Kimishima on how people are playing Switch, usage by household - Nintendo Everything

Submit a news tip



Kimishima on how people are playing Switch, usage by household

Posted on October 30, 2017 by (@NE_Brian) in News, Switch

This information comes from Nintendo president Tatsumi Kimishima…

This indicates the Nintendo Switch gameplay trends. This chart is based on the figures for Nintendo Switch gameplay for registered Nintendo Account users, gathered via the Internet. There are three different Nintendo Switch play modes: TV Mode, where Nintendo Switch is docked and play occurs on a TV screen, and Tabletop Mode and Handheld Mode, where Nintendo Switch is removed from the dock. As the graph breaks it down, we can see how the different play modes for hardware use are classified, from the docked to the undocked experience. We can clearly see that consumers are playing to suit their own play styles.

Here is some information on who is purchasing Nintendo Switch. These are the results of an Internet survey that was given to consumers in the US market in October who had linked a Nintendo Account to their Nintendo Switch system. Please keep in mind that these figures are only for the US market. As you can see, purchases are primarily made by male consumers in their 20s and early 30s. The results also show good interest among consumers in the 10 to 19 age range. This lets us look forward to future growth in our consumer base.

Source

Leave a Reply

  • FutureFox

    That’s probably about as much predicated as Nintendo could hope for. They marketed to the right target age and the bottom graphic shows this through.

    • YamiryuuZero

      Exactly. Nintendo needs to target those who grew up with the NES and SNES, their old fans who want to spend money on Nintendo titles. Those they neglected on the first half of the Wii U’s life…

      Glad they got it right this time around.

      • GoldenTriforce

        They need to market to the young adult market, not just the nostalgia market lol. Marketing just to your old fans is very limiting, Nintendo succeeded at marketing to a wider demographic in the same age range though.

        • YamiryuuZero

          Yes, that too. By not marketing to young kids and their parents, they managed to capture those who actually play games.

          • Tlink7

            Young children don’t play games? I must have imagined my youth then ๐Ÿ˜›

          • Strawman

            That was back in the ye olden days. Now kids play primarily on phones ๐Ÿ˜›

          • YamiryuuZero

            I never said young children don’t play games. I just said Nintendo’s efforts to market for that audience exclusively alienated adults and made kids uninterested on the Wii U.

        • Indeed. It’s what’s killing the big two in the comics (superhero) industry.

    • Jimmy Boy

      look at Nintendo Labo revealed today, they’re targeting that 10% now.

  • YamiryuuZero

    86% male? Obviously patriarchy.
    It’s not that women don’t want to play games, it just sexism, because it’s not 50/50.

    Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’ll go cry on tumblr about it.

    • Auragar

      I hope you are kidding because no. Just no.

    • . . .Huh?

      It says right under it that it’s based on survey responses, and nothing else. I get (I think, I hope) that it’s some kind of SJW joke but. . . it’s too random and pointless?

      I feel like people talk about/poke fun at SJWs more than they actually show up? (At least in some spaces.)

    • SecretX

      Nice.

    • Radish

      Unless this is some Halloween joke, pretending to be an SJW is just as bad as being one. We don’t need this nonsense.

      • YamiryuuZero

        This is just sarcasm. I had explained on another comment here, but I don’t see it anywhere for some reason.

        Anyways, I just decided to be cynic and make a snarky comment. That’s all there is to it.

        And frankly, I think it should be clear by the way I phrased it, but I guess sarcasm is really hard to get in text form.

  • MoYeung

    30% “primarily” on handheld/tabletop mode

    20% “mainly” on docked mode

    • FutureFox

      That’s over 2.2 million people. What’s wrong with that?

      • Strawman

        For comparison’s sake, how does one view a Switch? I mean compared to the competition in the home-console front, the device is pathetic, but if looking at it from a handheld point, it’s incredible.

        Honestly? It’s a handheld that masquerades as a home-console, and the docked mode should’ve never been a part of it to begin with, since that’s where Nintendo was going since they basically forfeited their key position after the Gamecube era.

        Which kinda makes their marketing as false as can be, because the docking part is but side-fluff to what truly is selling these games, and what truly draws people in. Nintendo prove themselves masters of manipulation, that’s for sure.

        • Constantinos Lapiotis

          @ForeVision:disqus Pathetic means “miserably inadequate” and the Switch on a tv screen is far, far from being miserably inadequate. You may want to use in the future adjectives that are closer to the reality.

          • Strawman

            Doesn’t change the fact that it does a far worse job of the competition, that has come long before it, in said performance on TV screen.

          • Triforce of the Gods

            It’s not THAT much worse. And if we want to play that game, the other consoles perform worse than PC so what’s your point?

          • Strawman

            I’d like Nintendo’s consoles to not receive the short end of the stick, not receive a compromised version that lacks features, or looks worse. I’ve been playing on their devices since Gameboy and SNES, they deserve better.

            Yet the lack of power is playing their parts, only portability is a true selling point for these games, which would mean the docked gameplay is not integral in said sales, and will probably fade as time goes by. I believe we shall see a handheld only Switch version soon enough, but no home-console primarily one to follow it.

          • nemo37

            I don’t know what Nintendo’s plans are. However, it would not be impossible for them to use the Switch’s architecture to build a more powerful stationary system. You have to remember the Switch’s GPU is based on an architecture used in desktops and the CPU is a mobile (which much like the Jaguar architecture used in PS4 [Pro] and XONE [X], was designed for use in tablets). In addition, games are already built with two modes in mind, a third more powerful mode can easily be added for a stationary system. In fact, Nvidia already has more powerful SOCs based on Switch’s architecture for more stationary uses. This would be similar to an XONE and an XONEX scenario.

            This would allow them to build first-party games in a way that runs on all the systems (enhanced upwards for the higher modes), and then what would differentiate the rest would be third-party content (which would come on the higher-end stationary mode or at least run better on it) versus portability of the handheld models. In this way they would not have to splinter their first-party development resources like they did back in the 3DS/Wii U (and basically every other generation before that where they made two separate libraries of games for each system). Moreover, portable gamers will get their powerful handheld that plays all of Nintendo’s games + some third-party games that run well enough, and stationary gamers will get their powerful stationary system that will play all of Nintendo’s games + more third-party games. It is a Win-Win situation for everyone.

          • Strawman

            Then let us hope they consider this and move in that direction. Nintendo needs to shake off the reputation of playing 2nd fiddle, being the console to buy after one has gotten their main machine geared and ready.

          • Radish

            I think if you ask most people which console they are most excited about now between the Xbox One X and the Switch, most will say the Switch. The weakest console vs the strongest console.

          • Strawman

            Games sell the system, sure. But the Xbox One X can easily get better in this regard, and we know how devs tend to react to the Switch and it’s lack of power….

          • Radish

            I think if you ask most people which console they are most excited about now between the Xbox One X and the Switch, most will say the Switch. The weakest console vs the strongest console.

  • awesomeparadise3

    And yet internet citizens will still call Nintendo a kiddy company.

  • Strawman

    Handheld mode primary, so it’s a handheld, now make a real home-console, Nintendo and don’t skimp on the hardware this time.

    • Bart

      Yeah Nintendo, make a boring, half-assed pc like your “competitors”, that’ll show ’em…

      Nintendo are actually the only ones still making real consoles in my book, but whatever.

      • Strawman

        Look, Nintendo would’ve arguably made the Switch look far better by marketing it as it is: A handheld, (and cheaper by ditching the dock).

        What sounds better? A “home-console” or the best handheld with console quality games?

        • Bart

          It’s a hybrid.

          Switch games look just fine, especially in the hands of a competent developer. But considering you mentioning EA, you’re not interested in those… ๐Ÿ˜€

          The stuff I grew up on, Nintendo reminds me the most of it.

          • shani

            Nope, the hardware and those stats above prove that it’s a handheld with HDMI-out.
            It’s not a hybrid (= handheld + stationary) console just the same way as a tablet with HDMI-out is not a Desktop PC.

          • Bart

            The only thing those stats above “prove” to me is that people are playing Switch in all the various ways possible, dunno what you’re looking at…

            It’s a thing that can play games both on a tv and by itself, better now? Oh wait, not really by itself now does it, it needs a dock…

            Whatever, I really don’t care what the exact dictionary definition might be, I’ll just be over here, playing a videogame…

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            It’s very much a hybrid considering it can provide the same experience as a home console. People suggesting otherwise are probably insecure or a hipster.

          • Strawman

            Same experience as a home-console, but Knick, it’s far worse than any other out there. Have you seen Frederick’s victory screen in FE:W? That wouldn’t have been the way it is with more power. Why is FIFA such an inferior version? Could’ve been better with more power. How will DOOM/Wolfenstein even compare? It’ll probably look far worse, and might even have more dips/drops, due to yet again: power.

            As people here: http://n4g.com/news/2008858/nintendo-switch-is-a-handheld-first-not-a-console give a solid point:

            “if people are going to desperately try to goal post by trying to
            pretend that this is not a portable, they’re going to have to explain
            what the term “Switch” means

            they’re going to have to explain the existence of the battery life

            they’re going to have to explain all the people that were being shown
            in the marketing in parks, on trains and all over the place without
            being attached to a television.”

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            Why is FIFA such an inferior version?

            Because EA historically makes terrible Nintendo ports. See Wii U for a history lesson.

            “Switch” means it can be used as both. It’s a hybrid, it’s always been a hybrid and it will always be a hybrid. I’m sorry, but this stupid “power this, dock that” argument changes nothing.

          • Strawman

            Yet the commercials are leaning towards handheld. The only thing it has above the competition, is handheld mode (and exclusives). So what is truly selling this thing? What do people really want about it?

            You may say docked all you will, but the fact remains that it’s a side-part of the Switch. Otherwise Nintendo would have no qualms about making a stronger dock, but they were already paranoid about people getting the idea that it’s less “portable” as seen here: http://letsplayvideogames.com/2016/10/report-nintendo-switch-dock-doesnt-support-external-usb-drives/

            “Nintendoโ€™s concern internally is that allowing consumers to attach large external drives to the Dock will cause players to see the system as less inherently portable, harming their core branding for the system as a portable home console.”

            That speaks volumes. The portability is the heart of this system. You can take away and burn the dock, nobody would bat an eye. But the portability factor? No. Never.

            You may call it a stupid argument, but when the future sees the Switch become a full handheld, arguably with a different name, then let us discuss this again.

          • Strawman

            Cartridges are why we get a lot of crap with things like the Switch tax, having to download extra parts of the game due to them being expensive, etc. Cartridges are a sacrifice for portability, since the Switch sure as hell can’t have disks, now can it?

            My argument for handheld is quite simple: Can you play the dock when ditching the handheld? No, but you can play the handheld when ditching the dock, so the dock is nothing but a piece of very expensive plastic with some innards to desperately try and give meaning to the Switch name, when it very clearly is just a weak and cheap TV mode.

          • Bart

            Cartridges are awesome.

            You can just stick em in and start playing immediately for one thing, try doing that on PS4 or Xbone… Also, I’ve never had a cartridge reader fail on me, cd drives on the other hand…

            And again, I really don’t care what people want to define Switch as, what category they want to put it in, it just doesn’t matter.

          • Strawman

            For the sake of comparison, for the sake of marketing, for the sake of understanding just what it is, it matters.

            People say to give it it’s own place, but that doesn’t magically exclude it from competing with PS4/Xbox One, to which it’s hardware is a lot weaker.

          • Bart

            Understanding what it is… It’s a thing that plays videogames. In versatile ways. And from the looks of it, this message is getting through to the average consumer just fine, it’s quite simple after all.

            Switch is plenty powerful to me, games like BotW and SMO look awesome, and it’s not because of fancy graphical effects, it’s because of art direction.

            But I’m quite done here now, we’re clearly not going to see eye to eye on this, we’re just looking for very different things from our videogames it seems.

          • Strawman

            “we’re just looking for very different things from our videogames it seems.” Ah but that’s where you are wrong, I simply wish to see Nintendo’s IP done justice!

            When you play FE:W, which I know you have, and you see some of those textures, Frederick’s victory screen, does that not make you frown? Does that not make you wonder “Why, why does this annoying, constantly appearing flaw get in my sight of an otherwise great gameplay experience?”

            Is that laziness? Would more power fix this? One thing for sure, Nintendo will get the short end of the stick from third-party multiplats (might even overall, just look at Capcom and their unwillingness to support), and that saddens me. They did not pull the industry out of it’s crash to end up on that side, yet they seem reluctant to really embrace progress (with how they were late to HD and seem to always be behind the competition) and that just saddens me.

          • Bart

            …I haven’t seen Frederick’s victory screen. That I can remember. Why the heck would I play as a male character in that game? xD

            You see Nintendo as being behind the so called competition, I see them as being on whole different level.

          • Strawman

            In portability, and what the system is. The system is great as a handheld, it’s great that it has both, but the portability came at the sacrifice of a better home-console experience. That is what saddens me.

            Try Frederick, see his victory screen, and you’ll know what I mean.

          • Bart

            I don’t really want to drag this up again, but I just remembered I was wrong, I have seen Frederick’s victory screen actually, it’s the one where he picks up the rock, right? I hadn’t noticed anything wrong about it tbh, though I probably will now, now that you told me something’s there.

            Just more indication of how differently we look at videogames I guess, to you the Switch is weak, for me it’s literally the most powerful console I own, stronger than the pc I’m using as well…

          • Strawman

            I play PC games on a reasonably powered gaming PC as well, having to pay top euro (300-400) for a graphics card upgrade to properly play the games I enjoy.

            But, you know, it’s just a shame. You want games done justice on any device, and in this case, there’s something silly like those bad textures ruining Frederick’s victory moment. How hard was it for them, to make that part look properly? Considering Nintendo’s history with third-parties, this may be a part of that haunting them, as they readily make use of it’s widely known weaker specs to skimp on games, giving the image that it can’t handle jack when it actually can.

          • Strawman

            It’s hard to really say if it’s specs, or laziness. It’s far more beneficial for lazy devs to have it be specs, and the Switch being known as a weaker system provides them a quick, easy and more importantly, a believable out.

            For every FE:W and Fate/Extella, there’s a Legend of Zelda/Mario Odyssey. So far, considering the games I’ve got and played, Xenoverse 2 and Rabbids were pretty good, so I’ll give Bandai and Ubisoft kudos where it’s due.

          • Bart

            Yeah, indeed, it’s not so much about the amount of power, it’s what you actually do with it. And it’s early days yet, things will only get better as more devs come to grips with the Switch hardware.

          • Strawman

            That is a part of it, but will third-parties give this machine a fair shake? Has EA? Has Koei Tecmo? Has Capcom? Will they? All questions that need to be answered in due time.

            The Switch is not as capable as the other consoles, but let’s not look at what isn’t, let’s look at what is. What can it do? What can it handle? That isn’t clear.

          • Velen (Not WoW)

            “…I haven’t seen Frederick’s victory screen. That I can remember. Why
            the heck would I play as a male character in that game? xD”

            Cause he’s fun and runs around like a Mack truck and hits like one too?

          • I’m going to butt in just this moment, and say that’s laziness. KT laziness, pure and simple. They’re lazy all around though, and even DQ had problems. (Not just on the Switch.)

            KT are lazy with their own games, even. They have brand and staying power, but people are often quite vocal about how cheap and lazy they are. (To the point that people expect problems out of just announced games.)

            Nintendo does deserve better, but it isn’t an issue of power in this case. It’s just the company.

          • Strawman

            I see, it would explain, among others, how they literally used a picture of a lot of rocks for textures at some point. Regardless, the downgrades on Switch are a thing sadly, and people who value graphics will look at this, and disapprove of it.

            I hope Nintendo can at least add something more to their versions of these games (No I’m not talking about Joy-Con support).

          • Some of the downgrades on Switch are also at times how companies aren’t used to optimizing, or play into creating artificial differences. There’s clear differences of course between power and capabilities, but some companies overstate it to play into ideals that flood the industry (because it helps them look good and sucker people).

            Some games do, and as more games are proper multi-plat, we’ll see better efforts. It’s also a given that early stuff from third parties may be kind of weak, unfortunately. But that’s with every console.

          • Strawman

            So you’re saying they’re mostly lazing it out? How is Nintendo not getting quite angry over this, since it reflects very badly on the Switch. It’s already known for being weaker in the hardware department, this crap doesn’t do it any favours.

          • I think Nintendo is letting it slide because they know KT is this lazy, period. It isn’t as though it’s relegated to working with Nintendo and they do lazy things on the other consoles too. Goes back to their brand power.

            It absolutely does it no favors; but think about it. People will say what they want. Even when pointing out facts to them, some people refuse to acknowledge the power or capabilities of the Switch. Some people think Setsuna running at 30fps on Switch and 60 on PS4 shows how ~weak~ the Switch is in comparison; even though better, more intense games have a higher fps.

            At this point, it’s best to let other facts speak for themselves, and people believe what they want.

          • Strawman

            It doesn’t help to get an idea of just what the thing is capable of. Specs are just that, if they’re not used, they might as well not exist at all, and so far I’ve come across, most third-parties don’t bother to go the distance and make their game properly.

            Fate/Extella is bound to 720P which I’ve noticed as 1080 had parts of the game clip into my TV’s edge. Fire Emblem Warriors being lazy doesn’t help either, so who of the third-parties, save for Ubisoft, are putting their backs into it? I guess Xenoverse 2 and Disgaea 5 do their part, but it’s been too long ago since I’ve played those.

          • Well, some people unfortunately value specs to be everything (even when they don’t fully understand them, apparently).

            I will say, at least the pattern is that the lazy or lower budget games follow the pattern so far. Fate/ apparently isn’t so hot on PS4 either (better, but people have complaints), and KT games are going to be that way. It’ll be interesting to see how DQ11 looks, or if Level-5 make a HD game for the Switch, how that comes out.

            Bamco do tend to deliver, and Xenoverse 2 does help a lot. There are other games coming too. It’s also too soon for people to write off the Switch over early titles, when the best games in terms of pushing console don’t come out in the first year.

