This is the point I was making early in the thread, third party support is crucial for this device to be successful and at this price point that is a difficult proposition. One of the challengestrouble VITA had early on was not enough AAA titles being developed, and that only got worse. Nowadays people say they don't want the same experience with a mobile gaming platform that they want on the home consoles. I think it's an excuse but again to the original point, if developers won't port for this platform what you going to play? Mario, Zelda and Smash will be great but they aren't yearly offerings.
Nintendo Switch Event 2017-01-12 and Switch Launch discussion
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
- Status
I don't know if it's a guarantee but they did move a lot of units when it came to their
core franchises on the Wii U, I figure they wouldn't want to miss out on potentially millions
of sales even if it's going to a relatively small user base that hasn't and likely won''t grow.
That way they could hedge their bets on two machines, the guaranteed sales and the unknown potential
of the Switch.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Well like it speculates, "other priorities". If I'm Nintendo then I want to focus my effort on persuading / helping devs bring new titles to Switch, not old tired titles that most have played.
They're aren't going to build any kind of interest in new hardware running yesterday's games. That's kind of been Nintendo strategy for 30 years and I think they've finally realised that isn't working anymore.
Like Skyrim... right?
Nintendo doesn't have a fucking clue and this is just more evidence to throw on the pile.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Like Skyrim... right?
Nintendo doesn't have a fucking clue and this is just more evidence to throw on the pile.
Were Nintendo involved in that or did Bethesda just port it? I think that's the difference. Nintendo are in the unfortunate position of having to convince third parties that it's worth their time and effort to support and publish to Switch. Skyrim on Switch was likely almost no effort as part of the work for the Special Edition work.
Rootax
Veteran
I agree, it's WiiU games. MK8 have higher rez, but still bad texture filtering and no AA. Mario, Zelda, Splatoon 2, don't have AA either. For Zelda it look really terrible. I would not be surprised if Mario developement started on WiiU.
I understand the idea of Switch and it is a logical one. But I don't know that by trying to be a jack of all trades, it could work. When I made the Vita comment, I meant that I seriously expected the future to be streaming, because so often it already works near flawlessly, and it would allow for a very lightweight, 3DS handheld. But they went another direction, and perhaps they are right, but right now it feels like it's not offering much of anything.
Things that bother me the most: 2 players only locally ... I thought 4 max for PS4 was already a disappointment (coming down from 7, and that used to be 8 on previous generations), as 3-4 players is used a lot in our house.
Apps, as above. It would have saved the Vita for certain.
Hardly a graphics upgrade over Wii U (at least the screen is a better size and better colors this time).
This thing will never credibly support VR.
Software support looks very dim.
It doesn't need much software, mind. If Nintendo can sign Monster Hunter again and the next Pokemon is really good and maybe two players on the same device, it could find a credible lifespan regardless. And perhaps they can sell it without the dock for 199 in relatively quickly. It's not hopeless as a follow up on the 3DS in particular, and by the strength of those killer titles the 3DS still has had, it can thrive if it gets the cost down soon enough as a pure handheld, and then it will be a handheld that can be augmented into playing with the dock on a bigger screen, which is what the Vita should have had.
Things that bother me the most: 2 players only locally ... I thought 4 max for PS4 was already a disappointment (coming down from 7, and that used to be 8 on previous generations), as 3-4 players is used a lot in our house.
Apps, as above. It would have saved the Vita for certain.
Hardly a graphics upgrade over Wii U (at least the screen is a better size and better colors this time).
This thing will never credibly support VR.
Software support looks very dim.
It doesn't need much software, mind. If Nintendo can sign Monster Hunter again and the next Pokemon is really good and maybe two players on the same device, it could find a credible lifespan regardless. And perhaps they can sell it without the dock for 199 in relatively quickly. It's not hopeless as a follow up on the 3DS in particular, and by the strength of those killer titles the 3DS still has had, it can thrive if it gets the cost down soon enough as a pure handheld, and then it will be a handheld that can be augmented into playing with the dock on a bigger screen, which is what the Vita should have had.
Rootax
Veteran
But the hardware is already pretty "old". I'm sur they had X1 dev kits in house for a long time. Or they really messed up somewhere.
Now imagine Zelda on PS4. It'd look like the original reveal trailers with that gorgeous combination of cell and GI lighting...
Rootax
Veteran
Well, I only ask for aniso and good AA
But yeah, Nintendo on powerfull hardware, I want to see that. Zelda, F zero, Wave Race, 1080 snowboarding, etc, can really benefit from a lot of power...I just noticed, Switch doesn't have analog trigger? Damn... Goodbye F-Zero&co again...
I have no idea of whether Switch will be a success or not but I do think there is a market for gaming that isn't "high-end" like PC/Playstation/Xbox and that also isn't the mobile market...
