Nintendo Switch

[Atariboy]

I think it's quite a stretch to state that the Virtual Boy was portable.

 

 

It felt like you were holding a brick, the battery life was two hours, hands too far apart and uncomfortable triggers, the Wii U tablet was mediocre at best and its functionality a total miscue.

 

I thought it was actually light and comfortable to hold.

 

I get better battery life than that, although it's not great. That said, with the charging dock that comes with the 32 gig version and with it resting in the dock when it's not in use, it shouldn't be an issue very often unless you routinely play games for hours at a time.

 

If you really hate it though, you just might want to reconsider a Switch if portable use is of interest, since it does seem to have similar styling. For console use, it looks like anyone that wants a traditional modern console controller will be all taken care of, much like how a Wii U Pro Controller suffices for most of its best games.

Edited October 21, 2016 by Atariboy

[Osgeld]

it shouldn't be an issue very often unless you routinely play games for hours at a time.

 

any other console it would be no issue to play games for hours at a time without even noticing it

[enoofu]

Apparently the Dev kits are currently running Erista (Tegra X1) some news outlets believe it will be powered by a Parker (Tegra X2) derivative SOC

 

 

Parker (Tegra X2)

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10596/hot-chips-2016-nvidia-discloses-tegra-parker-details

[HammR25]

What's the difference between this and a Toshiba Thrive? Native controller support?

 

[Atariboy]

 

any other console it would be no issue to play games for hours at a time without even noticing it

 

When you buy a console with a large touch screen incorporated into the middle of its primary controller, what do you really expect?

 

Anyone that bought a Wii U expecting to sit there and play it for 8 hours at a stretch without a cord plugged in, should've thought ahead that this isn't what they're likely getting.

 

For everyone else, it was easily worked around. Extended-life batteries, a convenient charging dock to keep it ready to go, keeping the charging cord handy if you did want to spend a lengthy amount of time at one sitting, purchasing a Pro Controller with its ~100 hour battery life that worked for the vast majority of the worthwhile games here, legacy Wiimote support, etc.

 

If someone wants to use this as a portable away from an outlet, I'd be prepared for 2-3 hour battery life right now. If that's unacceptable, prepare to be disappointed.

Edited October 21, 2016 by Atariboy

[Zap!]

Wow, tough crowd here.

 

Yet it's getting praise everywhere else. I'm assuming it's because many Atarians are bitter at Nintendo for their shady past towards our beloved company. I never understood rivalries. I don't care if it's an Atari ST, Amiga, or Apple IIGS, I love them all.

[Flojomojo]

Nah, it's just because we're old farts who have seen too many console cycles already.

 

I like this skeptical first impression:

http://www.digitiser2000.com/main-page/first-impression-nintendo-switch

[HammR25]

Yeah, we're definitely not the target market.

[toiletunes]

I'll want to know price and see a game library before I decide to Switch.

[Zap!]

Nah, it's just because we're old farts who have seen too many console cycles already.

 

I like this skeptical first impression:

http://www.digitiser2000.com/main-page/first-impression-nintendo-switch

 

The half-cycle that we're seeing with the PS4 Pro and XBox Scorpio is what bothers this Generation Xer.

[StopDrop&Retro]

The half-cycle that we're seeing with the PS4 Pro and XBox Scorpio is what bothers this Generation Xer.

 

You should wait for the half-cycle refresh for the Switch. I think they're going to name it the Swindle.

[Eltigro]

The video mainly seems to be about the controller and how you can change its configuration and the unit's portability.

 

1. The controller config with the two end pieces on the middle bit does remind me a bit of the Dreamcast controller. I think the dream cast controller is awkward to hold because the hand holds are too vertical. They are more I I when they should be more / \. This one looks like they are more / \, but still doesn't look too promising.

 

2. The end pieces connected to the center screen does look a lot like the WiiU controller screen thing. I don't have a WiiU, but I've played it a bit on the store demo machine, and it feels okay. Not sure about extended play, though. This is the "portable" configuration. This is the I'll-only-use-it-this-way-when-I'm-pooping configuration.

