Nintendo Switch

Discussion in 'Gaming' started by chi, Jan 13, 2017.

  1. There is five isnt there?

    • 1-2-Switch.
    • Just Dance 2017.
    • The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild.
    • Skylanders: Imaginators.
    • Super Bomberman R.
     
  2. I don't you could charitably count 1-2-switch as a proper game, especially for the price they're charging for it.
     
  3. This is probably the reason they don't include the charging grip: when the Switch is docked, the internal battery is being charged, but when you undock it and attach the Joycons, then the Joycons are being charged by the internal battery. So, worst case scenario, you have to use it in portable mode to charge the controllers and continue playing, or vice versa.
     
  4. The 1-2 Switch looks like a tech demo. Zelda, Skylanders, and Dance are Wii U ports. Bomberman is the only new game. I'm betting Nintendo didn't even finalize the hardware design until July.
     
  5. @bfun

    It may be a port but it's the first fresh Zelda since Wii. Likely to be the last fresh Zelda on Wii U.

    The Wii U costs $400, has a small user base, and never got a signature title. Unless you already own one, the jump to Switch is a no–brainer from Wii. You won't be missing much while saving $100. But Nintendo may have underestimated how many people will take the wait and see approach.
     
  6. I'm just surprised. The Wii U was a sales failure. I figured Nintendo would have been planning the next console for years but it seems like they even surprised themselves with the Tegra 1 choice. Now I'm just wondering why they didn't push the launch back so they could have more games at launch. It seems like the lack games was the top complaint about the Wii U.
     
  7. Zelda is 900p30 on switch (when docked) and 720p30 on Wii U...

    If nintendo themselves can't hit 1080, let alone 60FPS, on Switch with a game that isn't exactly pushing the boundaries then 3rd parties are going to have less luck I think!
     
  8. #28 cmdrmonkey, Jan 18, 2017
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2017
    I predict this will flop hard and be Nintendo's last home console before they go software only like Sega. Nintendo just can't accept that the handheld is dead and that smartphones and tablets killed it. Also that casual and kiddy gaming have moved onto smartphones and tablets and are never coming back to consoles.

    Hopefully after that happens, they'll release their games on viable platforms people actually use, like Steam or iOS. I'm sure Nintendo games would sell far better on Steam with its 130M+ person user base than the Wii U, which almost no one owns, or the Switch which no one is going to buy. I would happily pay for Zelda and Metroid games if they released them on Steam and made them work with KB+M and/or the Xbox controller, but I'm not buying another one of their stupid, gimmicky under-powered consoles. Also seeing as how their consoles keep using 15 year old hardware, I would think any modern PC could run their games as long as they do a half way decent job of porting them. And I think you'd be surprised by the number of former Nintendo fans who game on Steam now. Case in point Hawk4x4. Seriously Nintendo, Consoles are dying. Time to come join the glorious PC master race in the sun.
     
  9. I kinda/sorta agree. Nintendo gave up the 3rd party fight after GameCube. You're never going to buy a multi-platform game on a Nintendo console. By making their own hardware, they're adding several hundred dollar barriers, just to play Nintendo games.

    The confirmed 2017 lineup looks pretty weak... only 14 games total.

    1-2-Switch
    Arms
    Fast RMX
    Fire Emblem Warriors
    Mario Kart 8 Deluxe
    Untitled No More Heroes sequel
    Snipperclips
    Splatoon 2
    Super Bomberman R
    Super Mario Odyssey
    Xenoblade Chronicles 2
    Dungeon of Zaar
    Tank It!
    The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild
     
  10. I was a massive fanboy.

    Gamecube had its faults but was hugely underappreciated. Wii was a complete disappointment and was the end for me. Abandoning successful IPs for boring games with floating cartoon heads and balance boards is how you lose a fanboy. In fact, I built my first gaming PC after it was apparent that the Wii would suck. Wii-U wasn't even on my radar at all.

    I'll be honest, if the price went down, I'd buy a Switch just to play Mario Kart and Smash Bros with my family, but its not worth it for $400+ after buying accessories. That was the other thing Nintendo did right with Gamecube: $99 with a game in the box. You can't say no to that. Quite a few people I knew had a primary gaming system and also a Gamecube just for Nintendo franchises because it was so cheap.
     
  11. #31 cmdrmonkey, Jan 18, 2017
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2017
    I was a huge Nintendo fanboy too. Wii was where they lost me. The GC hardware they recycled was so out of date by 2006. The games were all girly, kiddy, and/or shitty.

    You bring up a great point about consoles. They used to be so cheap compared to now. I think I paid $129.99 for my Gamecube, $179.99 for Xbox, and $299.99 for PS2 (at launch). And those systems had decent graphics for the time. Want $400-600 for a console? No thanks. I'll take a high-end video card for that kind of money instead.

    Consoles used to be a cheap and simple way to play games. But modern consoles are neither cheap nor simple. They've become crappier locked down PCs that don't have any of the advantages of PC gaming, like state of the art upgradeable hardware or free online play. 360 and PS3 at least had the excuse of running high-end exotic hardware when they came out. But PS4 and Xbox One are using hardware that would have been considered mid-range in 2010 and was equivalent to low-end $100 or $150 video cards by the time they launched in 2013. Those systems should have launched at $299.99 for the PS4 (8GB GDDR5 isn't cheap, but the rest of the hardware is) and $249.99 for the Xbox One (with it's slow/cheap DDR3 memory and GPU equivalent to a $100 Radeon 7770). Both should have quickly dropped to below $200. Both were insanely, massively overpriced for the low-end budget PC hardware they had, with the Xbox One being the worst offender.
     
