It's only relevant to the people who insist they'd never spend the money to re-engineer Switch to not be in its current form-factor, when I am almost certain that "keychain GBA" and "ugly Discman Wii" required far more engineering with what would undoubtedly be far less pay-off for the effort were a TV-only Switch to exist.
Imo it makes sense for a Switch Lite but not for a "Switch Docked" if you will. I kinda want to call it the Switch Heavy tbh
Nintendo won't sell two widly different SKUs at launch, this will just mess with everyone and basically become another 3DS launch "It's just a new model for the DS".
yet the Switch Lite is portable only.
Me too, as great a concept as the Switch is, and as great it is for sales.
it would be nice to have the option. if Nintendo really nailed the scaleability aspect there could be many different variants without much extra effort on the development side. hopefully this remains a goal in the future.
Frankly I’m more confused why my comment is lumped in here since I’ve made my stance pretty clear on how I see a console only Switch coming about.
Very easily as a home console would be able to be more powerful than the hybrid so docked gamers like me could benefit from better performance.
I don't think anyone is suggesting that, just that, as you have a cheapo lite, you could have a high-end-ish docked only console.
Agree on all accounts. And frankly, is it worth giving up on the handheld aspect just for a little bit more power ? The thing that is coming seems to be powerful enough that the raw power gap will not be as visible anymore.
You would probably just get a cheapo docked only console with the same performance as a docked Switch.
Leaving aside NES and SNES for obvious reasons, the 2DS XL didn't launch after "its respective successor," because the Switch wasn't really that. The transition to the Switch was unlike any in Nintendo's history, and Nintendo would keep releasing 3DS games for more than two years. That scenario isn't going to be repeated now.
That's certainly one of the layers.
If adding two pins is all it needs to a) enable higher speed, and b) differentiate the Game Card generations, I think that it can be achieved without changing the shape of card or even the pin layout.
As the diagram shown, the current pins 5, 8, 11, 16, and 17 each can be bisected into two contacts, potential increasing the total up to 22 pins without changing the physical design of the Game Card, while ensuring backward compatibility. I’m of the opinion that it’d fit Nintendo’s product strategy better to have one physical SKU per cross-gen title, instead of selling two separate cards (Switch 1 and NG) of the same game.
iPhone
Metroid 6 in actuality, given the sucess of Metroid 5(Metroid Dread) on Switch, Metroid 6 on the Switch sucessor is almost garantee to happen, Metroid 4 is Metroid Fusion.
So as obsessed with video game visuals as you are, you wouldn't rather have the option of an 8tflop Switch 2 with 1800p DLSS with high quality RT vs a 3tflop docked experience with 1440p DLSS and low RT from a hybrid device?
That's not what folks are saying. They're responding to you saying this:
And people are telling you otherwise. When I bought a DS it wasn't because I thought the system had a better library than the GameCube/Wii. I bought it despite the fact that I thought it had an objectively worse library than the GameCube. I didn't want to play Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks - I wanted to play Wind Waker and Twilight Princess, but those weren't on a handheld.
The Advance series were all SNES games ported down to the lower resolution screen of the GBA. You said this:
"The primary thing that people buy a vehicle for is going places. Harley Davidson should simply make a car better for going places, if they want to sell them". This is either a very obvious, banal statement not worth examining, or radically incorrect.t
No I wouldn’t as I believe this hypothetical will result in impact to undocked support.
They shouldn’t entertain it. There are also a lot of other things they shouldn’t have entertained and they did. No one knows what Nintendo will do.
I'd love to see a Nintendo home-only console again
I was asking Ilikefeet specifically because of their massive interest in visuals. That particular question was directly at them and them alone.
I'm assuming you didn't mean to be insulting and call my post "pretend talk," and you were referring to Nintendo's beliefs about positioning, but my argument has nothing to do with their beliefs, but the hardware situation and the actual volume and kinds of games the 3DS received after the Switch was out. It would be willfully blind to pretend what happened with the 3DS was comparable to something like the handful of late NES games, or that there wasn't an obvious difference in Nintendo's situation between the DS replacing the GBA and the Switch (eventually) replacing the 3DS. The 3DS's extra lease on life will not even come close to being replicated in the upcoming hardware transition.
I don't think I need to compromise so much. I've said it times ago, but I do think RT is much more scalable than people think and that lighting does a lot to make a game that much more of a visual leap. ray tracing at 3TFLOPs is going to be great when properly accounted for and I expect Nintendo and friends to do that very well. resolution doesn't mean much to me as long a minimum threshold in image clarity is met. that usually means resolving close to the 1 sample per pixel at the panel's native res. temporal upscalers get close to that already
I mean... the Switch technically isn't the successor to the 3DS. Yes, it ultimately replaced both the home and handheld product lines, but it was more directly replacing the Wii U. Nintendo fully believed the 3DS had a place as a budget handheld and continued to support it as such until they realized that it didn't have as much gas in the tank as they believed. Remember that they originally planned to support the 3DS beyond 2019, meaning Nintendo foresaw themselves putting out 3DS games until at least a year after the releasing the Lite, which arguably is the direct successor to the 3DS by way of being a purely handheld system. Of course they scrapped that plan because, well, when the remake of the best-selling Mario RPG becomes among the worst selling Mario games of all-time... yeah, better transition any 3DS titles that aren't already near completion to the Switch ASAP.
