Nintendo Switch review: pure potential

http://www.theverge.com/2017/3/1/14772530/nintendo-switch-review-zelda-breath-of-the-wild

by Tomte • 9 years ago

302 363 9 years ago

coldpie7• 9 years ago

This is a good review. Nice pictures, and some real-world usage scenarios, especially concerning battery life.

I really wanted to like the Switch, but the addition of and focus on motion controls during their January press conference really killed it for me. Alternate input methods for games have failed, but Nintendo keeps pursuing this. My worry about the fact that the console supports motion controls is that games will use them. Motion controls killed the Mario Galaxy series for me, I couldn't get past the first hour or so without having so many frustrating input problems. I have a Wii U and Nintendo's games insist on using the microphone for stupid gameplay mechanics, like blowing on it to move platforms.

Nintendo makes really good games, but they're tied to crap hardware and forced to use really awful input gimmicks. This feels crummy to say, but I kind of hope the Switch fails so that they're forced to go third party, drop their crap hardware division, and put out their excellent software on game consoles I actually want to own and use.

TazeTSchnitzel• 9 years ago

Alternate input methods for games have failed

Is that really so? Motion controls work very well for certain niches. Some types of games are better without them, but so long as developers allow the choice of conventional inputs in cases where they don't work well, it shouldn't be a problem.

ronnier• 9 years ago

Joy stick for fighters.

Mouse and keyboard for FPS and similar games.

Traditional controller for platformers/side scrollers

Touch for a few types of games on mobile, not many though.

Almost never do I want to use motion.

kbenson3• 9 years ago

I would posit that some limited motion controls could benefit most, if not almost all games. The big problem is the controllers are poorly adapted for motion in most cases. The Wii is able to do more with motion because the controller setup makes that possible, with the separated joystick portion and motion portion. It causes problems in that it's not as button-rich as contemporary controllers, so cross-platform titles often require changes, but when used appropriately, the motion controls can enhance play quite nicely.

Unfortunately, there's little incentive for established third party developers to put much effort into motion controls, as they want their games on as many platforms as possible and large differences in control schemes make that hard.

That said, the PSVR stuff is really the next level of motion controls. Unfortunately, it looks like they ignored where I think Nintendo had good foresight, and didn't include a way to use analog joysticks with the controllers, so it appears you either use the VR controllers or a regular Playstation controller, and there's no hybrid solution equivalent to the Wiimote nunchuck joystick (I hope I'm wrong, or they have a way to fix this with an attachment). Motion controls are still going strong, we're just still evolving past the equivalents of the Atari joystick and original NES controllers.

intrasight• 9 years ago

I assume is a form of internal corporate welfare. One has to assume that the company would be bigger and healthier without the hardware division.

jclardy• 9 years ago

Hmm, I have to disagree here. I'm actually really excited about the Joy-Con's and the Switch's portability. Mainly because you take the tablet with you and you have the ability to do same-screen co-op just like that.

For a game like Towerfall or Mariocart (Or a launch title, like Snipperclips) that is amazing. And the ability to play Zelda on an airplane sounds awesome.

I do think they flubbed a ton of stuff on the software side (and even hardware...digital triggers on the joy-cons...) mainly by making 1-2 switch a $50 title and not a pack-in, so I see that flopping hard. At this point the only reason to buy is Zelda, so in that regard it seems like a soft launch for the dedicated fans, then the real launch will be this holiday season.

I do agree on disliking motion controls for a console like this, but motion controls do have their place in VR, so maybe Nintendo has some future plans in that space...

coldpie7• 9 years ago

Yeah, the portability is really cool! And the ad-hoc networking for multiplayer seems neat. The joycon controllers seem pretty neat, simple little controllers, which means you can focus on gameplay. I was really excited for it.

But... then the January demo happened. It's all dumb mini-games with shit motion controls. It's an ice cube vibration demo(?!?). It's some poorly-defined camera vision detection thing. They seem to be doubling down on awful input methods, instead of showing us good games that I want to play on hardware I want to own.

MadcapJake• 9 years ago

I do agree on disliking motion controls for a console like this, but motion controls do have their place in VR, so maybe Nintendo has some future plans in that space...

I could see them doing something like the Samsung Gear VR for the Switch.

ajeet_dhaliwal• 9 years ago

Experimentation is great but yes it's been (and continues to be) overdone. The best games in my opinion still use the standard controller, I just got done with FFXV and I never longed for anything but that DualShock4.

givinguflac2• 9 years ago

I disagree, I thought the use of microphone in gameplay was an interesting addition, and it's not like it's something that you had to do more than a few times total in a game. Also, there's no possible way that motion controls will be the main input for most games- it's portable.

k__3• 9 years ago

If I look at all the controllers since SNES, alternate input methods were always their thing.

And since they have a big hardware divison, they need to come up with innovative ideas to sell hardware.

coldpie7• 9 years ago

Nah, N64 and Gamecube were pretty standard. Buttons and joysticks.

ashark5• 9 years ago

I have a Wii U and Nintendo's games insist on using the microphone for stupid gameplay mechanics, like blowing on it to move platforms.

Haha, really? They've done that crap since the Famicom. Didn't make it to the states, but the Japanese controllers had a microphone. Had to blow into it for a couple games (Japanese version of Zelda, for one). They must be really in love with that input method.

timlod• 9 years ago

The Switch is supposed to have excellent hardware.

Also, the majority of people at preview events (greatly) praised the motion controls of the upcoming game ARMS. HD Rumble also is reported to be amazing.

I for one am excited to play with what may be the first really great motion controls.

vlunkr4• 9 years ago

The showed what, 2 games that used motion controls? I wouldn't expect most games to even bother with them. I guess we'll see though.

flukus13• 9 years ago

Alternate input methods for games have failed, but Nintendo keeps pursuing this.

The switch support standard input methods and then some.

ptrptr• 9 years ago

So is Switch next-gen handheld or home console? Will 3DS series be discontinue?

M_Grey8• 9 years ago

The answer to all of your questions is, "No".

gallerdude• 9 years ago

They're saying that the 3DS will live on, but I think it's clear that this is overriding it and the Wii U.

ihuman3• 9 years ago

Right now, they are saying it's not a 3DS replacement. However, they said the same thing about the DS, and how it was a "third pillar" to the GBA and GCN.

_ph_5• 9 years ago

I think it is the next-gen high-end handheld. You couldn't improve the 3DS much without ending out at something close to the switch. But it is larger and significantly higher priced. Especially when you compare it to the 2DS which is less than $100. So for quite a while the 2/3DS are going to occupy the lower price point and ultraportable sector. Only as the Switch prices get lower and possibly a "Switch Mini" gets released, the 2/3DS would be phased out completely.

bryanlarsen3• 9 years ago

The wired review is much more negative, if you want a contrasting view: https://www.wired.com/2017/03/review-nintendo-switch/

Tomte• 9 years ago

ArsTechnica is also tending towards negative, with optimistic parts: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/03/nintendo-switch-revie...

flukus13• 9 years ago

Ars has been against the switch from the beginning. I was actually surprised by the optimistic parts.

JohnJamesRambo2• 9 years ago

"At this point, with Nintendo not having commented on or fixeds the issue, I can only go forward assuming the Switch consoles going on sale this Friday will all potentially have this problem, and that Nintendo is about to sell you a $300 game system requiring some kind of fix before it performs its basic functions."

Yikes, that sounds disastrous.

treehau53• 9 years ago

Well if you weren't sold on waiting for the next release, you should be now. I was super excited about getting one of these, but now I will probably hold out for the Switch "S". At the very minimum, wait to see if the buggy left joy cons are being shipped with this initial batch.