 

3. I have hand held systems that I rarely use outside of the house. I've found that when I take portable systems with me, they tend to get left in the suitcase. I'm doing other things. Last time I took one, it was my DSiXL for a two night stay. The only time I took it out, was to plug it in to charge at the hotel. Didn't play it a bit.

 

So, in essence, the controller changes around (but looks like it might be uncomfortable) and it is portable (but I'll probably never take it anywhere but to the toilet). I don't think I'll be an early adopter. I'll probably get it at some point, because... well... that's what I do. But I still haven't gotten a WiiU yet, so I'll be in no hurry to get a Switch.

[+frankodragon]

You'll know he'll be watching:

 

[Lord Helmet]

Personally I think I looks pretty cool. Certainly a unique idea. If nothing else al least Nintendo has tried to do things differently again and again.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[HoshiChiri]

Forgot to mention this before: I don't like the name much, but it is brilliant from a marketing standpoint. Not only does it sum up how the system works, it tells the consumer what Nintendo wants from them. Switch back to Nintendo. Doesn't sound as cool as NX, but it's really clever.

[spacecadet]

3. I have hand held systems that I rarely use outside of the house. I've found that when I take portable systems with me, they tend to get left in the suitcase. I'm doing other things. Last time I took one, it was my DSiXL for a two night stay. The only time I took it out, was to plug it in to charge at the hotel. Didn't play it a bit.

This is actually my biggest personal problem with it. I love handhelds in theory, and there have been times in my life when they've actually been pretty helpful to me (I had a long hospital stay once, for example). I'm still amazed by my PS Vita and how powerful it is; the Switch is obviously even moreso, so as a handheld I'd probably marvel at it.

 

But outside of those few situations I've been in, I don't actually use handhelds much either.

 

I think handhelds in general are more useful for a) people who commute on public transit, or b) people who have to do a lot of waiting for various things in places they don't necessarily want to be, e.g. kids. This doesn't seem to be marketed towards kids in the same way the 3DS is, though, it seems more for a slightly older group. But the video seemed to be trying really hard to come up with situations in which American adults would actually use it as a handheld, and most of them felt really forced to me. I feel like it would probably be a lot more popular/useful in Japan, where a greater percentage of the adult population is stuck on trains for an hour or more per day. In America, I feel like it's a stretch to expect a lot of adults to be doing a lot of serious handheld gaming, I mean anything more involved than Candy Crush on their phones while they wait in line at the DMV.

 

I hate to say it but I kind of wish Nintendo would just make a traditional console again. If they went back to actually being competitive on specs, they'd have an easier time getting meaningful third party support. I mean that's always been their problem; it's too difficult for developers to port their games to the Wii or Wii U because they're so underpowered and have a completely different control setup vs. the other systems. The same is going to be true of the Switch, I predict, because it just uses totally different architecture from the competition (and also looks a bit underpowered compared to them).

 

But these days both Sony and MS are using x86 architecture, so imagine a world in which Nintendo basically just goes and buys a newer off the shelf AMD APU than either Sony or MS are using (meaning no real effort to port games, but they run better on the Nintendo system). So now you end up with basically a PS4 Pro or Xbox Scorpio that *also* runs all Nintendo first-party games. How is that not basically everybody's dream console? I mean, realizing that Atari and Sega don't make consoles anymore.

 

I do feel like some people here are being *really* hard on the Switch as it exists... I mean I think it's got a shot at being somewhat successful, and I might buy one just for the novelty. But I don't think it really solves any of the problems just releasing a far more powerful traditional home console would have. Nintendo went from trying to push the industry in a new direction with the Wii (their stated goal) to now just being different for the sake of being different. I don't get why they (or anyone else) think they have to zig when others zag. It's not working out for them. Why can't they just zag and do it better? It's time for them to realize that gamers really just want a powerful box that lets them play the latest games for a few years, until they buy another one. And I think we'd all jump at the chance at buying a console that can play both GTA V *and* Zelda, for example.

Edited October 21, 2016 by spacecadet

[Atariboy]

The thing is is that they've been fighting a losing war in the console world almost since the beginning. I think they had no choice but to blend the lines here.

