On March 07 2017 06:51 chocorush wrote: Those numbers just don't look right for the 3DSXL. You also have to add in the extra 2 inches or so on the switch because you're probably attaching the controllers.
3DSXL numbers taken from Amazon. Switch numbers taken from Nintendo's website, marked as joycon attached.
Form factor is comparable to the 3DS XL, the dealbreakers are the price and battery life. If both can get into the same ballpark as a 3DS, I could see it being a feasible replacement. As is, the system probably needs to come down ~$100 and up at least an hour on battery life.
On March 07 2017 05:06 Faruko wrote: people expecting a tablet size gaming device based on mobile SoC without external cooling to be as strong as a dedicated cooled system is beyond me tbh.
Of course it was going to be underpowered compared to normal consoles.
Anyway, power doesnt really matter honestly as long as the support is there, sales seems to be pretty good so that should push 3rd developers to put their games on switch, besides a few developers, most of them dont really care about dropping settings if they can put their game in a device that can make them money
For people that care about the console war, nothing will be good enough unless it can grab the 3rd party multiplats, which the Switch probably won't be able to do.
The console war is more about bragging rights than having something usable. Enthusiasts can be strange sometimes. It's a different target market than we are and I'm hoping Nintendo doesn't go after those guys.
The majority of consumers shouldn't care which PC-wannabe console is 2nd place on 3rd party multiplatform titles. I really don't get the people that have both a PS4 and an Xbox One and want the Switch to be more of the same. I guess some people like to throw their money around.
That's because people don't have a PS4 and an XB1 unless they have a lot of disposable income. So in the end, they need to make a choice. That is what creates the console war. If it comes down to buying a console they check the boxes of "does it play all the multiplats" and "do I prefer their exclusives."
I've been of the mind for a long time that Nintendo products are a perfect companion piece for the general console buying public. Their 1st party stuff is top notch and since they skim on specs, they tend to have cheaper prices which makes buying a second platform more accessible. But people haven't been buying in that pattern for a long time so it isn't a prevailing thought. Now it's "The new Nintendo thing can't play multiplats? Well, that's one strike for that and now all those games are counted as exclusives against Nintendo."
I feel like the thing the switch can, and hopefully will, do though is capture a lot of more semi-indie scene interest. It seems like a great companion to a PC-only house.
The sort of things I want to play on a handheld are games like metroidvanias (Ori and the Blind forest for example), platformers, or twin stick shooters. Some of these could run on the 3ds for sure, but some push things a bit further and would look nicer with the higher resolution.
The other group are the more modest/subdued/stylized 3d games like The Witness, Firewatch, or even something like Astroneer maybe.
The big difference from what I can tell is the Switch, in addition to being a bit more powerful than a traditional handheld at the expense of portability, is an easier architecture to develop and port to which means a higher chance of multi-plat titles. Not from AAA 3D big devs maybe, but from a whole mid range of titles.
It works doubly in that case because those are the type of titles I want to be able to sit around on the couch (or in bed) and play rather than sitting at my PC.
On March 07 2017 05:06 Faruko wrote: people expecting a tablet size gaming device based on mobile SoC without external cooling to be as strong as a dedicated cooled system is beyond me tbh.
Of course it was going to be underpowered compared to normal consoles.
Anyway, power doesnt really matter honestly as long as the support is there, sales seems to be pretty good so that should push 3rd developers to put their games on switch, besides a few developers, most of them dont really care about dropping settings if they can put their game in a device that can make them money
For people that care about the console war, nothing will be good enough unless it can grab the 3rd party multiplats, which the Switch probably won't be able to do.
The console war is more about bragging rights than having something usable. Enthusiasts can be strange sometimes. It's a different target market than we are and I'm hoping Nintendo doesn't go after those guys.
The majority of consumers shouldn't care which PC-wannabe console is 2nd place on 3rd party multiplatform titles. I really don't get the people that have both a PS4 and an Xbox One and want the Switch to be more of the same. I guess some people like to throw their money around.
