Discussion [The Verge] Tech Fails of 2022: The Nintendo Switch Really Showed Its Age

[woodhead]

The 3DS and Wii shops were not written in Javascript, and are native apps that should have the full system resources yet they suffer even worse speed issues.

I was going to say it’s probably resources as mentioned and that they should rely less heavily on big images but I was just messing with the eShop and it felt much faster than I’d remembered. It’s really not that bad. It also clearly loads some initial data and then slowly loads in images so you can scroll quickly without first waiting for everything to come in. Which seems pretty good to me. The big issue is the initial data which doesn’t feel like a UI issue.


None of their tech stack seems crazy and most if not all those libraries are still used regularly. Only one I’ve had serious issues with is react-router and that’s because I inherited code from a contracting company that used it in the dumbest way imaginable and there is no universe where Nintendo made that same mistake. I’ve also made sites using react-router without those crazy issues. The rest of the libraries I’ve used to make multiple sites with.


I’m actually pretty sure they do use trackers or at least google analytics on all their sites. Not sure what that would do to performance though since I haven’t had to deal with it in my work.

How did we get on this talk anyways? Oh, the slow NSO app. So I was exploring the eShop and the NSO app and had some thoughts on where and why some things are slow but honestly they were behaving speedier than ever for me. Not sure if the hotel internet I’m on is clearly set up better than my home internet or if it’s because I’m in a much less populated area but it’s clear the app can be relatively quick in certain scenarios.

For me the eshop is really slow when scrolling through the sale category. Also happens when my switch is in the dock and connected with LAN. I have a 250 Mbit/s internet connection so that shouldn't be the problem. The more I scroll down the laggier it gets. I also have to wait a few seconds when the next batch of entries needs to be loaded. IMO that shouldn't happen with any modern processor and with any choosen tech stack. But I also have no idea where the issue is coming from. I don't have much experience with web tech, just from a few university courses. I"m mainly a C++ desktop application programmer and if something is slow I would profile it. Don't know if this is also possible with web development. But as you said, the WiiU eshop was also fucking slow so it doesn't look like it's an compiled vs interpreted languages issue.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

The problem with Switch in regards to the eShop and NSO app is its slooowwww Wi-Fi chip. Those apps are glorified web pages and Switch's Wi-Fi speed caps at like 30mbps and the Ethernet port isn't much faster whereas my MacBook from 2013 gets 400mbps over my Wi-Fi and my M2 Mac Air and my new iPhone get 700mbps+ on my Wi-Fi.

The next Switch needs to come equipped with a much better Wi-Fi chip so that cloud gaming and general usability of the store and other web based apps is actually reasonable.

My home Internet maxes out at 15mbps, only recently upgraded from 8. Using eShop on Switch is still a turd compared to using a PC browser.

The maximum framerate of high-end TVs is not a normal benchmark to judge a game's value.

Does 60fps "look like shit" because it's only 1/4 the max rate of 240Hz tvs?

If there was a lot of 240Hz content for it to be compared to? Maybe it would.

30 was a compromise ~25 years ago when shifting to 3D, because they didn't want the majority of content on the 3D systems to look as bare as SNES Star Fox. It's balls that so much content remains stuck at that while resolution has gone up again and again and again and again. Imagine an alternate universe where things had gone the other way, and the latest shift in tech saw games going from 240p480 to 240p960. Bad imbalance.

 

[julian]

For me the eshop is really slow when scrolling through the sale category. Also happens when my switch is in the dock and connected with LAN. I have a 250 Mbit/s internet connection so that shouldn't be the problem. The more I scroll down the laggier it gets. I also have to wait a few seconds when the next batch of entries needs to be loaded. IMO that shouldn't happen with any modern processor and with any choosen tech stack. But I also have no idea where the issue is coming from. I don't have much experience with web tech, just from a few university courses. I"m mainly a C++ desktop application programmer and if something is slow I would profile it. Don't know if this is also possible with web development. But as you said, the WiiU eshop was also fucking slow so it doesn't look like it's a compiled vs interpreted languages issue.

I think it’s a clear mix of…well everything. If you use Netflix on your phone browser, it will have been made with similar tech but it will be much snappier than the eShop. Part of this is how it loads the metadata first and very quickly, then renders the images slowly as it goes, but part of it is also that Netflix screens tend to be limited to a certain amount of data at a time. But if I use Netflix on my “Smart” TV, it will work but it will feel more like the eShop, suggesting processing power is definitely a limitation since my phone almost certainly has more processing power and memory than my TV.