          • Strawman

            I’m not sure if XV2 had good sales though, and even then the game itself becomes repetitive and annoying later, but that’s a different discussion for another time.

            I thought a lot would rest on how Mario + Rabbids would do, in terms of third-party, but now I feel that’s more on Wolfenstein/DOOM.

          • Strawman
          • I’ve seen it, in more than one shot. There’s other things too.

            But yes, this is unfortunately just KT laziness. They’re renowned for cutting corners when/where they can, and notorious for being stingy and greedy.

          • Strawman

            God… why Nintendo… why did you give a game like that to them?! *sigh*

            I’ll be very curious how Wolfenstein and DOOM hold up. I’d buy those myself, but I’m a PC player primarily, and there’s no way in hell that I’ll play a shooter without mouse and keyboard ๐Ÿ˜›

          • Radish

            Just curious, as a PC gamer how could Nintendo possibly compete in the graphics arena with PCs for their third party games and win you over? What would make you buy a theoretical powerful Nintendo console’s third party game over the inevitable more powerful and cheaper PC version of said game?

          • Strawman

            Heh, for the combined offering of Nintendo IP and third-party IP of course! I realize that you have to have Nintendo’s system for their games, so might as well lobby to get the best of both worlds there. I tend to reserve my PC for shooters (barely play those) and RTS primarily.

          • Radish

            Yeah but my point was if graphics are that important to you, wouldn’t a Nintendo console on par with Microsoft and Sony’s offerings still fall well short of PC standards? I thought that was the whole reason why PS4 and XB1 were kinda…redundant. Is it really worth sacrificing innovation for another weak PC?

          • Strawman

            Depends on if the innovation matters to you. The Switch’s handheld component isn’t a universal “Oh my life has changed so much! It’s fantastic!” for everyone, and so they pay extra for something they’ve no use of.

            For me, my 3DS still fills that role and I very rarely use that as is.

            As for specs, as RoadyMike said, just parity with the other base offerings so that third-parties can stop their whining about power and their game not fitting on the system. The Switch’s portability means that any game can benefit from it. Having games then be barred from it due to means of specs is a real damn shame.

          • Radish

            I think most people feel the portability of the Switch truly is a game changer. In an age where so many things take us away from our gaming rooms or the time we have to devote there, the flexibility of Switch games is a huge asset. Never underestimate the selling power of convenience.

            As a system that’s circuitry is all in the handheld, it is very difficult to ask for something as powerful as a PC like the PS4 and XB1 attempt to provide. There’s just not enough space. They could always sell a dock later on that can increase the power, but that would mean games that you could only play docked. At that point, why would people move from the PS4 or XB1 to the Switch when it does the same thing?

          • Strawman

            You’re forgetting Nintendo still has their strong IP.

            And what I’m saying, is that it doesn’t need to give up it’s handheld component, but it’s very sad that power was sacrificed for it.

            They could, potentially, just make another home-console separately again, and make sure that has power.

          • Radish

            But then you are just proving that ultimately it comes down to Nintendo’s IP and exclusive games more-so than how graphically capable their hardware is.

            To me what Nintendo needs to address more than power is storage capacity. We are already getting games that the Wii U never would have gotten, but now because they are graphically intense they require huge downloads which the Switch currently can’t provide. MicroSD at the high end (128gb and higher) is still not cheap enough in my opinion.

            As for building another home console they would yet again just fracture their own sales by splitting them across 2 different platforms rather than focus all of their research and development in making one a huge success. The costs of making a new home console are extremely high (just ask Sega), and I don’t have faith that people would be satisfied with it if it were to happen anyway. You will get the same tired graphic-obsessed people comparing the tiniest of details and making it a huge deal, which will have the same effect.

            The Switch is proving that people value convenience > power.

          • Strawman

            Oh, I 100% agree with your storage argument, those downloads and only part on the cartridge are annoying as F.

            Again, what I seek in terms of graphics, is another reason less for third-parties to not port their games to the system. Also for comparison’s sake, this annoys me to hell and back: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/db66b3a8794b5b8b1522211ad7b4c2488f5ac6859ca95d77d00e2443f196e406.jpg

            The above game is a 2017 game on medium settings with my weaker card, that said it could be any myriad of issues that causes the armour to look that blurry, but you get the point.

            This I have no problem with: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cd428ea6570ac5caae162c91431563780ba0cd50866cfeda3e6aa61f89cd266e.jpg

            The 2nd is an old game from 2003, but you can see how everything looks in synch, without one thing being blurry and blobby, while the other looks just fine.

          • Radish

            Okay but I don’t see how power is going to be as big an obstacle for most third parties this time around. Nintendo is using a modern architecture that is much easier to port to and is scalable. I think we will know in a couple years whether the Switch is having trouble getting third party support. The fact that we are getting some major graphically demanding games this early is a sign of good things to come.

          • Strawman

            Depending on if they sell, and how they look and play. Both of those remain to be seen.

          • Radish

            It actually only depends on if they sell, and so far third parties have done very well on Switch from early reports. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Strawman

            I’ve seen good reports, aye, but DOOM and Wolfenstein, those are quite different from the usual. They’re realistic, graphically intensive, and shooter, all of those are not the “usual”.

          • Radish

            Lol @ demons and imps and monsters being “realistic”. I know I am going to buy those games, and I’m sure many will. These are games that Nintendo hasn’t gotten since the N64, and it’s refreshing to see them back! :>

          • Strawman

            Graphically realistic, you know, not the kind of stuff we see from FE:W, from Odyssey, from Zelda, from most Nintendo stuff we’ve had so far. It will be interesting to see how they hold up, very much so.

            I’d buy those games myself, but I love a mouse too much for shooters.

          • Strawman

            So, what I’m talking about in regards to what I don’t want to see in my Switch games, KOEI TECMO, is this: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/95481e802bf7a915f9e41495955cd16d463d86c9bb2c322810755485d9cc3d0d.jpg

            That line on his gauntlet? Doesn’t faze me, but that ground-texture…. It may only last a few seconds, but it’s so horribly ugly compared to the gauntlet that it stands out like a sore thumb.

          • Radish

            That’s the very definition of nitpicky, and it’s the reason why even if Nintendo were to make a powerful home console there would still be those out there going frame by frame searching hard for that one mistake so they can say definitively that it’s the “inferior version!”

          • Strawman

            That’s my only textual gripe with any game I’ve played on Switch so far, and I have Disgaea 5, Fate/Extella, Mario Kart 8, Mario + Rabbids, BotW, Dragonball Xenoverse 2, One Piece and Fire Emblem Warriors.

            Like Puchinri has already said, it’s laziness on KT’s end. They should do a better job. (This screen basically zooms real hard on that texture, hence why I’ve even noticed it. Frederick is my favourite in that game, so yeah, you come across his victory screen A LOT then)

          • Radish

            Well if that’s the only gripe you’ve had with Switch graphics so far, I’d say that’s pretty dang good!

          • Strawman

            Oh but it is, but then those games had a very different style from games like DOOM/Wolfenstein. Those will be a real good indication of what the Switch can do, since their graphics are far more demanding.

            Too bad I’ll have to watch YouTube videos to get an idea.

            Like Mike said, like many say, power is something one would want to take away reasons to not develop games for the system. Great games sell the systems they’re on, Nintendo has a plethora of incredible IP, but only so much of it. I can only imagine that, if third-parties for whatever reason stop developing for the Switch, Nintendo will have to crunch their own developers to maintain the pace.

            Wouldn’t want that, now would we? ๐Ÿ˜›

          • Radish

            It sounds like you are worried about something that has yet to happen. Third parties are coming on board faster and more excitedly than they have for any Nintendo console since the SNES. Some for the first time ever. This is proof of what is capable on the Switch and how successful it can become.

            This isn’t going to be like DOOM on SNES, which was nearly unplayable. This is DOOM with a steady frame-rate in HD on the go. That’s no small feat, and most people (graphics obsessors like Digital Foundry included) understand this.

            It’s unfortunate that you will have to watch on YouTube, because that’s usually a poor way of presenting a game.

          • Strawman

            I get that it’s a small feat, but then they also tend to emphasize “for a handheld” you see my point with that one?

            Yeah, well, it’s better then nothing. Shooters with a controller are not my jam, you can’t beat a mouse for games like those in my eyes.

          • Radish

            The expression is “NO small feat”, meaning it is a large feat. Lol, sorry if that confused you.

            I’m not sure then why you care about DOOM’s graphics on Switch if you just admitted that no matter how good it looks, you will always prefer the PC version because you can use your mouse. You wouldn’t buy the Switch version even if it was running at 1080p 60fps. But a lot of people will buy DOOM on Switch because of the flexibility you can’t get elsewhere.

            I prefer gyro aiming for shooters, so it is a bit disappointing it won’t have that as an option. There is literally no control method that can beat gyro aiming in shooters.

          • Strawman

            That was actually a typo on my end, derp ๐Ÿ˜›

            Because it wouldn’t surprise me if there were others at some point, or perhaps if people I knew would want to play PayDay 2 or something alike. Sure, older games, but “realistic” graphic style as well.

            As for control methods in shooters, that’s all subjective. I don’t play shooters at the best of times, as my current Switch and PC games attest. Of those I’ve enjoyed, they were either ruined by PVP (Overwatch) by Windows Live (Section 8 Prejudice) or don’t have much MP any-more to say the least (Unreal Tournament 2004)

          • Radish

            I’d say wait until we actually get something solid about third parties unable to port due to power limitations before screaming “The sky is falling!”. Btw PayDay 2 is coming to Switch.

          • Strawman

            Course, that’s why I even mentioned it ๐Ÿ˜› I’ll be unlikely to buy it, though, as MP titles have proven to be dry land so far for me (I primarily play co-op, and there ain’t much of that)

            Well, many give the idea of such, but don’t outright say it, I mean here’s a good example for you: http://nintendoeverything.com/thq-nordic-looking-to-support-switch-wherever-its-possible/

            โ€œWeโ€™ve been in touch with [Nintendo] about Switch for more than a year, so weโ€™ve been looking at it for our current line-up andโ€ฆ we look wherever itโ€™s possible. Itโ€™s a bit sad that they havenโ€™t gone out with a more beefy hardware but it is
            what it is, so we just have to work our way around it.โ€

            And not all of them will bother to work around it.

          • Radish

            THQ Nordic released Sine Mora Ex and despite worrying about Battle Chasers Nightwar in that article you linked, they are pushing forward and releasing it. This would NOT have happened on Wii U. They would have given up because it wouldn’t be worth the effort. So ultimately this proves that a large and active install base is more important and gives third parties financial incentive to release games on Switch.

          • Strawman

            Well, they did support the Wii-U with releases, like Darksiders.

          • Radish

            Wouldn’t be surprised to see a Darksiders collection released on Switch. But since they were trying to sell one of them very recently on Wii U, they didn’t want to make a collection just yet.

          • Strawman

            They are making a new one, but so far I know, it’s not coming to Switch. http://cdn2us.denofgeek.com/sites/denofgeekus/files/styles/main_wide/public/2017/05/darksiders-3.jpg?itok=uhRG35Cf

          • Radish

            It has a vague 2018 release date, so it’s still a possibility for Switch, perhaps released a bit later.

          • Strawman

            Would be nice, I bet it could get some good sales on Switch.

          • Strawman

            As for graphics, just that it looks good, as in don’t look like this dwarf in the lower left: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c66853d41220f8a6417a52904e6eedaa57f8d30c6463e6e8b04edcdb92db746e.jpg

          • RoadyMike

            TL;DR Specs as good as,if not better than the competition(like they used to be), architecture that makes porting games as easy and cheap as possible, no more useless and unecessary gimmicks sold as “innovations”, online experience comparable more to PC than PS/Xbox and for the love of God, no more of this “we’re not competing with our competition” bs from Nintendo

            For one, they could’ve used the tegra X2 with the newer architecture from Nvidia instead. Not only would that give devs more headroom to work with, it would’ve given the Switch better power efficiency; 1-2 hours (if lucky) for a graphically demanding game is terrible and not worth the trade-off for portability

            When building a PC, you choose all the parts and features you want it to have and you know how much you’ll be using said features. When Nintendo tacks on useless features like hd Rumble that do nothing but add to the system’s price and then call it “innovation”, it only leaves a sour taste

            There’s more to a system than just its graphical capability, like its online infrastructure and experience. For 3 console gens now, Nintendo simply hasn’t shown any sign of getting their sh|t together when it comes to online. Looks like the only thing they picked up from PS/Xbox is to charge you for online play

          • Strawman

            If you put it that way, they could’ve put in the better chip, ditched HD rumble and come better out of comparisons, have less whining about weak specs, and have third-parties maybe put in a little bit more effort.

            Who am I kidding, this is probably the best we’re going to get…

          • Radish

            Nintendo isn’t trying to make the most powerful system though, they are trying to make the most fun system. Besides, Nintendo cannot compete with PC in the power arena, as PS4 and XB1 are discovering. Sure they could compete with PCs back in 1992, but it’s 2017 and Nintendo can’t do that. They have to think differently than simply a graphics upgrade each generation (which they do anyway). And it’s been proven generation after generation that power does not equal sales. Sales is Nintendo’s bottom line.

            This “gimmicks” talk has to stop. Motion controls are here to stay, and we know that because PS4 has them built in to their main controller. And the best players of shooters that allow gyro aiming are the players who choose to use gyro aiming. Portability is not a gimmick either, it’s been around since the Game and Watch.

            If you want to talk about “gimmicks” go to a PS4 fan site and complain about PSVR, which has seriously derailed Sony’s vision lately. Like what are they thinking?

          • RoadyMike

            I’m not saying they HAVE to make the most powerful system, just give their system enough power to compete against the other 2 consoles. I don’t EVER want to hear the lack of power being the reason Nintendo systems don’t get as many 3rd party games as the other 2 ever again
            Sadly, they’ve sacrificed power for portability. What good is being portable if the system can’t run the games everyone else gets? It’d just be a repeat of the Wii/Wii U

            The “gimmicks” talk will stop when Nintendo stops implementing said gimmicks. I wasn’t even talking about motion controls, I welcome them since they can be and very much are a game changer when used properly. What I mean, in the case of the Switch, is stuff like the unnecessary HD Rumble; who’s R&D costs could have gone to making the Switch slightly more powerful, if nothing else. And are you seriously arguing that “console gaming on the go” is in no way a gimmick?

            I don’t own a PS4 so I don’t really care what they’re doing right now. Plus I hate VR in all it’s forms and all the overhype it gets

          • Radish

            I’m all for more power if they don’t sacrifice their innovative visions. The games that run on powerful graphics engines cost a lot to make though, and rarely get the returns on investment. There are just a few big games from the biggest companies that ever make these graphically intense games worthwhile. At the end of the day it is a business and something a lot of gamers may not understand fully is that return on investment is very important. The success or failure of the Xbox One X will tell us a lot about the power argument.

            Gaming on the go is not a gimmick, it’s something we really should expect going forward, just like we eventually accepted Internet on the go and all that comes with that. HD Rumble is a cool feature and I’m glad it is there.

          • Also, KT is pretty much the only company in that market anymore. I think Gundam is the only exception, and Bamco even has their other licensed usuals handled by KT (or Omega Force, who are still KT).

            Doom looked good, but I haven’t kept as much eye on Wolfenstein. Should be interesting to see though.

        • RoadyMike

          You, stop making sense and take whatever Nintendo gives you

          Do you REALLY wanna be like those silly PC gamers with those boring specs, free online, no compromised visuals and guaranteed games at those criminally lower prices?

          Nah man, all you need is some of that Nintendo magic

          • Bart

            Indeed.

            Whatever Nintendo gives me is pretty damn good in my estimation. I mean, if I want a pc, I’ll get a pc.

            I just want Nintendo to keep making cool toys basically.

            And luckily for me that seems to be exactly what they plan on doing.

          • RoadyMike

            I hate not being able to tell when someone’s being sarcastic or not. I’m stumped. If you’re content then good I guess?
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/0554aad644301399c4e2d43f037f0c2c0995488d0c10fcb0bc615342bbcdc8b2.gif

          • Bart

            Yes, good. Very good. Hurray for me! ๐Ÿ˜€

            Just saying, that last part of your post I was responding to, what you say sarcastically I can mean quite literally…

          • RoadyMike

            Nintendo’s magic is what cost them 3rd party support in the N64/PS1 era that they still haven’t recovered from
            So agree to disagree I suppose. Have a nice day

          • Radish

            Third Parties want a system that people actually own, and Switch is selling like crazy and will continue to. Bethesda is just among the first of the many 3rd party companies to commit to Switch. But we’re gonna pretend they don’t exist because that would dismantle your argument, right.

          • RoadyMike

            k now you’re just assuming sht
            I know devs will go to the system that has a large install base. However, that’s not always the case

            The Wii sold over 100 million units worldwide and never got games like GTA, Bioshock, Portal, RE5 – basically the most iconic games of the 7th gen of consoles all skipped the Wii despite despite everyone and their grandma having one. One of the main reasons was that devs didn’t want to downgrade their games to such an extent just to get them to run. Similar situation with the Wii U

            I don’t want the same situation to happen with the Switch. The Wii U proved that NIntendo’s main system simply cannot survive on 1st party titles anymore. But since Nintendo has compromised power yet again, the future is still uncertain

          • Radish

            The difference between the Wii and the other consoles that generation was a major graphical leap. We’re talking HD vs SD. Today it is HD vs HD. Most games for PS4/XB1 are not running at higher than 1080p or 60fps. The gap between Switch and them is remarkably close. As a result, we are getting games we never could have dreamed of getting from the Wii era.

          • Radish

            Thinking Nintendo can build a system as powerful as the ones PC gamers use is a pipe dream. And the whole video game economy would be a lot different if Nintendo priced their games like PC games. We’d get one AAA game per generation because the cost to develop it with the high graphics would never be recouped in sales of $20. Everything would become too high risk so only the safest of safe games would ever be developed. Basically we’d have EA as the business model for gaming.