Retr0spectrum4• 9 years ago

It definitely looks bad, but I've seen a few videos demonstrating the issue and it only really happens if you have the joycon entirely covered by your hands, or behind your back.

This could be a software bug that is fixable with an update, but that seems unlikely considering it affects the left controller more than the right one, which would indicate a hardware design flaw.

Fej• 9 years ago

From what I've gathered - the antennae in the Joy-Cons do not get enough power. GameXplain did a video showcasing the issue. The right Joy-Con also has the issue, to a lesser extent.

Nintendo might be able to adjust the gain on the Joy-Con radios, at the expense of battery life. They might have to re-certify with the FCC to do so.

vlunkr4• 9 years ago

I know the author of that is huge Nintendo geek too, so that doesn't bode well for it. Although he does say most of these issues could be ironed out soon.

criddell• 9 years ago

So it's a PS Vita with an HDMI-out?

minikites• 9 years ago

So the iPhone is just an iPod with a big touchscreen that you can also use make calls?

So the automobile is just a carriage that runs without horses?

So the airplane is just a bus with wings?

prodmerc2• 9 years ago

Yes to all.

Nintendo should probably switch (heh) to only releasing games for Android and iOS.

ihuman3• 9 years ago

But with competitively-priced memory cards and 1st-party support

izacus2• 9 years ago

Hmm, the battery life is kinda disappointing. I'm not interested in Switch as a TV console (PS4 does that significantly better and has better games for when I have time to give them) and it seems it's going to struggle as a 3DS replacement when it can't even live through a rather average flight :/

I do still hope the best 3DS franchises will make it to the Switch and I might pick it up after price drops under the price of PS4.

raphaelj• 9 years ago

Good thing is that you can use almost any powerbank with it, thanks to it's charging through USB-C.

bryanlarsen3• 9 years ago

According to reviews, it depletes the battery faster than it can be charged so a powerbank won't expand life as much as it should.

diabeetusman2• 9 years ago

But you can't charge and use it at the same time

M_Grey8• 9 years ago

"Jack of all trades, master of none." It's not a console you'd want to own without another console, it's not a portable you'd be able to use like a proper portable.

So what is it, other than something for people who already knew they'd buy whatever Nintendo had to offer?

Navarr2• 9 years ago

"... sometimes is better than a master of one" is the rest of the saying ;)

The Switch is almost a Wii U. The one big difference is that the Switch doesn't allow both screens at once - by using the small screen as the console.

It is an average Nintendo TV console with the added functionality of being able to let someone else use the TV by undocking the Switch and continuing game play - just like the Wii U.

nilkn3• 9 years ago

Just under 3 hours of battery life for a highly demanding game like Zelda seems pretty fair to me to be honest. 6 hours for less demanding games also seems pretty fair.

vkjv• 9 years ago

For me, that's disappointing. It means that a year or two into battery wear you'll be tethered to an outlet.

The situation looks even more dire after reading this quote.

...although we’ve yet to find a battery / cable that can charge the console faster than it drains.

jamesgeck0• 9 years ago

The Switch battery life is comparable to the original 3DS battery life. It seems that it'll last much longer than my iPhone does when I play demanding games on it.

gdulli• 9 years ago

And I personally wanted a new TV console with current-gen capabilities. It looks like neither use case is completely addressed.

odiroot• 9 years ago

I'm in the opposite camp. I'm a happy owner of Wii U and would probably skip the Switch.

I don't like the compromises (mostly performance) made just to make it portable. That's the use case that doesn't interest me in the slightest.

I would just prefer a beefy modern console that plays fun Nintendo-ecosystem games.

BuckRogers3• 9 years ago

Same here as a happy Wii U owner. Skipping the Switch unless there's some very compelling content and I don't know what that would be. It's essentially the Wii U all over again but you can take it out of the house. I don't care about that.

It might be a little more compelling if they kept the processing in the dock and the handheld was a thin-client, requiring a home network or internet connection to stream from it. Battery life would improve at least.

lmnt• 9 years ago

You seem to be thinking of your PS4 as a "home console" and the Switch as the "portable", whereas the Switch is really both those things and none of them. You can play the same games both on the couch and on the go (unless you are hellbent on always playing two games in parallel on each console).

I think the Switch will allow for a new "non-binary" way of thinking about what's portable and what's a home game, and fit into our lives in a new way. I can't wait to start playing a game on the commute back home from work (which takes well under the 2.5h), and continue the same session on the big setup later when I arrive. I think it will allow me to spend more hours per week playing big titles compared to what I can spare today.

CoolGuySteve2• 9 years ago

I really wish these reviews would tell us the display's brightness.

It's weird to criticize battery life without saying how many nits the display is outputting and what the battery life would be at, say, 200 nits with a demanding game.

So far all I've been able to find is that Zelda lasts 2.5 hours with full brightness. How bright is full brightness? It's a mystery!

Edit: Digital Foundry says that max brightness is higher than the 3DS XL and visible in daylight. So 500-600 nits maybe?

They also say that it lasts "just over 3 hours" with the display at half or low brightness.

CamelCaseName2• 9 years ago

I'm more interested in how low "low brightness" is.

I will never forget my Blackberry Bold 9600. Full brightness was quite bright. No brightness was also quite bright. Not great for checking your phone in the middle of the night without sunglasses.

jhugg2• 9 years ago

The more I learn, the more I want this as a 3DS replacement. The TV aspect doesn’t interest me as much. It looks like it might deliver on that promise as they work the kinks out.

slantyyz7• 9 years ago

The more I learn, the more I want this as a 3DS replacement.

I don't know if that's even possible. The 3DS has pretty good third party developer support and a huge back library.

The true worth of any system is how many high quality games are on the system and whether they're the games you want play.

Outside of the obvious "must have" first party titles, I can't see a whole lot of system-selling "must have" third party titles. If you're not into Nintendo's own games, you pretty much have no compelling reason to get a Switch. And if Switch hardware sales aren't strong enough, third party developers will stay away.

It also doesn't help (especially for parents on a budget) that Switch games are around $20 more than 3DS games.

OD_2• 9 years ago

Some of the niches that the 3DS owned up until now might be disrupted by the Switch though. I'm one of these old school (as in, thoughtful turn based combat, whether tactical ala FE or FFT, or more about party building and dungeon exploration like SMT and Etrian) RPG gamers who bought the 3ds solely games like the Fire Emblem, Etrian Odyssey, Shin Megami Tensei, Devil Survivor series, and of these, Atlus has already announced that the next major sequel to SMT will be on Switch instead of 3ds. The DS and 3ds up until now had all the major games of the series (Strange Journey, IV, IVA). It's nice to see the series go back to a more powerful console, we have missed seeing those demons animated in 3d the way they were in Nocturne on Playstation 2. Can't say I will miss the 3ds if the other game series follow suit.

Fire Emblem also traditionally had home console releases alongside portable gamesystems, but the Wii U flopped too hard for niche games to have much room. Concentrating developer efforts on a single console that does both portable and home, large screen play is a smart move for Nintendo.

baccredited• 9 years ago

Anecdote: my son and all his 13 year old friends can't wait for this console and are all preordering this week.

VLM3• 9 years ago

Same here, but they're completely advertising driven so the excitement is driven solely by lack of advertising for anything else, rather than the inherent abilities of the platform.

DaiPlusPlus• 9 years ago

I'm wary the Switch is simply too big and bulky to be a replacement for the GameBoy/DS form-factor that kids seem to go for (myself included - fond memories of pining for a GameBoy Color some 18 years ago) - smartphone games have effectively supplanted that area anyway. I see the Switch as a PSP competitor, but they'll have to try very hard to succeed.