Then there’s the way the actual data comes in. Netflix will get all the relevant results at once and then start streaming in the assets after. The eShop gets a query telling you how many results to expect but then only gets the metadata for the first 20 or so items. This is similar to Amazon. If you go to Amazon on your phone, you can scroll quickly down and you will likely hit a similar pause and loading circle until the next batch of items comes in, just like the eShop. Lots of sites work this way and it makes sense if you want people to keep scrolling rather than refine their search for better results. But it takes too long for the eShop to even get the metadata on the items, which suggests the backend is slow with its queries. Ideally, the eShop should send metadata for all the main screens at once when you load the eShop. It shouldn’t be that big an object since it is just some things like “best sellers” which is 40 whole items (practically nothing), recent releases and coming soon. The Great deals is probably the worst, but this is data Nintendo should have already for each region. But rather than just send you the data you need to start seeing info, it seems to query for it over and over again.

Then there’s the slowness as you scroll, which suggests they are not virtualizing the list. So rather than garbage collect the hundreds of images it queried for that you have scrolled past, it keeps them in memory slowing the whole thing down the more you query for. It also keeps some information for the various screens you’ve already visited which can make it even slower. This is a front end issue. More resources would obviously be better but honestly they should learn to work with what they have.

I dunno. Those are my best guesses without being able to actually look at the queries. Maybe if I’m bored later I can try to see how they actually do everything- if there even is a way for me to check.

 

[Deleted member 2]

My home Internet maxes out at 15mbps, only recently upgraded from 8. Using eShop on Switch is still a turd compared to using a PC browser.

If there was a lot of 240Hz content for it to be compared to? Maybe it would.

30 was a compromise ~25 years ago when shifting to 3D, because they didn't want the majority of content on the 3D systems to look as bare as SNES Star Fox. It's balls that so much content remains stuck at that while resolution has gone up again and again and again and again. Imagine an alternate universe where things had gone the other way, and the latest shift in tech saw games going from 240p480 to 240p960. Bad imbalance.

I just..... can't understand this way of thinking. It's so foreign to me. Do retro games on the NES / SNES look like utter shit to you or something?

 

[DittoM]

Imagine an alternate universe where things had gone the other way, and the latest shift in tech saw games going from 240p480 to 240p960. Bad imbalance.

That’s because no one can feel the difference between 60 and really anything over that. With resolution you can absolutely see a difference. Especially since “60 fps” doesn’t sell to a mass market unlike 4K resolution.

 

[Raccoon]

That’s because no one can feel the difference between 60 and really anything over that. With resolution you can absolutely see a difference. Especially since “60 fps” doesn’t sell to a mass market unlike 4K resolution.

personally I can much more reliably discern 30 and 60 fps than 1080p and 4K and I imagine most people would have an easier time with 60 vs 120 than 4K vs 8K

 

[BotenAnna]

That’s because no one can feel the difference between 60 and really anything over that. With resolution you can absolutely see a difference. Especially since “60 fps” doesn’t sell to a mass market unlike 4K resolution.

Excuse me what

 

[DittoM]

personally I can much more reliably discern 30 and 60 fps than 1080p and 4K and I imagine most people would have an easier time with 60 vs 120 than 4K vs 8K

I said 60fps and anything above it like 120. Though I also don’t know any benchmark for the amount of people who play games that can say they notice that a game is 60. I don’t really imagine the average person bringing their game from GameStop to the register and asking the cashier whether the game is 60fps or not.

I don’t disagree that people can easier tell the difference between 60 and 120fps than 4K and 8K, but mostly because of diminishing returns and the fact that 8K isn’t really a thing yet.

 

[Deformed_Lunchbox]

I truly do expect to be disappointed, yes. I also think it will just be an absolutely idiotic decision. Like such a dumb business decision I can't think of a more recent, dumber one. You got a near 30 million seller, most anticipated, likely GOTY contender sequel to one of the great reviewed games of all time that began the Switch's run 6 years ago. I just...I just cannot understand. Does not compute.

I think the WiiU name, branding and first year release calendar are worse, lol.

But yeah we never know with Nintendo. So many people are just clamouring for a more powerful Switch, they really could improve the specs and have another massive success on their hands. They aren’t so dense to not see they are falling behind in performance specs and it’s really hurting reviews and certainly making it more difficult for developers and future proofing their efforts.