Mea culpa
First off great post, completely agree with some of the post but I do have explain my positions on some parts.
No I didn't mean you viewed the DS's library as superior to those platforms because thats not relevant at all to DS's own appeal. Although I do think the market as a whole viewed it as more appealing considering the massive deficit between it and those platforms. You did certainly view the DS's library as appealing though. For example, if the DS only offered Jump Rope Challenge its appeal would dramatically drop no matter its form factor or price. A platforms library of games can overcome a poor/less desirable form factor or bad pricing, while an incredible form factor or fantastic price tag isnt overcoming a terrible library games. Form Factor and price I would argue are the next important things a consumer would consider but far less than the games it offers. Those games weren't on handheld but other appealing Zelda games were offered on DS, making DS am appealing platform. I also would like to end with I completely understand you and other people have a preference but understand I'm not talking about the minority, the vast majority of consumers are making decisions based on the library it offers first and foremost. Nintendo's motto is games sell systems, not the other way around. Theres also alot of consumers that prefer home consoles or handheld consoles but the vast majority want appealing games. Vita has a great form factor but it's library cost it dearly.
It playing a Zelda was what mattered the most, take Zelda or anything else you find appealing and there is no sale. Take its form factor and maybe you and the vast minority refuse to buy it, but the vast majority aren't crying over not being able to play on the go if it's gets the games people want to play. Sony and Microsoft seem to survive fine without handhelds and just recently Sony's handheld platform flopped massively.
There were several games ported but let's not act like the GBA didn't have more that allowed it to easily smoke SNES despite having some of the same games. A massive ip that never released on any of Nintendo's home consoles hit GBA and carried it. Pokemon is head and shoulders over the other games with multiple games at the top.
Vehicles and gaming consoles are vastly different because gaming consoles are carried by the purchase of software, while vehicles are made for transportation whether its a motorcycle or 4 door sedan. Motorcycles can be purchased for travel and completely fill your needs but handheld gaming console is way to reliant on offering appealing software.
Agreed
Im sure there are several consumers like you but for every consumer like you that has a preference for portable devices, there is a consumer like me that prefers a home console. I think people like me and you are definitely the minority similar to the people that hate Game Freak and their Pokemon issues. The vast majority still made Pokemon Scarlet and Violet a behemoth. A home console from Nintendo would likely be just as successful, just replacing consumers like you if its a home console with consumers like me. I also greatly doubt there are as many people as you think that would flatout refuse to purchase Nintendos home console if it was the only choice at consuming Nintendo ip. A few people on the internet have said alot things but doesn't mean it should all be taken seriously.
Nintendo certainly believes better support sells more consoles. They flat-out blamed themselves for WiiUs failure (the executives cut their salaries I believe), they could have blamed its form factor and just made a handheld only console. They instead course corrected by making a platform they could better support. That's how I know better support equals better sales, not better form factor.
Hard disagree here, GC/Wii/WiiU all suffered from droughts lol. None of them even had Pokemon titles.
Mario is all they had in common lol, Pokemon takes the top spots in way too many list for their handhelds. You do realize Pokemon is the second highest selling franchise in history? They did all that on basically handhelds.
Like I said Mario is all they have in common and you completely left Pokemon out. This also should help you see how drastically spaced out WiiU major releases were while for 3DS NSMB2 and Mario Kart 7 were back to back after a massive price cut. Add in those Pokemon games to help carry the system and clearly more than sharing some games matter. WiiUs release schedule was atrocious compared to 3DS.
Lmao comparing Pokemon's boom to Splatoon and Mario Maker is hilarious, of course they would fail WiiU. They showed up after it was too late to begin with, they showed up in 2015 after WiiU was dead. This is why after the emergency price cut, Nintendo had two behemoths hit 3DS back to back. Momentum and scheduling matters. WiiU and 3DS had a few counterparts (Mario) but that is hardly enough to carry a console, especially when your consumers are picking between having all of those Mario games/Smash and Pokemon and Animal Crossing. The 3DS had a far superior (sales wise) library and release schedule, thats hardly debatable.
March 2018, the first full year of the Switch, 3DS sales barely dropped. It wasn't an issue of there not being as much gas in the tank as they believed - Nintendo only greenlit three games for the 3DS after the Switch launched, and they were all remakes.
Well in theory 16 ROPs can be just ok, but I think there's more than just filling pixels and write them to the frame buffer. Modern games, while are more compute heavy, still demands some amount of pixel fillrate as games typically have many if not even dozens of buffers (zelda botw for example) that needs to be blended, not even accounting for stuff like alpha transparency, anti-aliasing and so on (though these kind of stuff stress the memory bandwidth as well, so there's needed some balancing in that regard, like the PS4 Pro has 64 ROPs but they never gonna have great ultilization since the memory bandwidth just isn't there).