Assuming this isn't Nintendo's swansong and last hardware product I hope they release an Android phone with built-in (pop-up?) game controls and an official emulator/store app.

sergiotapia• 9 years ago

I'm excited about the switch. My kids will use it in the car, we'll play some mario kart when we go out to eat at, my son almost exclusively games on his 3ds.

I'm hyped!

diimdeep• 9 years ago

Off topic: How much time people spend in public laundry? In post Soviet countries and Russia almost all families, even poorest have washing machines, while public laundry used only for complex cleaning.

whorleater• 9 years ago

This has sorta changed since I sometimes use those laundry-cleaning startups, but I definitely don't have a laundry machine in my apartment in Manhattan. There's a laundry room in the basement of my building, but that's been non-functional for about a month, so I sometimes trek a block to the laundromat for my regular laundry.

evan_• 9 years ago

A functional, used washer can be had for $100 in most places, which shouldn't be a huge barrier to most people (especially people who can afford a videogame console). Small apartments don't have washers because they simply don't have the room.

martinald• 9 years ago

I haven't seen a single London or Edinburgh flat (which on average will be much smaller than the US ones - even Manhattan) that hasn't had a washing machine in. One of my friends flat was incredibly small but still managed one.

Definitely some weird cultural thing that people rent flats without them. You wouldn't be able to do that in the UK.

ungzd2• 9 years ago

Public laundries are sharing economy.

flukus13• 9 years ago

Public laundries aren't about the price of the waching machine but about having the space to put one.

brightball• 9 years ago

Personally, I am a fan of the setup. I like the idea of having multiple TV bases so that the switch can be moved between rooms easily. My kids are at the age where they do a lot of family RV trips and we'd be able to get a base for there too.

I'm much more interested in the Switch as a family console than a personal. I grew up an only child and played A LOT of online games by myself. Ever since college I've had a standing rule about not playing games unless it's social - aka in the room.

This perfectly fits my use case.

atomicUpdate• 9 years ago

It feels like Nintendo is really gouging people on the peripherals though. Each docking station is $90, which seems pretty expensive for what's essentially an HDMI port and USB charger, especially just for the convenience of being able to play it in any room at any time. It doesn't take very many of those before you've basically paid for a whole new Switch.

slantyyz7• 9 years ago

The games aren't really cheap either. $50 MSRP for something like 1-2 Switch is ridiculous to me.

debt• 9 years ago

Multiple displays is an theme throughout all at-home consumer electronics. We need a technology that can be streamed to as an external display instantly anywhere that can be any size.

mercer4• 9 years ago

Is that technically possible, especially keeping in mind the need for very low latency?

freeone3000• 9 years ago

There are several competing standards. "Wireless HDMI" is a gaggle of unlicensed spectrum, but they manage to get 1ms delay with propriatary techs. We've had WiDi (with varying lag) and miracast (with awful lag) for a while, but nobody's been able to manage to standardize the standard, so to speak.

VeejayRampay• 9 years ago

If someone can answer that question for me:

Why has Nintendo shifted towards producing underpowered consoles? I used to play the Super Nes when I was a kid, and it was the most powerful console of its generation. The N64, the GameCube, the Wii and subsequent offerings were all underpowered in terms of graphical abilities and raw power after that. I hear people say "But the gameplay is what matters", which I agree with, but my question in the end is "Why can't we have both?".

Is it a costs thing?

nepeckman• 9 years ago

Yeah, its a cost thing from what I understand. Sony and Microsoft actually sell their consoles at a loss, they lose money on hardware sales.

ben010783• 9 years ago

Nintendo also sold consoles at a loss. The Wii U was sold at a loss, but they specifically didn't want to do that with the Switch (http://venturebeat.com/2016/10/26/nintendo-wont-sell-switch-...). I believe the original Wii was originally sold at a loss, but it wasn't long before Nintendo got the costs down and got profit on hardware sales.

ashark5• 9 years ago

The N64, the GameCube, the Wii and subsequent offerings were all underpowered in terms of graphical abilities and raw power after that.

The N64 was underpowered?

emehrkay• 9 years ago

At the time the Playstation pushed more polygons per frame. I remember this debate because Nintendo said that they allowed for larger seamless polygons and said that it produced a better image on the screen.

coldpie7• 9 years ago

Definitely not. The N64 outperformed the PSX, but it was far harder to program for and cartridges were far more expensive than discs. That's where Nintendo's lack of 3rd party support began. The Gamecube and Xbox were about on par with each other, and both outperformed the PS2. But the PS2 had a huge lead time and strong 3rd party momentum from the PSX. The Wii was the shift where Nintendo began to fall behind on horsepower, instead focusing on broad market appeal, lower price points, and less intimidating input methods. The Wii U and Switch are continuing that trend, trying to chase the Wii dragon, but so far not succeeding.

lanna• 9 years ago

a common criticism of the n64 was that it used cartridges while other consoles of the same era had adopted cd-roms offering much higher capacity. that lead to some games being shorter and/or simplified on the n64 compared to their equivalents on other platforms.

monocasa2• 9 years ago

They've always been underpowered, that's part of their shtick. Just some generations all of the competitors are underpowered too.

GuiA• 9 years ago

It is mostly credited to Gunpei Yokoi's philosophy:

"Yokoi articulated his philosophy of "Lateral Thinking of Withered Technology". [...] "Withered technology" in this context refers to a mature technology which is cheap and well understood. "Lateral thinking" refers to finding radical new ways of using such technology. Yokoi held that toys and games do not necessarily require cutting edge technology; novel and fun gameplay are more important. In the interview he suggested that expensive cutting edge technology can get in the way of developing a new product"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpei_Yokoi#Lateral_Thinking_...

Nintendo consoles have always been a bit behind technologically; but I think this became really accentuated with the Wii, which was by design not that far ahead of the Game Cube- when the rest of the industry went full steam ahead fighting on specs.

M_Grey8• 9 years ago

I think there's a bit of a darker side as well. The Wii was so unbelievably successful, and profitable that it seems to have created a kind of corporate-level of addiction, and subsequent profit-seeking behavior. The Wii was underpowered, quirky, but just happened to hit all of the notes that a ton of people who hadn't played games before (and would later move on to playing on phones and tablets) were looking for.

Most of all, they made a profit per unit sale of the Wii, when the standard at the time was (is?) to sell consoles at a loss and make it up on fees and sales of games. They made profit on the base Wii, then they profited from all of the other shit they made up to sell for it. When the time came to move on from that gold mine to something new, they predictably tried to strike gold a second time.

They didn't.

Now they're trying a third time, and I suspect it will end badly for them. They've increasingly lost sight of what made them great, blinded by the allure of unbelievably quick and vast quantities of hard cash.

agumonkey3• 9 years ago

The SNES CPU was underpowered compared to the Genesis. But the overall system yielded better gaming experience.

It's similar to Apple lesser RAM numbers compared to the market, yet iPhone are still smoother globally.

Jweb_Guru• 9 years ago

The SNES, N64, and the GameCube were not really behind technologically (they were different from their competitors, but not behind). The Wii was the first Nintendo console that was clearly just flat out technically inferior to all of its competitors.

swasheck2• 9 years ago

I like this utilitarian perspective and believe it could strike a good content/profitability balance if done correctly. Constantly pushing new hardware specs is what has allowed the novelty of franchises to wear off into tired rehashes with better graphics. So we have to buy new hardware to push the new rendering engine that powers the new Call of Duty game that is ... the same as the previous 3 Call of Duty games, with more realistic 'splosions and faces.