I just don’t grasp a better game to position new hardware with than ToTK. It’s their most hyped game ever, and even if the Switch 2.0 performance boost is minimal, from a business decision that pairing would almost guarantee the launch success of Switch. I don’t think a new 3D Mario would even carry such gravitas.

And as many point out the 100million Switch owners — well the game would still come to Switch, but also be used to sell Switch 2.0’s.
And weirder yet that they’d release their biggest tentpole game ever, and then release new hardware within 6-12 months later, which wouldn’t really position ToTK as anything more than a last gen game. Imagine BOTW came to WiiU 6-12 months before it came for Switch’s launch?

Even if we assume Switch 2.0 is backwards compatible, why release one of their biggest evergreen titles on hardware with a downward sales trajectory. It would be a bone headed decision all around I agree. Even if Switch 2.0 comes lates and it’s still a massive success, I struggle to think of a more golden opportunity and one they had ample time to see coming.

We can discuss this until the cows come home, and I know it’s always good to steer on the side of caution with Nintendo expectations — but I still fully predict and expect the Switch 2.0 to come with ToTK. I think it’ll be unveiled with ToTK, probably in the next few months.

I actually think ToTK was delayed specifically to align with Switch 2.0. And I think we’ll be playing it in 4k/60. God I hope lol

 

[Deleted member 2]

I truly do expect to be disappointed, yes. I also think it will just be an absolutely idiotic decision. Like such a dumb business decision I can't think of a more recent, dumber one. You got a near 30 million seller, most anticipated, likely GOTY contender sequel to one of the great reviewed games of all time that began the Switch's run 6 years ago. I just...I just cannot understand. Does not compute.

I think you're a little worked up over something that probably would be a result of things outside of nintendo's control

It's a bit of a reach to believe Nintendo's sitting around deciding whether to release the next Switch with TotK or to hold off on it for later this year or next year

 

[Chaos Theory]

Makes me wonder whether Nintendo are gonna yet again fuck up another system launch. Been a long time since they’ve had two successful systems in a row, and the thought of the next system launching four years before the sequel to TotK is due is pretty lol.

 

[Tentacle-tropes]

I think the WiiU name, branding and first year release calendar are worse, lol.

But yeah we never know with Nintendo. So many people are just clamouring for a more powerful Switch, they really could improve the specs and have another massive success on their hands. They aren’t so dense to not see they are falling behind in performance specs and it’s really hurting reviews and certainly making it more difficult for developers and future proofing their efforts.

I just don’t grasp a better game to position new hardware with than ToTK. It’s their most hyped game ever, and even if the Switch 2.0 performance boost is minimal, from a business decision that pairing would almost guarantee the launch success of Switch. I don’t think a new 3D Mario would even carry such gravitas.

And as many point out the 100million Switch owners — well the game would still come to Switch, but also be used to sell Switch 2.0’s.
And weirder yet that they’d release their biggest tentpole game ever, and then release new hardware within 6-12 months later, which wouldn’t really position ToTK as anything more than a last gen game. Imagine BOTW came to WiiU 6-12 months before it came for Switch’s launch?

Even if we assume Switch 2.0 is backwards compatible, why release one of their biggest evergreen titles on hardware with a downward sales trajectory. It would be a bone headed decision all around I agree. Even if Switch 2.0 comes lates and it’s still a massive success, I struggle to think of a more golden opportunity and one they had ample time to see coming.

We can discuss this until the cows come home, and I know it’s always good to steer on the side of caution with Nintendo expectations — but I still fully predict and expect the Switch 2.0 to come with ToTK. I think it’ll be unveiled with ToTK, probably in the next few months.

I actually think ToTK was delayed specifically to align with Switch 2.0. And I think we’ll be playing it in 4k/60. God I hope lol

It really isn’t that boneheaded of a decision. Drake will be successful with or without ToTK, there is too much momentum heading into that launch. Having ToTK at launch is a redundancy especially if they cannot procure enough stock. You can always sell people on an upgrade or an enhanced port of the game around the holiday season. Thus there is no need to pair the two together; the differences between WiiU-Switch to Switch-Drake are very stark.

ToTK comes out in early May. They can’t wait that much longer to unveil new hardware. February is probably the last month for any unveil.

