crepuscule
Bob-omb
And massively decrease durability. No thanks to having to get a major repair every few years. Joy-cons are bad enough.Wouldn't a foldable Switch add hundreds of dollars to the cost without adding anything meaningful.
And massively decrease durability. No thanks to having to get a major repair every few years. Joy-cons are bad enough.Wouldn't a foldable Switch add hundreds of dollars to the cost without adding anything meaningful.
And massively decrease durability. No thanks to having to get a major repair every few years.
So you... put the system in itself?Re: Foldable Screen, what if when folded, the resulting clamshell design was the Dock?
See my post about Lego integration. I think it's the most realistic way of bridging the gap between the physical and virtual worlds with today's technology and at mass market prices.I am breaking my head thinking about anything meaningful hardware wise, the best I can come up with is finding a way to make controlling a game more enjoyable and/or comfortable by taking the experience away from the screen and invest more commitment to interacting with ones surroundings as a gameplay feature. Think about the direction Niantic is taking but then focussed on fun instead of milking cashcows.
Pokémon is trying to do this with Pokémon Sleep, making even your sleep a gameplay feature.
But the question remains... What hardware gimmick other then a camera/mic recognising patterns could enhance the experience a step further?
The answer is came up with is touch, and by that I do not mean a touch screen but finding a way to create, shape and recognise surfaces, I don't think the technology exists yet, albeit not in a consumer practical way... HD rumble tried it in a certain way. Think of the first Stinky Horse game with the icecubes and counting balls. PS5's promo game did it as well, they actually nailed it imo, such a shame it never went beyond that single game.
VR and AR both still need a breakthrough as well, but it's just not convenient enough... yet
I love LABO but I think some of the criticism it got was legitimate. In particular, storing all those accessories after building them and using them only a handful of times.
Which is why I propose the following evolution for
Switch 2: LEGO integration!
Kits created by Nintendo and Lego, just like today's Mario sets, except these are a bit closer to Lego Technic sets and allow you to build custom controllers and other cool contraptions. They're completely optional, and you can always take them apart and use the pieces to build something else - including your own original designs which you can share through a LEGO/LABO-like smartphone app.
What you end up with is the best of both worlds:
- A Mario Maker community for creating and sharing physical designs - open to both Switch owners and Lego fans in general.
- Integration with a Game-Developer Garage like interface on the Switch itself, to program your inventions and share the software with other Switch users.
- Joy-Con covers\attachments that have the Lego "texture", making them an actual part of your builds - these would come either with the sets or with some of the games you buy from Nintendo.
- Meaningful Smartphone integration: use your phone to follow building instructions while you program and play on your Switch.
- A new form of dual screen gaming, reminiscent of the Wii U, but without having to purchase an expensive peripheral.
- $$$$ for Nintendo and Lego, with plenty of opportunities for cross promotion, including special support for Lego games on Switch, and more.
- A killer-app for Switch 2, especially among the younger audience, or parents who grew up with Nintendo and Lego.
- Camera integration (either in the console or using the phone's cameras) that add AR to the interaction: perhaps you can "scan" Lego builds, or "project" virtual builds into the real world.
- That last point screams "Minecraft" support!
- At this point you've won the console wars, and I haven't even mentioned the new LEGO Pokemon games!
I'm sure Nintendo are looking at sales of their Lego products and using those as a metric to decide if they have an audience for this direction.I am already sold at the idea of combining building toys like Lego with games, I think it will be hard to sell towards a grown-up audience even while they might be the specific audience needing it the hardest.
Nintendo would have to try and sell the idea of returning to your roots once again.
Anything that combines effort and fantasy with videogames without monitising it to death has my vote.
Having good memories about playing my own made up games with legos putting 2 armies against each other and taking turns attacking like some sort of turn-based RPG.
I think Nintendo have learned their lesson in the sense that they won't force the entire design of the new system, and its audience, to accommodate a radically new and unproven feature. But they'll almost certainly add some original functionality that is creative and weird yet optional and unobtrusive.The SNES was just a better NES.
The Gamecube was just a better N64.