If a company could, and would, pour its resources into a novel concept that leveraged existing, known technology, then I could be pretty happy with that. I don't like having to buy/accumulate more "stuff" but that's what we're being sold.

The closest I've seen Nintendo come to allowing this "Lateral Thinking ..." philosophy was with Xenoblade Chronicles X. Otherwise I've been wholly disappointed with the Wii U and the Wii before it (once the novelty wore off).

bedhead• 9 years ago

They know they can't win a spec arms race.

chadgeidel2• 9 years ago

Anyone can win a spec arms race. Whoever wants to spend the most money will win. Nintendo doesn't want to participate in a spec arms race.

jfernandez• 9 years ago

From what I've gathered through the years, I think there's this undertone to Nintendo's strategy around not directly competing with the likes of Sony and Microsoft: companies that tout and create powerful beefy specs that become a one if not the main driver to market their devices effectively.

Nintendo seems to continue, whether they're always successful or not (Wii vs Wii U), to push the company strategy towards make new-ish gaming paradigms and focusing more on the 1st party game quality.

We're also at a period where I feel we can all see the effect of diminishing returns on visual output (i.e. PS4 for a layperson doesn't look orders of magnitude better than PS3 releases later in that device's life), so again Nintendo is looking to differentiate where graphics quality is becoming more of a commodity amongst the major consoles.

ehsankia• 9 years ago

Exactly, they have their niche and their own unique games. The scene for the most powerful gaming device is already pretty saturated with the Xbox and Playstation, and let's not forget, the PC.

sametmax• 9 years ago

It's cost thing, but not just at the hardware level. Developing cutting graphics is always more expensive than settling the the level of what your could do 2 years ago.

Since they are not in a race, they prefer investing in other things.

anonymousab• 9 years ago

Both the N64 and GameCube were not substantially underpowered.

The choice of cartridges over discs, and later mini discs over full sized ones, were not directly ones of choosing the 'weaker option'.

The PS2 and Wii were the weakest systems of their generations and the most successful in terms of hardware unit sales.

nilkn3• 9 years ago

I actually thought the Switch was more or less breaking that trend. It doesn't seem underpowered when considered for what it is (a tablet).

rocky11382• 9 years ago

The portable screen is just 720p, which is not the end of the world. What I found surprising is that even when it's running Zelda on a full display, it only runs at 900p. I think if it can't do 1080p in 2017, it's fair to call it underpowered.

VLM3• 9 years ago

The SNES was extremely underpowered compared to my desktop at that time. A 3 MHz 16 bit CPU in the early mid 90s like I had in my 80s home computer, except it was 1994 not 1984 and I had a 40 mhz 32 bit 386 and was playing with this new "linux" thing I downloaded as a series of floppy disks from a local BBS.

Nintendo hasn't changed, but the console market has, such that their competitors gave up on the console ideal and now ship what amounts to strange desktops with mid grade video cards.

It seems to just be a cost thing.

CoolGuySteve2• 9 years ago

That's not really accurate.

First, PCs were extremely expensive at the time compared to the SNES. Your desktop likely cost $2000 or more I'm guessing.

Second, the graphics co-processors for rendering sprites and tiles in the SNES where much more interesting than what you'd get on a computer of the time.

Commander Keen was the most advanced PC scrolling game back then and it used a severely restricted colour palette compared to the SNES.

PopsiclePete4• 9 years ago

That's great. Except it wasn't until the year 1990 that someone like John Carmack could make a smooth-scrolling 2d platformer that would rival Super Mario Bros in terms of performance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_tile_refresh

SMB was released in 1985.

So yes, please tell me more how an early 1990's PC, without the specialized hardware that consoles had, in the hands of a programmer not-quite-up-to-par in the skills department as John Carmack, would kick the SNES's butt when it came to smooth-scrolling games.

ungzd2• 9 years ago

It's hard to make photorealistic Mario or Zelda. Their consoles are primary for their own games which have very cartoony look.

PopsiclePete4• 9 years ago

Nintendo can't really afford to sell hardware at a loss, for years, just to build-up market share, like Sony/MS can. Sony/MS can just do some Excel accounting magic to hide those losses under the giant umbrella of all their other businesses, but Nintendo - they have to make a profit, period.

Also, yes, gameplay is what matters. I have a PS4 Pro/VR combo and I can't say the games are that much more exciting than what I played on the PS3. Is Open World Game XYZ so much more incredible than what Rockstar pulled off with GTAV on the PS3? Eh....

We're plateauing quickly in terms of graphical fidelity. The PS3 was an easy sell, a huge upgrade over the PS2, but the PS4 - not so much. "It's kinda like the PS3, but crisper!" is how I'd describe it to a non-hard-core gamer.

Give me 60 fps and 1080p and I could give a rat's ass about how complicated the shader that renders photo-realistic ear wax in my RPG protagonist's ears is - that's not going to make me shell out another $400.

BinaryIdiot• 9 years ago

Nintendo can't really afford to sell hardware at a loss, for years, just to build-up market share

Not really. It's old but back in 2014 we saw Nintendo could run at a lose for many decades if necessary and still be fine because they were sitting on almost $11 billion in cash [1]. Today I thought I read that it's higher but not sure how to look it up.

like Sony/MS can. Sony/MS can just do some Excel accounting magic to hide those losses under the giant umbrella of all their other businesses, but Nintendo - they have to make a profit, perio

The PS4 sold for a profit from day one. I'm not sure if the XBox One was similar or not but they're likely making a profit as well.

Selling at a loss isn't as common in the latest generation.

We're plateauing quickly in terms of graphical fidelity. The PS3 was an easy sell, a huge upgrade over the PS2, but the PS4 - not so much. "It's kinda like the PS3, but crisper!" is how I'd describe it to a non-hard-core gamer.

Problem is you're only thinking in terms of graphical power. The PS4 has easily a better network for online gaming along with a ton of great games. Don't forget about PSVR being a really nice, mid-level entry into the market and is currently the leader as far as all currently released numbers indicate.

Being an easy sell or not is going to depend on the person you're selling to but I wouldn't dismiss the PS4 as just "crisper" than the PS3.

[1] http://nintendotoday.com/nintendo-not-doomed/

elsonrodriguez• 9 years ago

The Gamecube was actually more powerful than the PS2. An easy comparison here is to look at Resident Evil 4 on both consoles:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkKX-nU9fX4

If anything, the fact that the Gamecube's graphical superiority didn't help it much in the market is what made Nintendo make their shift towards innovations instead of clock cycles.

You can't have both because the market has told Nintendo specifically (via the DS, 3DS, and Wii) that it wants unique experiences, not more pixels.

cwyers4• 9 years ago

Well, then Nintendo really learned the wrong lesson from the Gamecube versus the PS2, because the lesson should have been "people want to be able to play DVDs on something that costs that much and hooks up to your TV, and they don't like switching discs to play a game."

TulliusCicero• 9 years ago

This isn't true. The N64 had more graphical power than the PSX, and the Gamecube had more power than the PS2.

rorosaurus2• 9 years ago

I believe this allows them to be more profitable than Xbox/Playstation where they try to squeeze in the best hardware. I also think it aligns well with the younger target audience. The graphics restrictions has also given us some of the more interesting graphics styles in modern Nintendo games.

kibwen3• 9 years ago

It's not just a costs thing. I have never, ever, ever, ever noticed a loading screen in any Nintendo game in my entire life, which is astounding. Lower-fidelity assets must be partly attributable to this, along with clever design to effectively hide whatever loading screens they do need. I have plenty of time to ponder this curiosity while waiting for Bloodborne and FFXV to load...

