The Nintendo Switch Console Thread

[Savor]

"6.2 / 720p

Kinda defeats the purpose of portability, ya think? And just like the dongles Apple forces you to carry with iPhone 7 and MacBook Pros, then you have to consider where to put those detachable controllers. Or just leave it there when you carry it around. Giant brick size that makes former Sega Game Gear owners from 25 years ago laugh.

Screen is obviously not going to be close to Retina but battery life wouldn't take a major hit if it were Full HD or Quad. Makes me reconsider getting a near dead PS Vita though because you can find second hand ones for under $100, battery isn't difficult to replace for the slims, matured library, portability, and PS4 remote play. Yeah, it is complicated and Vita stays in the house but Switch as a handheld isn't all the portable to begin with.

The next question is how much? Because price plays a huge factor with gamers. How powerful and what is battery life going to be? Because Nintendo 3DS had crap battery. I remember one Sony exec joked if they made a portable PS3, battery life would be dead after 20 minutes. Third-party support will sort itself and answer its question the next couple of years. I would love to see this Switch succeed but I have my doubts since Sony failed on this before.

Another Wii success or Wii U flop? The original Wii was kinda an unexpected fluke the same way Avatar (2009) is in the box office king but gets loathed later since Nintendo didn't cater to hardcore audience and used gimmicks which people eventually grew tired of months later. By 2008, the fad went away with motion controls and core gamers went back to playing their PS3 and Xbox 360.

The $250 price tag also helped fool people thinking Wii was "next gen" when it fact the Wii was hardly anymore powerful than a original Xbox. This is also why the Wii U flopped. It was barely as power as a PS3 and Xbox 360. Nintendo started charging $400 by 2012 and core gamers were no longer falling for their controller gimmicks, kiddie games, and lack of third-party support. The Switch is basically a finished product of what the Wii U tried to implement four years ago.

 

[akuma13]

"6.2 / 720p

Kinda defeats the purpose of portability, ya think? And just like the dongles Apple forces you to carry with iPhone 7 and MacBook Pros, then you have to consider where to put those detachable controllers. Or just leave it there when you carry it around. Giant brick size that makes former Sega Game Gear owners from 25 years ago laugh.

I pretty much stopped reading there. I know i might be part of a very small niche but this is what a lot of people wanted from the Vita. True console type games in a portable. And yes the Duo is a portable system. So an ipad mini or a kindle are not portables? The "dongles" are a required of the system if you want to play games on the go. It also serves as a stand alone controller when you dock the system to your TV screen. On top of that Nintendo is not charging you an arm and a leg for it. It's included. There is a purpose for everything in system.

 

[gkarris]

I pretty much stopped reading there. I know i might be part of a very small niche but this is what a lot of people wanted from the Vita. True console type games in a portable. And yes the Duo is a portable system. So an ipad mini or a kindle are not portables? The "dongles" are a required of the system if you want to play games on the go. It also serves as a stand alone controller when you dock the system to your TV screen. On top of that Nintendo is not charging you an arm and a leg for it. It's included. There is a purpose for everything in system.

Maybe Nintendo will make Switch games have a "screen control" mode.

Like Halo:Spartan Assault - when I run it on my laptop, it can tell I have a keyboard and mouse and if I have a controller hooked up. When I run it on my Windows Tablet, it can tell I only have a touchscreen and lets me use the touchscreen as the controller. If I hook up a controller, it can tell I have that.

That would be cool if you choose to leave the controls at home and just use the screen virtual controls...

 

[JohnGrey]

Maybe Nintendo will make Switch games have a "screen control" mode.

Like Halo:Spartan Assault - when I run it on my laptop, it can tell I have a keyboard and mouse and if I have a controller hooked up. When I run it on my Windows Tablet, it can tell I only have a touchscreen and lets me use the touchscreen as the controller. If I hook up a controller, it can tell I have that.

That would be cool if you choose to leave the controls at home and just use the screen virtual controls...

This is exactly what I mean concerning special hardware considerations. Every time you invent a novel input scheme, that's more programming that you have to do, and in the case of third-party support the further that you have to modify code from whatever you're trying to port to the Switch, and that's not just development time that's also market research for user experience and multiple QA cycles per revision.

Nintendo is expecting launch sales of two million. Even if we're generous and double that for the first full year of availability, as with the Wii U, that was the PS4 install base at the end of fewer than two months of sales, and it has 44mn total install base. So, let's assume that you're the bean counter for a triple-A developer. You have two consoles:

1.) Last generation hardware, 40mn install base, identical input map, identical architecture, long history of successful sales for triple-A titles. You're developing for its newly-released semi-generational refresh and will have to devote some resources to making certain that the experience is equally good on the older hardware.

