To each of their own, but for me nintendo is just boring. The last console I had from them is the gamecube, but even still it didn't hold my interests for long. Now fast forward to the switch and still nothing. Alot of there games are more for a kid audience. The console itself on a technical level can't compare to current gen, and now they're charging for online services.
Why do I want to pay for online services when other consoles offers more. I know there's people hyped up for this and that's fine, but I was expecting abit more considering the Wii U didn't do well. The games line up is pretty much what u expect, mario, zelda etc...Then this weird ass game called Arms (don't get me started on that shit). The whole motion control gimmick really ran its course. I don't see alot of people playing like that for long.
I also don't see too many people playing on it in the public. Hell the battery probably want last for long, and you'll probably set yourself up to get robbed.
As someone who fell for the Wii U hype , not gonna fall for this again . I walked away from this announcement angry . Just thankful that Zelda isn't a switch exclusive!
After the hype died down and rewatching the presentation I kinda agree with you there. There just wasn't a whole lot of new games, especially at launch to get people like me excited. I like Zelda and this one looks pretty good (although Nintendo still is way too obsessed with their overdone bloom lighting) but what other big games are there to play on launch other than re-releases/ports? I think ARMS could turn out to be a very interesting multiplayer game, not sure how many people are keen for it though or would not get bored after a few rounds. I think it's by far my favourite looking game the Switch has to offer though.
As for longevity, if they pull all their efforts into Switch by making previously handheld exclusive games now on a portable console (Fire Emblem, Pokemon, etc) I think it will do massively for Nintendo. Here's hoping they do. That would get me way more interested in buying just one more Nintendo system.
The last Nintendo console I bought was the Wii, but that was 9 years after launch in 2015. Even then, it was primarily to play a handful of old gamecube games that I got an urge to play after all these years (Luigi's Mansion, Super Mario Sunshine, Super Smash Bros. Melee to name a few). I'll admit that I did't watch the conference, but that in and of itself should tell you that I'm just not that interested in Nintendo anymore. This could be different. However, I'll just have to wait and see what games there are going to be before I jump on or off the hype train, because while Nintendo finally got some good third party support on the Wii U, it still took them way too long. I still have absolutely no interest in buying a Wii U, and until I see some promising games outside of the usual first party titles, I don't see myself buying a Switch either.
I think what made me excited about this was I viewed it more as a successor to the 3DS versus the successor to the Wii U. I use my 3DS pretty frequently with my commute. That being said, that is why I pre-ordered it.
You could just change the title to "The Nintendo conference was underwhelming" because it was. For some reason it made me not wanna buy a switch, even i was planning on doing so.
Last Nintendo console I owned was a GameCube as well, but I'm excited for the Switch. It makes a lot of sense. I don't think I'll play it much in public, rather I just take it places to play it wherever I end up going. It also doesn't need to be as powerful as even Xbox One because it's for Nintendo games. And kid audience, I don't know. I guess? Doesn't mean I can't still enjoy them though.
I am sort of banking on this thing to spit out a couple fun games to play while you're with a friend. That's an assumption as we haven't seen a lot of that yet, but still I feel like that is a pretty safe assumption to make given the nature of that JoyCon controller? If it does that, I'm already happy with my purchase because that's what I'll use it for most. I'm not really looking for a third place to play AAA games by myself for hours on end.
You could just change the title to "The Nintendo conference was underwhelming" because it was. For some reason it made me not wanna buy a switch, even i was planning on doing so.
Same, it kind of unsold me. When they first showed off the Joy Con motion control, I went "what, really, this is the first talking point?" And then they kept going with that. I was back on board when the dude laid down on the couch all comfy like.
But I still plan to get it by the end of the year, as that's where Nintendo games will live for the foreseeable future.
The 1,2 switch demo was so bad it was funny to watch. The rest was just bad. Also 300$ plus 70$ for a decent controller makes this an awfull value proposition.
I think there is a lot of interesting features in Switch, but I do wonder if there is much sense of economy or logic with the features.
Lets put it this way, what was the 'cost' to add HD Rumble, motion control accelerometers, the IR sensor for seeing you hands, putting the RFID sensor in one Joy-con, having a dock who functions seems only to hold pass through for power and video?
For instance, while HD rumble, the IR camera for distances, and RFID are neat they games you can do with those are not exactly going to do much for many games. The RFID in particular has not been explored in the Wii U very much, and Amiibo function for 99% of buyers is for the statue. (In fact, the functionality rather spotty as we saw with the last Mario Party where Dan's Amiibo of a VERY well known character didn't work.) So why keep the function? Why spend they money on it? It is a neat feature, but they have proven it not really worth the cost if that is how they use it. That HD Rumble is neat, but do we see more than one or two party games using it? I don't! The IR Camera to see you hands and for the "quick draw & sword catching" is neat. But again where is 'the economy' of adding that function if only one or two games really use it?
Nintendo can and has spent some time and money on these things but in the end I woudl rather have seems them put that time of engineering and that cost of parts is the CPU/GPU, on-board RAM, on board storage, or a bigger battery. Or, ditch some the IR Camera, HD Rumble, and RFID; keep the accelerometers, CPU/GPU, on-board RAM, on-board storage the same; and just get a bigger battery and lower the cost down to $225.
That why I first brought up where is the sense of economy and logic with these features? Was anyone at Nintendo thinking about what was 'needed', what a function was worth in cost, and what the overall goal of the device would be? That seems to be the biggest question, "What IS Switch for?" Is it a home console that 'can be' take out of the home? Is it a portable handheld that can be docked in the home to play games on the sofa? Is it a party game device that goes beyond visuals games or playing with one other person?
...Or, is it 20 years of features vomited up as a 'dog dinner' combine yet again into a device with zero functions it does well?!
I'm pretty late to this but, the hype for the switch is that its a portable home console what every gamer who doesn't really play on handhelds wants. In reality we've already had two portable console try to emulate a home console on handhelds and it didn't go over to well.
The psp and vita respectivly. Hell the second version of the psp could directly plug into your tv and the vita has a home console version of it. However since neither of those are "real" home console most people who weren't into handhelds glossed over them. That's not to say neither of these console didnt have their problems (psp was hacked to shit as you well know and vita didn't have any huge western games to really prop it up in the west so it just became a psp 2.0 which means it was used as a weeb machine) one of those was their battery life. Psp was slightly better in that regard but its sleep mode was hit or miss and if you were playing a psp game you would only have bout 5ish hours of game time which isn't a lot if you're really traveling (flying,long bus ride, trains etc.). Vita's life was even worse with about 4hours on vita games however its sleep mode is fantastic but trying to use it while traveling is just as bad as using the psp. You have to have a charger with you at all times (both require the use of a power brick not something you can really shove in you pocket) or to buy a spare batter charger that you can charge up before hand. This doesn't even get into their portability issues that both of them have neither really fits inside of your pocket, or the fact that phones have all but replaced hand held consoles.
Which brings me back to the switch which is a tablet so not very portable not going to have a very long battery life and will probably require a power brick to charge and you don't have a very portable console anymore you just have a gimped under powered home console which is what the wii and wii u were. Nintendo keeps trying to strike gold again like they had with the wii but they don't seem to understand that the public for the wii has all but stopped playing games and have already sold their wii's or use them as streaming boxes and won't be buying their new console at all.
This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:
Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along
with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely
increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.
Comment and Save
Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other
Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll
send you an email once approved.
Log in to comment