Narishma• 9 years ago

There are loading screens in the new Zelda.

flukus13• 9 years ago

You must have stopped playing nintendo games before the gamecube came out.

Volt5• 9 years ago

I'd highly suggest reading this discussion from 2000 between Miyamoto, Itoi, and Iwata. It pertains to the cancellation of MOTHER 3 on the N64, which was probably their most ambitious project at the time. It's an enlightening read. (https://yomuka.wordpress.com/2013/08/18/earthbound-64-cancel...)

It's long, so I'll throw in a few quotes.

Miyamoto: Game quality was at a point when it caught up with top-tier entertainment, with visuals that had come so far that all we had left was coming up with new ideas for us to express. It was like we gained incredible calvarymen to make an unstoppable army. […] We came in right during that time period. I think we got distracted by the prospect of building up that powerful army and lost sight of how we were going to form our battle strategies.

The following snippet is the highlight. Note that Iwata became the president of Nintendo shortly after, in 2002.

Iwata: There’s this really strange common sense now that says it takes a huge team of people working with a large scale and a lot of time to create a good game. A good game is supposed to be based on a good idea that’s very fun, even if it’s small. That notion disappeared somewhere along the way, and it’s turned into a battle of who can spend the most time and utilize the most manpower. You could even say that Nintendo needs to take a stand against this.

The result: the adoption of the Blue Ocean strategy.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-10-10-nintendos-i...

I'm reminded of a Twitter thread in 2013 by CliffyB, where he talks about the game industry's obsession with inflated budgets (http://www.igameresponsibly.com/2013/06/13/cliff-bleszinski-...). This is what Nintendo sought to avoid with a slower adoption of raw power and instead making more focused games.

flukus13• 9 years ago

Nintendo can't sell consoles at a loss the same way sony and MS can. You're also forgetting their portable lineup, their portables have always been under powered compared to their competitors.

bane• 9 years ago

Nintendo is competing against two competitors with impossibly deep pockets: Sony and Microsoft. They can't do a loss leading razer-and-blades sales model where they lose on the system but make it up on games. Thus every system they sell since the entry of both competitors has to be both profitable and price competitive.

roflchoppa2• 9 years ago

Can't wait to see the home brew being made for this. Especially how the exploit will be fed into the system.

monocasa2• 9 years ago

It'll probably be a WebKit vulnerability like most initial console exploits these days.

Retr0spectrum4• 9 years ago

I'm also intrigued to see what mitigations will be involved. Perhaps the browser will run inside a VM?

roflchoppa2• 9 years ago

Dude I was mind blown when I saw that the exploit for a 3DDS was vectored via a sound file?

But my personal favorite was the GTA exploit on the PSP, good times :D

rodionos• 9 years ago

Speaking purely as a consumer. Have 3 Wii consoles across the extended family. It was good as a gift, but ended up sitting idle given the demographics in our households. Hence - skipping Switch, time better spent outdoors, at the gym.

CamelCaseName2• 9 years ago

outdoors, at the gym

Gyms are usually indoor facilities.

Also, you could take your Switch to the gym. Use it between sets or watch something while on the treadmill.

slantyyz7• 9 years ago

I think the parent meant "outdoors and at the gym" as in two separate activities, not an outdoor gym?

losteverything• 9 years ago

Where I work we expect to sell out......

The review was helpful to the under knowledged ringing up the units.

DaveSapien• 9 years ago

I've been using the same form factor for PC gaming ala linx vision for a while now. And I have to say its brilliant! Super convenient way to fit gaming into my life. When my vision dies, I'm switching...uhmmm to the switch.

pryelluw2• 9 years ago

I see the Switch as a replacement for the DS, which Nintendo was successful with. The fact that it works connected to a TV is a benefit but not a main feature. Nintendo is competing against the iPad and Android tablets that kids get for Christmas and their birthday. Not against the ps4 or Xbox. This is where I see Nintendo having a chance. Parents can buy their kids a tablet that is also a game console. Which is brilliant.

jdcarter2• 9 years ago

That's precisely why I'll be buying one: my daughter wants a 3DS, but I said let's wait for the Switch instead. Then we'll get to use it on our main TV (replacing our Wii U, which we rarely use) and have games that work in both settings. Win-win.

slantyyz7• 9 years ago

If your daughter wants a 3DS to play portable games (with nothing specific in mind) then waiting for a Switch instead of getting a 3DS is probably worthwhile.

If, however, your daughter wants a 3DS for specific titles, you're still better off getting her the 3DS. For example, if all of her friends are currently playing and trading on Pokemon Sun/Moon, getting a Switch will basically have her feeling left out.

popobobo• 9 years ago

If they come up with this 5 years ago, it will be EPIC...

danso3• 9 years ago

As a late Wii U owner, I'm willing to wait until the Switch proves to be a success. The horror stories of the Wii U's launch, combined with lackluster support and signs that Nintendo didn't know how to adapt to the Internet age haven't exactly been mitigated by what we know of the Switch so far: no web browser, no Virtual Console nor movie services like Netflix at launch. Everything smells rushed...in the meantime, I got a PS4 to try the VR and have been more than entertained by the system's regular selection. It's surprising to me that Nintendo couldn't score Overwatch or a Rocket League, two of the best multi platform games currently out, which would go a long way in showing the purported value of console-power in handheld.

iamatworknow3• 9 years ago

Lack of a virtual console I can understand, but are you really being dissuaded from purchasing a Switch based on its lack of web browser and Netflix -- two things that run on half a dozen or more devices that the typical HN reader probably already owns?

danso3• 9 years ago

Exactly...two things that are ubiquitous on modern devices, but aren't on the Switch because of what seems like rushed online infrastructure. Why should we have faith that Nintendo has successfully executed social matchmaking and account services, which are much more bespoke?

squeaky-clean• 9 years ago

but are you really being dissuaded from purchasing a Switch based on its lack of web browser and Netflix -- two things that run on half a dozen or more devices that the typical HN reader probably already owns?

It's competing against those devices though. And not just for sales, but pocket/bag space. If I'm bringing a Switch somewhere, I don't really want to carry an iPad with me too if I want to watch something on Netflix.

nickik• 9 years ago

I usually have a phone, and sometimes also a laptop. If a added the Switch it would be add a far superior viewing experience when I am sitting in the train and watching.

Also, when Im playing video games and want to look up something, I would like it to be 2 clicks away and not on a different device.

I think Nintendo could just sell these as tablets that are specially good for gaming. The people who already carry around tablet will not drop theirs until the Switch supports common stuff, and they will not buy a Switch because why add another device of the same size.

M_Grey8• 9 years ago

The problem is that it appears to be handheld-power in console, not the other way around. That being the case, the trend seen with third-party titles and the WiiU is going to be more pronounced right out of the gate with the Switch.

mintplant• 9 years ago

The lack of a web browser is I suspect a reaction to WebKit vulnerabilities having been one of the primary entry points for people hacking the (New) 3DS. Omitting this functionality reduces the OS's attack surface.

gommm• 9 years ago

It was also the entry point for the Wii U.

delroth• 9 years ago

Except they will support connecting to public Wi-Fi hotspots, which almost always require logging in or accepting terms of services on an HTML page nowadays. So they definitely didn't get rid of WebKit.

dawnerd• 9 years ago

Quite a few hacks come right from exploited game saves and I have a feeling the same will happen this time around too.

n-gauge• 9 years ago

..and maybe to stop users playing HTML games (Nintendo ripoffs for example). This is a shame as I felt the Wii U was crippled in this respect (i.e. video tag supported but not audio!)

