Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Based on zero knowledge of what Nintendo is actually thinking, I would believe they would like to keep both a dedicated handheld/3DS or successor *and* a home console/Switch or successor, as then they would have profits from both consoles.

I believe they have given up on the idea that the handheld/3DS will be the first gaming device that a child will use. They have even said so, saying that they realize that kids playing with their parents phone is now the first gaming experience a child will now have.

A low cost handheld has (my opinion) immense appeal for parents and kids, something like a 2DS price range, as these can be made relatively cheaply, have interesting games, and not easily broken (or cheaply replaced if the kid drops it).

The Switch is a real "disruptive" device. It introduces a new capability that nobody is quite sure what the eventual impact will be. It could be a tremendous success, as "serious gamers" could potentially trade lower rez graphics for the ability to game on the go. Or not, that may be too much of a compromise. I'm not sure it would really be a 3DS/handheld replacement, as it just costs way too much. Look at how the sales for the 2DS skyrocketed after it was introduced. (Handhelds used to be fairly cheap, the GBA was $70).

We just don't know yet. I think Nintendo is keeping all options open and watching what the market decides. At some point if one system completely tanks, then I think they will make a tough decision, otherwise, they are going to hedge their bets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8692574
Based on zero knowledge of what Nintendo is actually thinking, I would believe they would like to keep both a dedicated handheld/3DS or successor *and* a home console/Switch or successor, as then they would have profits from both consoles.
.
.
We just don't know yet. I think Nintendo is keeping all options open and watching what the market decides. At some point if one system completely tanks, then I think they will make a tough decision, otherwise, they are going to hedge their bets.

The Switch is a home and portable console. I cannot imagine how the hardware developers managed to sell that idea to the bean-counters inside Nintendo (ie combining, what was essentially, two very separate revenue streams into one). IMHO, that's whats so gutsy about the Switch.

I totally agree with your latter point. The metrics of profit will dictate what direction Nintendo will take going forward.
 
Just had my first trip away with the Switch, and it was awesome. Battery life exceeded my expectations. It was a marvel to me that I could play BoTW at any point during my trip.

I've had zero issues with JoyCon connectivity or screen scratching thus far. It does sometimes take a couple button presses for the left JoyCon to connect, but once it does, I've had no issues.
 
Your arguments could apply to any new console which comes out. How do you account for developers "switching" from PS2 development to PS3, or PS3 to PS4? As everything you've mentioned(installed base, development costs, projections, etc) would have applied to those platforms when they launched as well.

I'm pretty sure we're all aware of how history played out for those platforms now.

First is brand equity, the perception that the hardware released has a stronger-than-average chance of built-in success on install basis. The PS3 had that in the long run despite a weak launch and a bafflingly Byzantine architecture, and the PS4 has been hugely popular because of its gaming philosophies and its exclusives lineup. The 3DS has proven that it has install base, so it gets third party support. The Switch, however, still functions as a home console and would ostensibly have a not insignificant amount of Wii U-only buyers in its install base. The Wii U was the feather in the cap of the notion (now essentially proven after the GCN, Wii and Wii U) that third-party games do not fare well on Nintendo home consoles.

Second is the product category consolidation and the uncertainty that it brings. Home consoles have traditionally been simply technological updates of previous hardware. The situational (where it's played) and operational (how it's played) aspects, for the most part, are identical to the their predecessors. It's understood who the audience is and reasonable sales projections can be made. This is not true of the Switch. It's an untested chimaeric platform and there is no data to be had about its draw or its longer term viability. If this were the Switch 2, it would be precisely the same conditions as the PS3 -> PS4 and I wouldn't be making the same argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hawkeye_a
I really like it, it's got that old school vibe gameplay wise, and it's really varied. Characterisation is great and it's just really good harmless fun. Turn difficulty up to expert and you have a game that can be almost as tough as dark souls !!!