That's because people don't have a PS4 and an XB1 unless they have a lot of disposable income. So in the end, they need to make a choice. That is what creates the console war. If it comes down to buying a console they check the boxes of "does it play all the multiplats" and "do I prefer their exclusives."
I've been of the mind for a long time that Nintendo products are a perfect companion piece for the general console buying public. Their 1st party stuff is top notch and since they skim on specs, they tend to have cheaper prices which makes buying a second platform more accessible. But people haven't been buying in that pattern for a long time so it isn't a prevailing thought. Now it's "The new Nintendo thing can't play multiplats? Well, that's one strike for that and now all those games are counted as exclusives against Nintendo."
I feel like the thing the switch can, and hopefully will, do though is capture a lot of more semi-indie scene interest.
The sort of things I want to play on a handheld are games like metroidvanias (Ori and the Blind forest for example), platformers, or twin stick shooters. Some of these could run on the 3ds for sure, but some push things a bit further and look nicer with the higher resolution.
The other group are the more modest/subdued/stylized 3d games like The Witness, Firewatch, or even something like Astroneer maybe.
The big difference from what I can tell is the Switch, in addition to being a bit more powerful than a traditional handheld at the expense of portability, is an easier architecture to develop and port to which means a higher chance of multi-plat titles. Not from AAA 3D big devs maybe, but from a whole mid range of titles.
It works doubly in that case because those are the type of titles I want to be able to sit around on the couch (or in bed) and play rather than sitting at my PC.
No doubt. I think Nintendo can work wonders with their 3rd party support they've cultivated in the handheld market and the Switch offers more than enough for the indie market. The potential is there as long as the system sells, it's just made for a different market than the Console Kiddies and that's why it gets backlash from them.
On March 07 2017 06:51 chocorush wrote: Those numbers just don't look right for the 3DSXL. You also have to add in the extra 2 inches or so on the switch because you're probably attaching the controllers.
3DSXL numbers taken from Amazon. Switch numbers taken from Nintendo's website, marked as joycon attached.
On March 07 2017 06:51 chocorush wrote: Those numbers just don't look right for the 3DSXL. You also have to add in the extra 2 inches or so on the switch because you're probably attaching the controllers.
3DSXL numbers taken from Amazon. Switch numbers taken from Nintendo's website, marked as joycon attached.
The switch is shorter than I thought it was, but still notably longer than the XL imo. Regardless, neither of them fit in my pocket like my N3DS, and I probably won't ever accept it as a portable device.
On March 07 2017 07:16 chocorush wrote: The switch is shorter than I thought it was, but still notably longer than the XL imo. Regardless, neither of them fit in my pocket like my N3DS, and I probably won't ever accept it as a portable device.
FE 18 though. Stop complaining and buy it already
got 7 more hours of zelda in, contemplating calling in sick tomorrow to play more. MOAR. What a game.
On March 06 2017 14:28 TheYango wrote: At the very minimum the Switch needs a price cut to be competitive with the 3DS. People aren't going to drop $300 with the intention of it being just a handheld like the 3DS.
$60 price point for Switch games is also relevant. 3DS found a niche because $100-$200 console + $40 games is a budget range far enough below other platforms while still being above F2P/indie mobile games. Asking people to drop 1.5x the money for its successor and games is a tough sell, especially when it's an audience that already doesn't really care that much about graphics.
I thought it is about pushing switch as the new 'handheld console' to those handheld demongrahics? Because you pay a bit more to be able to have this option to play your games on big screen, sounds reasonable to me?
Oh god, I am so tempted to get it, thinking to get it for Christmas to see if we get a Bayonetta3 later of the year xD I really wish they ironed out their minor issues in the next 6 months
On March 07 2017 06:16 JimmyJRaynor wrote: the 3DS XL and the Switch are comparable in size. Nintendo has probably done 5,000 studies on how consumers view this new piece of hardware. i own a 3DS XL and i can easily see this thing replacing it.
They might make a new version of the Switch in 2 years at a lower price that is directly aimed at eliminating the 3DS.