          • RoadyMike

            Again, never said they HAVE to have top of the line specs compatible to PC’s. Never said any of the big 3 have to price match their PC counterpart (though that would be awesome)

            I’d argue that if games were priced more accessibly, more games would be bought, to the point of balancing out costs and profits. But we’re both only making assumptions and I doubt either of us are market experts/analysts

          • Radish

            That’s true it was an assumption on my part. However, my point was only to ask why buy the Nintendo version when you can buy the graphically superior PC version that’s also cheaper AND you don’t have to pay for online play.

          • RoadyMike

            I’m not replying to separate replies anymore so I’ll dump all the replies here

            The problem I have is Nintendo selling gimmicks as “innovations”

            Nintendo has ridiculous resources so there’s no reason why they can’t a system that’s both powerful and “innovative”

            HD rumble is in no way a game changer. It’s slightly different rumble that Nintendo thinks is a good selling point. It’s nothing but wanted resources and only makes the Switch more expensive. At least touch and motion controls changed the way you played

            It’s more than just resolution. Polygon count, frame rate, aliasing, physics, shading, effects -the works
            If any of these cannot work on the Switch the way it works on other system/as the dev intended, they’re gonna have to make workarounds (possibly costing them more $$$) and even then it may not work as well as they’d like. Some may not even bother doing any extra work just because Nintendo didn’t provide more headroom

            Even if the power gap between Nintendo’s system and the competition is lower, it is still below the competition. I don’t want this to be the excuse for why we’re not getting games again

            Ikr? There’s really little arguments anyone can make about choosing a console version of a game over the PC version. The only thing I can think of, in the Switch’s case at least, is the portability aspect. But if you’re ok with carrying around a laptop in a backpack or something then PC’s got you covered there to

            The only reason I want Rocket League on the Switch RN even though I already have it on Steam is because my laptop’s battery died and has to be plugged in at all times(that and the fact that my laptop wasn’t that great for playing games on to begin with)

          • Radish

            How many games do you know the developers said they cannot port or develop for the Switch specifically because of power restrictions? I remember Rocket League couldn’t be ported to Wii U, but now it is on Switch. Doom couldn’t come to Wii U, now it is on Switch. Wii U never ever would have gotten Wolfenstein II brought over. If anything, Switch is proving itself quite capable.

          • RoadyMike

            I know. But if you really look at what I’m saying here is that I don’t devs to use “lack of power” as their reason to not bring games to Nintendo’s systems going forward
            Since Nintendo already sacrificed power for portability with the Switch, the same could happen again. It already happened with the Wii, it happened again with the Wii U. No mas

            This is why I say I’d rather Nintendo have power as a main focus again like the pre Wii era. It’d be one excuse completely eliminated for devs

          • Strawman

            Power and portability, that has my vote.

          • Radish

            You keep referring to an excuse that has yet to materialize. The Switch fixed a ton in regards to Nintendo’s relationships with third party devs.

            I’m sure if Nintendo can find an innovative way to use power that the weak PCs aka ps4 and xb1 aren’t using, they will go for it. That’s why they focused on it back then. But it’s just a very different market now than it was back then. And no matter what you say about the Wii/DS era, it absolutely loaded Nintendo’s coffers, and that’s the bottom line.

          • Strawman

            Scuse my interruption, but he is referring to an excuse that has materialized before: http://nintendoeverything.com/developer-a-plague-tale-innocence-not-coming-to-switch-because-of-the-systems-lack-of-power/

          • Radish

            Wow, one game that doesn’t even have a release date yet from a story 4 months ago. With the way Switch is flying off shelves this holiday, I wouldn’t be surprised if they find a way to port it over. Then again looking at their other games they haven’t been particularly great either. I’d much rather have DOOM and Wolfenstein and Skyrim and LA Noire.

            Not to mention that the Switch CAN handle many AI units on the screen at the same time with all the KT Warriors games that are coming! Seems like once they see enough people own a Switch they will find it a worthwhile project to port the game, assuming it ever releases.

          • Strawman

            True, tis one game, but it is an example.

          • Radish

            Yeah that was back in January, and that guy looks like a fool now because of how well Switch is selling. EA is not making friends with anyone lately, so it’s not a huge loss. They’ve made it pretty well known now that they will only be publishing the least risky and most iterative games possible from here on out. Which means we as consumers get either [email protected] or the same game every 1-2 years from them.

            Again, we have yet to hear anything recent from third parties regarding Switch’s power being a limiting factor. All you’ve cited is a game without a release date (that may never get released) and pre-launch nonsense that really is not relevant anymore given Switch’s success.

          • Strawman

            I’ve given you some to back this up on another comment, but again, they don’t outright say it. We’ll see how things are, once more devs get to grip with the stuff.

            Though I should mention the Final Fantasy XV developer Hajima Tabatha and how he handles the machine. His contempt is silly to say the least.

          • Radish

            Actually Final Fantasy XV should never have been expected on Switch at all given its development timeline. But the fact that Switch is selling so well is making Tabatha scramble to find a way to get the game on the hottest selling console right now.

            I wouldn’t be surprised if going forward developers start making games that are Switch-compatible from the start, now that they know it is going to have a healthy install base of people who actually buy games.

          • Strawman

            Oh, that wouldn’t surprise me. If only because there’s a legit reason to put their game on a Nintendo machine now: portability. Still, it’s a shame that it also limits the machine, but I’ve spoken enough on that.

            SE is working on Octopath, a game I personally cannot wait to play the full version of, so I’m rather content for now. (That said, SE, something like Final Fantasy Explorers would be nice on Switch, or just a couple of good JRPGS *wink wink*)

          • RoadyMike

            “an excuse that has yet to materialize”? Why do you think I even bothered mentioning the Wii and Wii U? Because that’s exactly what happened with those systems. Despite the Wii’s popularity, it didn’t get the top multiplatform games that defined the 7th gen of consoles because of its weak hardware.
            The Wii U shortened the gap and surpassed the PS360, but did not come near the PS4/Xbox1. That, along with no system online infrastructure for devs to use and low sales cost the Wii U even more games like Tomb Raider, Overwatch and Destiny.

            “weak PCs aka PS4 and xb1” okay your fanboy is showing. If those 2 are just weak PCs then where does that leave the Switch which is weaker than the 2? You really don’t wanna go there
            And what “innovative way”? What’s the point of portability if the system can’t run the games literally every other platform is getting?

            The market never changed. What happened with the Wii/DS was that Nintendo tapped into a market that no one else at the time considered. Now almost all of that “market” has moved on to mobile/tablets. The ones left over were still the ones who were playing on Xbox and PS, the consoles that were getting every game Nintendo didn’t.
            Then the Wii U came around and Nintendo thought that “market” was still there/theirs. They insisted that they didn’t have to compete with PS/Xbox and “did their own thing”. What happened soon after was that the wii u had a slow yet short life cycle with only a trickle of 1st party games and some indies keeping it alive. This is not my opinion, this is fact

          • Radish

            We are talking about the Switch here, not Wii/Wii U, and there have not been any major dev complaints about its power or difficulties porting games to the point where they are outright cancelling them.

            Ask any PC gamer which of the consoles they would prefer to have and I guarantee you most will say Switch. Why? It provides them with the most exclusive games and on the go gaming that PC gaming doesn’t provide (and no, a laptop is not a handheld). That’s why I call ps4 and xb1 “weak PCs”, because they don’t offer anything different. They as you say “stuck to their guns” and I don’t know how much longer they can stubbornly refuse to accept that PC wins the graphics fans over. That’s why you see PS4 desperately diving into the VR arena in hopes that it takes off.

            Just because the market shifted doesn’t mean they lost all of the money they made off of Wii/DS. They are in an amazing position now because of the billions they made in that era. They can afford to take risks, they can afford to make big amazing games, get third party exclusives, etc. They also have a mobile strategy that is attempting to bring the more casual gamers back into the fold. With how fast Switch is selling, I have a hard time believing that Nintendo isn’t winning some of them back as well as the more hardcore gamers.

            Except this time they aren’t doing it with Wii Sports, they are doing it with amazing games and a flexible, convenient, marketable, understandable system.

          • RoadyMike

            I mentioned those 2 for perspective. C’mon man

            Well no sht PC gamers will prefer the Switch, almost every game the other 2 get are also on PC. Every single PC gamer I know says they’d get Nintendo systems over PS/Xbox cuz of its exclusive IP’s. Not because of portability. And I never said laptops. I mentioned laptops because that’s PC’s portable option that’s been available for years. You have pretty much every game that isn’t exclusive to consoles on the go

            Sigh, you love putting words in my mouth, don’t you?
            I never said Nintendo lost the money they made off Wii/DS. Sure Nintendo can take risks, everyone here has parroted the “Nintendo can have losses for decades and still have millions” thing already. I get it. The problem is that Nintendo are using the money towards things just to be “different”.

            What’s worse, they’re keeping up this “different” shtick for an audience that isn’t there anymore. Wii U showed us that being different isn’t necessarily better, just look at how much the PS4/XboxOne outsold it and they’re just “weaker PC’s” according to you.

            There would be absolutely no issue for Nintendo to have a system that doesn’t have unnecessary gimmicks and was, for the most part, just a regular console with high specs. They’d still have the upper hand with their exclusive IP’s and quite possibly the 3rd party support that they’ve been missing since the SNES

            Hey the Wii U was marketable they just never bothered to do so ๐Ÿ˜›

          • Radish

            The PS4 and Xb1 are being outsold by their previous gen counterparts, the ps3 and xb360. And they aren’t just weaker PCs according to me. It’s according to anyone who has moved from PS4 and XB1 to PC gaming. And Sony and Microsoft are going to continue losing customers to PCs unless they do something different like Nintendo.

            Nintendo offering something different is the way they stay relevant in the console space. There is no other company that gets as much hype and that’s because they are truly unpredictable, and that’s exciting. We don’t know if there will be a PS5 or another Xbox, but we already know what to expect. More of the same.

            The way I see it is there is either PC gaming, or Nintendo console gaming. Tell me why I would need anything else.

          • RoadyMike

            The way I see it, whether you agree or not, was that PS and Xbox stuck to their guns. Nintendo tried doing something different with very low specs and gimmicks that appealed to a much wider audience and it worked out for them. But it came at a cost, one that I think really mattered. This is why the Wii was such a HUGE turning point for everyone in the industry

            Sadly, they thought this was the way to go moving forward, so they adopted this family friendly image. They thought they could get away with weaker hardware and gimmicks again because it worked so well the first time

            But the people who bought the Wii by the truckloads were gone. By the time the Wii came out Nintendo was already bleeding 3rd party support. 3rd party devs that stuck around saw how their games weren’t selling on the most popular console at the time. I think it had to do with Nintendo’s target audience and 3rd parties’ target audience being a little too different. Pair that up with cripplingly low specs to work with and its no wonder why they left

            These events all but solidified Nintendo as a “kiddie” game company in the eyes of would be gamers and 3rd party devs (despite many of their consumers being adults)

            When the Wii U came along, Nintendo’s “market” and most 3rd party devs were gone. The devs that stayed only put out last gen scraps to “test the waters”. When those didn’t sell, they jumped ship. The players that stuck around were ‘rewarded’ with a very slow trickle of 1st party games up until the Wii U’s end

            The DS family still did amazing tho. Goddamn I fkn love my 3DS to death man, you have no idea. Maybe this is why Nintendo made the Switch more of a handheld

            This, all these events that have led to this point is the reason I seriously don’t want Nintendo to skimp out on console specs, to try and sell gimmicks that only add to the price as “innovations”, to try to cater to a market that simply isn’t there anymore and to continue this “We’re not competing with our competitors” PR BS. Nintendo fanboys aren’t doing Nintendo nor other fans any favors by being perfectly OK with less

            This is my position, in its entirety. I hope it helped you see where I’m coming from, even if just a little

          • Strawman

            I’ve got a feeling many share that one with you. I hear people wanting to return to the Gamecube days, to Nintendo being the way their E3 presentation of 2004 went:

            The pot-shotting is no longer needed, but that solid line-up of hard to beat games, third-parties definitely included, yeah.. We haven’t had that for a loooong time now.

          • RoadyMike

            If there are others who feel the same, they certainly aren’t here. Too much azz kissing going on, settling for less than the competition cuz “Nintendo and they can do no wrong”. What bothers me the most is that Nintendo is always in a position where they can do a lot better but choose not to, then we have people defending and making excuses for them nonstop

          • Strawman

            I guess that’s just where we sit today, Nintendo being in an underdog position and people feel the need to defend what’s left.

          • Radish

            They are no longer an underdog.

          • Strawman

            Depends on whome you ask. They’re very much still part of the big 3, but many see them at the 3rd place, although maybe MS has taken that, but it remains to be seen.

          • RoadyMike

            Xbox just doesn’t have as much appealing exclusives like Playstation and Nintendo. I’m kinda surprised they’ve made if this far

          • Strawman

            Tis true. I also remember them saying they want the Xbox One X to be “The place to play third-party games” so I’m guessing their focus is to woe them.

          • Radish

            They will be done once Xbox One X flops. But they have more money than Nintendo and can afford it if they want to.

          • RoadyMike

            I kinda don’t want Xbox to go away tho. More competition means companies have to keep trying to 1 up each other and give us better stuff

          • Radish

            I actually agree and want all 3 to keep making hardware, because competition benefits us as consumers. I just don’t see much of a future for Xbox realistically speaking. They need to buy some 1st party studios (or not because apparently they don’t use the ones they have).

          • RoadyMike

            Rest in R.I.P Rare

          • Radish

            Nintendo should build a new 1st party studio and see if they can hire Rare employees

          • RoadyMike

            They could just absorb playtonic or something similar. Heck, buy out Sega, they’re not doing too hot anyway and they’ll get Atlus as a bonus. It’s just more games under their belt

          • Radish

            Nintendo will never buy out Sega. That’s just too much of a mind twist. Maybe they could get Hudson Soft from Konami. Playtonic would be good for both Parties, I agree.

          • Radish

            As of 2017 they are 1st place, objectively speaking.

          • no

          • Radish

            Sales numbers, yes.

          • no. switch has not outsold a system that’s been out for years

          • Radish

            I said as of 2017, and they have.

          • no, they haven’t
            stop lying
            ps4 has sold 67 million consoles
            has switch sold 67 million consoles?

          • Radish

            PS4 sold 67 million consoles in 2017? No. Switch has outsold PS4 in 2017. It’s a fact. Switch is the new #1.

          • so you’re just crazy
            noted

          • Radish

            If crazy means I use objective facts to support my argument, then yes. You have yet to disprove anything I said. Have fun with your $500 netflix player.

          • Strawman

            Oh, on what do you base that? I mean the PS4 had recently had… 67 million something sales? Sure it’s been on the market far longer, but if you’re looking at “places” then such a huge sales number should put you in first.

          • Radish

            Did you misread the part where I specified “As of 2017”?

          • Strawman

            I’m afraid I don’t follow. Do you mean how much Switch has sold compared to PS4 in 2017? Because you do have to keep in mind that PS4 still has some heavy-hitters incoming (sure, so does Nintendo, but then there’s still a ton more PS4’s out there in comparison)

          • Radish

            Yes, I am referring to comparisons in 2017 and forward since Switch wasn’t around before then. It is currently the hottest selling system on the market, hence the #1. PS4 had plenty of titles they announced years ago that were supposed to be out by now and they’ve not surprisingly been delayed (Shenmue 3, etc).

          • Strawman

            True, but eventually these will come out, and there’s games in there that will probably sell extremely well, like Monster Hunter World and Dad (God) of War.

            Plus, a part of the Switch’s success would have to be attributed to newness and it’s concept of design, much like how VR probably got a ton of sales at the start, because people wanted to “try it”.

          • Radish

            VR is Sony realizing they can’t keep getting away with doing the same thing every generation. They are trying to expand their gaming brand because that’s the only profitable part of their business remaining.

            Switch will continue to sell well and I don’t see it slowing down anytime soon. I’m glad you’ve realized Switch is #1 in 2017 going forward.

          • Strawman

            Well, from what I’ve also gathered, Sony will be damned if they let that happen without a fight. They seem hell-bent to “reclaim” Japan.

          • Radish

            Well right now Vita users in Japan are transitioning to Switch so I don’t know how Sony plans on “reclaiming” Japan.

          • RoadyMike

            Easy, going full on ninja mode by replacing all systems with Vitas and PS4s while they sleep. I feel sorry for any witnesses

          • Radish

            I don’t think Nintendo ninjas would lose to Sony samurai.

          • RoadyMike

            I said Sony Ninjas not samurai tho

          • Radish

            Sony doesn’t have ninjas though, only samurai.

          • Strawman

            If it’s true what they say, and Japan is getting hyped for MH:W, then via games.

          • Radish

            I truly will be shocked if Capcom doesn’t bring a mainline Monster Hunter game to Switch. Once that happens, Sony will have nothing left in Japan since even Square Enix is putting games on the Switch.

          • Strawman

            Well, now it’s SE especially, and even they are doing strange things (Where is Seiken Densetsu for the West, Square? Up yours?)

          • Radish

            We’ll get it eventually.

          • Strawman

            There’s also that remake of a classic SNES game that came to all other platforms but Switch: http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2017/08/secret_of_mana_is_getting_a_3d_remake_but_guess_what_console_its_not_coming_to

            I’ve no words for this.

          • Radish

            Again, I wouldn’t be surprised if we get that eventually. Right now I am happy with SE giving Switch an exclusive NEW game in Octopath, rather than just remakes of old games (even if I do want that).

          • Strawman

            Sure, I’m looking forward to that as well. But compared to their other efforts, it doesn’t feel equal in scope, and that’s a shame. Like Switch gets the bone after all the chicken’s been eaten off it.

          • Radish

            How does it not feel equal in scope, and what are you comparing it to?

          • Strawman

            Course, I know there’s development time and all that, but just compare it to what SE has released and will release on the other platforms.

            Compare Octopath to KH3 and FF 15, do they feel like the same budget/effort?

