasn't been any meaningful improvement in console/desktop PC tech

You're expecting too much of Switch 2, but you might be right about Switch 3/PS6, we'll see.

Any handheld attempting to chase power would have to raise its pricing proportionally, like the Steam Deck.

Not necessarily, they can sell at a lower profit/break even/sell at a loss. Nintendo likes to sell weaker hardware at high prices, profiting a lot, whereas that's not always true with the competition.

Sony attempted that in the past, twice, and it failed both times.

False, PSP was a success. Vita failed for many reasons, most having nothing to do with that, it's low on its list of issues.

Sony would never produce a hybrid like the Switch because it would essentially be seen as copying Nintendo

Someone never heard of PlayStation Move, I guess.

Nintendo won't face any competition in the hybrid space from Sony or Microsoft because they know they can't really compete

I doubt they will too, but it's possible, especially further down the line, maybe after PS6, because I'm not sure how much stronger a PS7 could be, they're already hitting diminishing returns and graphics aren't that different between PS4 & PS5 as it is. Probably better to just do a hybrid at that point.

Reality is Nintendo considers it a home console.

Yeah, they do call their portable a home console, I acknowledge that.

Everybody else calls it a hybrid which means they consider it at least as much of a home console as it is a portable, if not more, since not everybody uses it as a handheld.

Doesn't matter what they consider it either. 100% of users could use it as a portable 0% of the time and it'd still be a portable they're playing hooked up to their TV. But I recall Nintendo's own data suggesting a fairly even split of mode usesage. Factor in Lite, and most people use Switch as a portable.

 

[IDanceonTrannyGraves]

Oh will you two fuck off and get a room already.

It **doesn't fucking matter** what it is.

 

[Celebrate Nite]

It **doesn't fucking matter** what it is.

 

[xXx: State of the Union]

All that matters is it better be called a Super (Nintendo) Switch

 

[Two Dollars]

All that matters is it better be called a Super (Nintendo) Switch

SS for short.

 

[Gravemind]

STOP TALKING ABOUT THINGS.

TALK ABOUT OTHER THINGS INSTEAD, YOU HOMOSEXUALS.

 

[Betonhaus]

All that matters is it better be called a Super (Nintendo) Switch

Why not a New Switch?

 

[Gravemind]

Why not a New Switch?

No, what we need is the SwitchCube.

 

[xXx: State of the Union]

Why not a New Switch?

Cause nerds already bitched about that and they keep using the fucking Super Famicom button color scheme in new games and Super Nintendo was dope as fuck.

(also cause it's just going to be a beefed up switch)

 

[Pissmaster]

STOP TALKING ABOUT THINGS.

TALK ABOUT OTHER THINGS INSTEAD, YOU HOMOSEXUALS.

We will all die in the midst of either the Second American Civil War, or World War III, and we will not live to see the successor to the Nintendo Switch.

 

[Smug Chuckler]

No, You get Wii Three DS.

 

[The Demon Pimp of Razgriz]

What? That's just plain false

And the RE 5 probably looked and ran like the games they actually released on 3DS rather than the HD versions everybody is familiar With. Please note, they never actually released RE 5 on the 3DS, despite supposedly getting it to run.

As for stuff that actually released, there's several such as Tekken 3D (port of Tekken 6) and Sonic Racing: Transformed. It not only coukd be expected to do that much, it DID that much, because it was capable of that much

Tekken 3D was basically like the PSP port of Tekken 5; rebuilt using far inferior graphics, only playing like the original. It wasn't even worked on by the primary Tekken team, but Arika, in conjunction with Bandai Namco Games. And it got mixed reviews due to lack of content and terrible online play. Impressive for what they were able to do with it...or it would be till one remembers that it was a five year old game by the time this version came out, so it wasn't like it was a brand new port. My guess is the Sonic game is the same; they had to make massive concessions to get it to run, and it still wasn't successful.

The ultimate point is that the Switch is comparable enough to its contemporaries in that the concessions that need to be made to get most modern games to run outside of the largest AAA blockbusters are far more minimal than it would have had to be in years past. For games from previous generations, the concessions would be nonexistent. Only a few games have needed major concessions to get released, like The Witcher III, while all the games that potentially would have required the biggest downgrades or simply been unworkable, like Red Dead Redemption 2, simply skipped the system, but, to reiterate, this was limited primarily to the largest titles. For every game that got a Switch release, the Switch version was anywhere form generally comparable to downright identical to all other versions. Hopefully, a Switch 2 will ameliorate the issues for the larger games.

So what?

The point is that the PSP was barely a contemporary of the PS2 and treating it like it was such is being misleading. The PS2 was on its way out and Sony were already prepping for the PS3's launch. It was really a contemporary of the PS3 and part of that generation. The fact that, say, some third parties continued to release PS2 games for a bit (which isn't uncommon during the crossover between generations) after the PS3's launch is irrelevant to that. But in any case, this may just be another point we agree to disagree on.

Not necessarily, they can sell at a lower profit/break even/sell at a loss. Nintendo likes to sell weaker hardware at high prices, profiting a lot, whereas that's not always true with the competition.

I'm not sure how many companies would be willing to sell a powerful handheld at a loss in this market. The Steam Deck is probably the only handheld to ever go into this market, outside Nintendo, and truly succeed, and, you can at least argue, that this is because the Steam Deck and Switch are not really operating in the same market now.

False, PSP was a success.

The PSP did alright sales wise, but it got is shit pushed well in by the DS, and it wasn't even close. Doubt Sony were ultimately happy with that performance.

Someone never heard of PlayStation Move, I guess.

If you remember the Playstation Move, you will also remember that everybody straight up shat on Sony for outright copying Nintendo, and the device was a flop.