The GBA was just a better Game Boy.
But more importantly:
The Wii U would have been better off as just a better Wii. An early Wii HD was always the right play, and they fumbled it. The gamepad turned so many people off.
The 3DS would have been better off as just a better DS. Instead they ended up having to slash the price immediately and ultimately dropped 3d from a bunch of models.
Nintendo has learned their lesson. Switch 2 will just be a better Switch.
But like I've said, if I had the choice of features, it'd be glasses-free 3d.
I really don't think there's anything certain about it. Once Nintendo had decided on making a hybrid console, the whole design of the Switch felt like the aim was to make the hardware itself as bland and unobtrusive as possible. No cameras or mics, no 3d, no gimmicks, nothing that would unduly raise the cost per unit beyond what was necessary. Frankly it looked like a knock-off chinese tablet to me at first, I was initially shocked it was something that Nintendo designed. And the one unique aspect - the joycons - were a necessity once they decided to make a hybrid machine, and looked and behaved much like anyone would have predicted detachable controllers would. (HD rumble was a humorous marketing wheeze, nothing more.)I think Nintendo have learned their lesson in the sense that they won't force the entire design of the new system, and its audience, to accommodate a radically new and unproven feature. But they'll almost certainly add some original functionality that is creative and weird yet optional and unobtrusive.
I disagree with your assessment because this is exactly what they did with the Switch - they just did it in subtle ways that were less noticeable to the average consumer.I really don't think there's anything certain about it. Once Nintendo had decided on making a hybrid console, the whole design of the Switch felt like the aim was to make the hardware itself as bland and unobtrusive as possible. No cameras or mics, no 3d, no gimmicks, nothing that would unduly raise the cost per unit beyond what was necessary. Frankly it looked like a knock-off chinese tablet to me at first, I was initially shocked it was something that Nintendo designed. And the one unique aspect - the joycons - were a necessity once they decided to make a hybrid machine, and looked and behaved much like anyone would have predicted detachable controllers would. (HD rumble was a humorous marketing wheeze, nothing more.)
On the other hand, Nintendo's creatives were in the lab working on some incredible things like Ring Fit / the Ring-Con, and also some fascinating failures like Labo. I really expect this to continue - Nintendo is still creative with hardware, but it'll express itself in their peripherals now.
Ultimately, adding something that is optional and unobtrusive yet adds cost to every unit sold - that seems to me like the exact opposite of their approach with Switch. If they DO add something, expect it to be universal and essential to the experience.
Not having seen whatever it is that people are talking about makes this scrollwheel thing very amusing.
Reminds me of the clickable, flickable jog dial whose patent is owned by... Sony. Actually a really cool input method from a single object now that I think about it.
Not sure how beneficial it would be for games.... Like i guess you could scroll through weapons or whatever? Dunno, seems less ideal than just... A touch screen. Which, funnily enough, is what killed the jog dial in the first place!
Think of TotK but with scroll wheels. It would actually have a functional control scheme, cause you can't use the touchscreen docked.
I think 3DS and Wii U were hurt not just by having weird new features, but that those features harmed things the previous systems were known for. In 3DS's case specifically I've often thought about how many ways DS's screens could be used. Main screen on top with additional on bottom? OK. Main on touch screen with additional on top? OK. One connected space? OK. Playing in book form? OK. But 3DS made the top screen MAIN SCREEN. If you wanted to have main action on the touch screen, you're both losing out on 3D and 20% of screen space. Using both screens connected would make for a weird T shape, and only half the viewing area capable of 3D. Book style wouldn't have both sides be the same size, and 3D would again be lost. The upside is Switch would be much less harmed by all this, since it already just has one main screen, and sideways play is almost entirely used by 2D oldies anyway.The SNES was just a better NES.
The Gamecube was just a better N64.
The GBA was just a better Game Boy.
But more importantly:
The Wii U would have been better off as just a better Wii. An early Wii HD was always the right play, and they fumbled it. The gamepad turned so many people off.
The 3DS would have been better off as just a better DS. Instead they ended up having to slash the price immediately and ultimately dropped 3d from a bunch of models.