Are they really that comparable? The switch is about a foot long in size and doesn't collapse on itself like the 3DS. It's also pretty much just a long lever, so physics makes me inclined to not like it.
Then again, I'm an original 3ds user that upgraded to the regular new 3ds. Anything even bigger than the 3ds LL is kind of horrendous.
i'm a 3DS XL user. not a 3DS user. i'm 100% happy with the 3DS XL. so far i'm happy with the Switch as a portable. Nintendo has to keep me and others like me on the revenue tread mill. My 3DS XL is now 4+ years old. Time to feed the machine.
i could see teh Switch branching off in all new directions with totally new applications never before thought of. http://i.imgur.com/etyfb3z.gifv
On March 07 2017 05:06 Faruko wrote: people expecting a tablet size gaming device based on mobile SoC without external cooling to be as strong as a dedicated cooled system is beyond me tbh.
Of course it was going to be underpowered compared to normal consoles.
Anyway, power doesnt really matter honestly as long as the support is there, sales seems to be pretty good so that should push 3rd developers to put their games on switch, besides a few developers, most of them dont really care about dropping settings if they can put their game in a device that can make them money
For people that care about the console war, nothing will be good enough unless it can grab the 3rd party multiplats, which the Switch probably won't be able to do.
The console war is more about bragging rights than having something usable. Enthusiasts can be strange sometimes. It's a different target market than we are and I'm hoping Nintendo doesn't go after those guys.
The majority of consumers shouldn't care which PC-wannabe console is 2nd place on 3rd party multiplatform titles. I really don't get the people that have both a PS4 and an Xbox One and want the Switch to be more of the same. I guess some people like to throw their money around.
That's because people don't have a PS4 and an XB1 unless they have a lot of disposable income. So in the end, they need to make a choice. That is what creates the console war. If it comes down to buying a console they check the boxes of "does it play all the multiplats" and "do I prefer their exclusives."
I've been of the mind for a long time that Nintendo products are a perfect companion piece for the general console buying public. Their 1st party stuff is top notch and since they skim on specs, they tend to have cheaper prices which makes buying a second platform more accessible. But people haven't been buying in that pattern for a long time so it isn't a prevailing thought. Now it's "The new Nintendo thing can't play multiplats? Well, that's one strike for that and now all those games are counted as exclusives against Nintendo."
I'm a huge PC gamer, even tough I'm only about to buy a new one for the first time in 7 years. The PS4 and XB1 can't really do anything the PC can't. My New 3DSXL has functionality that's not available on the PC. The Switch is trying to be differentiated as well. Time will tell how successful Nintendo is but I appreciate the attempt.
I just don't think the market is big enough for three consoles trying to do the same thing. The PC will always be the best for multiplatform titles. I want my console to be able to do something different.
On March 07 2017 05:06 Faruko wrote: people expecting a tablet size gaming device based on mobile SoC without external cooling to be as strong as a dedicated cooled system is beyond me tbh.
Of course it was going to be underpowered compared to normal consoles.
Anyway, power doesnt really matter honestly as long as the support is there, sales seems to be pretty good so that should push 3rd developers to put their games on switch, besides a few developers, most of them dont really care about dropping settings if they can put their game in a device that can make them money
For people that care about the console war, nothing will be good enough unless it can grab the 3rd party multiplats, which the Switch probably won't be able to do.
The console war is more about bragging rights than having something usable. Enthusiasts can be strange sometimes. It's a different target market than we are and I'm hoping Nintendo doesn't go after those guys.
The majority of consumers shouldn't care which PC-wannabe console is 2nd place on 3rd party multiplatform titles. I really don't get the people that have both a PS4 and an Xbox One and want the Switch to be more of the same. I guess some people like to throw their money around.
That's because people don't have a PS4 and an XB1 unless they have a lot of disposable income. So in the end, they need to make a choice. That is what creates the console war. If it comes down to buying a console they check the boxes of "does it play all the multiplats" and "do I prefer their exclusives."