I doubt they will too, but it's possible, especially further down the line, maybe after PS6, because I'm not sure how much stronger a PS7 could be, they're already hitting diminishing returns and graphics aren't that different between PS4 & PS5 as it is. Probably better to just do a hybrid at that point.

I mean, its possible. Hard to tell what consoles will look like that far ahead in the future.

But I recall Nintendo's own data suggesting a fairly even split of mode usesage

Yeah, Nintendo released their own findings based on data they collected and it was something like 40-45% used the Switch only as a docked home console, 40-45% used the Switch only as a handheld console, and like 10-20% used it as it was designed to be used, like a hybrid. This is why in the past I suggest that the next Switch would see Nintendo forgo a hybrid design entirely in favor of two different consoles, a home console and a handheld, that merely both used cartridges and shared the same library. Maybe add some kind of interactivity between the two versions as their main "gimmick". It would be a logical way to respond to the information.

All that matters is it better be called a Super (Nintendo) Switch

Why not a New Switch?

The one thing I've hoped Nintendo would have learned from the Wii U debacle and castigation they got for the name of the New 3DS would be to not give their consoles stupid fucking confusing names when a simply, concise one would work better.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

And the RE 5 probably looked and ran like the games they actually released on 3DS rather than the HD versions everybody is familiar With. Please note, they never actually released RE 5 on the 3DS, despite supposedly getting it to run.

Yeah, 3DS wasn't HD, so? Nobody is claiming otherwise, you're moving the goalpost. Vita wasn't HD either, you can't just say it didn't get get PS3 & PS4 games because of that.

You said they had to have "completely separate libraries made for them alone" because the systems "couldn't be expected" to run the games, but that wasn't true.

As for never releasing RE5, it's what lead to Mercenaries, a better fit for a portable experience.

And it got mixed reviews due to lack of content and terrible online play.

I never said it didn't suck, but if you want another example, Street Fighter 4 was very good, and quite fun, which I can say from experience.

My guess is the Sonic game is the same; they had to make massive concessions to get it to run, and it still wasn't successful.

Concessions are always going to be there for a portable, and again, this is moving the goal post.

The ultimate point is that the Switch is comparable enough to its contemporaries in that the concessions that need to be made to get most modern games to run outside of the largest AAA blockbusters are far more minimal than it would have had to be in years past.

This is a different claim than what you made and then moved the goals for, but it is true nonetheless. Yeah, there's obviously going to be greater handheld/home console parity with each generation due to diminishing returns in the home consoles. But ever since DS/PSP the fact is the home console games could and were put on those systems, especially PSP & Vita because they were a bit stronger and had better controls to match home consoles more closely.

For every game that got a Switch release, the Switch version was anywhere form generally comparable to downright identical to all other versions. Hopefully, a Switch 2 will ameliorate the issues for the larger games.

I'd agree personally.

But in any case, this may just be another point we agree to disagree on.

I suppose so.

I'm not sure how many companies would be willing to sell a powerful handheld at a loss in this market.

Currently none I'd say, but a lot can change over time.

Sony's Portal sold well somehow, and they've hinted at re-entering the portable market post-Vita before. Seeing the success of Switch & Steam Deck (plus hitting a wall soon on home consoles making a big leap between generations anyway)...it starts to look like it'd make a lot of sense to do a hybrid after PS5 or at least PS6.

If you remember the Playstation Move, you will also remember that everybody straight up shat on Sony for outright copying Nintendo, and the device was a flop.

The only point is they did it.

I mean, its possible. Hard to tell what consoles will look like that far ahead in the future.

True.

This is why in the past I suggest that the next Switch would see Nintendo forgo a hybrid design entirely in favor of two different consoles, a home console and a handheld, that merely both used cartridges and shared the same library. Maybe add some kind of interactivity between the two versions as their main "gimmick".

That's actually pretty damn smart. I think they could also just sell the Switch 2 as a hybrid but have some kind of (probably optional) dock that boosts it significantly. I'm not a tech guy but I think that's feasible.

The one thing I've hoped Nintendo would have learned from the Wii U debacle and castigation they got for the name of the New 3DS would be to not give their consoles stupid fucking confusing names when a simply, concise one would work better.

They tend to keep naming conventions around for successful lines, like NES, Wii, GB, & DS, so I expect them to probably keep the Switch branding. With no history of naming consoles numerically it's probably gonna be either something basic like "Super Switch", or if they're feeling particularly dry, something based on its capabilities, like "Switch 4k".

If there's a prominent gimmick it may be named after that, or it'll be a complete curve ball, Wii U style, like "SwitchR".

 

[TVB]

No, You get Wii Three DS.

I still would rather have a Wii Phone

 

[Never Scored]

New Super Nintendo Switch Deluxe OLED Model

 

[IDanceonTrannyGraves]

This is why in the past I suggest that the next Switch would see Nintendo forgo a hybrid design entirely in favor of two different consoles, a home console and a handheld, that merely both used cartridges and shared the same library. Maybe add some kind of interactivity between the two versions as their main "gimmick". It would be a logical way to respond to the information.

So....a Gamecube and GBA?

 

[Betonhaus]

This is why in the past I suggest that the next Switch would see Nintendo forgo a hybrid design entirely in favor of two different consoles, a home console and a handheld, that merely both used cartridges and shared the same library. Maybe add some kind of interactivity between the two versions as their main "gimmick". It would be a logical way to respond to the information.

I don't see why they would forgoe the hybrid, as the multiple use cases is still it's major selling point. Plus those statistics don't cover the use cases where the console is 90-95% used as a home console and 5-10% used as a portable.

The most logical thing would be to make a smaller and cheaper version of the Switch Lite which can play all Switch games, then sell it alongside a new hybrid console that's backwards compatible with Switch games and controllers. Maybe the Switch Micro and the Super Switch.