          • Radish

            Did you expect an exclusive KH3esque game from SE this early in the Switch’s life? You can’t call Octopath a lack of effort when they could have easily just ported over Bravely Default or perhaps give us a new one that’s a copy and paste effort. Not only that, but people who have played the demo said it was the first game they really experienced HD Rumble, which is pretty amazing when you think about it. SE also communicating with the fans about the game during its development is also something you would not get from FF 15 or KH3.

            And yes, development time is a massive factor, especially when it comes to companies like SE. How long as Kingdom Hearts 3 been in development for? Since 2006? Yeah. I’m sure we will get an experience like that on Switch, but to expect it this early shows how out of touch gamers are with development.

          • Strawman

            I’m not expecting it, and I’m not saying Octopath is worse than those games, but it’s clear that Octopath is of a much smaller scope, and thus probably a ton easier/cheaper/faster to make.

          • Radish

            And what is your point? I’d rather have a new IP than a rushed port of an old game.

          • Strawman

            Nevermind, at this point you either understand my point and have your thoughts on it, or you don’t care enough to understand it which means we’ve nothing left to discuss here.

          • Radish

            Exactly, you have no point. You are just trolling, as I expected. Desperately grasping at straws trying to come up with a way to discredit the Switch’s success.

          • Strawman

            That’s the conclusion you’re drawing? I’ve no words, Radish. You prove your immaturity by saying I’m trolling. It doesn’t take a Fing rocket scientist to see that, even if it’ll be great, even people, myself included, will buy it and enjoy it, it’s a lower budget, lower scale, side-team project in comparison to something like Final Fantasy XV.

            Spin that how you will, I will not have someone make me out for trolling while having a normal discussion.

          • Radish

            You continue to embarrass yourself with immature responses like this. I don’t know how clueless you have to be to expect a massive game like FFXV to be on Switch within 8 months. You have no idea what the timelines are like for various projects. I mentioned that KH3 has been in development for 11 years, and you get upset if it isn’t on Switch within 8 months? Also you have this assumption that because we are getting Octopath it means we won’t be getting a bigger game from SE. It’s very difficult to discuss things with you when you are being this dense and stubborn.

          • Strawman

            I’m talking about having a project IN THE WORKS of the same scope, you ignoramus and again, I’ve mentioned that DQ is kinda of the same scope, but just ignore that to make yourself look better. Also you say it’s hard to discuss things with me? What do you think from my point of view, if you can even imagine that? Probably not, but eh, just the sort of person I’m dealing with /shrug.

            This discussion has gone towards the route of annoying as hell. So, I’ll make it short: SE is no saint, that’s all I’m saying, take from that what you will.

          • Radish

            Did SE support Wii U? I don’t recall if they did, and if they did it was probably minimal. You can’t win back a developer that quickly. Of course Sony is getting preferential treatment, they’ve had a long relationship on Sony consoles. SE is only just starting to come back to Nintendo, where they’ve mostly been giving 3DS and DS games rather than console games. That’s why it is so great that Switch is selling well because it gives SE more incentive to reconsider Nintendo once again. Your problem is that some of your expectations are extremely naive in regards to game development and business relations.

          • Strawman

            SE had supported the 3DS quite thoroughly though, and the Switch has the 3DS’ legacy, so they’ve been with Nintendo at that point as well, all things considered.

            Call it what you will. Those who jump in early, now that there is relatively little competition will find strong profit, while those that jump in late, when the competition is settled, will find themselves at a disadvantage sales wise.

          • Radish

            I agree completely with your last paragraph. That’s why I was saying Bethesda is taking a risk which could turn into a huge reward for them for getting in while it’s still very early. Most of the other devs are playing it safe by not committing much right now until they know for sure it is a profitable decision to make.

            As for SE, yes they made plenty of games for 3DS, but that’s why this Switch exclusive is like an enhanced Bravely Default and not a KH3. They have to get more familiar with the hardware before they bring over bigger games, but it was important for them to get an exclusive title on the Switch early.

          • Strawman

            Then I’d argue (without knowing the details, but none of us do) if Bethesda can bring Wolfenstein and DOOM, then less intensive titles should be able to follow too, right? Why aren’t they, save for all the obvious reasons (waiting it out, not thinking it will sell, bladiebla) Not thinking it will sell being a funny one considering the Switch doesn’t have any shooters to gauge sales with, and Bethesda are bringing 2, high profile ones.

          • Radish

            Not every company is willing to take a risk on a Nintendo platform. They’ve been burned too many times before. It’s that simple. It takes much longer to rebuild bridges than it does for them to burn down.

          • Radish

            Boy you are extremely salty lately. I honestly don’t even know why you bought the Switch if you feel so strongly against it. You have to realize that the only way to convince Nintendo is to vote with your wallet, and you voted for Switch. Hypocritical to say the least, considering you are validating their “mistakes” with your wallet.

            And enough with your quotes that no one here has said.

          • RoadyMike

            Not replying to 3 different posts. Going from earliest to latest replies

            Influence huh? Tell me, how often do devs use motions controls in their games if it was so influential? Surely since pretty much every platform has some kind of motion control it must be used as often as the Wii, right?

            Sure, the Powerglove came before the eyetoy. What I was getting at was that we had already seen motion controls before. That’s all. And when it came down to it, that’s almost all the Wii had to offer over the other 2 consoles

            See this is what I mean by you putting words in my mouth. I NEVER said the Switch was awful, just lacking.
            If you would simply pay attention to what I’m saying instead of drawing your own conclusions and twisting my words you’d realize that what I have been saying this entire time is that the Switch has faults that were also present in the Wii and Wii U. These faults had negative effects on Nintendo;
            how the people percieved them (general public, gamers, devs etc), their mentality of not competing with direct competition affecting the system’s design, major 3rd party devs pretty much abandoning them etc, etc I’m not repeating myself again for you

            And don’t assume to know what PC gamers want

            “And they aren’t just weaker PCs according to me.It’s according to anyone who has moved from PS4 and XB1 to PC gaming”
            Cop-out. Do you want me to point out every instance of you called PS4 and Xboxone just that throughout this conversation?

            Sony and Microsoft seem to be doing pretty fine despite playing it safer and PC being a much better alternative. I can confidently say that they’ll continue to do fine(Playstation at least. More exclusives)as long as they continue to get almost every game each generation. The same can’t be said about Nintendo consoles since the SNES. Even if the PS5 /Xbox whatever are just power upgrades, that’s enough for them to get these multiplat games

            I’m not telling you what you should get. What i’ve been saying is for Nintendo do do what the other 2 consoles have done right so Nintendo gamers don’t have to miss out on the games everyone else gets ON TOP OF Nintendo’s IP’s. Get it now?

            Why does everyone think I get salty? I love discussions. The only problem is when I have to repeat myself over and over because people simply just don’t understand what I’m saying or keep assuming things I never said. It gets tiresome sometimes

            I don’t hate the Switch, I just dislike certain aspects of it. I love how I will be able to play console like games on the go. Once the games I actually wanna play come out I’ll probably be stuck to the thing.
            But I don’t like how power was compromised. I don’t like the overhyped rumble that doesn’t really add anything that regular rumble could’ve done just fine. I don’t like the crappy battery life. I don’t like the crappy storage. I don’t like how there’s still no media apps or internet browser (stuff that the Wii U had around the same time frame)
            I don’t think any of these are unfair criticisms.

            The Switch was available at a Best Buy that was really close to my house so I nabbed one before all the stock was gone. No one really knows when stock would be available again. Games I really wanted to play were already announced/knew they were coming and I knew beforehand it would be a good investment. The game’s aren’t out just yet tho.
            I’m not validating anything. If Pokemon, Zelda, Metroid, Smash and Xenoblade weren’t Nintendo exclusive I would’ve never bought the system and would’ve easily ditched Nintendo long ago

            Actions speak much louder than words and I see a top of people blindly defend and make excuses for Nintendo all the time here. No criticism allowed or else you get called all kinds of names. I just wanna see Nintendo do better and get the games the other platforms get. Is that really so bad?

          • Radish

            If you can’t see that Nintendo is already doing better than they were with Wii U, then there is no getting through to you. You assume I am a Nintendo fanboy so everything I say is “defending blindly” and somehow you think I “don’t allow criticism”, yet I can say the same about you “blindly attacking” as a “Nintendo hater”. See? Not so nice, and not true.

            I understand your point with the faults of Wii and Wii U and how you think they are carrying over onto the Switch. But so far it hasn’t been the case. The Switch is gaining more 3rd party support, and devs are genuinely excited about making games for it. And it hasn’t even been a year since its launch. I expect next year we will get much more 3d party support too, as well as the other missing features you mentioned.

            If you continue buying Nintendo consoles even though you have problems with the system, you are telling Nintendo you will be buying whatever they make anyway. So why should they change when you buy it anyway? You are right, actions speak louder than words and your actions are approving Nintendo’s decisions.

          • RoadyMike

            Goodness what’s with you assuming what I think and pretending I said things I never said?

            Never said the Switch isn’t doing well
            For the 5th time now, all I said was that the Switch DOES share various factors that hindered Nintendo’s previous systems even if you choose to ignore them or think they’re not that big a deal. I literally cannot put it any simpler than that

            If the Switch can continue to show that devs want and can develop all the games they want/can on the Switch, I’ll concede that it was just me overthinking things

            But if/when 3rd parties come out saying that they cannot port the biggest multiplat titles of the year that are on every other platform due to lack of power, bad online infrastructure, cart space limitations etc, I don’t want anyone calling these devs “lazy” for not wanting to spend more resources than they have to because Nintendo didn’t provide them what they needed to make porting games easy due to their “we have to be different” mentality

            Updates won’t fix the storage, battery or power issues

            I buy them cuz it’s the only way to legitimately get the games that are only on these consoles. Doesn’t mean I approve of everything Nintendo does as a company

            Guess I’ll go back to pirating all their games and/or buy everything Nintendo 2nd hand then. Easy

          • Radish

            The only way you can influence a big corporation is with your wallet. Wii’s success led to Wii U, because the massive sales of Wii told them this is what people wanted from them. Not many people bought a Wii U and so Nintendo made a Switch (pun intended), which people DO want as evidenced by sales numbers. A convenient gaming console that is marketed to them and not toddlers, and provides them with hardcore gaming experiences as well as Nintendo’s unique games. So yes, by buying a Switch you are telling Nintendo they are on the right track. And I’m glad you did ๐Ÿ™‚

            So far devs have not complained about power limitations, so I’d say yes you are overthinking things. You are prematurely complaining about something that has yet to materialize. If your whole argument is based off of a hypothetical situation then you clearly don’t see the difference between Switch and Wii U. Bethesda would never put so much stock in Switch’s success this early on if they thought it was too weak for them to work with.

          • Strawman

            The question then remains, why is it only Bethesda that does this? Nintendo has something more going on than just Bethesda good will, since otherwise we’d see more efforts going on. Wii had the latest COD, where’s that? The other consoles have Overwatch and Diablo 3, where are those?

            There are still plenty of thirds sitting by the sidelines, and whatever their reason, not all of them are bothering to develop for the Switch, as Activision-Blizzard attests.

          • Radish

            Given the absolute failure of the Wii U it is perfectly understandable why third party devs would take a wait and see approach with Switch. It’s too much of a gamble and with the cost of development these days it’s too risky. Bethesda took a huge risk and it is likely to pay off really well for them since they won’t have as much competition early on. It honestly wouldn’t matter what type of console Nintendo released, third party devs would be very hesitant. Winning them over was never something they’d be able to do in a night. Burned bridges take a while to mend, and games take a while to develop/port. I wouldn’t be surprised if GTA lands on the Switch at some point.

          • RoadyMike

            Wish they wouldn’t basically holding some of my favorite series hostage on their own systems. Plus it’s not like the Switch is a terrible idea, I’ve already said I like the concept. But I don’t necessarily want the Switch, I want the games that are only gonna be on it.
            Since I’m short on money and can’t buy a better laptop/build a PC of my own, it was either the Switch or PS4 for my gaming needs(alongside the 3DS). PS4 doesn’t have a lot of exclusives I’m interested in so I decided on Switch. How would a situation like this be construed as me agreeing with Nintendo’s decisions?

            Pfft, they’re marketing adults more now cuz the Wii U gave them one hell of a wake up call that kids and “casuals” were long gone. The Wii U would’ve been very different in Nintendo hadn’t tried to recreate the Wii’s success without checking demographic/market changes first. It was hilarious how they used mainly adults for the initial reveal.

            And you speak far too soon. I’m going off Nintendo’s console history here, specs, features that aren’t there, similar things that were said about Wii/Wii U that are being said now etc. You’re going off, what, 8 months since launch? Wii U had “incredible, unprecedented” 3rd party support in about the same time frame yet look what happened. You think everything will be great for the Switch because of a mentality that boils down to “it just is”. We’ll see who was more accurate in about 2 years time, dealio?

          • Radish

            Sure, the Wii U had 3rd party support early on, but no one was buying those games and so they left (partly because they were bad ports and partly because Wii U gamers had no interest). The same can’t be said of the Switch, where third parties have been reporting very good sales on the Switch as opposed to other platforms. As long as sales are high they will keep bringing us games. That’s hardly a “it just is” rationale. And I never said “EVERYTHING” will be great for the Switch, look at you putting words in my mouth. Hypocrite much? I’ve already explained issues I have with it.

            Exactly, they are marketing to adults now because they learned from Wii U. But you won’t give them credit for this and assume they are going down the same path which they clearly are not, as you just admitted. As for kids, yes kids do still play video games. Not sure where you came to the conclusion that “kids were long gone”. Ever play Call of Duty?

            You weighed the positives and negatives of Switch in your mind and decided that despite all the issues you had with it, Switch was still a better purchase than the PS4. It tells Nintendo they did something right to get you to spend your money on their products rather than their competitors. Whereas with the Wii U not enough people made that decision so Nintendo realized they had to change course, and that’s how we got Switch. ๐Ÿ™‚

          • RoadyMike

            Must’ve missed this one

            And that’s good how Switch has been getting games. But what I was getting at was that it’s still too soon to think the Switch won’t suffer the same fate as Wii/U .If power becomes the reason why Switch doesn’t get the games everyone else gets down the line, despite the popularity (giving i=us another Wii situation) this was all just wishful thinking on your part. And sure focus on ONE WORD to try and call me a hypocrite when you know darn well what I meant

            Well duh. Like I said, it was a hell of a wake up call hahahaha. They realized they actually have to TRY to appeal to the people who actually buy their stuff. Never said kids don’t play games you buffoon, this is exactly what I mean by you putting words in my mouth.
            What I meant by that (which I know for a fact you knew what I was referring to, especially given the context. So stop pretending) was the kids, soccer moms, seniors etc that bought Wii’s by the dozen have moved on to mobile devices. By the time the Wii U came out, the demographic Nintendo tried to appeal to again were playing stuff like Angry Birds on their tablets and phones. Wtf does CoD have to do with anything?

            I want the games, not the system. The only system I can play these games I want is the Switch. I didn’t have much of a choice, no one who wants to play Nintendo games does. If you wanna play Pokemon, Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Kirby etc, you have to buy a Nintendo system. The only people who can say this is a GOOD thing or “nintendo doing something “”right”” is Nintendo themselves. If you seriously think this is a good thing and or Nintendo for it, that’s being a fanboy no matter how you try to spin it

            Yea, it took the worst console launch and life cycle in Nintendo’s history bar the VirtualBoy for NIntendo to get the memo. But of course, you might think “better late than never”. I’d rather not suffer a car crash to realize I have to hear a seatbelt, Nintendo seems to think differently

          • Radish

            So you think a company taking risks is bad. You think a mistake can never be corrected for. You assume the worst before evidence (as with your position on 3rd party support, because we have yet to hear any complaints in regards to power). I’m guessing you also think Nintendo should go 3rd party, something so stupid I can’t believe anyone can still think that without being ironic.

            It’s way too soon to be thinking the Switch is doomed, I mean come on man, even the most extreme Sony fanboys aren’t saying such things. At least wait until you have a shred of evidence. But nope, we keep getting new game announcements on a weekly basis, something that never happened with Wii U. I know it’s lazy and easy to compare Switch to the Wii era, but just use your brain for a second and think before you reveal how stupid you sound.

          • RoadyMike
          • JasonBall

            Fkn

          • RoadyMike
          • RoadyMike
          • JasonBall

            Lol maybe the filterbot picks up on your hostility with it and blocks you out of spite.

          • RoadyMike

            Hostility? I’m being civil tho. A bit frustrated at times but never hostile :c
            This has happened in the past. I would have to rework entire short essays to try and get through but nope. Then I just changed a random word and it goes through. What even

          • Radish

            Except being different has not been detrimental. Nintendo’s most financially successful periods were when it was most different. What would be worse is if they were too similar. Look at what Xbox has become. So much like a PC that even its “exclusive” games are now on PC. There is absolutely nothing left to differentiate an Xbox from a PC. It’s just low-powered and you have to pay to play online. So there’s no reason to buy one. Is that what you want Nintendo to become?

            Cartridge tax? – Since every game you get is like buying 2 games (one for at home and one for on the go) I don’t have much of an issue with this. I consider it an excellent value, no other console gives this level of value.

            Terrible storage? – First off, no matter what console you own, users buy external storage, it’s just a fact these days with how big the games are. Even if the Switch came with 500 gb internal storage and costed $100 more, it wouldn’t take long to fill that up. Unless of course you don’t want the big games that Sony and Microsoft are getting from third parties. So with that in mind I’d rather buy my own external storage when it’s on sale for cheaper instead of Nintendo telling me how much it costs to be included in the console. It’s much more affordable that way. The only gripe is they should have provided one SD card with the Switch.

            Internet? Reggie already confirmed we will hear about the Switch’s internet infrastructure in 2018, so there is nothing to comment on at the moment. You’re just assuming.

            Battery life? Depends what game you are playing and how long you intend to play it nonstop. In most cases most of the time, people who play in portable mode are not going to be on it long enough in one stretch for it to make a difference. You play for a while, and then charge it or put it in the dock and play on TV. Everyone who owns a cell phone already knows this. My phone’s battery doesn’t last as long as Switch.