2.) Semi-current hardware with multiple render modes and variable input map (significant special hardware consideration), sales of 4mn, history of abysmal sales in the triple-A software space when offered to that brand's install base.

What reason, at all, would suggest to you that developing for the second console, from a cost-benefit analysis perspective, is a good allocation of resources when you're already going to be developing for five hardware platforms (PS4, PS4Pro, XBONE, Scorpio and PC)?

 

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

Nintendo is expecting first-years sales of two million.

No, they expect to sell 2 million units in the first fiscal year, which ends the same month as it launches, ie. they expect to sell 2 million units at launch. They have not stated projected first year sales.

 

[0098386]

This is exactly what I mean concerning special hardware considerations. Every time you invent a novel input scheme, that's more programming that you have to do

That used to be the case but now there are unified libraries, so Nintendo will have to create multiple remap configs for each adapter as a default. Though I imagine there will be the option to create custom ones. Sony have done that with the Vita and Remote Play.

I imagine the Switch will have a default layout, like what the Wii U does now with a base control scheme spread out over numerous devices (Gamepad, Pro Controller, SNES controller, VC controller). That part wont be a problem at all. Ultimately we're only going to have one controller but perhaps we'll get themed bonus ones like a NES or SNES ones.

 

[JohnGrey]

No, they expect to sell 2 million units in the first fiscal year, which ends the same month as it launches, ie. they expect to sell 2 million units at launch. They have not stated projected first year sales.

Apologies, my implication there was to extrapolate out for the entire first year sales, roughly doubling launch sales between launch and year-one, as with the Wii U, which was 3.06mn and 5.86mn respectively. I've edited my post to that effect.
[doublepost=1477920127][/doublepost]

That used to be the case but now there are unified libraries, so Nintendo will have to create multiple remap configs for each adapter as a default. Though I imagine there will be the option to create custom ones. Sony have done that with the Vita and Remote Play.

I imagine the Switch will have a default layout, like what the Wii U does now with a base control scheme spread out over numerous devices (Gamepad, Pro Controller, SNES controller, VC controller). That part wont be a problem at all. Ultimately we're only going to have one controller but perhaps we'll get themed bonus ones like a NES or SNES ones.

Fair enough. Does that mean that the Switch will have sufficient sales, assuming their projections, to justify the expense of third party development in any meaningful way when factoring technical cost? Since we're dealing with large SDs for the physical space, how will they justify and/or mitigate the increased production cost? Will they demand a digital-only arrangement, knowing that consumer will have to shoulder the cost of the storage microSDs (since the internal storage is almost certainly laughably small)?

 

[0098386]

Fair enough. Does that mean that the Switch will have sufficient sales, assuming their projections, to justify the expense of third party development in any meaningful way when factoring technical cost? Since we're dealing with large SDs for the physical space, how will they justify and/or mitigate the increased production cost? Will they demand a digital-only arrangement, knowing that consumer will have to shoulder the cost of the storage microSDs (since the internal storage is almost certainly laughably small)?

I imagine;

- We don't know how they'll handle game cards. It could be something smart like the game card is just something that activates the product and it gets added to that device's account, and if the card is present then the data can be run from there saving storage space. They could kill off the second hand games market there - something Sony has been looking into doing too.
- Do we know they're using MicroSD's? I know the New 3DS does, but that's arguably a tiny device. I reckon it'll use SD cards. We can't say anything about internal storage. But considering this is a full console with its primary delivery method being downloads that it'll have a lot of internal storage. Maybe thats where carts come in as an option to reduce storage?
- I don't know what this additional technical cost is beyond buying/renting the SDK. What do you think it is?

 

[JohnGrey]

I imagine;

- We don't know how they'll handle game cards. It could be something smart like the game card is just something that activates the product and it gets added to that device's account, and if the card is present then the data can be run from there saving storage space. They could kill off the second hand games market there - something Sony has been looking into doing too.

Microsoft tried that rubbish with the XBONE and the platform is only now recovering. If Nintendo tries it, they might as well set fire to their hardware division and go back to making hanafuda cards full time. Also, that'll never happen. You can do that on a PC, where you can have TBs of storage space. I would shocked if the switch has more 64GB of onboard storage. They can't keep price in the sweet spot on go larger; this isn't a reference device that they picked out of some manufacturer index. It's 70% bespoke if not more.

