dazzybee Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 I still think party chat won't be a thing on the Switch. I look at the Switch video and I see a company still pushing for those local multiplayer experiences. With it also being a handheld, I can't see Nintendo being bothered about online functionality and features that much. Surely they realise it doesn't have to be one or the other. They must see the success of online games (even their biggest games are online now - kart, smash, splat, maker).
Hero-of-Time Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 Surely they realise it doesn't have to be one or the other. They must see the success of online games (even their biggest games are online now - kart, smash, splat, maker). Thing is, they should have seen just how popular online gaming was last generation but it didn't stop the Wii U from being borked in terms of online functions. I honestly just think it's something they aren't really fussed about.
Rummy Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 I still think party chat won't be a thing on the Switch. I look at the Switch video and I see a company still pushing for those local multiplayer experiences. With it also being a handheld, I can't see Nintendo being bothered about online functionality and features that much. With a number of other things looking like they're moving in the right direction - I just can't believe or accept quite yet that they won't go forwards for party chat as a minimum, and online voice chat hopefully as a standard on par with competition. It's going to be interesting to see and possibly a real deal breaker for me - imo if they manage to implement something on par with the competition this system will fly off the shelves; if they leave it out then it'll have a modest performance outdoing the WiiU but ultimately end up hindered by being behind a very current and still evolving curve that's a standard expectation. I'd like to hope/think they won't just implement, but at the same time do a classic bit of Nintendo magic and even jump beyond it, but they're still Nintendo and I'm still wary given a lot of their decisions in the last gen or two. /RetroDreams
Clownferret Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 The problem with the party games is how they run and what they offer. If 3rd party games are ones that I have already played on the PS4, come out the same time and run worse, or have borked online functions then these will be a bust for me. I think the only 3rd party games I will likely pick up on the Switch are ones that are exclusive. While I do appreciate that you will be able to have these games both as a console game and a handheld game, I can't see them running as good as they do on the PS4 or Xbox. Plus, I gotta keep my trophy count going. Well that's the million dollar question that will decide the fate of Switch. Would you prefer a static but enchanced version of a game or a mobile but downgraded version of a game.
Hero-of-Time Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 Well that's the million dollar question that will decide the fate of Switch.Would you prefer a static but enchanced version of a game or a mobile but downgraded version of a game. I imagine the Switch will do very well over in Japan, where they will no doubt want the latter option. As for the rest of the world? At this point it's hard to say.
dazzybee Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 I imagine the Switch will do very well over in Japan, where they will no doubt want the latter option. As for the rest of the world? At this point it's hard to say. Still think that even as a Nintendo device it'll do well, the line up of games will (Presumably) be so far beyond wii u. Even if it has a gimped online and rubbish 3rd parties, that line up of games is enough to attract a much wider group of people, especially if it's £200.
Hero-of-Time Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 Still think that even as a Nintendo device it'll do well, the line up of games will (Presumably) be so far beyond wii u. Even if it has a gimped online and rubbish 3rd parties, that line up of games is enough to attract a much wider group of people, especially if it's £200. The price, if the rumours are true, should be appealing to more people, however, we've seen with the Wii U that great Nintendo software isn't enough to draw people towards their home console. If that were the case then the Wii U would have been fine. Gimped online and shoddy 3rd party support isn't going to sit well with a lot of people. As for the expanded audience, it may not bother them but they have been proven to be very fickle and can't be relied upon in the long run.
Clownferret Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 I guess it will do 3DS type numbers as it is in effect Nintendo's next handheld device. I'll buy one purely for the portability aspect. If I know I've got a slow day at the office I can take it with me plus flights and long car journeys it will be priceless for the kids. Looking forward TL hearing about the other functions that have not been revealed yet.
liger05 Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 (edited) Skyrim confirmed? What do you think of the Switch, Nintendo's newly announced console that is portable but also hooks up to your TV? I love it. I got to play it. I will tell you – well, maybe that's an N.D.A. thing. One of the best demos I've ever seen. Probably the best demo I've ever seen. At E3. Was it a Nintendo game? I mean the device itself. I think it's really smart what they're doing. We're definitely going to be supporting it. It's the first time we've done something on Nintendo. If you don't count the old NES stuff. Home Alone. Or Where's Waldo? Can you really bring Skyrim with you on the go? It's the same game on the TV and on the other screen. http://www.glixel.com/interviews/skyrim-creator-todd-howard-talks-switch-vr-and-elder-scrolls-wait-w451761 Nintendo really had that NDA locked in tight considering people got to see and play it at E3. Starting to think Jan 12th will get some real tasty software announcements. There is something unique about this system that we still don't know about. Edited November 21, 2016 by liger05
Hero-of-Time Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 Ronnie has used the football icon. FIFA confirmed for Switch!!