Those are two different "Switches." And it's pretty easy to argue that it was specifically the need to replace the Wii U that motivated the change of plans from one to the other.
In what way is that two-faced? You just acknowledged it was the backup plan, and nobody can dispute that it received prolonged support above and beyond any other time in Nintendo's history. What Nintendo said publicly and what they believed are irrelevant to the post of mine he was responding to, but even on its own merits, the idea that 3DS support was another "DS is the third pillar" lip service position from Nintendo is just not true.
See this is why Dread shoulda opened with "NINTENDO PRESENTS: METROID 5" like Super and Fusion did.
Ok I'll concede to you all, although I don't believe in this notion at all honestly. I would 70 % of the decision is based on games but who knows lol.
Absolutely, Iwata always envisioned something like Switch but that certainly wasn't what he only envisioned. He mentioned a family of consoles because I'm sure he has considered a future of different types of hardware sharing software like Apple products. Honestly, Nintendo being a business is the other reason why they have to aim higher. Nintendo sold over 250 million Wii and DS consoles. They aren't hitting that with a single platform, now with two split platforms that share software, who knows. The ideal scenario is for a consumer two buy both platforms, obviously that ain't happening but somewhere in between could be huge. Imagine a portable platform that sells 60 million and a home platform that sell 50 million individually. Around 20 or 30 million could buy both leading to a massive userbase. Repeating Switch success will be tough, people tend to forget Switch greatly benefitted from a global pandemic that ain't happening again next generation.
I still have my GBA player, gotta find the disc of course.
Home consoles will always have the power advantage over devices with Switch's form factor. Home consoles don't need a battery and fan. Hardware will always improve and scalable engines can't solve everything. Switch still misses out on several 3rd party releases due to this and so will Switch 2. You also can't forget this is Nintendo, they are always seeking the next viral gimmick. The next home console could include a gimmick that only makes sense in a home console such as the Wii remote and the next handheld could include a gimmick that only make sense in a handheld like a touch screen with textures. I remember a screen some time ago that let's you feel the textures on a screen, Nintendogs could go viral again with that. My point is, is certain hardware form factors are just better suited for certain "gimmicks", Switch is hardware kind of hampers what they may come up with.
I think Nintendo being a business will consider the growth potential and see from there.
I think I finally understand your position. I think you are wrong, but I do understand it
. It's been confusing because you've either moved the goal posts, or engaged in enough hyperbole that it looked like you did.I never said I didn't, and this is why we're going back and forth. You started out with the bold statement that Nintendo's home console sales vs handheld sales have nothing to do with the appeal of the console, and everything to do with the appeal of the library. You have walked back that statement every time you call people out on it, saying that yes, the console has individual appeal that combines with the library. Which is all I am saying. Let's clear this up with some yes or no questions?
Nintendo fans are, for the most part, handheld fans. Sony and Microsoft's fans are not. Consumers do not view video games and video game consoles as interchangable widgets. As you say, if home consoles were the only place to play Nintendo IPs, then Nintendo fans would play on TV or not at all.
I'm not acting like that. I'm trying to go by objective numbers by using the top sellers for the platform. Rather than wave vaguely at the library and say "this is the good one, this is the bad one" let's just acknowledge that the popular games were available on a TV console and more people bought it handheld. That suggests that a significant portion of the sales come down to being able to play that quality library in handheld mode, and if the support is the same, that the handheld console will sell better.
Pokemon is a second party franchise, that's why I excluded it. Your assertion was that Nintendo first party support is enough to drive sales, but Nintendo tried to get Pokemon on Switch early on, and Game Freak told them to fuck right off. Because Nintendo is not the full controller of the IP and cannot categorically choose how much support TPC/GameFreak offers their platform. Nintendo is a huge influence, obviously, as the publisher and co-owner of the IP, but within the world of "decisions about Pokemon" GameFreak is an independent and equally powerful player.
They also believe that consoles need to be built around features that make them appealing. It's in every single statement they make on the matter. Please, let's talk about data.
First party titles. You're talking about Nintendo's first party support, we're talking about first party titles. Yes, there are droughts, because there is a limit to how many titles that Nintendo can create. Handheld games are cheaper, and 2nd and 3rd party titles were able to keep the handhelds alive while Nintendo isn't touching them.
Huh. Wonder how that happened? Is it possible that Pokemon's unique appeal was built around the handheld nature of the console, and resulted in a synergistic effect not replicable with a different system? Nah.
Pokemon launched after GameBoy sales had crashed. GameBoy had been out 8 years when Pokemon launched. The Wii U at Splatoon launch was outselling the GameBoy at Pokemon launch (barely). After the launch of Pokemon GameBoy sales reversed, and were higher than they ever were.
Alright.