- Do we know they're using MicroSD's? I know the New 3DS does, but that's arguably a tiny device. I reckon it'll use SD cards. We can't say anything about internal storage. But considering this is a full console with its primary delivery method being downloads that it'll have a lot of internal storage. Maybe thats where carts come in as an option to reduce storage?

I was referring to the expandable storage slot beneath the kickstand, not the game carts themselves; those are some sort of wonky proprietary housing over what is almost certainly an encryptable SD format. The problem with assuming SD cards are a panacaea in this case is that there's the inescapable storage iron triangle: size, speed and cost. They can certainly use cards with bus speeds sufficient to make the game eschew the storage medium entirely, but given the sizes required for games these days, I find that difficult to believe. Given the probable speed of the custom die, which is almost certainly an Tegra X1 variant, and the onboard memory, which is confirmed to be 4GB, I doubt that the console will be capable of dynamically resampling textures for reduced resolution in portable mode whilst maintaining the 60fps they seem committed to. Does that mean there will have to be two texture libraries? If so, what will that mean for a game like the new COD double-release, which is a 130GB delivery?

- I don't know what this additional technical cost is beyond buying/renting the SDK. What do you think it is?

I don't know, I've never worked in triple-A like that. Given the money that gets dropped during the crunch, and that there are already five independent target platforms, that's seems to me to be:

1.) SDK Procurement
2.) Training Cost (must learn the inevitable Nintendo quirks)
3.) Market Research (is this something that our dedicated audience even cares about, are we likely to substantially increased profit ex additional costs)
4.) QA
5.) Dedicated support material development
6.) Training for human direct-interface support

 

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

and the onboard memory, which is confirmed to be 4GB

Apart from Switch having an Nvidia GPU, no hardware specs has been confirmed. Everything else is rumors, until January 12th.

 

[JohnGrey]

Apart from Switch having an Nvidia GPU, no hardware specs has been confirmed. Everything else is rumors, until January 12th.

As you say. On January 12th, when the specs are found to be 4GB, my point will still stand.

 

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

As you say. On January 12th, when the specs are found to be 4GB, my point will still stand.

If it feels good to be you then, by all means, feel good about yourself now.

 

[the8thark]

As you say. On January 12th, when the specs are found to be 4GB, my point will still stand.

January 13 to be exact (as this is a Japanese company).

 

[MRU]

So Zelda : Breath of Wind is reportedly now 'not' a launch title for the Switch ....

So the old status quo of Nintendo endlessly delaying their AAA games will continue on to the Switch. Let's hope that 'supposed' mass enthusiasm from third party developers proves to be true or we will be left with a severe drought once again.

 

[gkarris]

So Zelda : Breath of Wind is reportedly now 'not' a launch title for the Switch ....

So the old status quo of Nintendo endlessly delaying their AAA games will continue on to the Switch. Let's hope that 'supposed' mass enthusiasm from third party developers proves to be true or we will be left with a severe drought once again.

Maybe people are thinking this whole "Dockable Tablet" is yet another gimmick...

They should've just stuck with with PS4 level graphics console with their pro controller and released it for $199 and get a lot of 3rd party support...

 

[JohnGrey]

Maybe people are thinking this whole "Dockable Tablet" is yet another gimmick...

Because it's precisely what it is. On the one hand, the Switch can be construed as a both an acknowledgement of the buying trends of Japan, to which Nintendo has always catered, even to the detriment of its Western reputation, and that Nintendo considers, and not incorrectly, that the 'triple-A' development model constitutes an unsustainable bubble that will burst and transition to a more mobile, arcade-style experience produced on comparatively modest budgets. The issue is that to buck the wave, one must have the install base to survive and remain dominant in the face of the loss of those customers which are either not prepared to adopt that experience or simply will never accept that experience, and Nintendo has not been in that position since the days of the SNES. Granted, the PSOne would seem to invalidate that trend but that's because the PSOne banked on MORE as opposed to DIFFERENT, whereas Switch's message is both LESS (compared to its forward competitors) and DIFFERENT (compared to the prevailing home console experience). That is, I argue, a losing value proposition.

They should've just stuck with with PS4 level graphics console with their pro controller and released it for $199 and get a lot of 3rd party support...

They should have but that would require repudiating the internal conceit that their 'creativity' is more important that the realities of the market or the desires of its customers, and so long as the tin god Miyamoto retains his power, that's not going to happen.