    • like like x 1
  12. The Switch, 3 extra controllers, and the games will cost about $630. Alternatively, you could look for a used Wii U and some used Wii controllers and maybe do the whole thing for half the price. I think I got my Wii U for $200 and those two games eventually went on sale for $30 a piece. All my controllers were free since I got them from old Wii systems people didn't want anymore. I don't play the Wii U myself but as a kids console it's pretty darn great.
     
  13. Completely agree. The last great console generation was PS2/XB/GC. After that Sony and MS have been selling glorified TigerDirect barebones kits. I still bought a PS3 and X360 but I'm done with them. Nearly every game on PS3 required massive downloads before first play. A lot required a chunk of the game installed to the HDD. My X360 died at least 2 times. Sam's Club replaced it a few times, but I started to give such few fucks I took it apart and baked it in the oven. Shit like this just piss me off now. I want quality hardware and completed games. I don't a accept day one patches, it means your game isn't ready for release.

    I've slowly joined the PC master race. Consoles are for kids and poor people.

    The Switch actually appeals to me due to portability. I travel a lot and play Nintendo/Sega emulators on an Android tablet. But the price is too high and not enough AAA titles are coming in 2017. I'd be interested in a standalone portable unit without dock for $150ish.
     
  14. #34 alterego, Jan 19, 2017
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2017
    The games list is longer if you include the indie games, which is obviously something Nintendo wants to cultivate now that they're also releasing iOS and Android games themselves.

    As for the pricing comments, check this out…it's three years out of date, so if anything, the prices would even be a bit higher. Gamecube was only 50 bucks cheaper and didn't even come with a portable play option. And look at the Atari VCS price! That's the reality: this stuff is so much cheaper than it used to be for a far greater entertainment value.

    http://kotaku.com/36-years-of-console-prices-adjusted-for-inflation-1485353267
     
  15. #35 cmdrmonkey, Jan 19, 2017
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2017
    Those launch prices didn't last long for the Xbox or GC. Xbox bombed so hard at launch that it plummeted from $300 down to below $200 within the first year. You could easily find deals on it in 2002 where it was $149.99. I got mine bunlded with Halo CE and an extra controller in 2002 for $179.99. And GC dropped to $99 pretty quickly. Even adjusted for inflation, that's way cheaper than anything now. The PS2 was the only expensive system that generation.

    Even the inflation adjusted launch prices are still cheaper than the $399 for PS4 or $499 for Xbox One. You have $259 for GC, $389 for Xbox, and $395 for PS2.

    What you posted only proved what Supersonic and I were discussing: Xbox/GC/PS2 launched cheaper, and dropped in price faster. Even when you adjust for inflation they were significantly cheaper systems.

    360 and PS3 could get away with those insane prices because they were using state of the art exotic hardware for 2005/2006. The 360 used an X1800 derivative that was even more advanced than the desktop card and had unified shaders. X1800XT was a $500+ GPU in 2005. But Xbox One and PS4 can't have more than $150 to $200 worth of budget PC hardware in them. There is absolutely no reason they should cost what they do. X1 is running a Radeon 7770/7790 derivative. 7770 cost $85 to $100 in 2013. And that's for the desktop card that used GDDR5, not the shitty DDR3 in the X1. And the PS4 is running a 7850, which was $129.99 in 2013. And I'm sure they are getting volume discounts on the APUs and chipsets from AMD. And volume discounts on the memory, HDDs, and blu ray drives. The CPUs are AMDs equivalent of the Intel Atom, so essentially worthless. DDR3 was at rock bottom prices in 2013. A consumer could get 8GB for $30. And I'm sure MS spent way less than that. No way there was more than $150 worth of hardware in the X1 at launch, so why the $500 price tag?
     
  16. Here's the history of the price cuts. GC took two years to drop to $99. Xbox dropped to $149 in 2004. So the Switch, at launch, is only $169 more than the inflation adjusted $99 ($129) GC with a portable gaming option included and controllers with gyroscopes, accelerometers, and IR cameras.

    http://vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/Price_cuts
     
  17. #37 cmdrmonkey, Jan 19, 2017
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2017
    Those might be the official price cuts on MSRP, but retailers were selling them cheaper than that much sooner.

    I remember GC plummeted fast because it was selling so badly. Retailers tried $149.99, then $129.99, then $99 because they couldn't sell them. If you were a fan of Nintendo exclusives, the GC was a no-brainer at those prices.
     
  18. I don't doubt that there were some limited time sales or local deals, but it wasn't anything nationwide until the official cut. I bought a GC at launch and that link is pretty much in line with what I remember for price drops. Besides, PS2 was far more expensive in comparison and far more successful, so the pricing didn't really drive the sales anyway.

    IMO, the Switch launch price is actually less than I thought it would be. Far better deal than the Wii U for sure.
     
  19. That's an interesting chart. Clearly Nintendo would out-compete hardware at better prices before. The N64 is the best value on the list, and GameCube was better than the PS2 and held its own against Xbox. They gave up the lucrative dude-bro market with the Wii.

    Might have to do with how consoles were marketed to us as kids. A new console basically meant better graphics. The SNES, N64, GameCube had large graphical leaps and were better than the competition. Now we're paying for the mobile technology offset by inferior graphics. $300 retail means Nintendo is making them for $150 tops. They could've sold near cost and put extra $$$ into graphics, imo.
     
  20. The ability to use as a handheld and as a TV console is the most important part. That's a differentiation that can sell in a market that already has two different versions of Playstation and an upcoming second version of Xbox. Pursuing "graphic leaps" for home consoles is already a pointless exercise.