Nintendo has learned their lesson. Switch 2 will just be a better Switch.
But like I've said, if I had the choice of features, it'd be glasses-free 3d.
I hear this brought up sometimes, but how do you imagine it working? In TOTK you had to use one button to bring up a list, and then use something else to scroll through it. Wouldn't that still be the case with a scroll wheel? You couldn't use ONLY it, or every time you changed finger position to scroll again it would think you've made a selection, which would usually be a bad thing.Think of TotK but with scroll wheels. It would actually have a functional control scheme, cause you can't use the touchscreen docked.
I mean wouldn’t haptics be limited to battery life anyway?I think Nintendo would be going very hard into haptics this gen except that the Switch 2 being a hybrid will mostly prevent that as more advanced haptics are very electricity hungry and would kill the Switch 2's battery in handheld mode.
They could just make the haptics more exclusive to docked mode, but then I don't know if developers will take advantage of the superior haptics.
I mean wouldn’t haptics be limited to battery life anyway?
Unless you meant on the unit itself and not just the controllers?
I mean if you're asking my opinion on what the actual new hardware feature would be... I think nothing. Or at least nothing substantial. But the thread presented it as if it's a given that a new Switch had to have some cutting edge tech in it, and asked us to put ideas out there. I strongly disagree about the "without adding anything meaningful" part by the wayWouldn't a foldable Switch add hundreds of dollars to the cost without adding anything meaningful.
Wouldn't a foldable Switch add hundreds of dollars to the cost without adding anything meaningful.
I'd still take the wheel over a stick for those lists any day. You gain a lot of speed without losing any precision. IMO it'd just feel better.I hear this brought up sometimes, but how do you imagine it working? In TOTK you had to use one button to bring up a list, and then use something else to scroll through it. Wouldn't that still be the case with a scroll wheel? You couldn't use ONLY it, or every time you changed finger position to scroll again it would think you've made a selection, which would usually be a bad thing.
No? The tech is pretty mature at this point. Hardly cutting edge.
And it would bring DS style games back to Nintendo’s ecosystem (not to mention it would facilitate the DS NSO service). There’s plenty of new gameplay possibilities that it would open up with a clamshell design; enabling Tate orientation games as well as front/back multiscreen titles (Yoshi’s Crafted World in particular was screaming for this kind of setup).
It also potentially makes the system significantly more pocket friendly (potentially halving its physical footprint when folded).
And it does this with no compromise to the current single large screen experience either.
With how many publishers are now releasing FPS games on Switch (Doom, Metro, Wolfenstein and more), I genuinely think there would be huge potential in Nintendo including gf3D on the next Switch, and showcasing all the benefits it has for playing First-Person games in portable mode.But like I've said, if I had the choice of features, it'd be glasses-free 3d.
The scroll wheel only minimally solves the problem of not enough buttons true, but the major problem. The problem of spending too much time in menus is like immediately fixed. I mean the game is super complicated, but scroll wheels would make the gameplay experience much smoother; example the quick item select.I think 3DS and Wii U were hurt not just by having weird new features, but that those features harmed things the previous systems were known for. In 3DS's case specifically I've often thought about how many ways DS's screens could be used. Main screen on top with additional on bottom? OK. Main on touch screen with additional on top? OK. One connected space? OK. Playing in book form? OK. But 3DS made the top screen MAIN SCREEN. If you wanted to have main action on the touch screen, you're both losing out on 3D and 20% of screen space. Using both screens connected would make for a weird T shape, and only half the viewing area capable of 3D. Book style wouldn't have both sides be the same size, and 3D would again be lost. The upside is Switch would be much less harmed by all this, since it already just has one main screen, and sideways play is almost entirely used by 2D oldies anyway.
I hear this brought up sometimes, but how do you imagine it working? In TOTK you had to use one button to bring up a list, and then use something else to scroll through it. Wouldn't that still be the case with a scroll wheel? You couldn't use ONLY it, or every time you changed finger position to scroll again it would think you've made a selection, which would usually be a bad thing.