 

[0098386]

So Zelda : Breath of Wind is reportedly now 'not' a launch title for the Switch ....

So the old status quo of Nintendo endlessly delaying their AAA games will continue on to the Switch. Let's hope that 'supposed' mass enthusiasm from third party developers proves to be true or we will be left with a severe drought once again.

I've bet my (emotional) house on the line for Breath of the Wind. It's exactly the game I've wanted to play for decades now. So if they want to put another year into it then that's fine by me!
Be funny if Skyrim is launched before Zelda!

 

[JohnGrey]

I've bet my (emotional) house on the line for Breath of the Wind. It's exactly the game I've wanted to play for decades now. So if they want to put another year into it then that's fine by me!
Be funny if Skyrim is launched before Zelda!

But surely you have to admit that such a delay will hurt the Switch launch. This is a title that has been in active development for years and was actually put off for the Wii U for a full year so that it could launch with the next-gen console, and after the backlash that occurred with Mighty No. 9 because of repeatedly delays, Nintendo can neither afford to have negative consumer equity when it finally does go on sale, or to have one less strong launch title, especially in the retail desert of spring.

 

[0098386]

But surely you have to admit that such a delay will hurt the Switch launch. This is a title that has been in active development for years and was actually put off for the Wii U for a full year so that it could launch with the next-gen console, and after the backlash that occurred with Mighty No. 9 because of repeatedly delays, Nintendo can neither afford to have negative consumer equity when it finally does go on sale, or to have one less strong launch title, especially in the retail desert of spring.

Oh my yes. However there was a rumour a while ago about a port of Smash Bros 4 for the NX/Switch. So maybe they're planning a bunch of enhanced ports for the Switch? If they launch with a Splatoon, I mean, that'll shift a lot of units! Or if they get that Mario game from the trailer as a launch title then that's the core fans satisfied.

But for this Zelda game, personally, I want it to take a while.

 

[JohnGrey]

Oh my yes. However there was a rumour a while ago about a port of Smash Bros 4 for the NX/Switch. So maybe they're planning a bunch of enhanced ports for the Switch? If they launch with a Splatoon, I mean, that'll shift a lot of units! Or if they get that Mario game from the trailer as a launch title then that's the core fans satisfied.

The Mario title is a strong possibility, but 3D Mario games historically shift anywhere from one-half to two-thirds less units, both resale and bundled, than 2D Mario titles, and lifetime 3D Mario games max out at 30% attachment rate, as opposed to 2D which range from 30 - 50% in past two generations. We don't have data to justify saying Splatoon will move systems. Did it do well on Wii U? Yes, because there was no other co-op multiplayer games and it released in the middle of the drought. I'm not saying that it won't do well, I'm just saying that I can't make a prediction one way or another.

But for this Zelda game, personally, I want it to take a while.

That's a fight in which I have no dog. I was a huge Zelda fan until I played the same game for the fourth time (TP). Now, I just don't care. I just know that another delay is going to result in a large group of angry fans.

 

[the8thark]

The Mario title is a strong possibility, but 3D Mario games historically shift anywhere from one-half to two-thirds less units, both resale and bundled, than 2D Mario titles, and lifetime 3D Mario games max out at 30% attachment rate, as opposed to 2D which range from 30 - 50% in past two generations. We don't have data to justify saying Splatoon will move systems. Did it do well on Wii U? Yes, because there was no other co-op multiplayer games and it released in the middle of the drought. I'm not saying that it won't do well, I'm just saying that I can't make a prediction one way or another.

Care to prove this with links to the statistics?

Most people saying only having NSMBU at the WiiU lkaunch really hurt the console launch. For me it was like that. I never boubght SM3DW but if that was at launch instead of NSMBU I'd have thuoght SM3DW and a WiiU at launch. Because it wasn't I didn't buy a WiiU at launch.

 

[JohnGrey]

Care to prove this with links to the statistics?

Most people saying only having NSMBU at the WiiU lkaunch really hurt the console launch. For me it was like that. I never boubght SM3DW but if that was at launch instead of NSMBU I'd have thuoght SM3DW and a WiiU at launch. Because it wasn't I didn't buy a WiiU at launch.

As for exact counts, I can't provide them as they're from NPD reports that were purchased for my work and I can't share them (I didn't pay for them). That said, a cursory look at even a relatively limited resource like VGChartz will give you some idea of relative percentages. Granted, that site only tracks retail data, but in the case of Nintendo, digital sales are significantly less, usually between 70/30 and 80/20 depending on the title, than their competitors.