I've been of the mind for a long time that Nintendo products are a perfect companion piece for the general console buying public. Their 1st party stuff is top notch and since they skim on specs, they tend to have cheaper prices which makes buying a second platform more accessible. But people haven't been buying in that pattern for a long time so it isn't a prevailing thought. Now it's "The new Nintendo thing can't play multiplats? Well, that's one strike for that and now all those games are counted as exclusives against Nintendo."
I'm a huge PC gamer, even tough I'm only about to buy a new one for the first time in 7 years. The PS4 and XB1 can't really do anything the PC can't. My New 3DSXL has functionality that's not available on the PC. The Switch is trying to be differentiated as well. Time will tell how successful Nintendo is but I appreciate the attempt.
I just don't think the market is big enough for three consoles trying to do the same thing. The PC will always be the best for multiplatform titles. I want my console to be able to do something different.
If Nintendo drops the 3DS line, the Switch's success is all but guaranteed. Nintendo doesn't need it to be a strong console, they just need to consolidate their fanbase behind a hybrid.
On March 07 2017 07:16 chocorush wrote: The switch is shorter than I thought it was, but still notably longer than the XL imo. Regardless, neither of them fit in my pocket like my N3DS, and I probably won't ever accept it as a portable device.
On March 07 2017 06:52 TheYango wrote: Form factor is comparable to the 3DS XL, the dealbreakers are the price and battery life. If both can get into the same ballpark as a 3DS, I could see it being a feasible replacement. As is, the system probably needs to come down ~$100 and up at least an hour on battery life.
?
Idk what kind of battery life does your 3DS has but mine its about 3.5-4 hours at best, my New 3DS does has better battery life, like 5 hours, maybe 6.
But all ive heard is the switch having 3-4 hours of battery lfie which is comparable with the original 3DS and XL
On March 05 2017 08:23 m4ini wrote: Watching Dansgaming playing Zelda, i made two important observations.
First: i really want to play Zelda. But.
Second: man the performance is bad. Like, there's neither a way nor a reason to try and sugarcoat this. It's awful. Yes, there's stretches where the game runs 30fps, but there's entire zones (especially if raining) where it drops below 15fps. And not just rarely.
I mean, come on. Zelda should've been the reason to get a switch over the Wii U, performance. I don't care for 900p, if i can play on 720p without drops (assuming it does, didn't look into it yet).
It's drops to 20 fps because of how it's coded, not 15. Basically any time there are frame drops for longer than a split second the game will force itself to run at the next closes stable framerate i.e 20 frames. That's why it seems so bad when it's raining, because it can't stay locked at 30 it decides to lock itself at 20 instead. The Wii U version has the same problem.
First of all, 20fps already is bad. Secondly, no. It drops lower. It dropped considerably lower than 20fps for dansgaming. The console, in certain regions/conditions, can't hold 20fps, and that kinda kills it for me. The trailer for Xenoblades 2 (the game i'm really waiting for) looks good, but if it runs anywhere near as bad, the console isn't more than a paperweight for me.
I got multiple 3DS (1 xl), the Wii + Wii U, i don't care for Horizon levels of graphics if the gameplay is alright. Which, don't get me wrong, it is in regards to Zelda. Until things are fixed, or they pull a "sony" by releasing the console slightly overclocked (lets call it the Switch Pro), i'll hold off.
On March 07 2017 06:52 TheYango wrote: Form factor is comparable to the 3DS XL, the dealbreakers are the price and battery life. If both can get into the same ballpark as a 3DS, I could see it being a feasible replacement. As is, the system probably needs to come down ~$100 and up at least an hour on battery life.
?
Idk what kind of battery life does your 3DS has but mine its about 3.5-4 hours at best, my New 3DS does has better battery life, like 5 hours, maybe 6.
But all ive heard is the switch having 3-4 hours of battery lfie which is comparable with the original 3DS and XL
My 3DS is like 3.5-4 hrs of battery life after many many hours of use and was pushing 5 when it was brand new.
Switch having 3 hours of battery life on a week-old battery is not a good sign.