            When I say the Switch is a success I am speaking in this moment obviously. I can’t predict the future and neither can you, so all we have to go on is what we know presently. The facts are that the Switch is currently the hottest selling console of the 3. It can still fail, but until there is evidence of failure you can’t say that. You are the one calling failure prematurely.

            The Wii U was never flying off shelves, nor was there major third party support, so was never in the same situation as Switch currently is. They have learned from history. They learned that marketing actually matters: compare the Wii to the Wii U. The Wii’s marketing was brilliant and it worked. The Wii U’s marketing was a laughable embarrassment. The Switch is Nintendo learning from their mistake with Wii U and their success with Wii.

            We’ve got 2 of the best games Nintendo has ever made in its history this year for Switch and this is the failure you speak of? Article after article about third parties congratulating Nintendo on its early success with Switch and how excited they are for it, is this the failure you speak of? You’re really comparing Switch to Nintendo’s failed consoles Wii U/Gamecube? I now know why your message was rejected by NE, it was to help you avoid embarrassment.

          • RoadyMike

            Nintendo’s most financially successful periods were also when they lost the “core” market, the people play games more as a hobby instead of a fad and the developers who, despite the Wii’s success still found success elsewhere and without having to downgrade their games.
            If the Wii was such a huge success, why did almost every major 3rd party dev/game skip the system?
            You cannot be this unaware. Why do you think people buy Nintendo systems in the first place? Why do you think PS4 is outselling Xbox1 so much? What make’s people buy one system over the other?
            EXCLUSIVES! What makes Nintendo different from the other 2? THEIR HUGE CATALOG OF TIMELESS EXCLUSIVE IP’S! Clear enough for ya?

            Xbox1 has virtually no exclusive titles to speak of while PC, PS4 and Nintendo have a good amount of exclusive titles each. Nintendo can NEVER become even remotely similar to Xbox because it will always have these exclusive multimillion selling IP’s they can use whenever as an upperhand. Xbox only has, what, Halo, Gears of War and Forza last gen, plus kinect that no one cares about anymore, the first Titanfall (for a while) and sunset overdrive for this gen.

            This “Nintendo would just become too similar and boring” bs from every. single. Nintendo fanboy has to STOP. There is literally NOTHING wrong with having a Nintendo system equal or better in specs where you can get your Nintendo exclusive IP’s AND 3rd party games that are no longer hindered by inferior hardware. Why in the world are Nintendo fans so against this?

            Cart tax: Are you kidding me? You’re not buying 2 versions of a game at the same time. What I mean is having to pay extra, us and devs, for the format which, as recently reported, might not be enough for some 3rd parry games; just like the N64. And oh man, that’s some serious fanboyism if you’re more than willing to pay more than what everyone else is paying for the dame game

            Storage: 32 gigs for a console is trash. Even PS3 offered several hundred GB models. Now both competitor are offering 1 or 2 terabytes worth of storage. It’d definitely take a while for you to use up 1/2 teras of storage, even for bigger titles and their ridiculous updates. Like I said, and you’re so close to agreeing with me here, is that it’s basically MANDATORY for you to buy external storage.

            Internet: Nintendo is providing an online SERVICE, not infrastructure. Read this:
            http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-09-29-its-impossible-to-play-with-friends-online-on-fifa-18-on-switch-and-its-nintendos-fault
            Nintendo does not have a system wide infrastructure in place like the other 2. Each game -Mario Kart 8, Splatoon 2, ARMS- all have to have their own solutions. This is what I meant by an online infra that 3rd parties can use instead of having to make their own. This makes devs work harder on Nintendo platforms than with the other 2. Yu can say “well, this is just EA and FIFA” all you want, if/when more devs go through the same, don’t be surprised if less games come to the Switch. Plus, I also meant ethernet. You have to buy ($$$) an adapter that you can’t even use on the Switch’s main unit at all, so there goes the Switch’s portable feature (unless you want laggy, unreliable wifi)

            Battery: I clocked Shantae and the Pirates curse at around 2 hrs and 14 mins. Not a graphically demanding game. I had the brightness set low, turned off the volume and even left it idle and only got like an extra 3 mins. I tried it with PuyoTetris demo and got about another extra 10 mins. 2 or so hours is what Nintendo mentioned BotW would last. Not true. Now imagine an even more graphically intensive game like Doom, Skyrim etc.

            Not claiming failure, but the possibility of failure due to the Switch sharing many things with previous systems that ultimately led to those systems’ failure or at least their underperformance. Saying that the Switch will be just fine because it’s “hot” right now is incredibly naive, especially given the faults I’ve listed for you (which you insist aren’t problems at all. Denial)

            Sooo, Switch getting more marketing than the Wii U= system success? That’s a pretty low bar you set there. But yea I’m please with the Switch’s marketing myself so no real complaints there.

            Devs said the same thing about the Wii U, till they actually tried putting games on the darn thing. One of those top games isn;t even a Switch exclusive m8. The Wii U and even the Wii had it’s own share of top rated games of all time. The N64 had 2 of the consensus best games of ALL TIME being Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time. That only tells me Nintendo makes good games, not necessarily systems, so what’s your point? And yes, I compare the Switch with all these other consoles because the similarities are there, even if you choose to ignore them.

            k now you’re just being an a$$

          • Radish

            It’s so clear you are trolling now because every time you read something you disagree with you just scream “fanboy” or “fanboyism”. This is because you have no actual arguments, you just have name calling. Apparently you didn’t get your wish for your kiddie Nintendo games to be in 4k so you are having a temper tantrum online.

            I’m done here, you’ve embarrassed yourself enough and I can’t dumb down my arguments for you any further. Have fun with your XB1X, since all you care about is graphics. The rest of us will enjoy the Switch’s runaway success.

          • RoadyMike

            Cop outs, accusations, false claims, assumptions and condescension was all I ever got from you.I gave you my reasoning but not ONCE did you acknowledge anything I brought up, you just kept trying to deflect
            You’re so angry when I point out how your behaviors are similar to that of a fanboy’s but instead of proving me wrong about that, you call me troll

            No one ever said anything about 4k

            No one here is throwing a temper tantrum, this is a discussion that you’re rage quitting because you put too much focus on one word

            Why do you always affiliate the Xbox with me? Hating on other platforms now Radish? I’ve never owned an Xbox and never said I even wanted one
            Never said all I cared about was graphics either

            And who’s this “rest of us”? Don’t try to speak for everyone else

          • Radish

            Actually I addressed everything you brought up. Instead of actually reading what I write you assume I am a fanboy and attack some strawman position that I don’t hold. Your reading comprehension skills are lacking to the point where it makes this discussion fruitless.

            Clearly you have some emotional baggage that you brought over from Wii U, the anger you have for Switch has made you lash out at anyone who disagrees with you as a “fanboy”, even when they are critical of certain aspects of the Switch themselves. If anything, you’ve proven yourself to be the fanboy of Nintendo’s games. What’s wrong Roady? You can’t just play PS4 exclusives instead? Knack 2 not good enough?

            I know your schtick. You want Nintendo to have a “traditional console”. It sounds so simple, Nintendo makes great games, so just put them on a more powerful system and voila, success! Right? It sounds dandy, but it’s also very naive. You clearly don’t understand the game development process at Nintendo. The innovations they make in hardware design directly impact their software development. As just one example, we never would have gotten a game like Splatoon from a Nintendo Station 4.

            The irony is that what you want, a “traditional console”, would actually only appeal to hardcore Nintendo fans. If I don’t care about Nintendo’s games or think they are too kiddie for me, why wouldn’t I buy a PS4 which has more mature exclusives or the more powerful PC? All it would attract are Nintendo fanboys.

            And that’s why the Switch is so successful. It offers something different.

          • RoadyMike

            The way we’ve gone back and forth can boil down to this:

            Me: “Switch has X,Y and Z factors that previous failed systems had. These other systems failed because of these factors, therefore we can assume the same could happen with the Switch”
            Radish: “No, that was that and this is this. Switch is doing great so far so it won’t fail”
            Me: “But it still has these factors that led to these other systems not doing well. I don’t want to see Switch go through the same”
            Radish: “IT JUST WON’T OK?!”

            And yes, I do. The Wii U was a disappointment. There were LOTS of promises made and nearly none of them came true. Even Nintendo themselves think the Wii U was a flop. Nintendo handled the Wii U atrociously. Are you gonna tell me and Nintendo otherwise?

            Here’s what I hate, and I mean truly gets me riled up with Nintendo fans.
            What in the world is so damn wrong with wanting Nintendo to put out an “innovative” AND powerful system? The two are NOT and NEVER WILL BE mutually exclusive

            Nintendo fans have this idiotic mentality that if Nintendo were to make a powerful system, that system can’t also be “innovative” and Nintendo-like. That, if they do what has worked for PS and Xbox, regardless if they add their own Nintendo spice to it, they’d cease to be unique and would just be ‘another boring box’ or ‘PC wannabe’

            Can you imagine if the Wii had power comparable to the PS360 ALONG WITH its motion control feature gimmick? It would have been a completely different story for Nintendo and the industry as a whole

            You act as if there’s something inherently wrong with “traditional” consoles. It’s worked great for PS and Xbox so far, seeing how they’re still getting much more 3rd party games than Nintendo platforms(except maybe 3DS) and the PC crowd has only ever been growing and growing.

            But I never even said I wanted a “traditional” console from Nintendo. What I’d like is for Nintendo to incorporate what works on these other platforms(providing power, online infrastructure, system wide social features etc) into their own, ON TOP of their own Nintendo spin on it.
            That way, Nintendo could appeal to almost everyone; “casuals”, “hardcore”, newcomers, older fans and maybe even those who’ve been skeptical of Nintendo before, even 3rd part developers.
            That way, we’d get great 1st AND 3rd party games because there would be no reason not to since the system would be able to handle almost everything you throw at it. Nintendo could completely DOMINATE

            I’m not talking about just the development process at Nintendo, I’m talking about giving other devs more to work with. They won’t have contort to fit Nintendo’s development mentality if Nintendo gives them the workspace, headroom and tools to develop games in their own creative vision
            And I think I’ve made it clear that I enjoy Nintendo games and am not ashamed to admit that I’m very much a Pokemon fanboy. Are you telling me what I should be playing instead Radish? Well aren’t you quite the condescending vegetable
            Knack was k, but not amazing

            You’re waaaay too closed minded if you think having a slightly more “traditional” console wouldn’t attract 3rd party devs and their games. Gamers will go where the games are and if Nintendo had a system with great 3rd party games AND their exclusive IP’s you cannot get anywhere else, where do you think they’ll go?

            Wii offered something different, sold a lot, but lost trust and games. Wii U tried to do something different and it failed miserably. All Playstation and Xbox do is come out with hardware upgrades every 6-10 years and they get games by the truckload. PC has never changed and it gets every game that isn’t exclusive,period.
            Maybe being so different isn’t as great as you think it is?

          • Radish

            I’m glad I’ve finally convinced you that innovation is a GOOD thing. And of course we want our consoles to do everything, so yes a powerful AND innovative console is the dream. However, there is a practical issue when it comes to designing such a console. And that’s cost. Cost matters, both to the consumer and to the console-maker. They have to hit a sweet spot with their cost that allows them to make a profit on sales of the system while also creating a huge install base. That is why a $600 Nintendo console that is powerful enough to get every third party game without compromises is not going to be easily absorbed in the market. So there would be a fringe audience that could afford a console like this, and while third parties may be happy with the specs, they would be upset with games that won’t sell enough copies for them to make a profit.

            The Xbox One X is a good example of this. At $500 it is actually an okay price for its specs, but how many people have $500 to blow on a console before they even buy a game? More importantly, Microsoft is LOSING money on each sale of the console. It’s like the worst of both worlds. They are pricing it competitively for its specs and therefore losing money, yet it’s still too high a price point for the average gamer, so not many will buy it.

            Nintendo realizes that gaming consoles have to be affordable to the mass market. They also realize that ultimately their install base is more important to third parties than the specs. That doesn’t mean that specs don’t matter, of course they do. But you have to weigh each thing on a cost basis.

            There’s also the fact that there’s a lot about the Switch we still don’t know. What is Nintendo’s plan going forward? Neither you nor I know this so we can’t assume they didn’t think of any potential issues that would arise. This is the main problem with your thinking, you are assuming it will fail based on your comparisons with Wii U, whereas I am saying that RIGHT NOW it is a success, and that is all we know.

            With your logic I can say “well the Wii U had some great 1st party games and the Wii U failed. Therefore Switch will fail because it also has some great 1st party games!” See how ridiculous that sounds?

          • Strawman

            Nintendo’s plan going forward? If we’re to go by the late Satoru Iwata then I quote:

            “While we are only going to be able to start this with the next system, it will become important for us to accurately take advantage of what we have done with the Wii U architecture. It of course does not mean that we are going to use exactly the same architecture as Wii U, but we are going to create a system that can absorb the Wii U architecture adequately. When this happens, home consoles and handheld devices will no longer be completely different, and they will become like brothers in a family of systems.

            Still, I am not sure if the form factor (the size and configuration of the hardware) will be integrated. In contrast, the number of form factors might increase. Currently, we can only provide two form factors because if we had three or four different architectures, we would face serious shortages of software on every platform. To cite a specific case, Apple is able to release smart devices with various form factors one after another because there is one way of programming adopted by all platforms. Apple has a common platform called iOS. Another example is Android. Though there are
            various models, Android does not face software shortages because there is one common way of programming on the Android platform that works with
            various models. The point is, Nintendo platforms should be like those two examples. Whether we will ultimately need just one device will be determined by what consumers demand in the future, and that is not
            something we know at the moment.”

            So, consumer demand has completely overwhelmed them. They can keep the same architecture and parity, insert more power/less power and make a more expensive/less expensive home-console/handheld version, but if we’re going by sales, then they’ll likely iterate on the Switch as it is now.

            Personally when we talk innovation, I’d like to see innovation in gameplay, in the games themselves, not the machines they’re played on. The computer’s been around for a pretty damn long time, and people still happily, (even more than before) play games on it.

          • Radish

            I think you have a misunderstanding of what I mean by innovation. I am not referring to the shape of the console or what it looks like as a piece of hardware. I am referring to how it can offer new ways to play and experience games. Motion controls were not fully realized with the Wii, but nowadays they are a must-have for any shooter in my opinion. The aiming is so much more intuitive, fun, and precise, and makes for a more enjoyable experience when you can focus on the action rather than the inputs. The DS offered a touchscreen interface which allowed for a much wider variety of playing experiences as well. The Switch has joycons that allow players to hold their controller in a more flexible and relaxed position than every before, since they aren’t attached. They also have HD rumble which offers developers more creativity with force feedback. And the joycon’s sensors are what make games like ARMS possible.

            So yes, Nintendo’s innovations in hardware ARE gameplay innovations. I can care less about its color or shape (though I do like color variety lol).

          • Strawman

            Well, here’s the thing, and I think @RoadyMike can agree with this: You can have a console with good specs, and have those motion controls, have those different controls for different experiences. Look at the PC, you can have a fight-stick, a controller, a mouse and keyboard, a steering wheel and possibly some other stuff I didn’t think of. All of those change your gameplay experience and yet the PC you use them with can be an absolute beast. There will probably be a time in the future, where PC can have motion-controls and the likes as well.

            As for shooters, I woudn’t want to play with anything other than a mouse. The speed and precision are, from MY perspective and what I’VE experienced better than motion-controls (I’ve tried Splatoon 1, had a Wii with plenty of games, even bought the motion+ and I’ve played ARMS with motion-controls before sending it back to the retailer)

          • Radish

            It’s no coincidence that the best Splatoon players all use motion controls. The results speak volumes about which control method is most effective. But regardless, that is what is great about Nintendo. They are flexible enough to allow multiple control methods for games. And the Switch can be played in so many ways, its convenience is such a huge selling point that goes unnoticed. Sure you can bring your laptop with you and set it up and connect to hotel internet and play games, but no one does that. And you certainly couldn’t do local multiplayer unless everyone brought their laptop with the same game lmao which I can’t even finish this sentence it’s hilarious to imagine. It’s inconvenient.

            You can have a console with good specs and innovative games that separate it from the competition, but like I’m telling RoadyMike, it comes with a huge cost. Right now Nintendo found that sweet spot in the market in terms of price point and giving consumers what they want. The demand speaks for itself.

          • Strawman

            There’s also a reason why they never allow cross-play in shooters between PC and console.

            Convenience, is that the keyword in gaming these days? All the people who bought a PS4/Xbox One or a PC, they don’t care for convenience, but there’s still a ton of them.

            You know what I’d like to see? Nintendo put their games on PC, so basically what Microsoft does. I’d love to see what it does to the sales numbers.

          • Radish

            You wanna see what putting their games on PC will do? Look at Sonic Forces. Really amazing what Sega’s been doing since they went third party. They’ve been wittled down to just a couple franchises. They don’t make enough money to even afford Bayonetta anymore, let alone making quality AAA games. The same would happen over time to Nintendo, just not as fast.

            Convenience is the selling point for Switch. PS4’s selling point is that it established itself early on as the go-to console for third party gaming for people who want a good graphics for a gaming console, but are too lazy to go the PC route. Again, that’s convenience too, but just for graphics. They are also desperately trying with PSVR, which is the Playstation selling point this holiday. It won’t win the holiday against Switch though.