That said, there are a number of factors to consider. There have only been four generations with 3D Mario and only two of those have had 2D alternatives, so it's not exactly broad sampling. The two hardware platforms that have had a non-remake 3D and 2D Mario title: the Wii and the Wii U, which had lifetime install bases of 101.6m and 13.4m units sold respectively.

For the Wii, you had NSMB Wii (28.31m) and Super Mario Galaxy (11.34m) and Galaxy 2 was even less at 9m, both of which are very significant shortfalls. In the following generation, the difference is much less, that about a million difference between them (5.2m to 4.3m), but that's caused by a combination by a lack of competing titles later in the Wii U life cycle and the fact that NSMB U was essentially a third-remake after the DS and Wii title. You can also look at the sales rate of Super Mario Maker, which has reached 75% of SM3DW's sales despite two fewer years of availability, and that's without being an actual game so much as a licensed ROM hack.

 

[MRU]

As for exact counts, I can't provide them as they're from NPD reports that were purchased for my work and I can't share them (I didn't pay for them). That said, a cursory look at even a relatively limited resource like VGChartz will give you some idea of relative percentages. Granted, that site only tracks retail data, but in the case of Nintendo, digital sales are significantly less, usually between 70/30 and 80/20 depending on the title, than their competitors.

That said, there are a number of factors to consider. There have only been four generations with 3D Mario and only two of those have had 2D alternatives, so it's not exactly broad sampling. The two hardware platforms that have had a non-remake 3D and 2D Mario title: the Wii and the Wii U, which had lifetime install bases of 101.6m and 13.4m units sold respectively.

For the Wii, you had NSMB Wii (28.31m) and Super Mario Galaxy (11.34m) and Galaxy 2 was even less at 9m, both of which are very significant shortfalls. In the following generation, the difference is much less, that about a million difference between them (5.2m to 4.3m), but that's caused by a combination by a lack of competing titles later in the Wii U life cycle and the fact that NSMB U was essentially a third-remake after the DS and Wii title. You can also look at the sales rate of Super Mario Maker, which has reached 75% of SM3DW's sales despite two fewer years of availability, and that's without being an actual game so much as a licensed ROM hack.

Or bit of perspective ... Sony's mediocre Knack has sold more copies than SM3DW ... Mario isn't necessarily the hardware seller or even software seller that it once was.

 

[JohnGrey]

Or bit of perspective ... Sony's mediocre Knack has sold more copies than SM3DW ... Mario isn't necessarily the hardware seller or even software seller that it once was.

Well, the install base was much larger for the PS4 than the Wii U, and PS4's digital delivery infrastructure, along with its storage paradigm, isn't in the bleeding dark ages like Nintendo.

 

[MRU]

Well, the install base was much larger for the PS4 than the Wii U, and PS4's digital delivery infrastructure, along with its storage paradigm, isn't in the bleeding dark ages like Nintendo.

On the contrary, the Wii U at that point had a greater install base than the PS4 as Knack was a launch title. Yet as Mario 3D World struggled to even enter the top 20 games charts sales wise, Knack outsold it. Which means those Nintendo faithful who still claim that all Nintendo really need is Nintendo titles, didn't proportionately buy one of the best games on wii u compared to the amount of PS4 users picking up Knack with their launch PS4's. Neither arguably then did it sell as many wii u's compared to Knack sold people on PS4 which is quite depressing thinking.

Launching the Switch without Zelda would be the biggest mistake, and it would be wiser to delay the launch of the Switch until it at least had decent handful / plethora of triple A games. Launching against two consoles with a now a mass library each and full third party developer support the Switch without games is a poor option.

I honestly expect the Switch to struggle beyond those eager early adopters. I don't think it will vastly appeal to casual users or a lot of mobile users at at launch price, given most have smartphones and these casual game experiences and now even Nintendo themselves are launching franchises on them. Without a doubt Pokemon Go since it's release this year has sold / installed more copies of Pokemon on smartphones than the total combined copies of its Pokemon games over last 20 years on Nintendo handhelds.

The 'niche' the Switch is appealing to, I fear will be far 'too' niche to drive genuine 3rd party support. I also don't expect the Switch to be very more powerful than the Wii U. I expect performance below XB1 and it struggles at 900p on most titles.

Even if targeting the Switch to be a companion console to your XB1 or PS4 and also your Smartphone ... the wii u sales have proven folks tire of such prospect ....

I just can not get excited about it.