On March 07 2017 06:52 TheYango wrote: Form factor is comparable to the 3DS XL, the dealbreakers are the price and battery life. If both can get into the same ballpark as a 3DS, I could see it being a feasible replacement. As is, the system probably needs to come down ~$100 and up at least an hour on battery life.
?
Idk what kind of battery life does your 3DS has but mine its about 3.5-4 hours at best, my New 3DS does has better battery life, like 5 hours, maybe 6.
But all ive heard is the switch having 3-4 hours of battery lfie which is comparable with the original 3DS and XL
My 3DS is like 3.5-4 hrs of battery life after many many hours of use and was pushing 5 when it was brand new.
Switch having 3 hours of battery life on a week-old battery is not a good sign.
That's running BotW right? I'm curious to see how long the battery lasts when it's playing a game it can run without having to drop frames.
On March 07 2017 05:36 chocorush wrote: You seem to have missed the point there. It's completely reasonable for people to be disappointed in something that is a hybrid of an underpowered gaming console, and a poorly designed portable device. Some people would rather have a handheld console specifically designed to be portable like the 3ds, or a fully featured home console, rather than something that doesn't fulfill either of those roles particularly well.
Edit:
The majority of consumers shouldn't care which PC-wannabe console is 2nd place on 3rd party multiplatform titles. I really don't get the people that have both a PS4 and an Xbox One and want the Switch to be more of the same. I guess some people like to throw their money around.
Maybe it's because of the terrible exclusive model of selling consoles. If the Switch was more of the same except you got to play Nintendo games, even hardcore Nintendo fans would probably be happy either way.
2in1 Laptops want to have a word with you, 2in1 Laptops are bad tablets and decent laptops, yet they are the new hot property overall, everyone wants a piece of the píe
Nowadays EVERYTHING is based on the idea of doing everything, exclusive features or "dedicated" stuff is mostly no more.
Even Phones, they are getting bigger eating the phablet and even small tablet territory
2 in 1 laptop exists for years and are now only more attractive because of the hardware is far more energy efficient and expandable.
Look at transformer pro 3, with a egpu it can be as good as top end gaming laptop. And there is no difference between docked and non docked in performance unlike the switch.
Switch on the other hand, dock means faster GPU but currently not powerful enough to run 900p Zelda but forced to do so because there's no option. I don't know if it's because of the game not optimized well It also took away the touch capability of the handheld mode.
I heard there will be handheld exclusive games and I certainly hope they do the same for console exclusive game where they can optimized based on the full capability. For dock and non dock games I hope they do give us options to change the resolution for better fps.
Relevant, I believe. After Pokemon Go, moving more into AR would be really, really cool with the trust Nintendo now has. Don't think the Switch will be as ubiquitous as phones are at any time, but we'll see what they can do within a few years.
On March 07 2017 06:52 TheYango wrote: Form factor is comparable to the 3DS XL, the dealbreakers are the price and battery life. If both can get into the same ballpark as a 3DS, I could see it being a feasible replacement. As is, the system probably needs to come down ~$100 and up at least an hour on battery life.
?
Idk what kind of battery life does your 3DS has but mine its about 3.5-4 hours at best, my New 3DS does has better battery life, like 5 hours, maybe 6.
But all ive heard is the switch having 3-4 hours of battery lfie which is comparable with the original 3DS and XL
My 3DS is like 3.5-4 hrs of battery life after many many hours of use and was pushing 5 when it was brand new.
Switch having 3 hours of battery life on a week-old battery is not a good sign.
That's running BotW right? I'm curious to see how long the battery lasts when it's playing a game it can run without having to drop frames.
Brightness settings also affects battery life on the 3DS.
On a different point, the original 3DS launched for $249. The 3DS XL launched 1.5 years later for $199. With all the reported launch problems, I wouldn't be surprised to have a better version next year. Even on older consoles without a new version, consoles on later manufacturing runs were better than the launch ones. I never got the older 3DS and waited for the cheaper, newer version when enough games had come out.