 

Not only has their console business been in decline other than the Wii anomaly, but then the smartphone showed up near the end of the DS and murdered their cash cow that was carrying the console side for many years. Gone almost overnight were millions of customers and most of the 3rd parties, with the casual fair lost forever to the general purpose smartphone.

 

They're faced with almost single handily supplying their systems with steady offerings of quality software and they simply couldn't do that without long droughts in-between major releases when both sides of the business were independent. This hybrid system though allows them to develop software for all Nintendo Switch owners, not just a fraction of the marketplace at a time like has traditionally been the case.

 

Should go a long ways towards solving their #1 problem, which is keeping a steady stream of worthwhile releases going. The 3rd party situation is most felt when there's nothing new to play, so this should help allay that issue to a degree even if the Nintendo tradition of lackluster 3rd party support continues.

 

I hate to say it but I kind of wish Nintendo would just make a traditional console again. If they went back to actually being competitive on specs, they'd have an easier time getting meaningful third party support. I mean that's always been their problem; it's too difficult for developers to port their games to the Wii or Wii U because they're so underpowered and have a completely different control setup vs. the other systems. .

 

It's not so easy.

 

Look at the Wii U. Very competitive with the 360 and PS3, yet 3rd party support was weak from day 1 and virtually gone by the 1 year anniversary when the XB1/PS4 showed up. Yet healthy 360/PS3 support lasted another year or so even after that for 3rd parties. That commonality didn't help even before developers would've had to go out of their way to downgrade games for the weaker Wii U hardware.

 

Would they really gain much in comparison to the added cost? I think they're better off securing their own ship and stopping the exodus of Nintendo fans and start attracting new fans, and then the 3rd parties and customers that would never consider supporting Nintendo will naturally return.

 

I don't think they can force the issue with competitive hardware or even making a leap forward ahead of MS and Sony. They'll just drain the bank even quicker and the 3rd parties that did support them will still develop for the lowest common denominator anyways, erasing their tech advantage if they tried to jump ahead of the game.

Edited October 21, 2016 by Atariboy

[Mord]

Look at the Wii U. Very competitive with the 360 and PS3, yet 3rd party support was weak from day 1 and virtually gone by the 1 year anniversary when the XB1/PS4 showed up. Yet healthy 360/PS3 support lasted another year or so even after that for 3rd parties. That commonality didn't help even before developers would've had to go out of their way to downgrade games for the weaker Wii U hardware.

 

You kind of point out why the Wii U got weak support though. Sure the hardware was on par with the 360 and PS3, but those two consoles are already familiar to the developers by now - and were about to be set to pasture. There was no reason for them to spend a lot of money and time learning the ins and outs of the a new console that wasn't going to be able to compete with the PS4 or Xbone. And so... they didn't. Plus because Nintendo didn't get their own franchises onto the Wii U in a timely fashion, the install base never took off.

 

What Nintendo really has to do, if they're going to make a traditional console, is to make sure it's competitive with the other consoles AND it gets released at about the same time. Not several years later, when everyone's already picked up the latest Xbox or Playstation. That's probably a bigger reason for why the Wii U didn't stand a chance.

 

On the plus side, the Switch probably will let Nintendo merge their console and handheld dev teams, thus enable them to pump games out twice as fast. And for the pokemon fans, this pretty much means you'll finally have a mainstream Pokemon game on the big screen.

 

I'm at least considering the Switch myself (And I still might get a Wii U regardless...) as i tend to play with the handhelds on the way to work, or on break, etc. So it'll work well for me in that sense - assuming it has some games worth getting of course. We'll see how that goes.

[leods]

I personally think they went overboard with this thing. To me a console is a reliable, cheap and SIMPLE machine that plays videogames.

 

With all this attaching and plugging and whatnot I feel the simplicity is gone. Also, the portable unit doesn't have a d-pad. This might sound small for some, but to me at least it's huge. My favorite games on the WiiU are played on a d-pad. Most of my favorite games overall are played on a d-pad. Why should we give up one of the most basic staples of nintendo consoles for tiny crappy detachable controllers? If people want to play multiplayer, how about just buy an extra controller?