Makes me wonder whether Nintendo are gonna yet again fuck up another system launch. Been a long time since they’ve had two successful systems in a row, and the thought of the next system launching four years before the sequel to TotK is due is pretty lol.

Unless Nintendo completely botches generations &/or switches to different hardware; I’m not seeing how they would screw up another launch.

 

[EricTheGamerman]

I think the WiiU name, branding and first year release calendar are worse, lol.

But yeah we never know with Nintendo. So many people are just clamouring for a more powerful Switch, they really could improve the specs and have another massive success on their hands. They aren’t so dense to not see they are falling behind in performance specs and it’s really hurting reviews and certainly making it more difficult for developers and future proofing their efforts.

I just don’t grasp a better game to position new hardware with than ToTK. It’s their most hyped game ever, and even if the Switch 2.0 performance boost is minimal, from a business decision that pairing would almost guarantee the launch success of Switch. I don’t think a new 3D Mario would even carry such gravitas.

And as many point out the 100million Switch owners — well the game would still come to Switch, but also be used to sell Switch 2.0’s.
And weirder yet that they’d release their biggest tentpole game ever, and then release new hardware within 6-12 months later, which wouldn’t really position ToTK as anything more than a last gen game. Imagine BOTW came to WiiU 6-12 months before it came for Switch’s launch?

Even if we assume Switch 2.0 is backwards compatible, why release one of their biggest evergreen titles on hardware with a downward sales trajectory. It would be a bone headed decision all around I agree. Even if Switch 2.0 comes lates and it’s still a massive success, I struggle to think of a more golden opportunity and one they had ample time to see coming.

We can discuss this until the cows come home, and I know it’s always good to steer on the side of caution with Nintendo expectations — but I still fully predict and expect the Switch 2.0 to come with ToTK. I think it’ll be unveiled with ToTK, probably in the next few months.

I actually think ToTK was delayed specifically to align with Switch 2.0. And I think we’ll be playing it in 4k/60. God I hope lol

Next few months? My friend, ToTK is 4 months and 5 days from its release date. We're officially in a shorter period between reveal and release than the OG Switch when Nintendo had every reason to rush that system excessively. We're getting to the point where a new Switch coming out would be one of the most insane turnarounds from announcement to release. Like, coming into the type of territory where you're practically shadow dropping the brand new next generation console.

And I just don't buy that as Nintendo's move on any level. Zelda is not the only thing that can drive sales on a Nintendo console by any means. Mario Odyssey has sold 23 million copies on its own, so I do think 3D Mario can totally push a new console. Especially if it's a big upgrade over the Switch that lets you conveniently play more modern games and Nintendo has a bunch of other releases to steadily roll out for it.

I feel like BOTW lowkey has made people forget Zelda was never the insane seller launch day game that sold a system until the Switch. Yes you had Twilight Princess, but Wii Sports was THE title to make people buy a Wii. It was Mario all throughout the first three generations and people have shown themselves to be hungry for good Nintendo content on a good console across the whole Switch generation. TotK is an important and big game, but it's not the end all/be all for Nintendo.

Like the original Xbox and its brand is a good example of a console defined by one game with Halo and it didn't even launch on the 360 til two full years after the system's launch.

 

[Imitatio]

I think it's just a tad funny how the discussion largely evolves around Nintendo's prior home console generational transitions as an indicator for how the Switch will fare, while their very successful handheld console history is being ignored in many arguments within this thread. Those who want to make an actually good argument for or against the successful generational transition will have to take the handheld line into consideration as well, otherwise you're off the mark already.

 

[ViewtifulCereza]

I mean after 6 years it's time like most consoles.

 

[Herb Alpert]

I think it's just a tad funny how the discussion largely evolves around Nintendo's prior home console generational transitions as an indicator for how the Switch will fare, while their very successful handheld console history is being ignored in many arguments within this thread. Those who want to make an actually good argument for or against the successful generational transition will have to take the handheld line into consideration as well, otherwise you're off the mark already.

I kinda agree, but DS to 3DS wasn't a walk in the Park either...

 

[Eclissi]

Next few months? My friend, ToTK is 4 months and 5 days from its release date. We're officially in a shorter period between reveal and release than the OG Switch when Nintendo had every reason to rush that system excessively. We're getting to the point where a new Switch coming out would be one of the most insane turnarounds from announcement to release. Like, coming into the type of territory where you're practically shadow dropping the brand new next generation console.