liger05 Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 (edited) I'm intrigued by the 'best E3 demo ever' comment. Surely that doesn't mean just performance wise of a particular game. Expecting the system should be pretty slick and the transition between home and taking the game on the move to be impressive. Edited November 21, 2016 by liger05
Ronnie Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 Ronnie has used the football icon. FIFA confirmed for Switch!! Only because there's no rugby icon
liger05 Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 (edited) “It’s largely a hardware thing,” Bethesda VP of PR Pete Hines told Joystiq at QuakeCon, discussing why Elder Scrolls Online, Wolfenstein: The New Order and The Evil Within would all be skipping the Wii U. ”None of the game’s we’ve announced are being developed for the Wii U, so it’s guaranteed that none of those games are coming to Wii U,” Hines says his companies goal is to “make the games that we want to make, on whatever platforms will support them as developed.” Quite the 360 from Bethesda. Looks like Nintendo actually produced a console which is in the right ballpark power wise. Now just get GTA V and RR2 on it. Edited November 21, 2016 by liger05
dazzybee Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 The price, if the rumours are true, should be appealing to more people, however, we've seen with the Wii U that great Nintendo software isn't enough to draw people towards their home console. If that were the case then the Wii U would have been fine. Gimped online and shoddy 3rd party support isn't going to sit well with a lot of people. As for the expanded audience, it may not bother them but they have been proven to be very fickle and can't be relied upon in the long run. but is it the same? Wii u launched with nsmb and Nintendo land, switch with Mario, Mario rpg, maybe splatoon. Within the first 6 months it's getting an insane librarian the Wii u never got. It's getting a big Zelda which the Wii u never got. Plus it may be cheaper. I don't think it's comparable (if rumours are led to be believed)
Falcon_BlizZACK Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 but is it the same? Wii u launched with nsmb and Nintendo land, switch with Mario, Mario rpg, maybe splatoon. Within the first 6 months it's getting an insane librarian the Wii u never got. It's getting a big Zelda which the Wii u never got. Plus it may be cheaper. I don't think it's comparable (if rumours are led to be believed) Yeah it's not the same. I got the Wii U day one - Assasins Creed, Nintendoland and Sonic Transformed Racing were the only games that I were playing for what seems like four months. The Wii U is a bad example to use as a guide to how future Nintendo consoles will sell - everything Nintendo has said and what has been leaked is showing Nintendo understands this. Wii U's top quality first party games came too late - at a time when the audience felt the console had nothing to offer due to its lack lustre launch and launch window, as well as the supposed confusion of the gamepad and an over reliance on platformers.
Sheikah Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 but is it the same? Wii u launched with nsmb and Nintendo land, switch with Mario, Mario rpg, maybe splatoon. Within the first 6 months it's getting an insane librarian the Wii u never got. It's getting a big Zelda which the Wii u never got. Plus it may be cheaper. I don't think it's comparable (if rumours are led to be believed) Thanked for the insane librarian.
liger05 Posted November 22, 2016 Posted November 22, 2016 Yeah it's not the same. I got the Wii U day one - Assasins Creed, Nintendoland and Sonic Transformed Racing were the only games that I were playing for what seems like four months. The Wii U is a bad example to use as a guide to how future Nintendo consoles will sell - everything Nintendo has said and what has been leaked is showing Nintendo understands this. Wii U's top quality first party games came too late - at a time when the audience felt the console had nothing to offer due to its lack lustre launch and launch window, as well as the supposed confusion of the gamepad and an over reliance on platformers. Agree. I had wii u day 1 and from Jan 13 till past Easter from what I remember it was brutal. There were no games. Not forgetting the gamepad was horrible to use as well as the wii u os being slow and a chore to navigate.
Rummy Posted November 22, 2016 Posted November 22, 2016 Is he an orang-utan by any chance? but is it the same? Wii u launched with nsmb and Nintendo land, switch with Mario, Mario rpg, maybe splatoon. Within the first 6 months it's getting an insane librarian the Wii u never got.It's getting a big Zelda which the Wii u never got.Plus it may be cheaper. I don't think it's comparable (if rumours are led to be believed) Did you seriously just try and make that point completely un-ironically?? I thought just a few posts ago you were 'saying the same thing' as H-o-T when he was expressing his concerns on how much content for Switch will actually be new compared to re-utilised Wii U content!!
Hero-of-Time Posted November 22, 2016 Posted November 22, 2016 but is it the same? Wii u launched with nsmb and Nintendo land, switch with Mario, Mario rpg, maybe splatoon. Within the first 6 months it's getting an insane librarian the Wii u never got. It's getting a big Zelda which the Wii u never got. Plus it may be cheaper. I don't think it's comparable (if rumours are led to be believed) While I agree the Wii U launch period was very lacking ( Monster Hunter saved it for me ), the point I was trying to make is that Nintendo's own output may not be enough to sway everyone. If you look at the Wii U line up as it is now, it has a fantastic selection of Nintendo games, some of which are arguably the best in their respective series. Despite this line up people still didn't flock to the system. Granted, the damage was probably already done by the time all these games arrived but it still points at a Nintendo box not being enough to grab everyone's attention. I believe there has to be a number of other things that go right for it, such as strong 3rd party support and a good online setup. The counter argument to this is the 3DS. The online for the handheld isn't great and although there is a strong 3rd party support from Japan it's still very much a Nintendo games driven device. Despite these things it still managed to do very well in todays market. Of course, the handheld market and the home console market are very different but Nintendo have been saying that the Switch is their next home console. It will be interesting to see which way this sways once all is said and done.