_ph_5• 9 years ago

There are plenty of indications that Nintendo considers this release a just as an early on release addressing the enthusiasts who need to have a new console on the first day. They clearly plan to ramp up everything over the course of the year. One could claim that the release is only finished when Mario Odyssey gets released. Nintendo clearly hinted at the virtual console coming to the Switch, its just not there yet. It is probably connected to some of the upcoming online feature (as they talked about offering a different older game with it every month). Nintendo probably equally wants to stress that the Switch isn't a tablet but a serious gaming system. Therefore (and probably just because they are not finished), no web browser or Netflix client now. But there is no reason to assume they are going to be left out forever.

TYPE_FASTER• 9 years ago

I honestly don't really care about a browser or NetFlix, because I've never used NetFlix with our Wii U. The two things that have disappointed me about the Wii U have been: * Lack of games * Reliability

Reliability especially...the drive has pretty much stopped reading any discs, even when there aren't any scratches. The console randomly stops with a fatal error. I don't really want to pay to get it fixed, since new consoles are coming out and there isn't a huge catalog for the Wii U.

muro• 9 years ago

I can't tell whether it's scratched disks or broken drive. So happy Nintendo went with cards for the Switch.

NegativeLatency• 9 years ago

Sounds like a dirty optical drive?

boondaburrah3• 9 years ago

Nintendo has a history of only supporting games on their consoles. They still don't view themselves as your home theatre center-for-everything like xbone does, and that's a relief for me. They only thing they need to be "complete" in this day and age is to have good online multiplayer.

That being said I'm looking at the switch as a vita replacement, not a home console.

Chardok• 9 years ago

I agree with your points and wanted to add some more as to why I am wary in looking in a new Nintendo console.

1. Wii and the Wii U especially never truly lived up to their potentials. They release small minigames (Nintendo Wolrd is a good example) that were amazingly fun and utilized the dual screens, but then developers almost completely forgot about what differentiated the consoles and it became merely inconvenient to have motion controls or the dual screens.

2. They absolutely do not listen to their fans, at least Americans. I can't tell you how badly a lot of people wanted a true console Animal Crossing, and they throw a shitty board game at us. Mario Party 10 could have easily been an amazing multiplayer game with dual screens and motion controls but they watered it down to a very mediocre experience. Pokemon 3d? Heres a tekken style game. Hell, the Wii U is finally getting a Zelda game.. at the release of their new console.

3. Amiibos. Sorry I don't want DLC in the form of hard to obtain collectibles.

Don't get me wrong, some of my favorite games were brought to me by Nintendo but it is hard clutching on to these memories when they are just pumping out years worth of "almost there" titles and experiences. I would love to be proved wrong but Nintendo is certainly more focused on bottom line profits than providing a fun gaming experience.

kanpan• 9 years ago

This is exactly how I feel about my Wii U purchase. I bought it initially to play the new Fatal Frame and Zelda games. Then I had to buy an external hard drive because FF couldn't fit on the device. Then Zelda was pushed back... all the way until their new console was released. The system itself just feels lackluster and I won't be buying into another generation of Nintendo console with barely any worthwhile titles.

vegabook• 9 years ago

No browser?? No netflix? If you want these there are umpteen devices in your life giving you instant access already. This is about pureplay gaming. Nobody buys a console to browse anymore. I can literally do browsing and netflix with 3 devices right now within my immediate reach in the living room, and I'd be really unlikely to want to replace my smartphone with the switch when I am travelling even if it had a browser.

taurath2• 9 years ago

Browse no. Netflix, well yeah sorry, if a big powerful device is hooked up to my TV and it's not speakers I expect it to have Netflix. It doesn't matter much to someone with 5-10 consoles and blu ray players and smart TVs, but for a lot of the country $300 is still a decent chunk of change and it's likely to be replacing a much older console. Still, those folks are less likely to be getting a newly launched console, so it may be fine.

Netflix on devices certainly makes me use them and think of them more. I'd say half my PS4 time is spent on Netflix, which gives plenty of opportunity to pique my interest for some newly released game or service whenever it boots up.

nikofeyn• 9 years ago

i see the lack of a web browser and no movie services as a move to emphasize that this is a gaming machine and not a tablet. it focuses the use of the machine as a gaming device and not as a do it all device. i like this commitment. it's similar to what amazon does with the kindles (that ignores the limitations of the e-ink screen though).

although, i have certainly been disappointed with nintendo's embracement of online services even within games. e.g., matchmaking and co-op features.

taurath2• 9 years ago

As a longtime Nintendo fan I'd say it's not so much a commitment as a total lack of resources put into basic online functionality. It just seems brave of them because it's such a glaring error.

intopieces• 9 years ago

Lack of a web browser is a feature if you are a parent. The easier it is to control access to content, the better.

freeflight• 9 years ago

That's what parental controls should be there for, an actual feature. Nothing would have stopped Nintendo from just adding a "disable web browser" to the parental control feature the Switch already possess. As such the lack of a web browser is not a "feature", it's merely omitting functionality.

laumars• 9 years ago

signs that Nintendo didn't know how to adapt to the Internet age haven't exactly been mitigated by what we know of the Switch so far: no web browser, no Virtual Console nor movie services like Netflix at launch.

The Wii (not Wii U but the original Wii) had all of that though. A web browser, multiple on demand services including BBC iPlayer and Netflix, an online store that allowed you to downloadable games direct to the console, etc. So it's not the case that Nintento "can't adapt for the internet age", they clearly did already. This is more a sign that Nintendo don't want the Switch to compete with living room entertainment systems nor general purpose computing tablets.

This actually makes some sense when you consider both of those markets are already saturated. eg most living rooms already have several streamable devices such as:

    * other consoles (eg Xbox 360 / P3 and newer),
    * XBMC/Kodi devices,
    * Amazon Fire Stick and similar,
    * or even just a smart TV with that stuff in built.

And who doesn't already have a smart phone and/or tablet?

So instead of chasing after saturated markets that exist on the fringe of their business, Nintendo are focusing on their core market.

danso3• 9 years ago

Another data point: the Switch will facilitate voice chat by the use of a smartphone app: https://www.reddit.com/r/NintendoSwitch/comments/5nv1ht/conf...

Chat is a function served by many, many applications and devices, of course, but it doesn't seem strange for games and system makers to provide dedicated in-game/system chat even in the face of Discord. Granted, chat is much more integral to a game than Netflix or even a web browser. But the argument isn't that the Switch "competes" on these facets, but that it's natural to use these apps before/during/after a game session. For example, after playing a game on my PS4 or Wii U, instead of switching off my system to turn on Netflix on my Smart TV, I'll just use the app on the system, because it's usually fewer steps. Admittedly, I rarely use my console browser...but that's because I usually have access to my laptop in my living room. But the Switch is meant to be a mobile device; it's not hard to imagine the situation of checking the web to look up a tip or guide while gaming. Could you pull out your phone? Sure, but again, you could argue this for any function on any system ("just use X device, which most people carry around all the time").

Again, it's not the absence of these things that are alone disconcerting. It's just that we know of these downsides -- on top of a whole bunch of other online-related things that on launch week we have no clue: Nintendo's online account system, social network, purchase transfers, etc., things that Nintendo's history has not inspired confidence about.

maxsilver• 9 years ago

The Wii (not Wii U but the original Wii) had all of that though.

For what it's worth, the Wii U also had that too (a web browser, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Instant Video, etc).

I get the impression that most Wii U owners didn't use it much, and mainly used the console for gaming. But it's still there, and works.

EJTH• 9 years ago

"I don't want to compete against all the other (faster) sprinters in the olympics, so I just cut off my legs"

taneq• 9 years ago

no web browser, no Virtual Console nor movie services like Netflix at launch.