And I just don't buy that as Nintendo's move on any level. Zelda is not the only thing that can drive sales on a Nintendo console by any means. Mario Odyssey has sold 23 million copies on its own, so I do think 3D Mario can totally push a new console. Especially if it's a big upgrade over the Switch that lets you conveniently play more modern games and Nintendo has a bunch of other releases to steadily roll out for it.

I feel like BOTW lowkey has made people forget Zelda was never the insane seller launch day game that sold a system until the Switch. Yes you had Twilight Princess, but Wii Sports was THE title to make people buy a Wii. It was Mario all throughout the first three generations and people have shown themselves to be hungry for good Nintendo content on a good console across the whole Switch generation. TotK is an important and big game, but it's not the end all/be all for Nintendo.

Like the original Xbox and its brand is a good example of a console defined by one game with Halo and it didn't even launch on the 360 til two full years after the system's launch.

Correct.

But why would Nintendo waste the opportunity to launch a console with a ready-made killer application? With Switch they didn't waste it and launched the console together with BotW...
If "Switch 2" was close I wouldn't understand this choice, honestly.

 

[Imitatio]

I kinda agree, but DS to 3DS wasn't a walk in the Park either...

Oh, absolutely, it was not. But we're talking about very different proportions, then, and very different market dynamics and effects that are crucial to the platform's launch and all that it entails. I'm not advocating for simply applying the handheld line-up's success to the Switch and its potential successor and calling it a day; but not keeping that market segment in mind, doesn't do the Switch successor talk justice, either. That's my main point here.
Obviously we can't just assume that, because the Switch is also a handheld, its successor basically will automatically sell well - so yeah, bringing up the 3DS isn't wrong, but it's also only part of the picture.

 

[EricTheGamerman]

Correct.

But why would Nintendo waste the opportunity to launch a console with a ready-made killer application? With Switch they didn't waste it and launched the console together with BotW...
If "Switch 2" was close I wouldn't understand this choice, honestly.

That's my point. Why is Zelda the only killer-app people can think of when historically Mario carried that weight fine, and more often than not in the history of consoles any number of things can carry a console to great heights if it gets strong support out of the gate with a solid brand name and exciting premise. If they don't launch in May, they can have a ready-made killer application with Mario or Mario Kart or whatever they have on deck.

With Switch they had to bet everything on the console because the Wii U (AKA one of their main income sources) was cratered and not coming back to life. They had to rush and come out swinging harder than ever. They knew they had a great game and they knew throwing it out to only the Wii U was not a lucrative move when no one owned one and they weren't going to buy a 4 year old failure console to play it.

Zelda is not the only killer-app Nintendo has. Until BOTW, it was never seen as the end all, be all to console launches. As long as you got a quality Zelda game on your system, people would come to it as well. I don't think BOTW3 in 2027 or whatever lets say 3 years into the Switch 2 would be a bad thing if in the lead-up Nintendo released tons and tons of great software alongside the continued just ease of the Switch concept bringing third party ports. To play a big game on the go alongside your favorite Nintendo titles is the selling point on its own. More of that will hep push the Switch 2.

It doesn't have to be Zelda, it can be other titles. And as long as Nintendo gets a strong year one, I don't think it matters too much.

 

[Tentacle-tropes]

Correct.

But why would Nintendo waste the opportunity to launch a console with a ready-made killer application? With Switch they didn't waste it and launched the console together with BotW...
If "Switch 2" was close I wouldn't understand this choice, honestly.

What is there to waste? The differences in scenarios between the WiiU-Switch & Switch-Drake are vast. If Drake follows some of the patterns we are seeing with PS/Xbox then what exactly is Zelda doing at launch that it couldn’t do later as an enhanced port.

 

[Deformed_Lunchbox]

It really isn’t that boneheaded of a decision. Drake will be successful with or without ToTK, there is too much momentum heading into that launch. Having ToTK at launch is a redundancy especially if they cannot procure enough stock. You can always sell people on an upgrade or an enhanced port of the game around the holiday season. Thus there is no need to pair the two together; the differences between WiiU-Switch to Switch-Drake are very stark.

ToTK comes out in early May. They can’t wait that much longer to unveil new hardware. February is probably the last month for any unveil.

Unless Nintendo completely botches generations &/or switches to different hardware; I’m not seeing how they would screw up another launch.