It's just whether Nintendo is able to execute properly.
One of benefit's of Switch obviously lower game dev cost's...especially in a time when it's increasingly very expensive to create modern games. I think Zelda: Breath of Wild file size is 13GB. That's like a fraction of a modern AAA... I know that isn't a direct indication of the dev cost but still.
It's just whether Nintendo is able to execute properly.
One of benefit's of Switch obviously lower game dev cost's...especially in a time when it's increasingly very expensive to create modern games. I think Zelda: Breath of Wild file size is 13GB. That's like a fraction of a modern AAA... I know that isn't a direct indication of the dev cost but still.
I'm not sure that niche exists after all Nintendo's great strength has always been their great ability to choose and use art styles that suit their tech the best. If they were to arrive on PS4/XB1/PC they could still choose a cost effective art style as nothing about those platforms enforces photo realistic art styles.
The broader point about AAA not needing to all focus on photo realistic I completely agree with but the reason they all do it is that no-one can point to a AAA title that earns $$$ like photo realistic style games do.
I think 'indie' is where that has gone and with the nostalgia train having finally arrived at the 32 bit stop we might see more large scale titles going for non-photo realistic styles (like Yooka Laylee, etc).
The broader point about AAA not needing to all focus on photo realistic I completely agree with but the reason they all do it is that no-one can point to a AAA title that earns $$$ like photo realistic style games do.
I think 'indie' is where that has gone and with the nostalgia train having finally arrived at the 32 bit stop we might see more large scale titles going for non-photo realistic styles (like Yooka Laylee, etc).
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
I trust very little about Nintend's efforts on 3rd party relations (their hardware speaks as much), but I trust a lot less about anything coming out of Randy Pitchford's mouth.
If I was a console maker, I too wouldn't want to be associated to Randy Pitchford in any way.
Regardless, I played the hell out of Borderlands 1 and 2, but Borderlands Prequel was just the same old used formula with very little to add and AFAIK it tanked. I don't think Borderlands 3 will be any different.
Of course there is.
You just have to price it accordingly, both on hardware and software. Which Nintendo did not.
$40 bigger games, $15-20 smaller 1-2-Switch like games, a $250 Switch on day one with bundled Zelda BotW would fly off the shelves.
At least until people realized the library for the whole year is quite poor.
Yes, they do. This might be because many of these games might have started for the Wii U which had EDRAM (>50GB/s at least?) for the GPU and all of the sudden they had to adapt to a SoC with 25GB/s for both GPU and CPU. They're probably not taking advantage of some of Maxwell 2.5's perks either, like 2*FP16 throughput.
Not to me, they don't... Some improvements are visible at least in docked mode, but they're definitely not huge.
The Wii U only got a tiny user base with a tiny adoption rate on top of it, so any development for that console during the past 2 years has been out of honor, commitment and little else.
Last edited by a moderator:
CaffeinatedChris
Newcomer
IMO that's more an indication of developers leveraging compression since they've got an SoC that's designed to very efficiently decode those compressed assets, whether it's DXTC/ASTC for textures, HEVC for video, or virtually anything for audio; as well as realizing that you don't need to store an 8K^2 texture for something that hasn't got a chance in hell of rendering it in time.
Well I am personally OK with Zelda being "fully priced" ($60) game. But yeah 1-2 Switch should be a bundled game or $20 like you said. Arms and Bomberman and even Mario Kart 8 Deluxe (basically a direct port)should be $40...Puyo Puyo Tetris is pushing it at $40...
But yeah I'm hoping this thing hit's $250 within a year...if nothing else it's on sale during black friday or something.
250 would be fair, as it is you could buy a ps4 and a game for the price of the switch and i dont think anyone would choose the switch in that situation unless they already had a ps4. if youre going to limit your audience to people that already own a competing home console then the entire docking the switch to the tv aspect of it is no longer very compelling, strictly as a mobile device its competing with your cell phones and tablets, and you can get some pretty nice stuff for $300 nowadays. going forward its only going to get worse, just look at the prices last years flagship mobiles are going for. i highly doubt that nintendo is going to slash their prices to equivalent levels.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
But... This was in reference to Borderlands 3, which hasn't been released yet.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Well after facing terrible initial sales, the 3DS got its price slashed by 32% ($250 to $170), just 4 months after being released in the west.
I can predict terrible initial sales for the Switch, accordingly.
I think there is enough demand from Nintendo loyalists and early adopters that initial launch sales will be good. I would not be shocked if this thing is hard to get during the first month especially. It's the continued long term sales that could be problematic if they don't reduce the price or at least have sales like Microsoft and Sony do during the holidays.
- Status