I'm not a console gamer, but why would you want those things in a game console? My TV does all that already. What my TV can't do is play new Nintendo games.

If anything, I find it annoying when I buy a new device and the developers have clearly spent more than half their budget trying to (poorly) replicate functionality that's already built into every other device on my TV cabinet.

Do one thing. Do it well.

bschwindHN• 9 years ago

Virtual Console
why would you want those things in a game console?

The virtual console was huge on the Wii and Wii U

Do one thing. Do it well.

This is a game console, not some Unix tool. The rest of the competition has demonstrated that not only can they play games, they can handle other features just as well. Unix philosophy doesn't apply to everything in life.

amelius• 9 years ago

It seems a bit silly that they made the cheapest component replaceable. You could, without much extra cost, have all the benefits by just duplicating the controls.

skdotdan• 9 years ago

I reckon it will be a big success. But, honestly, I believe video-game only hardware should no longer be a thing in 2017.

Almost all features of the Nintendo Switch could have been built on the top of iOS or Android. Nintendo should pivot to a software only company.

nsxwolf3• 9 years ago

Why? They sell massive amounts of hardware. Clearly their customers do not want to play their games on a smartphone.

eric_the_read• 9 years ago

Based on the response to Super Mario Run, Fire Emblem Heroes, and Pokemon Go, I'd say their customers clearly do want to play their games on a smartphone; they just haven't had the opportunity.

Now, if you'd said, "their customers don't mind buying Nintendo hardware to play their games on," that's much harder to deny.

hahamrfunnyguy• 9 years ago

I'm with you. Last console I bought was an XB360. I don't play games as much any more, but anything I do play is a Steam game. I don't have any games on my phone right now, but I do enjoy playing them when I am traveling. I'd love to play a REAL Mario game on my phone with a REAL gamepad.

brotoss• 9 years ago

Nintendo Switch + Higher End PC will be the optimal gaming package

boondaburrah3• 9 years ago

Except that iOS and Android are terrible platforms for games. They're all built around the idea of varying resources, having to kill apps when ram is scarce, a call can interrupt any time, and no guaranteed input other than a touchscreen.

For a number of games that simply won't do. Sure you can write games to be underpowered graphically and still be fun, but there's no guarantee someone isn't trying to run your game on a $50 smartphone so you really have to shoot low to get that to work. Also you're competing against a lot of 99¢ or free games in the appstore/market. Sure they're really bad games, but side by side (in the store) the consumer isn't going to know the difference and will choose on price.

I don't want to live in a world with only free-to-play match-three "action-puzzle" games.

Also touchscreen as controls is terrible for any real-time game that doesn't have a one-to-one mapping from what you touch to what happens. (aka, most of them, besides turn-based) I have to be conscious of not only what I want to do, but where the controls are to do it, since I can't feel them.

Nintendo can't build an iOS device for obvious reasons. By the time they strip down android and customise it enough for it to be suitable for gaming it would be easier to make NintendoOS anyway.

_ph_5• 9 years ago

I am very excited about the Switch and hope my preordered unit arrives in time :). I do like the WiiU, the biggest complaint being, that it is tied to my tv, and not always where I want to play it. Playing it on the pad is nice, but the resolution and range are very limited. I also like the 3DS, and would really like a faster version of it with a larger screen with much more resolution.

It turns out, that the Switch checks all these boxes. If you design a screen for a 3DS successor with is slightly larger and higher res, you arrive at the screen of the switch. It is also the same size as the screen of the WiiU. And docked, it outperforms the WiiU as stationary console. Of course it falls behind the PS4, but I think the market for non-portable consoles has been "won" by the PS4. But while they will continue to exist, the prime time for stationary consoles might be over too. With the Switch, you are no longer tied to the TV. Nintendo took quite some care to make sure that the Switch mostly performs identically docked and undocked. There shouldn't be many if any games which are tied to one mode only.

The popularity of gaming laptops should tell us, that there is an increasing number of people who want to be mobile in their gaming, not necessarily as in playing while riding the bus, but as in taking your gaming hardware with you when like visiting friends. And that is, where the Switch easily outshines for example a PS4. Add to it the ability to do multiplayer gaming on the local network (Splatoon2, Mario Cart,...) and it has a lot of prospect.

vlunkr4• 9 years ago

It seems like the ideal system for me as well, as someone who uses the 3ds pretty heavily, let's hope there are enough of us to save this console.

slim• 9 years ago

It seems that you can't use touchscreen while docked. So it will stay unused because games won't rely on it. Apart from games that have different gamplays for indoor/outdoor (pokemon switch?)

_ph_5• 9 years ago

It looks to me that the dock is partially designed to especially block the access to the touch screen :). This makes sense, as Nintendo, at least for the launch, wants all games to work identically docked and undocked. I could imagine though, that later on, there will be touch based games, once the system has been established enough.

nlawalker• 9 years ago

They've already announced a game that requires the touchscreen (and thus cannot be played while docked): http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-02-27-nintendo-switch...

I think these will be uncommon, but they will exist, because they can.

PopsiclePete4• 9 years ago

I'd totally buy a Switch....if it was actually humanly possible. I also wanted to by a NES Classic, which also proved impossible. Solved that problem with a Raspberry PI. I loathe Nintendo's idiotic business practices of artificially limiting supply when there's huge demand. They have something like 2 million Switches for the launch window. 2. Million.

_ph_5• 9 years ago

By all indications, you should be able to pick some up from walking into stores. While there is probably not a huge supply, there seem to be a lot of units available for walk-in customers. YMMV though.

slantyyz7• 9 years ago

> Solved that problem with a Raspberry PI.

If you're ok substituting a Pi for the NES Classic, you might want to try substituting a GPD Win [1] in place of a Switch.

Depending on the games you play, the GPD Win is an excellent portable computer for playing games. After I saw the opening title list and pricing of the Switch, I just ended up buying a GPD Win and play a lot of my Steam library on it. For the games it can't play, I can still use Steam Streaming if I'm playing with it at home. I was pleasantly surprised with some of the 720p frame rates I could get with it. There's a list of games that are playable in the GPD Win's Reddit group [2].

1: https://liliputing.com/2016/10/gpd-win-handheld-gaming-pc-qu...

2: https://www.reddit.com/r/gpdwin/comments/5a8z2t/games_that_a...

nameless912• 9 years ago

I didn't have much trouble at all getting a pre-order...I just used nowinstock to track all the stores in the US that were accepting preorders and jumped on one as soon as it was available. Took me maybe 3 or 4 days of trying.

notadoc• 9 years ago

Let people play all the NES, SNES, N64, Gamecube classics on the thing and I'm sure it will be fairly popular.

chadgeidel2• 9 years ago

This is one of the main reasons I'm interested. Not THE main reason but here's hoping Nintendo continues to build their Virtual Console library. crosses fingers

mpg33• 9 years ago

That and a $50 price drop...

fphhotchips2• 9 years ago

+ Gameboy, Color, Advance, DS and 3DS titles also. I would be so happy.

anotheryou3• 9 years ago

I wonder why they made the dock so bulky... https://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/MDlcmzBowKNZ425oxRfyJ1-bMBM...

akovaski2• 9 years ago

Surely they made it bulky so that it doesn't fall over.

anotheryou3• 9 years ago

a quick photoshop with the same footprint: http://i.imgur.com/Z3QVKRK.png

edit: oh, maybe that bottom part I reduced is full of weights. Not making the actual switch stick out further on the top might be a simple design decision than. They could have squeezed half of that in the back half of the thing though.

anotheryou3• 9 years ago

springs! not weights: https://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/f1khMcJIVrO5v3Wr.h... it's so you can jam it down :)

Animats2• 9 years ago

Now this form factor is what Google's Project Ara should have been. It's a modest size tablet to which you can attach peripherals. Peripherals big enough that many industrial sensors would fit. If you need an airflow meter with temp/humidity/CO2 sensing (HVAC techs use these), that would fit. Or a digital voltmeter/oscilloscope. (That would be very useful, especially at a Nintendo price point.) Or an RFID tag reader. (Those are way overpriced now.)