 

I don't think this is terrible, just like the WiiU it's probably going to be fine once they are desperate and cut the price in half. The gimmick won't break the system (except when it literally does), but to be honest this certainly isn't what I wanted. And there is one main reason for that:

 

Sony has proven twice already people don't want the home full experience on the go. The 3DS is a success because it is a portable, with portable games. It's great for kids, and many adults buy it because the games are simpler and focus on fun, not graphics. Now bringing better graphics and higher expectations to the mobile platform might just kill the best thing Nintendo had going, that is their portable systems.

 

Time will tell. What I would actually like to see would be just a gaming console. Just give me that normal "pro" controller, and a box that plays games on the tv, and sell your games on those cartridges. Done. On the portable side they could just release the Nintendo one screen, go back to a more GBA like design, finally get rid of all the gimmicks, and keep doing amazing games like Super Mario Wii U and 3D world.

 

But still, if they did that the console would probably sell poorly anyway, so who cares. Overall the public in general know nothing about videogames and don't really care to know either, so commercial success has basically nothing to do with quality.

[Keatah]

The wife pointed out The Switch is nothing new and has been around since the mid-1970's. Compatibility and support? Unrivaled!

 

[Raticon]

I dont like the name. As english isnt my native language i cant really explain it but it just sounds bad. NX would be a much better name in my opinion.

 

Im with leods on the portable-home console issue. It did not work for Sony and i have a hard time thinking Nintendo will succeed in that area as well. Something need to be nerfed and they will either have a really cool portable that is very lacklustre as a home console or the other way around. I cant see how they can come close to rival a PS4 or Xbone hardware inside a tablet.

 

As far as games go Zelda, Mario, Pokémon, Metroid will carry them a long way if done right. I hope they pull it off, and i hope the rumours about Skyrim is true because if they want to appeal to more people than the standard Nintendo crowd they will need the EA Sports games like Fifa, NHL and so on, and preferably some FPS games and fighting games.

 

I do not think i will get one as i get my modern gaming fix from PS4 and PS3.

 

I hope Nintendo will not set a ridiculous price on it and have it fail. It ia bad enough as it is that almost everyone think about the 80s and early 90s when they hear the name Nintendo.

[Flojomojo]

It makes lots of sense for Nintendo to try to do something different. In a marketplace where the main TV consoles are pretty much locked-down, proprietary PCs that can only play games, it's impossible to compete against them in terms of "power."

Raw power is overrated anyway, it's all about the game design. The open world Zelda looks super stylish but I doubt it's a specs hog.

My issue with Switch is that aside from the Nintendo games, it has the same kind of problem as PS4 and Xbone vs the PC -- Switch appears very similar to existing tablets, but doesn't seem to do any of the useful things that tablets do. I have huge collections of iOS and Android software and it's going to be an uphill road to convince someone like me to ...Switch.

Younger people might not have this problem, and they'd probably be less concerned about backwards compatibility than people like us. It will probably come down to price, especially if there's a significant drop from the launch price by holiday 2017.

My guess for launch price: $299 for a stripped-down version, $349 for the one that comes with stuff everyone wants. (This is a total guess, but it's based on the old $199 Shield TV price, the position of Xbone/PS4 in the market, Wii U pricing, and the need for Nintendo to make a splash without hurting themselves by selling below cost.)

[xenomorpher]

I think they nailed it. Having the option to have the screen propped up and using a pro-controller kind of seals the deal for me, depending on the price. I LOVE the idea of playing Skyrim anywhere with multiple controller type options. The reality is that I highly doubt I'll preorder since my backlog is monstrous.

[Flojomojo]

Here's the thing about Skyrim... it's five years old, and can run on fairly modest Windows laptops with xb360 controls.

 

Maybe Bethesda has something interesting planned for this version of Skyrim, especially since the Special Editions of that game are coming out on PS4/Xbone/PC right now?

 

Cynical me wonders how different that would be from the Wii U special editions of Mass Effect 3 and Batman Arkham City.