I agree with everything you've said, some of my frothing desire for Switch 2.0 is just to experience a brand new Zelda in unseen fidelity on brand new hardware.

I also just don't quite know why people are so sure they won't do it. Switch 1.0 was announced in October, fully unveiled in January, and released in early March. It was a tight turn-around. For them to announce Switch 2.0 in January-March with a May release would be the status quo.

Not to mention we've had Switch upgrade rumours going on two years, and somehow everyone is so burnt out on the rumours not coming true, they don't think Nintendo will follow the footsteps of their mega successful launches of Wii and Switch alongside brand new Zelda games.

I think ToTK and Nintendo will be fine regardless of their decision, I'm just in camp faithful here.

 

[Tentacle-tropes]

I agree with everything you've said, some of my frothing desire for Switch 2.0 is just to experience a brand new Zelda in unseen fidelity on brand new hardware.

I also just don't quite know why people are so sure they won't do it. Switch 1.0 was announced in October, fully unveiled in January, and released in early March. It was a tight turn-around. For them to announce Switch 2.0 in January-March with a May release would be the status quo.

Not to mention we've had Switch upgrade rumours going on two years, and somehow everyone is so burnt out on the rumours not coming true, they don't think Nintendo will follow the footsteps of their mega successful launches of Wii and Switch alongside brand new Zelda games.

I think ToTK and Nintendo will be fine regardless of their decision, I'm just in camp faithful here.

For me personally I’m skeptical for a few reasons. Mind you they still could do a short reveal but I’m not sure people are gonna like the implications. I also think the scenarios for which Switch finds itself in now are not really comparable to the other times Nintendo has used Zelda.

 

[Aether]

Well my switch is showing its age. Sticks are making problems again, housing is creaking and starts falling appart, battery is not as solid as it was in the start.

=P

That's my point. Why is Zelda the only killer-app people can think of when historically Mario carried that weight fine, and more often than not in the history of consoles any number of things can carry a console to great heights if it gets strong support out of the gate with a solid brand name and exciting premise. If they don't launch in May, they can have a ready-made killer application with Mario or Mario Kart or whatever they have on deck.

With Switch they had to bet everything on the console because the Wii U (AKA one of their main income sources) was cratered and not coming back to life. They had to rush and come out swinging harder than ever. They knew they had a great game and they knew throwing it out to only the Wii U was not a lucrative move when no one owned one and they weren't going to buy a 4 year old failure console to play it.

Zelda is not the only killer-app Nintendo has. Until BOTW, it was never seen as the end all, be all to console launches. As long as you got a quality Zelda game on your system, people would come to it as well. I don't think BOTW3 in 2027 or whatever lets say 3 years into the Switch 2 would be a bad thing if in the lead-up Nintendo released tons and tons of great software alongside the continued just ease of the Switch concept bringing third party ports. To play a big game on the go alongside your favorite Nintendo titles is the selling point on its own. More of that will hep push the Switch 2.

It doesn't have to be Zelda, it can be other titles. And as long as Nintendo gets a strong year one, I don't think it matters too much.

It can be others.

Zelda is just a perfect cross section:

	Zelda	Mario
Has a ton of fans that will buy a console for it	X	X
has a huge fanbase thats crossing barriers (gender,...)	X	X
Has such a big scope / such an artstyle that it can be obvious even on a small screen what the new console can do more	X	~ (no such vast/dense worlds)
is in the cross section between cartoon and "realistic" fantasy	X	-
audience is slightly older on average (more disposable income)	X	~
is the higher prestige ip (games media push)	X	~

So yeah, im confident that Zelda would be the better launch title. Metroid Prime 4 would also be a good candidate, but...
its not mainstream enough, to "mature". MK would obviously be huge, but with the DLC there is no chance that we get MK9. DK? not big enough.
Smash/pokemon? no chance. also no Animal Crossing (and i don't think that it would sell systems in the launch period without another lockdown).

So if its not Zelda... it probably is Mario. Zelda is still the better choice in my book.

 

[karmitt]

The next 3D/Open-Air Zelda won’t hit until 2028 earliest unless Nintendo’s expanded the team significantly to release them more often. Development on the new platform isn’t going to be any less demanding as the team seeks to take advantage of new tech and look great in 4K.

I’m tired of arguing for it as the ideal launch title. I just know if I have to wait that long to experience a new 3D Zelda game on new hardware I’ll be exceptionally bummed.