Clownferret Posted November 22, 2016 Posted November 22, 2016 I have to disagree with the Wii U software comments. I had already sold my 360 by the time the Wii U was released so I didn't have the option of buying games on another console but I had over 20 games within a few months of release.
liger05 Posted November 22, 2016 Posted November 22, 2016 I have to disagree with the Wii U software comments. I had already sold my 360 by the time the Wii U was released so I didn't have the option of buying games on another console but I had over 20 games within a few months of release. Iwata even apologized for the lack of games: "Nintendo takes seriously its responsibility to offer a steady stream of new titles in the very early days of a new platform to establish a good lineup of software," Iwata said. "On the other hand, we also firmly believe we have to offer quality experiences when we release new titles. Based on our software development schedules at the end of last year, we concluded we should spend a little more time to satisfy our Nintendo standard of quality. I apologize to those supporting Wii U about the lack of titles in January and February."
Dcubed Posted November 22, 2016 Posted November 22, 2016 (edited) These ports are quite frankly, the sensible thing to do. Not only does it give these games a second chance at life, but it's also the only realistic way that they can get a broad number of and a wide variety of games out during such a short timeframe. They really need to explode out of the gate with Switch and they're basically having to do it on their own (save for three games from 3rd parties that we know are coming any time soon. These being Skyrim Switch, Monster Hunter Cross Generations and Rabbids Meet Mario RPG Boogaloo). How else could they possibly do it? HD games take too long to make and take up too many resources for them to fill the launch window with anything else. They have no choice but to salvage as much as possible from Wii U (be it ports of released games, or ports of cancelled and upcoming games, like Pikmin 4 and Zelda BOTW). Hell, it's not even just Nintendo! Just look at the PS4 and Xbone and other 3rd parties. A large chunk of (and in many cases, the majority) of their respective recent outputs comes in the form of ports and re-masters of older games. Why? Simple. Because new games take too long to make, they need to fill their software schedule somehow. At least here, they're adding new content to each of them so that they're not just straight ports. They've got something new to offer to people, even to people who've played their original versions before. Edited November 22, 2016 by Dcubed
dazzybee Posted November 22, 2016 Posted November 22, 2016 Is he an orang-utan by any chance? Did you seriously just try and make that point completely un-ironically?? I thought just a few posts ago you were 'saying the same thing' as H-o-T when he was expressing his concerns on how much content for Switch will actually be new compared to re-utilised Wii U content!! The difference is it isn't out on Wii U , people haven't paid for it and played it. I don' think Hero is bothered about Zelda being a Wii U game, that's still new to us. While I agree the Wii U launch period was very lacking ( Monster Hunter saved it for me ), the point I was trying to make is that Nintendo's own output may not be enough to sway everyone. If you look at the Wii U line up as it is now, it has a fantastic selection of Nintendo games, some of which are arguably the best in their respective series. Despite this line up people still didn't flock to the system. Granted, the damage was probably already done by the time all these games arrived but it still points at a Nintendo box not being enough to grab everyone's attention. I believe there has to be a number of other things that go right for it, such as strong 3rd party support and a good online setup. The counter argument to this is the 3DS. The online for the handheld isn't great and although there is a strong 3rd party support from Japan it's still very much a Nintendo games driven device. Despite these things it still managed to do very well in todays market. Of course, the handheld market and the home console market are very different but Nintendo have been saying that the Switch is their next home console. It will be interesting to see which way this sways once all is said and done. Oh yeah, I don't think it guarantees it either, but I think the line up is so good, it'll do well; plus the handed and home console hybrid appealing to different people could be a big factor. Who knows. I mean I think Nintendo have learned a lot, so remain hopeful it'll be a huge step forward on that front - I mean it has a specific share button so it must be doing more than a quick link to miiverse (Expect this line to be require on Jan 12th when Kimishima announces "the new share button, instantly takes you to miiverse!"). Whatever happens I think Switch will do really well. How well depends on how much Nintendo has modernised.
Hero-of-Time Posted November 22, 2016 Posted November 22, 2016 Hell, it's not even just Nintendo! Just look at the PS4 and Xbone and other 3rd parties. A large chunk of (and in many cases, the majority) of their respective recent outputs comes in the form of ports and re-masters of older games. Why? Simple. Because new games take too long to make, they need to fill their software schedule somehow. While I don't disagree with this argument ( I was waiting for someone to bring it up ), at least with the other 2 consoles you have a large selection of other games coming out, both retail and download. These remasters fill in the gaps nicely. With Nintendo there is a strong possibility that they will be the only ones supporting their device in a meaningful way, which means this games could end up being tent pole releases rather than being filler games. I have no issue with remasters and ports. I'll happily buy them if they do appeal to me, especially if there is new substantial content, which looks to be the case with some of these Switch games. The danger is when your console line up is the majority of games which have been ported. Again, it's a bit rough on those who played them all on the Wii U. Speaking of ports, a point which RFN brought up in this weeks episode is that there is a very strong possibility that we could see 3 versions of Super Mario Maker in the space of a year and a half. That's insane.
Recommended Posts