[Schizophretard]

I was hoping it would still be called the NX because it just sounds cool. But later I was thinking that even though it would sound cheesy to me that a better name for marketing would the Nintendo Go like Pokémon Go and all other mobile games with Go at the end to make it clear that it is mobile gaming. They could have used it at the end of the names of games like New Super Mario Bros. Wii, New Super Mario Bros. Wii U, and New Super Mario Bros. Go to make it clear which system it is for. It could even be used in ads like,"Play Nintendo games on the Go!". That said, after watching the preview Go wouldn't fit because I was thinking about how I would mostly want to play it which would be a portable but what they showed was truly a hybrid that you could switch up to play how you want as portable, console, and semi-portable with your controller preference. In other words, it looks more modular to me now instead of mostly portable with a console mode. But the Nintendo Modular wouldn't be a very marketable name to convey the concept. The Nintendo Switch would though. That name mixed with all that was shown with the logo clicking together like some Kit Kat commercial made it clear that it was modular and for switching things up. I don't think there would be any confusion about what it is suppose to be in the same vein as going from the Wii to the Wii U. So, I'm all for the name.

 

I like how most of the controller configurations they show are pretty traditional. They showed them on the console, on the separate controller device that appears to be charging them when it is used based on the green lights like the dock also has, a pro controller, and just holding both halves like Wii-motes. So, that should make it easier to get third party support and ports because if they map the controls for the very traditional looking pro controller then they are mapped just as well for the other configurations. The only configuration that is different is the half controller one but the impression I had from the video is that this time around the traditional controls will be the standard with the half controller gimmick being for simplified games, mini-games, and so forth.

 

I think what may be a bigger issue for third party developers would be the different configurations for using the screens. Like if one game does spit screen on the TV or the screen but also has the option to spit the screen between two Switch screens so that you can't see what the other player is doing but then another game doesn't do that with two Switch screens then it would be confusing to the consumer and make one game look like it lives up to the idea of the Switch than the other. Or if one game only requires one cart to mirror the exact screen on two Switch screens but another game requires two carts then it would be the same kind of thing. So, I think Nintendo should set standards to make it consistent and easier for developers by doing some of it themselves so that gamers would be able to seamlessly switch from console mode to those different multiplayer portable modes. Like have the Switch itself automatically mirror screens and make spit screens transition into being on two or more screens with one cart for anything local multiplayer and only require another cart for online multiplayer. Things like that should be done because it could get very confusing, inconsistent, and complicated for gamers. For an example, if you could play local multiplayer in console mode on your TV with one cart but if you needed two carts just to mirror the screens with two Switches for local multiplayer then that would be very strange because just changing how you play locally determines how many carts you need. I hope there is going to be a bundle that includes both the device for making a controller out of the two halves and a pro controller to help encourage devs to make more local multiplayer games for these different configurations by knowing there are at least two controllers per Switch, to make it muliplayer out of the box, and to pick which controller you prefer.

 

I liked the scene where the e-sports team is setting up a lan party while sitting on the floor playing in portable mode for practice before going into the tournament to dock their Switches to compete in console mode. The scene looked like a set up like with those portable Gaems gaming monitors but miniature. The only time I have ever played an original XBOX was when a co-worker would set up a few TV's to play Halo. I thought it was kind of fun playing like that. That scene made it look much more simple to set up because if you own a Switch you have all you need without a TV being necessary. I can see this feature attracting third parties and gamers who would want to have small e-sports lan parties that they can fit in their living room.

 

I like how it appears that it just sits in the dock not connected to anything as if it is charging and interacting with the TV wirelessly so you don't have to worry about breaking a connector and can remove it by sliding the controller back on.

 

I like how if it does have any touch controls for potential downloadable games and apps and/or to just touch a menu option instead of using a button that it didn't show it in the preview because I think it would have caused confusion and an impression that it would be the standard when if it is there I assume it wouldn't be standard just like the half controller thing for multiplayer. In other words, it gave me the impression that traditional controls will be the mandatory standard and any type of touch or half controller gimmick would be optional to add onto the standard.

 

I love that it can be used as a handheld. When I'm not gaming with someone, the TV is already in use, my wife is asleep, etc. then I prefer to play privately with head phones just like how I prefer a laptop over a desktop. I like to be immersed in what I'm doing with no interruption and/or anyone looking over my shoulder.

 

It looked to me that when docked it had a boost in graphics and resolution.

 

I found it disturbing how the guy at the beginning of the video felt the need to touch his dick from watching Link on a horse.