What's the interface to the peripherals? (The base unit has USB-C and the peripherals have Bluetooth, at least, but it's not yet clear what the wired connection between peripheral and main unit is.) Can the device take new software, or does Nintendo have a lock on that?

kerbalspacepro• 9 years ago

Can't you just get those peripherals as plug ins devices for an iPhone/Android?

Animats2• 9 years ago

Then you have dangling cables and need both hands.

__david__6• 9 years ago

It sounds good, but the cartridges apparently taste terrible: http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/original/17/170059/29224...

Seriously though, I'm taking a wait-and-see attitude here. The console looks promising and there's a lot to like, but it also has some potential negatives: underpowered, bad battery life, poor 3rd party support compared to Sony/Microsoft, unknown online strategy (having a separate phone app for social seems very bad).

None of those are deal breakers, but they're a little "red-flaggy". Since I'm not dying to play Zelda on day 1, I'll be watching how things progress over the next few months. I'm hoping for my and all gamer's sakes that it turns out good.

mortenjorck• 9 years ago

  Now I can take Zelda with me wherever I go — not some limited 
  version, mind you, but the full console Zelda experience. I can 
  play on my TV, pick up the tablet from its dock, and continue the 
  game without skipping a beat or compromising the experience.

Continue... where, exactly? Modern mobile games work because they can be picked up for a few minutes in a line at the grocery store and put back down when you get to the checkout. Can a full Zelda title lend itself to this pattern of short mobile sessions? Furthermore, the Switch may be a svelte device, but is it something you'll actually carry around every day like your phone?

The Switch looks very well suited to a plane or road trip, where you have to sit for a longer period without anything to do, but it's hard to imagine that representing a major change in regular usage for most users.

anthony_romeo• 9 years ago

If I recall, a number of studies showed that most people mostly play their portable gaming devices at home. I suspect the portability of the Switch for big games like the Legend of Zelda are largely about accommodating this use case (comfort, extra screens in the home, multitasking).

crooked-v• 9 years ago

I think it's also hard to overstate the parental appeal of "you can get the TV back at any time without the kid whining about an interrupted game".

TranquilMarmot• 9 years ago

The Wii U does this, and with much better battery life. I can kind of see where moving the whole console into the controller is a logical step forward, but at the same time I feel like they should have just beefed up the Wii U to have Xbox One/PS4 specs or better. But maybe then it would be harder to sell as a "new" console?

rorosaurus2• 9 years ago

According the US Census in 2013, 5% of commuters used public transit and nearly 10% carpooled. [1] I know I would enjoy occupying that time with some Zelda!

[1] https://www.census.gov/hhes/commuting/files/2014/acs-32.pdf

acchow• 9 years ago

Nintendo didn't get the memo - "mobile" gaming really means smartphone gaming. What is this monstrosity?

flukus13• 9 years ago

Nintendo was doing mobile gaming 20 years before the first smart phone.

chasing• 9 years ago

So I wouldn't buy a Nintendo console as my first console. But I have a PS4 that covers me for most of my gaming (and Netflixing needs) and the Wii U was a great addition to get access to all of Nintendo's stuff. So I'm excited to swap out the Wii U for a Switch -- although there's no rush for me.

One thing that has changed my opinion a bit about Nintendo's products, though: Having a kid. Suddenly it's very clear what it means for Nintendo to make a family console as a product subtly different from a gamer's console or a more adult console, which is what I would consider my PS4 to be.

snowpalmer• 9 years ago

I believe this is squarely where Nintendo lives, in the family space. We have all of the consoles available to my kids. The only ones they play? Wii and Wii U. Don't care about Xbox or PS because of the Nintendo's first party titles.

zupreme• 9 years ago

Apologies to the naysayers and even the inevitable down voters but iOS and Android have already crushed the portable gaming market. The likelihood of dedicated hardware EVER getting back its previous glory is unlikely.

Console gaming retains its luster because mobile simply cannot compete against consoles regarding graphics, audio quality, and so forth. Nintendo Switch enjoys no such benefits.

There are already controller cases for both iPhone and iPad which are just as good, if not better, than the one Switch ships with. iOS already has a mature app store with TONS of quality content (not gaming and otherwise).

I'm sorry but I just don't see a solid future for this kind of thing anymore.

vlunkr4• 9 years ago

The 3DS has sold 65 million units. Obviously there still is a market, even it's not back to the glory days. And Nintendo has jumped into the smartphone space as well.

flukus13• 9 years ago

The likelihood of dedicated hardware EVER getting back its previous glory is unlikely.

People that want good games with good input devices will always go with dedicated hardware. Most games simply can't be done on iOS/android.

nvarsj• 9 years ago

The switch has been the first Nintendo console I haven't been excited for. It's hardware is boring (it's just a tablet with a dock, yawn), battery life is bad as a portable gaming device, and controllers seem to compromise too much function for form. The Wii-U, while being terribly marketed, was unique in its two-screened console idea (which originally came from the GBA link + gamecube experiment), and there are a lot of really unique experiences that can only be had on it.

Despite my own misgivings, it feels like a smart move by N to try and appeal to the mainstream tablet/phone gamers. I really hope the switch is successful enough to let N start doing some crazy things again.

kibwen3• 9 years ago

battery life is bad as a portable gaming device

Though it still has better battery life than the Sega Game Gear! And doesn't require six AA batteries to recharge. :P

JKCalhoun• 9 years ago

Sorry, I feel like the portable-gaming system went the way of the compact camera, MP3 player....

flukus13• 9 years ago

Sorry, I feel like the portable-gaming system went the way of the compact camera, MP3 player

So your saying they will still be bought by people that care about quality?

onmobiletemp• 9 years ago

Why dont they make a console with really good hardware, yet still affordable, and simply _make good original content for that console_? Look at breath of the wild. People arent excited for the switch, a _tablet_, they are excited for breath of the wild. Look at resident evil 7. Success in games is really simple: make a good game. Its not that hard. Look at battlefield one. But no, everyone decides to rely on gimicks and whats already popular.

BuckRogers3• 9 years ago

From a happy Wii U owner (mine is indeed not dusty, we use it all the time)- Nintendo needs to give up on hardware other than the GameBoy.

The answer for them is to stream their content to any device they choose as a premium option of sorts through their own LiquidSky copycat service and let whatever their current-gen Gameboys (3DS?) are act as the controllers. Let the handheld act as a phone too and they'll have something. Then they keep their massive portable market, at least the one that has decent battery life and get a solid answer on a good home console.

It shuts everyone up on 1080P or 4K Mario games, through 'NintendoSky' they can just pay for whatever resolution they want and access it on their Macbook, iPhone, iPad, AppleTV, Windows10 or whoever they want to work with. I'm assuming they could do it on iOS, macOS and Windows10 without any gatekeeping or royalties at all. And it seems like a really nice value-add that Apple should be eager to sign onto their AppleTV. I'd much rather not have yet-another device and just pay Nintendo directly per month for their service. I can't say it's a great idea for most, because few actually have good enough games to warrant a monthly fee but Nintendo does.

Nintendo Switch review: pure potential

Related Stories