          • RoadyMike

            Meh, I put “innovation” in quotation marks for a reason(mainly because wen I use the correct term “gimmick”, Nintendo jimmies get rustled) You haven’t convinced me of anything that I didn’t already think about but k. HD rumble isn’t an innovation tho and I’d rather that R&D been put towards something else

            I know it costs but like nintendo fans keep spouting, Nintendo has billions and can take losses for decade and still be running. How bout they act upon it now. The standard PS4 cost about 400$ and it was the most powerful console for a while. If Sony can do it, I can’t see why Nintendo could create a similar system with comparable specs and “”Innovation”” at around that same price

            Remember around the Wii era? If the Wii was about as powerful as the PS3, it would’ve dominated considering it was going up against “Five hundred and ninety nine US dollars”. It could have cost $350 and still be more appealing than that alone

            Xbox is not a good example because the Xbox brand never really had anything going for it to begin with. Everything but a tiny handful of exclusives like Halo were also available on PS and PC. The Xbox1’s price only made it less appealing. The only reason it can keep going imo is because Microsoft can afford to keep throwing money at it

            As I was saying, what’s the point of having a huge install base if the 3rd party games can’t even run on the darn thing? This is exactly what happened with the Wii, please just understand why I keep bringing it up

            The only thing left to reveal/implement is Nintendo’s online service for the Switch. They’ve already given us the outline of what this service will be. After that it’s off to the races. They can’t upgrade their hardware to PS4/Xbox1 levels with an update (heck it’d be very controversial if they could and/or do).

            As I’ve said, many time now, my stance is based on Nintendo’s consoles’ previous history. It’s not my fault that the things that kept the Wii U from succeeding, Wii from getting 3rd party support etc, are also present in some way in the Switch and what have worked for the other platforms, absent. You could accurately predict what could happen with the Wii U if you recall what happened with the Wii later in it’s life. Same situation here with the Switch.

            I’m speculating what could very well happen, because it’s happened before. I’m not assuming things will go ok because it’s been going good so far. That’s just assumption and its still way to early to make that kind of call

            That’s not my logic at all and is a terrible misrepresentation of what I’ve been saying. It’s not even the complete picture. Wii U didn’t fail because of 1st part games, it failed because, for the most part, 1st party games were the ONLY things keeping the shabby leaking Wii U raft afloat. And that’s still just one factor

          • Radish

            Correlation does not equal causation. You have to learn that, otherwise you will keep making ridiculous statements like “because Switch is under-powered like Wii U, it will fail like Wii U.” That’s why I gave you the hypothetical example of someone saying “because Switch has great 1st party games like Wii U, it will fail like Wii U”. You can’t just make a basic comparison and say that just because these 2 things are similar, they will result in the same thing.

            Your comparisons aren’t even accurate. To say that Switch is in the same position Wii U was in at this time in its lifespan is to be in a coma the past 5 years. The Switch is moving in the exact opposite direction Wii U was heading, the Switch is GAINING third party support whereas the Wii U was LOSING third party support. The mass market didn’t understand what the Wii U was, they understand the Switch. No matter how you slice it, the Switch is no Wii U. The Switch will outsell Wii U’s lifetime sales within a year of being on the market.

            The Wii was 480p. They were not even in the same league as PS3 and XB360. There was a reason why PS3 was $600. Power costs a lot. That’s why hardcore PC gamers have no problem building $1000 rigs to game on. If Wii were to be near as powerful as PS3 in 2006, it would have costed over $600. Meanwhile the Gamecube was more powerful than PS2 AND was easier to develop for and flopped. I’m glad Nintendo didn’t double down on their Gamecube failure.

            Again, you are too naive to understand the business side of things. Nintendo is not going to take a loss on its hardware. They have shareholders and are a publicly traded company. People invest in Nintendo when Nintendo is profiting, not when they are taking losses. So unless you have a plan for Nintendo to build this miracle $300 machine that has high power, lots of storage, a strong online infrastructure, and innovative enough to attract more than just Nintendo fanboys, you’re dreaming. I’d be totally on board if that were possible, but reality says it isn’t.

          • Radish

            A return to the Gamecube days? The Switch is on pace to outsell the Gamecube in its 2nd year easily. As much as I loved the Gamecube, Nintendo does not want another failure of a console.

          • Strawman

            Gamecube was a great console aye, but we’re not talking the console itself. We’re talking the games they got back then, and how awry it has gone since, that we know see Nintendo barely get third-party support, testing and shoddy ports. In that regard, they’re definitely not in first place.

          • Radish

            So far its looking like Switch will have far more 3rd Party support than either Gamecube or N64 when it’s all said and done.

          • Strawman

            That depends on if third-parties will get off their spectator bench and actually join in.

          • Radish

            Bethesda, Rockstar, Square Enix, Koei-Tecmo all have major releases so far, and in SE’s case an exclusive coming. They were spectating with Gamecube, Wii, and Wii U. Capcom is sitting on the sidelines, but I doubt they will in 2018. There’s too much money to be made on Switch.

          • Strawman

            I’d put more faith in the home-market stabilising than Capcom getting their act together, but then I will freely admit that I’m rather spiteful to them.

            SE, yeah, Rockstar… with L.A. Noire right? What else do they have? KT sure, they’re doing their best, but they need to stop cutting corners. Bethesda is admirable, I can’t say anything negative about them. They could’ve easily left it at Skyrim but they went above and beyond to get DOOM and Wolfenstein on the system.

          • Radish

            Rockstar is owned by Take 2 which has released NBA 2K18, LA Noire, and WWE 2K18 on Switch. I am upset with Capcom, but I think they will get their act together with Switch, it’s success is undeniable now and they will have a hard time justifying to their shareholders that they won’t be putting games on Switch. Afterall, even Konami has supported Switch with Bomberman and they’ve been hinting at a new Castlevania game for Switch.

          • Strawman

            Castlevania you say? That would be awesome. But yes, among third-parties, Capcom is my personal biggest let down, what with them not even bothering to localize XX for 3DS, let alone for Switch.

          • Radish

            Yeah but at least you can play games region-free now, yet another way Nintendo has improved with Switch!

          • Strawman

            There’s still the problem of the language barrier. If no English option is provided, you have to follow guides to figure out what the F you’re doing…

            Besides, you can also look at it this way, in case there is no such patch: If they can’t bother to localize it, then why should we bother to pay them for it? ๐Ÿ˜›

          • Radish

            Yeah but my point was that if Nintendo chose not to make Switch region-free, people like you would complain about how with other platforms at least they can buy games from Japan and play them, but no not with Nintendo. Well, now they give you region-free options and now the complaint is “well we didn’t actually want the game region-free, we want it localized”. Ah, see?

          • Strawman

            Now you’re just looking over things. I didn’t say English patch for the fun of it you know? How the F am I to properly understand the game I’m playing (especially since RPG’s are up the top, where you need to read to understand what the F you’re supposed to do) if I have no clue what the game is trying to tell me?

          • Radish

            I do see where you are coming from, and I had major concerns with the Wii U as well. But I think you are mistaken with some of your assumptions, and also are not acknowledging the great things that came out of the Wii era.

            First, the “Nintendo is kiddie” image has long predated the Wii era. I don’t know how old you are, but when I was in high school the Gamecube was released and I remember how embarrassing it was to admit I had a Gamecube or to be seen playing Smash Bros during lunch hour. It was absolutely seen as a kiddie system, and Wind Waker didn’t help that either. Of course, as a kid it was annoying to deal with, but I’ve matured a lot since then. The N64 with all its colorful iterations, its lack of many of the mature titles that came to PS1. And Nintendo in general has always been about family entertainment, hence Famicom, Super Famicom, etc. Their own IP are for all ages and can easily be considered “kiddie” by insecure teenagers. Kirby, Yoshi, Mario, DK, Pokemon, Animal Crossing, etc are all “kiddie” no matter how good those games are.

            The Wii era gave us motion controls which at first were pretty awful and inaccurate, and a headache for devs. But over time with later Wii games, then Wii U, and now Switch the motion controls have evolved considerably to the point where its precision gives you a significant advantage in games, and the movements are so subtle now. It’s not at all like waving a wand anymore. They are built into all modern controllers, and are obviously the foundation of VR too.

            I do think it is PR BS when Reggie says they are not competing, because they are. They are just competing with different weapons.

            If what you are saying is true, Xbox One X should be an absolute success, and I look forward to seeing if that becomes reality, or if the Switch will outsell it.

            Nintendo’s biggest problem right now is not with power, but with storage capacity. It’s absolutely ridiculous that the internal storage is so low that we have physical game boxes that have to warn consumers before they purchase a game. Talk about a deterrent! I’m not a blind fanboy.

          • RoadyMike

            The only truly great thing that came out of the Wii era was that it brought in more gamers that might’ve otherwise never have bothered with games. This helped out PS/Xbox and heck maybe even PC.
            Eh, I wouldn’t give the Wii such praise for motion controls for 2 reasons:
            1. It wasn’t the first to implement motion into games. I remember the PS2 had this thing called eyetoy that was basically a very primitive kinect
            2. The people enamored with motion controls all left by the time the Wii U hit. What’s more, it was the only control option that made people like Blade completely sick of them. I personally liked it for shooters like Black Ops and Wii Sports but for everything else, it got annoying

            Like I said, don’t care about VR. I think it’s a waste of resources in all of its forms. Augmented reality has much more uses even outside of gaming

            Not just storage, the Switch has terrible battery life. What’s the point of a game being portable if you can only play for 1-2 hours max on demanding games when undocked? And unlike the 3DS, Nintendo has made it a pain in the asz to put a better battery in there. You’re gonna have to dish out more money for a power bank

            Speaking of dishing out more money, you basically have to spend a lot more than just the console and some games to get the most out of the Switch.
            There’s the pro controller, which costs more than a full priced game for no apparent reason, the SD card nonsense, a ridiculously overprice peice of plastic with nothing but an hdmi adapter inside(dock), screen protectors cuz the dock itself scratches the screen since its all plastic, expensive joycon pairs at ~80$US if you want to have more than 2 players with joycons (Nintendo is marketing this as a party system as well) and a ton of other peripherals/accessories. Granted you don’t all these things for the Switch to function properly, but just the essentials:
            -Switch system -$300 US
            – At least a 64GB SD card – at least $15-20
            -Pro controller – whopping $70
            -Screen protector (unless you like scratches on a screen) ~$7-10
            Add up almost another $100 to the price and we haven’t even gotten to any games yet

            I insist on the power aspect because even if the Switch can handle a lot of games right now (albeit inferior versions in terms of visuals), the Switch should be expected to last at least another 3-5 years. Who knows how games will look by then, or what other things like physics will require more power

          • Radish

            The eyetoy never popularized motion controls or used it in an effective way or were even accurate. The Wii popularized it, improved upon it, and eventually made it a new standard for ALL modern controllers, regardless of platform. If that’s not influence, I don’t know what is.

            Heck, if we’re going back to the Eyetoy we may as well go back to the NES and Genesis days when there were motion control accessories for games. It definitely did not originate with the Eyetoy.

            I wonder why everyone is buying a Switch then if it really is as awful as you think it is. I’ve noted the main issue being storage (Internet will be addressed next year apparently so I will hold off on that). We are getting great third party ports of games people care about (and PC gamers want on the go).

    • Aline Piroutek

      Nope. We don’t need 2 home consoles.

      • shani

        No but one real home console, not a handheld marketed as a hybrid.

        • Tlink7

          A hybrid is always going to be a handheld, how else could it possibly be portable (and thus a hybrid)…?

      • Strawman

        3 If you look at the total picture of the market, but at the same time none of the other 2 (PS/Xbox) have Nintendo’s IP, as that’s what should sell their system.

        • Aline Piroutek

          We also don’t need 2 portable consoles. 3DS is only needed for more 1 year to people got time to move to the new platafform.

          • Strawman

            The 3DS will have a grand and worthy successor, but the Wii-U doesn’t have anything.

    • Triforce of the Gods

      Actually both primarily. 30% handheld primarily and 20% docked primarily leaves 50% of the user base playing both equally.

    • Morian

      There’s really no point in making a “real home console” now. If they make it, the game library is going to be redundant. Look at Wii U and 3DS, they both have the same Smash, Yoshi Woolly, 3D Mario, etc. And for the third-party side, everyone is going to buy the Switch version. What is left? AAA games? hahaha. AAA gaming is the reason why I find Generation 8 very boring and the decline of console sales. Every G8 console can’t meet the numbers of it’s predecessors.

      • Strawman

        The only true thing that sells consoles, is games, is it not? Why else would you buy an expensive piece of machinery like that, if it doesn’t have these killer games you’d love to play? There’s a reason why people shell out far more than any console’s cost on their PC to play the latest games and have them run as best they possibly can.

        I get the whole argument of Nintendo having to have to do this due to not being able to support 2 platforms, but the marketing for this machine borders on a flat-out lie. The machine that they call the Switch is a handheld device, the dock isn’t an integral part, it’s a cheap piece of overpriced plastic that some people don’t even use!

        If the dock truly provided power to achieve parity between third-party games, now I could see one argue hybrid then, but the dock itself is close to meaningless, as is proven with how people just as easily make their own version of it.

        • ben

          This just isn’t even true. The doc makes the console play games at higher frame rates and higher pixel count.

          It is a hybrid because people use it as one. Just because I have 100 hours in handheld mode and only 30 in console mode that doesn’t change the fact it is capable of doing both.
          Your posts are just antagonistic and are at odds with the facts. You can argue that your opinion is different but it is your opinion against hard facts.

          • Strawman

            And yet still, it’s far behind the competition in regards to what it does as “home-console”. Again, Ben, does dock do ANYTHING at all without the device that is truly the Switch? No? Then it isn’t a hybrid, because the Switch itself isn’t a hybrid, the Switch itself is a portable, else you couldn’t have ever played those 100 handheld “mode” hours.

            At odds with what facts? A hybrid is capable of doing both things it’s known for at least equally well, right? The Switch is doing handheld faaaaaaaaaaar better than it could ever function as a home-console, and this is a simple truth.

          • ben

            The doc powers the console so it can operate at a higher performance level.

            And we are done.

            It actually destroys the competition at being a dedicated gaming device.
            It boots faster. Games are not based around heavy installs to run.
            It isn’t just being a cheap pc it is a genuine games console.

          • Strawman

            Damn Ben, I didn’t know you were such a shill. Sad thing to see you go down like this.

            Those games also look, and operate, far worse than the competition. Look at all the comparison videos, look at FIFA, how it misses features. Look at FFXV, how it’s engine can’t properly run on the Switch, the evidence lies stacked on the table.

          • ben

            I don’t see how picking out two games makes the Switch a bad console?

            Look at Assassin`s creed unity it barely ran!

          • Strawman

            You know as well as I do that those are but examples. Show me one third-party multiplat that looks better and runs better on the Switch. Don’t worry, I’ve got the time.

          • ben

            Why does a game looking better define whether or not the switch is a hybrid?

          • Strawman

            Very well, so you can still call it a hybrid, but in the sense of it doing both components equally well, equal justice, that is flat-out not true. It offers the best handheld experience, but only a meagre home-console one.

          • ben

            It is still a better “console” than both the ps4 and the xbox. Neither of which actually work without games being installed like a pc.

          • Strawman

            And yet when installed, these games run much better than on Switch and don’t need to compromise for weak hardware.

          • ben

            The PS4 and the Xbox are weak hardware.. jesus.

          • Strawman

            Compared to a good PC, sure. But how does the Switch look compared to them? How does the Switch look compared to a good PC? Best not even go there.

          • ben

            Well. The switch isn’t a 6kg pc or a 4 kg console it is a hybrid that weighs 300grams. So it is incredibly impressive.
            I don’t even get your point anymore. You hate that Nintendo made a hybrid but I have told you it is basically a waste of money and Nintendo talent to make a HD box because those boxes are nothing but crappy pcs. You go back to well at least they have pretty graphics. But that is a dumb argument when the drawback is a huge box that isn’t even a real console.

          • Strawman

            Alright, let me formulate myself better, my gripe is that they sacrificed power for portability, and plays parts against the console. Just look at the games not coming due to it, devs expressing wanting it to have been stronger, etc. In the end, it’s about the games, and sadly, power is a part of all that.

          • ben

            I don’t even consider the Xbox one or the ps4 game consoles they are pcs with custom os.

          • Strawman

            Yet they are dedicated to only playing games, so they obviously are. The Switch is also dedicated at only playing games, but it’s very clearly a handheld device, since I can’t exactly grab a PC/Xbox One/PS4 and play it that way, now can I?

          • ben

            But they are not are they? They ship with Blue ray players to appeal to the home entertainment crowd.

            So you can use it as it was designed to be used and that stops it being a hybrid, how?

          • nemo37

            “A hybrid is capable of doing both things it’s known for at least equally well, right?”

            That is not really what a hybrid is supposed to be. Hybrid devices are really a different category of products. They are not as powerful as a stationary system and not as portable as a pocket handheld system, but they offer certain advantages that the others do not. For example, Switch is more powerful than a regular portable system (albeit less portable), yet it is more portable than a home console but more portable.

            It would be very difficult, if not impossible, to build a hybrid device that is the perfect portable and the perfect handheld system. This is largely because you cannot really take the SOCs inside of a console like PS4 (which consumes over 100 watts of power) and put it inside a small system like Switch; for something like that to occur you would need a much bigger system, much more cooling, and much bigger battery (essentially you would get a much less portable device; hence demonstrating that you cannot really have it both ways).

            Now this might be disappointing to some because the way I described a hybrid makes it seem like a compromised product. Yet when you look at it as its own category of device, it no more or less compromised than a stationary or pocket handheld system. In addition, Switch is nowhere close to being the first successful hybrid device. The Laptop/portable PCs were a hybrid between PDA and stationary PCs (leaning more towards the PC). The tablet was a hybrid between the smartphone and laptop. The convertible is a hybrid between a tablet and a laptop. As with laptops, tablets and convertibles (all of which are hybrids), the Switch represents a new category of device (think of pocket portables like smartphones, Switch like a tablet, and PS4/XOne as a desktop PC).

            One final thing I will say is that the Switch has found success (much like the other hybrids) because people want a more powerful portable device, even if it is not as portable or powerful as the category of devices it is between. However, people expecting the ultimate portable or the ultimate stationary device are really fooling themselves. This is not a pocket handheld nor is it a home console, it truly is a different category of device (a powerful portable). I actually remember telling you that (back when your display pic consisted of the cute bunny) earlier when the Switch was announced and when the system later launched.

          • Strawman

            And yet this exists: https://www.razerzone.com/gaming-systems/razer-blade extremely thin, yet still very powerful.

            I’ll repeat what I’ve said many a time: Nintendo fans looking for the 3DS’ successor have the Switch. Nintendo fans looking for the success to the Wii-U’s failure have nothing. You don’t have a choice in regards to wanting the best Nintendo experience, yet have no use for the Switch’s portable nature, as it has made many compromises to be portable.

          • nemo37

            With the Razer device you proved my point. In order to create a device that is more stationary, it sacrifices the portability aspect. That Razer device cannot be used as a handheld. It cannot practically be played while in a bus, subway or bench. It is very much like the Switch, except where as the Switch is more portable with less power, this device is more powerful with less portability. Yet both are still hybrids, which shows my point that hybrids are not meant to provide perfect handheld and the perfect stationary experience.

            As for home console users losing out. From a Nintendo standpoint this system is still about 3X more powerful than Wii U in docked mode not to mention more modern. However, I do realize that is not what you want. You want a system that comparable to XOne and PS4. As I already mentioned in a reply below, such a feat it possible with Switch’s architecture much like it was possible for XONE and XONEX, it is just a matter of if Nintendo will do it. I am pretty sure the time will come when Nintendo will feel insecure about their position (one product, Switch and its successors, to carry an entire company; mobile and licensing deals are not sustainable primary business drivers for a company that is the size of Nintendo). At that point you will, most likely, get your wish of a home console Nintendo device. They are focused on Switch right now and I assume that will remain the case for the next year or two, but in an industry where you can go from a completely successful device to a flop (Wii -> Wii U; as an example) I am sure Nintendo will realize they need more product lines.

          • Strawman

            And yet their strength stands in portability. In home-console, they face strong opposition that they’ve allowed to grow strong with their mistakes and inaction.

            Now they’re no longer able to match them, and thus they try to bring their strength to their weakness, a good move, but ultimately I believe they’ll be solely handheld makers. They’ve lost the home-console fight long ago.

            And with the hybrid you prove my point that it’s more handheld than anything else, that the docked mode is but a novelty to please people who ignore looking at the faults.

          • nemo37

            “In home-console, they face strong opposition that they’ve allowed to grow strong with their mistakes and inaction.”

            I wouldn’t necessarily say that they are lacking anything that the competition has (with the exception of online but that is something that plagues them on the portable side of things as well). The reality is that Sony and MS both pick custom parts (and custom in that they are slightly modified versions of existing mainstream chips) from external companies (in recent case for those two the company that they are dealing with has been AMD). Microsoft is not engaged in the semiconductor business and Sony is so behind that it can no longer create an SOC fit for home console system like they once did with cell (and even then they had to get the GPU from Nvidia). In sum, they are in no different position than where Nintendo is right now. Nintendo can easily call up AMD and Nvidia, as them to show them parts for a stationary system, choose the best option, and build a stationary system (much like what Sony and MS do). In fact, most other consumer products out there just use off the shelf components that are either identical to one another or slightly customized. If they build a strong enough system and perhaps pay to cover some third-party marketing costs (like Sony and MS have done in the past; and as Nintendo has started doing more of more recently), they can easily reenter that market.

          • Strawman

            Yet they won’t because their handheld component is what makes them the big bucks, what has it all sell, let alone the consumer side of it.

            People have come to associate Nintendo with hardware-weak, yet innovative systems and great games. It took them a really long time to get rid of their “kiddy” image, and so the same goes for this.

            All in all, the PS4 is so far the best selling home-console, isn’t it? Nintendo is able to gain momentum, solely via the portability part of the Switch, as they cannot match them in this department.

          • nemo37

            But here’s the thing. In the past it was handheld + home console that made them the bigger bucks than one system can achieve, and it was both system lines that gave them security, because if one did badly they could count on the other one. I suspect this is one reason why they are holding onto 3DS. I hypothesize that a smaller and cheaper Switch will replace the 3DS and the current model (or maybe an update to the current model) will be moved to XL status. But at the end of the day, it is one product that will be carrying them and I doubt they will feel secure about that. In addition, they will not have anything at the upper price ranges; something will need to fill that void. I think a home console that is an extension on the Switch’s architecture (ie compatible with everyone on Switch maybe with the ability to enhance what is already on there through Xbox One X and PS4 Pro style patching; but far more powerful). But we will see.

            Anyways, this was a great and engaging discussion ๐Ÿ™‚ But I now need to engage in one of my long commutes to school and after that to work accompanied with my Switch.

          • Strawman

            I am not convinced of whether Nintendo will make anything towards home-console, if anything that smaller handheld only Switch, yes, but nothing beyond that. We shall see.

            Safe journey.

          • Gamingfan

            This is what I’ve been saying for months. Nintendo’s handheld fans get their successor, the switch. Us console fans dont get a wii u successor. Nintendo are marketing this as a home console first but we just look at it as an overpriced console compared to the competition.

    • Bruno_Ostara

      Learn to read graphics. It shows that most people are playing in both modes

      • Strawman

        Learn to be less of a d!ck, the device itself is a handheld, since it works without any other component that comes in the box, save the joy-cons. Does your dock still work without the device?

        • ben

          It is a console and a handheld because it seamlessly operates as one without the user having to plug a single wire into the handheld. You simply place it in its charger/ hdmi hub and the handheld speeds up its clock speed and operates as a console. You can say that is bs but you only say that because you cant actually deal with the facts and the consoles success.

    • Toni

      it does not matter you moron, the point of the system is to give people the option to play however they want, stop being an ignorant

      • Strawman

        I bet you’re a very good spokesperson with that attitude. Doesn’t matter what the point of the system is, it should be sold as a handheld without the dock, because that’s very clearly the system itself. The dock is objectively but a piece of side-equipment, otherwise the Switch wouldn’t function without it.

        • ben

          The system would never have sold the way it has if all it was an expensive HD handheld.

          • Strawman

            And yet that’s exactly what it is. Dispute my point about the dock first, Ben. If it was an integral part of the system, then people would not have been able to play their games without it in some form, and yet there are plenty who don’t even unpack the damn thing. This alone proves that it’s not a hybrid in the sense of being equal 50/50, but more 80/20.

            That may still give it the name hybrid, since it’s capable of doing 2 things, but when you look at how well it does those, then it’s very clear that one part is the focus (handheld) where the other part is an afterthought (home-console)

          • ben

            The graphics just says thirty percent of people use it more in handheld mode it doesn’t say they never use it docked. I think you have your hill and you can just die on it because this is a pointless argument the Switch is a success because it is marketed as a hybrid that is the end of it. I have explained how the dock works if you don’t want to accept that just move on.

          • Strawman

            What is selling games like FIFA on the system? People are buying this because it promises great games on the go, and that’s what truly matters, that’s the strength of this system. It’s docked component is something they can drop a moment’s notice, not of any true import. If it was, then surely they would’ve done their darnedest to make that dock count for something more than it does now: be a simple medium to connect to the TV.

          • ben

            What are the biggest selling games on the switch?

            Splatoon 2? A game which is primarily a tv game and almost unplayable in handheld mode.
            Mariokart 8 a game that is made for local multiplayer on a tv.
            Zelda only runs for 90 minutes in handheld mode.
            Mario odyssey a game that is far better in TV mode.

          • Strawman

            And you can prove me that these are worse in handheld mode? I’m pretty sure there’s far more people playing these handheld. Hell, I’ve heard countless times that Zelda looks better in handheld, even used to run better in handheld! Why else do I come across third-party games that don’t even bother to go above 720P? Because it goes above the P that matters, that being handheld’s.

            Face it, Ben, this system is selling on it’s promise of console quality games on the go, of local multiplayer via tabletop. The home-console part is but a last vestige to Nintendo’s legacy, soon to be wiped out entirely.

          • ben

            Splatoon 2 is the main reason for its success in Japan and that is a tv game. You cant even squirm and say otherwise. It has to be connected to the internet. It is best played with the Pro controller. A third of Nintendo switch consoles have been sold in Japan.

            You are just wrong move on.

          • Strawman

            You can’t be serious… I know you live in Japan, but we’re talking handheld country. Since when did they start giving an F about home-console play again?

            Look, I don’t own Splatoon 2, but surely you can play it online, in handheld mode, in the train or some such. I doubt they don’t have wifi in those over there.

            And still, tis but one game Ben. I’m looking to validate the TV play mode as the underdog that will potentially be scrapped, and I need some more solid evidence beyond that.

          • nemo37

            The dock is just a USB Type-C hub with DisplayPort alternate mode similar to the one Apple sells with the new MacBook and the one Samsung uses for DeX on the Galaxy S8/Note8. In fact, I believe you can use the Switch dock as an alternative to the DeX dock Samsung sells with a Galaxy S8/Note8. However, as you can see in the graphic above, people do seem to use the dock a lot, a the vast majority of people appear to play in both portable and docked mode. Hence, it does not make a lot of sense to remove it.

            I do believe that as Nvidia shrinks the process node for their X1 chip we will get a Switch without the detachable controllers and without the dock, but they will most likely still sell the current one as an XL model that can connect to the TV.

          • Strawman

            Those people are the only reason the dock is still included with the machine I’ll warrant.

            What is selling Switch games? It’s docked mode? Or the promise of quality titles on the go? Pretty sure it’s the last.

          • nemo37

            As it is marketed right now (I agree with you that the marketing for it will become increasingly more portable oriented as time goes on and smaller versions are introduced) It is the promise of high quality titles that can be played anywhere (including the big screen). You also cannot discount the social aspect, as some people like to play multiplayer on the big screen while sitting on a couch.

          • Strawman

            The big screen is but fluff, since you can also just use tabletop mode. It’s a matter of time before the dock is gone and there’s only the Switch handheld, since that’s where Nintendo is still king.

            High quality titles? Exclusives, yes, but not the multiplats. Too many compromises that only people who crave portability will happily overlook.

          • nemo37

            Again judging by the graphic above based on how many people play in both modes, I would argue it is more than just fluff for these individuals and I doubt Nintendo will abandon it (though again a more portable variant might be introduced that doesn’t;t include it). Although, then again, they can just integrate it and just leave a mini-HDMI out on the system for people to connect to a TV. Technically speaking with an AC adapter connected you could run the system as if it was in docked mode, but then something would need to keep the system upright for airflow.

          • Strawman

            A stand would fix that air-flow problem, and you see my point in them making a portable variant, right? Again, Nintendo’s success lies in their handhelds. The moment the Switch was released is the moment they closed off their chapter of traditional home-consoles.

          • Strawman

            I will concede you make strong points, Nemo and I thank you for putting my mind to some ease.

            That said, when people get over the newness of the Switch (save for those that really value portability), and they consider they’re getting less bang for their buck in when it comes to multiplats, the third-party sales will drop, and they’ll abandon the system yet again.

          • nemo37

            “That said, when people get over the newness of the Switch (save for those that really value portability), and they consider they’re getting less bang for their buck in when it comes to multiplats, the third-party sales will drop, and they’ll abandon the system yet again”.

            Well I think the majority will see the value in the portable aspect, so I do not see a big chunk of its base going. I think like you have said, a great deal of people do see it as a portable first system (which is what it really is as a hybrid; it leans heavily towards the portable side of things; just look at its components) On the other hand, though, the complaints you mentioned by those that prefer stationary systems will bubble-up overtime and Nintendo will need to react to them. In addition, there will come a point where the system, like other entertainment devices, will reach its peak and a point where the concept becomes tired and the masses demand either something entirely new or something to compliment it. If Nintendo can provide that (which I expect it will be in a form of a home console) and if they cannot or if they do not do it by the point when Switch 2 or Switch 3 is no longer successful enough to carry their company then they will go third-party at least with regards to home consoles (and who knows maybe if mobile phone manufacturers become competent enough to build proper software standards for gaming, then a device like Switch might become redundant on the portable front as well; so they might even go fully third-party there).

          • Strawman

            We will see, as it stands, the Switch is on a meteoric rise, but the future is indeed not set in stone.

            Regardless, I hope Nintendo can keep up and stay in the game. They didn’t pull the industry out of it’s crash, only to crash themselves later ๐Ÿ˜›

        • Toni

          I bet you’re a very boring person trying to argue about pointless things for hours, can’t get any more sad than that, all that’s missing is that you tell me that shani is your second account and you’re upvoting yourself, that would reach ultimate pathetic levels… but enough of that I’m back to playing what I want, however I want, while you keep crying about how they’re not marketing the switch they way you want, lol

          • Strawman

            You should’ve never bothered to come in here to begin with then, as you can’t even hold your own in an argument. Enjoy your handheld that masquerades as something it’s not, sap.

          • Toni

            keep believing that while you beat around the bush for hours and days if that’s all to your pathetic idea of enjoyment

    • ben

      I can tell you that there is no cpu available to make a home console affordable and more powerful than the Xbox and the PS4. So all Nintendo could do is do what MS did with the XBOX1X and stick a crap load of ram in it and overclock the dated GPU.

      CPU tech has not moved enough for Nintendo to produce a similar product to sony and MS and make money. Even if Nintendo did make a sony clone console why would anyone buy it over a sony or MS console?

      • Strawman

        Oh, I don’t know, Nintendo IP? People would like to see what today’s amount of power can do for such venerated franchises, instead of it ALWAYS being held back by the console they’re held prisoner on.

        • ben

          Honestly, every ps4 game is held back by the ps4. Every xbox game is held back by the xbox..

          PC gamers have been complaining for years about this stuff. Why are you singling out Nintendo?

          • Strawman

            Because Nintendo sure isn’t pushing to get it any better, now are they? Always behind the curve, always weaker than any of the other offerings.

          • Triforce of the Gods

            Always as in for the last three generations? Cause the GameCube was stronger than the PS2 but that didn’t stop the latter from getting games.

          • Strawman

            Tis true, but the Gamecube had other things plaguing it, such as mini-disks. It probably would’ve done far better if they had resolved the issues surrounding it, much like the Wii-U, ironically.

          • Triforce of the Gods

            Third parties showed the very next generation they they had no issues using multiple discs on 360 to match PS3’s Blu Ray. Hell Capcom even did it on GameCube so it was clearly feasible.

          • Strawman

            http://www.goliath.com/gaming/10-reasons-why-the-nintendo-gamecube-failed/

            The GameCube was the first Nintendo console to use optical disks as its media format. While the PlayStation 1 used a CD-ROM drive to overshadow the Nintendo 64โ€™s cartridges, the PlayStation 2 stepped things up even further by providing DVD as the consoleโ€™s physical media. Nintendo would move to the DVD format as well, but stopped short of using traditional DVDs. In an effort to reduce piracy and lower production costs, Nintendo opted instead for miniDVD, also known as a microdisk. This format used an 8 centimeter disk, as compared with the traditional 12 cm for DVDs). Unfortunately, this plan ultimately backfired. The smaller disk naturally had a smaller storage capacity (1.5 GB compared to proper 4 GB DVDโ€™s). This meant that FMV scenes and audio were more compressed to fit on a single disc, reducing their quality and giving the PS2 and Xbox the edge in terms of what they could include on a disc.

          • Triforce of the Gods

            …That didn’t tell me anything I didn’t already know, nor did it refute my point.

            The next generation, the 360 stuck to DVDs while PS3 used Blu Ray. Third Parties got around 360 having less storage by using multiple disks. Capcom proved that this was possible to do on GameCube by using multiple disks for Resident Evil 4. My point was third parties had no issue doing that on 360 so they could have done that on GameCube.

          • Strawman

            That site gives many reasons as to why it failed. Case in point, is that the lack of power will see Nintendo get the worse versions, with only portability to go for it.

          • nemo37

            I think you are discounting portability a bit too much. For a lot of people that do not have the time to play (such as those of us that are always in commute or those that now have families) portability is a god send. To put things in perspective, I have a PS4, a gaming PC, a Wii U, and an XONE. I have a huge backlog for both and I am sure every third-party game on there looks and runs better than the Switch counterpart (if there is one). However, I have not turned any of those systems on in the past 3 months (8 months or more for the XONE in the living room) simply because I do not have the time. I noticed this was a trend with friends as well (these are people, btw, that used to play constantly on their PS3, Xbox 360 and some on Wii back when we were in high school); to many of these people (who are, to my surprise, really embracing the Switch; for some it is even their first Nintendo system in more than two decades) portability is the only way we will experience games. Without systems like Switch, smartphone gaming is the only other option, and say what you will about the Switch being a downgrade graphically, but smartphone games are a downgrade in terms of graphics, gameplay, and value. Thus, the phrase “only portability going for it” sort of downplays a huge feature that is essential to the lifestyle of many gamers.

          • Strawman

            I’m not discrediting how strong portability is, I’m merely emphasizing how that’s all it truly has. The dock can be thrown away, and you’d still have that part of portability you so crave.

            I’m just sad to know Nintendo will never again have a dedicated home-console, because this is very clearly the way forward. The most preferable situation would be that you could buy Nintendo’s games on PC/PS4/Xbox One, but we all know that will NEVER happen.

            So everyone who wants the best of both worlds, though worse versions of every multiplat to grace Switch has no choice. If you want games, like say the latest Assassin’s Creed, you can chose PC/PS4/Xbox One, and then decide which one works better for you. If you want the latest Fire Emblem, Mario, Zelda etc, then you MUST buy whatever Nintendo has dredged up from the depths of their minds this time.

            Just for the record, I recognize that, as a handheld, the Switch is an unparalleled system without equal. It’s just that as a “home-console” it might as well not exist.

          • nemo37

            I would not use the word NEVER to describe a future stationary console. Nintendo will come to the realization that they cannot rely on a single device line to sustain their business; particularly in a business with as much ups and downs as video games. It is why they do not want to let the 3DS go. If they do not diversify and say the Switch 2 or 3 end up being failures like the Wii U was they will not have anything to sustain them (they had the 3DS to counter Wii U); in that case they will either quickly re-embrace a stationary console or they will at least bring their games to other home consoles. Knowing Nintendo as a dedicated hardware developer, I believe they will first embrace the idea of creating their own stationary system before bringing titles onto other platforms. My bet is that Wii U is not the last stationary system venture up Nintendo’s sleeve.

          • Strawman

            Many would love to have Nintendo’s games on hardware of their choice, but I believe Nintendo would rather sink trying to get a new hardware option before going in that direction.

            Why would they ever go back into the “stationary” business, when they’ve already given that away? They’ve lost that market, there’s no reason to go back there unless it somehow implodes and the opposition loses their hold on it.

            This “hybrid” venture has proven utmost profitable for them, and the majority of people love the handheld option, so if there’s any direction they would go, it’s dedicated to what works, leaving what doesn’t behind.

          • nemo37

            Just because something is profitable right now does not mean it will always remain that way. Switch’s success does not necessarily mean that Switch 2 will be successful. Just like the PSP’s success did not mean that PS Vita was successful, and the Wii’s success did not translate to Wii U. Nintendo will need a diverse product line to carry it, they cannot rely on a single device.

            In the 1990s, Apple had a product line of PDA devices known as the Newton. This supposed to be a serious productivity device. Now these devices were underpowered and had terrible hand writing recognition (that improved over time), and while Apple started by dominating the PDA market for a while, they lost their position to new rivals like Palm. When Steve Jobs came back to the company he discontinued that entire line of product instead focusing on the Mac and later iPod. During this period, Palm, RIM, HP all took control of the PDA market and overtime they added telephony capabilities to their devices and hence started the smartphone. Apple was not involved in any of this and pretty much everyone agreed that with the success of the iPod they would never need to reenter that market. Yet in 2007, about 10 years after discontinued Newton, Apple entered the Smartphone market with iPhone to compete with other smartphones and iPod touch (and later iPad) to compete with the cheaper PDA devices. One other thing pretty much everyone agreed on was that Apple would never make a stylus input device like the pen for the Newton and yet now the iPad Pro and Apple Pencil exist. The point of the story is that just because a company stops doing something for a while, it does not mean they will never come back to it. Nintendo can very well make another stationary system in a few year, just like Apple came back to a market they had abandoned earlier.

          • Strawman

            “they cannot rely on a single device.” And yet everyone applauds their move, so they only need to support a single device. They were splitting their development resources, and now it’s focused on a single system, which people seem ecstatic about, and they say the Wii-U suffered severely under the 2 systems to develop for.

            I see your point, but we are talking Nintendo, and if a lot of people are correct, then there is no place for Nintendo in the console market anymore.

          • Gamingfan

            a cheap nintendo console could do really well. not sure what you’e on about there.

          • Gamingfan

            So do you think nintendo will release another platform to go alongside the switch?

          • RoadyMike

            Well, Nintendo did already say they were gonna make a 3DS successor (or something of the sort) and they weren’t talking about the Switch

            Honestly, who knows?

          • ben

            Again, even if that is true both the xbox and the ps4 are way behind the PC.

  • shani

    For anyone still doubting it (as if the hardware wasn’t enough):
    This is the ultimate proof that the Switch is a handheld (with HDMI-out).
    What a shame, really.

    • Triforce of the Gods

      And your basing this on what? That more play handheld only more than docked only? Cause even more play both equally.

      • KnickKnackMyWack

        It’s based on literally nothing. If you wanted to use the Switch as strictly a home console, you have the power to do so. He needs to cling to some form of hope that the weird Nintendo console isn’t making a splash against the ‘precious’ status quo.

        • Strawman

          Let’s go base then. Grab your Switch, take in your hands, what does it look like? Then do the same to PS4/Xbox One and you can very clearly see the point.

          The dock is a piece of side-equipment that will become obsolete if proven to be more of a liability than an asset. The system doesn’t sell off of it’s grand home-console gameplay promise, it sells off of it’s incredible handheld and on-the-go potential.

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            Grab your Switch, take in your hands, what does it look like?

            And if I grab my Pro controller instead? Your entire argument falls apart at that point.

            The system doesn’t sell off of it’s grand home-console gameplay promise, it sells off of it’s incredible handheld and on-the-go potential.

            And yet a ton of people use both. That’s the beauty of it; it lets people choose and you’re trying to suggest that Nintendo basically should take that choice away despite what a success it is? That’s just silly.

          • Strawman

            It’s just a shame, that this grand portability that people love so much, came at a cost to the system’s power.

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            -shrug- According to folks like you, that’s where the success comes from. Boohoo for power anyway. If you’re into specs, get a PC.

          • Strawman

            I have a PC, a fairly good one. You know what the problem is? I’ve been a Nintendo player since SNES and Gameboy, and I really value their IP, so I’ve no choice as it stands.

            Besides, I find your lack of empathy disturbing. Some people out there don’t have need for portability, but they cannot opt for a different choice. Those that do, still have a 3DS with an incredible backlog of info to choose from, along with the Switch.

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            Besides, I find your lack of empathy disturbing.

            It’s just factual. Everyone has their niche but if that niche involves high specs, high performance then PC is the way to go. Which is why it’s frustrating that anyone puts that mentality onto anything involving consoles, which leads to insipid discussions about power and specs despite the far larger number of limitations within consoles as opposed to PCs.

          • Strawman

            I’ve told you this before, but just in case I’ve not, as you’ve seen, I don’t mind “bad” graphics, or not state of the art graphics. What I do mind, is third-party developers that cite the Switch’s power as a reason not to support it.

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            We had this song and dance with Xbox when both systems first came out. Developers will better understand Switch hardware with time and if the games sell well, they will continue to make ports for the system. It’s simple as that. There is a reason why Modern Warfare was on Wii and sold well to boot despite it being a radically different game visually.

          • Strawman

            Oh I do not doubt them understanding it, but consider Nintendo’s history with them, and their current aversion in some cases, the question is: do they WANT to understand?

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            Considering it aided in botching Wii U’s chances at success and Bethesda is on board for the first time since the NES, I’d say yeah they do.

          • Strawman

            Bethesda is a case of more going on here, since Nintendo is seriously marketing Skyrim. For all the third-parties on-board, there’s still examples of those who aren’t at all, like Activision-Blizzard.

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            I’m willing to wager it was far too long into the development pipelines for both CoD and Overwatch to make Switch ports. And frankly Kaplan is a freaking moron.

          • Strawman

            Overwatch: http://nintendoeverything.com/overwatch-director-on-challenges-bringing-the-game-to-switch/ Diablo was not discussed, so far I know.

            But besides that, you’ve got games like Destiny 2, for which they could argue couldn’t fit on Switch due to it’s portable nature and Destiny 2 always needing to be online (even though there is an MMO coming to the system). That’s why I said it being a case of wanting, because Wolfenstein is probably more graphically demanding than all the aforementioned games, but the ones behind them don’t care for the Switch to do a port.

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            Which is a stupid argument considering Switch has all the same bells and whistles necessary for playing online as the other two. I don’t see why it can’t have online-only games when it connects to Wifi without many issues.

            The only reason there was not a rush to get games on Switch was because of Wii U. The system is a fly-away success at this point. It really won’t surprise me if a Destiny collection hits Switch some time early next year.

          • Strawman

            True, it is a fly-away success, but is this a spur-of-the-moment kind of thing, or something to truly bank on? I reckon they want to be 100% sure of this before going all in, well, save those already going all in, of course.

            Well, I did read that a developer was talking about how it’s portability was a problem for it’s online. Can’t remember the specifics, but it seems they’ll use any excuse not to go for it.

          • RoadyMike

            That’s definitely something I’m concerned about since the Switch reveal. How are you supposed to play online when in portable mode and you’re up and about on the road, train etc?Even downtown, there aren’t many wifi hotspots around, let alone in the suburbs I’m in where rural areas are a stone throw away
            I would really only be able to play online multiplayer games at home for a stable connection which makes me question the point of making the system portable.

            Can’t completely blame devs for thinking you wouldn’t have a stable connection at all times if you plan to take the system outside. But I think it’d be better for now if devs just assume we’ll have a stable connection at some point and port their online multiplayer games over. I dunno

          • Strawman

            Yeah, it is a valid concern honestly. If games are always online (which is the frightening reality many of them are speeding towards) then it’d require the devs to ground these games to docked mode, or tie it to being 100% sure you’re connected somehow. But at the same time, there’s Dragon Quest X and Phantasy Star Online coming to the Switch in Japan, both being online games… (MMO’s to be precise)

            Do we have any games on Switch, in the West, so far that MUST have you be on the net?

          • RoadyMike

            Strange state of affairs to say the least. Wonder how it’ll play out. I think even the Vita had a 3G model or the like to have connection whenever. Too bad the Vita itself didn’t do well

            Not that I’m aware. We have lots of multiplayer games but not that absolutely require you to be online all the time. Except, of course, when you actually wanna play online

          • Strawman

            And none of the always online games are coming to the West… Hmmm…

          • Strawman

            Also just for the record, I still play PC games from 2004 that look like this:

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cd428ea6570ac5caae162c91431563780ba0cd50866cfeda3e6aa61f89cd266e.jpg

            Power is simply something that third-parties want to get their games over, and I certainly want my other favourite machine to receive those games, but that’s just me.

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            I’m the kind of person who will accept the best performance where applicable. Games like Doom and Wolfenstein won’t be quite on par with their stronger brothers, but as long as they run well enough, it’s fine by me. Now if the ports are straight up gimped, missing content and features then we have a problem. I don’t see how Nintendo can keep third parties if consumers are going to arbitrarily punish developers for making the best out of a tough situation.

          • Strawman

            “Now if the ports are straight up gimped, missing content and features then we have a problem.” So like FIFA?

            Well, let me put you in a situation then. A multiplat comes out for Switch and PC. You own both platforms, the PC being reasonable, not good enough to handle the latest, but that will soon change. Put yourself in my position, and consider that portability doesn’t matter in the slightest. For which platform would you buy the game?

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            Great job, you listed one game from one publisher with a far more than shoddy history with Nintendo hardware dating back as far as Wii if not sooner. If any other games follow that criteria, feel free to inform everyone.

            For which platform would you buy the game?

            That’s a pretty loaded question. In my case, I’d double-dip but I don’t represent everyone.

          • Strawman

            Fair enough, but most people barely have the extra cash for 1 game, let alone 2 of the same one!

            Well, FIFA is the only obvious example so far, but also one that shouldn’t be an example. It’s a much beloved game in countries were soccer is huge.

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            Steam sales dude. That’s what I’m doing with Wolfenstein 2.

            I get that FIFA is big and all, but EA churned out a rotten product. Even Capcom didn’t do that with Ultra Street Fighter.

          • Strawman

            Might be, but Ultra Street Fighter is still a remake of a remake for, what was it? 39,99? The original being Street Fighter 2 so far I know, which is from the 1900’s.

            Steam sales are only applicable to Steam though, and isn’t directly relevant in a discussion that pertains Nintendo and Switch. The day that I see Steam-esq deals on Nintendo’s Eshop, is the day Sony gives them a solid win, which they’re far from inclined to do, I might add.

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            You’re moving the goal posts. Ultra Street Fighter II is neither broken, nor missing features nor unfinished. If you bought it, yeah it costs a pretty penny but you are still getting an at least decent quality game out of your purchase. The same cannot be said about EA’s garbage for the last 8 or so years on Nintendo consoles.

            Steam sales are only applicable to Steam though

            Well first, you’re splitting hairs since that was precisely my point. Second, eShop has sales all the time. I very recently bought Darksiders on Wii U for like $8.

          • Strawman

            Still, no console has sales the way Steam has them, like buying Shadow of Mordor for 4 euros with all the DLC, where that would’ve costed 39,99, plus the more important part, not everyone has a PC, let alone one strong for gaming.

  • Devlin Richberger

    There is that hybrid love. I got to love the few people complaining here about the Switch being a hybrid console/handheld.

  • Those responses for the surveys. . .

    I still haven’t gotten a few of the surveys in my e-mail. I wonder if they’re not sending them out to everyone? Or how that works? Do they send more to people that also respond?

    I would love to see age and gender breakdowns by region. I have a few estimates, but I want to know how close they are. I also wonder which region actually responds the survey more frequently.

    • Tlink7

      Aw, if it gives you any consolation, I haven’t gotten any survey invites either xD

      • ben

        I have had 5.

        • Tlink7

          Regarding the Switch I meant. I’ve had plenty other ones in the past few years

          • ben

            All mine were for Switch games.

          • ben

            I should add I have over 30 switch games.

          • Tlink7

            Haha that explains that. I have five physical Switch games and three eShop games xD

      • Thanks! I feel a little better, but now I want to be indignant for the both of us, lol.

  • LB

    all three modes for me. when im home, i play exclusivly in tv mode. when im on the train to work/home, i play in handheld, and when im at work taking breaks i only play in table top

    • MoYeung

      How long does the battery last?

  • SecretX

    And then Nintendo will start targeting more males and making more male leads games. jk

    • ??? Could they do more than they already do? ^u^;
      Aside from Metroid, what series do they have that doesn’t have a male lead, or the option for it?

      I know you said jk, but like. . . huh? ^u^;

  • McCaron

    I play 99% on my TV
    I only play handheld when I travel

  • Gregory Weagle

    I’ve been using it in portable mode. Then again, I don’t have a HDMI-compatible television. The A/V standard hasn’t completely died out, Nintendo. Not even close.

    The gender gap needs to be addressed in 2018. An increase of 4% for non-males is not enough at this point.

    • Aline Piroutek

      I will need a converter to play on my TV. “TV Tubรฃo” as we say here.

    • I am sure it isn’t so bad in reality, but I do kind of wonder.

      For one, I wonder how many Switches were out ww by Oct. 2016 that they only sent 600k surveys. But I also wonder in general, how many female gamers got them. (I haven’t gotten any, except for Kamiko now that I remember.)

      But yeah, it should be addressed. Nintendo did great with the 3DS in attracting female (and younger) audiences, and Iwata was very aware of that. I think they’ll continue to be aware (esp. with share holders mentioning it), and I am very curious about what they’ll do to attract and keep people.

    • MoYeung

      Buy a new TV? Very cheap these days…

      • Gregory Weagle

        I have been considering that, but I keep putting it off for some reason. And it’s not like I don’t have several HDMI cables lying around.

  • Constantinos Lapiotis

    Hi Maria. Nice red t-shirt you got there. Sorry to upset you but we are not interested here for your Google weekly payouts and your brand new Land Rover thing.

  • Nintendo need more female content, like they did with DS/Wii era

    • I know they’ll deliver, but I love that they made efforts to be inclusive more with the Wii/DS, and the 3DS. I hope they do keep that up, but it sounds like Kmishima is like Iwata, where he recognizes that and intends to see to it.

      I already love everything they give us, but more efforts to cater (and pander) to female oriented content would be nice. (Or content like FE, where they cater and pander both/all ways.)

    • Hidden Flare

      I think my girlfriend would like style savy. Also think games like animal crossing can work.

      • Certainly! I think female cosumers wull be great divercity for the gaming divercity!

  • JasonBall

    And then fits are thrown over content that panders to males. Ladies, if you want equal rep in games, buy the ******* systems.

    • I mean, at the same time, what exactly on the Switch is actively catered to female audiences right now?

      Are we going by having a male or female lead? Attractiveness of our lead? Quality and quantity of story, or the gameplay?

      What reason do female audiences have right now to buy the system?

      But really: it’s important to remember that they note this is only people that responded to the survey, and they only sent out 600k. It’s very likely that a lower number of female gamers happened to get it, and even less responded. (Same may even be the N/A response.)

      I’ve seen a lot of female players, and some I know will get it when Animal Crossing (or Pokemon) comes.

      • JasonBall

        No idea your point.

        • RoadyMike

          Females aren’t being catered to so there’s no reason to get into it

          What pisses me off is that people, especially women, will complain about this disparity but won’t get into it themselves and/or blame men/devs for women choosing not to get more into games

          • JasonBall

            That’s what I said in my original post.

          • RoadyMike

            I know m8

          • We don’t actually know how the gender of a majority of Switch owners though. Thing is, there could be a lot of female owners, even more equal. The problem is, our data is limited. What we know is based on responses to a survey, that wasn’t sent out to a lot of a people. (I mean, that is a lot, but compared to how many own a Switch, nah.)

            And we do know that when Animal Crossing comes, that will draw in a lot of female gamers. Pokemon will as well, and probably the main FE. I’ll bet Warriors helped; just as people call it a waifu roster, it has a number of the prime “husbando” favs.

            I don’t see the kind of complaints and remarks that you are mentioning, but I’m sure they happen; I doubt they’re the majority though. Especially with how many female gamers I’ve seen excited about the Switch, its games, and Nintendo in general on social media and around.

            (Region also probably plays into it though. In the US, women game a crapton; and they do in Japan. I can’t speak for EU, Canada, etc.)

          • RoadyMike

            I meant in general, not just with the Switch

            I don’t think it’s fair when people complain how there’s not enough representation of X group in activity Y if said X group don’t participate in activity Y. All they do is complain about the “underrepresentation”
            Then, they get angry at the people who provide activity Y (devs in this case) for not pandering to group X or having more of group X in their ranks, even though the devs see that group X is nowhere near their biggest demographic and therefore don’t have much incentive to pander to them

            You simply don’t just try to pander to those that don’t even buy your stuff in the first place. I’m not saying they shouldn’t try, it’s just that, generally, there are still more men simply play more games than women (except maybe one mobile.. in Japan?)

          • Huh. Well, okay.

        • ?

          No idea to my questions? Or just my whole response?

          Are you saying you don’t get my point? Or that the point is in my favor? I’m not looking for a point, just trying to understand more.

          • JasonBall

            Trying to understand more? Okay. Basically, I’m saying women should stop whining they’re not well represented in games and that most content panders to men.

          • Alright, then.

  • R.Z.

    Time to release that Animal Crossing game …

    Also, personally, I’ve been playing much more in portable mode, even at home (I say “even” at home but I have taken the Switch out only about twice since I got it XD).
    It’s all about the convenience.

  • Gamingfan

    the ps4 pro is $399 in the us and the switch is $299.

    In australia the ps4 pro is $469 and the switch is $469. how does that make any sense? you can [email protected] right off with that bs nintendo.

  • Hello!
    Nice article!
    xoxo