Lots of mini games and puzzles, tons of replay-ability. And if you want a local co-op game you are covered too.

Biggest issue of course is that going forward we know they are taking a break this year from a new release, but question then is will they release a new game next ?

Just got it along with crash bandicoot and it's a fun game. I really like how you don't need the NFC pad, it's built into the joycon. Thanks for the recommendation.
 
Last edited:
Every day I'm fighting the urge to buy the Switch just to play the new Zelda. So so many positive reviews and comments from everyone...

But then my rational side kicks in and says it isn't worth it to buy a whole new system just for one, two or three games, and that it would be best to wait and see more games be released to see if there's more to buy in the future.

But in this case it's really difficult to listen to my rational side... I just want the Switch
Another way of looking at it is that Zelda is such a massive game, that you'll literally be finding yourself playing it for months, and still won't have anywhere near 100% completed it yet, so you'l still be playing it by the time more games come out! (and loving every minute of it!)

I do agree with you though that it is a bit pointless to buy a Switch if Zelda's not a game you intend to play (right now, my daughter only really has snipperclips on hers, so isn't really enough to keep her busy until more games come out, so she plays on her WiiU alot more in the meantime). But if you're into Zelda though, trust me, you'll have more than enough! In fact, my biggest dilema now is that I know that by the time Mariokart 8 Deluxe comes out on April 28th, I'll be dying to play it, but won't wanna have to come out of Zelda in order to do it!

Not having enough to play on a Switch for a Zelda fan is certainly not a problem I have! (For quite a few months yet, this is all I'm gonna ever need! It's been hella fun so far, and the ride ain't stopped spinning yet!!) ;)
 
Just had my first trip away with the Switch, and it was awesome. Battery life exceeded my expectations. It was a marvel to me that I could play BoTW at any point during my trip.

I've had zero issues with JoyCon connectivity or screen scratching thus far. It does sometimes take a couple button presses for the left JoyCon to connect, but once it does, I've had no issues.

I've been meaning to comment as well, when used in handheld mode, playing Zelda, it doesn't feel warm at all, and I don't hear any fan noise. It really seems optimized to play games well as a handheld!
 
Anybody on here using there switch on a smart TV?
Anytime I set it on the dock it'll pop up on my LG that the HDMI port that it is plugged into can now be used...But then it continuously does so like every couple of minutes when i am not even attempting to use it.

Continuously pops up in the middle of my screen while watching TV...Doesnt happen with my xbox
Well this is weird. Last night t began popping up about every 30 seconds at one point for a few minutes. Got to the point my girlfriend got mad cause it was interrupting her tv. Looks like it will only be plugged in when needed to be charged now
 
The Zelda reviews are just wow I'm really impressed.

Have you guys tried to charge the switch with a Power bank now and does it even work? I guess a 20.000 one will be the minimum in terms of power requirement right ?
 
Tried to move the dock over to my main tv. For whatever reason Nintendo forces you to use the original charger to use the dock, even though I can use my MBP charger to charge it out of the dock.
 
The Zelda reviews are just wow I'm really impressed.

Have you guys tried to charge the switch with a Power bank now and does it even work? I guess a 20.000 one will be the minimum in terms of power requirement right ?

Yes almost any power bank will work but it's best to get one that outputs at 15 or 5 volts. Anything else might charge at snails pace.

Do yourself a favor and get this particular RavPower battery pack. It outputs at 15v which is similar to charging your Switch with the official power adapter. Best purchase i've made.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B01LRQDAEI/ref=ya_aw_od_pi?ie=UTF8&psc=1
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Got my dual pack of Orzly glass protectors. They are very good and much better than the awful Hori / Nintendo official one.

What makes the Hori/Ninty ones awful? I've ordered the amFilm Tempered Glass screen protectors (they seem to be getting good reviews)

Cheers
 
the awful Hori / Nintendo official one.

It's just a standard flimsy plastic protector that is a bit of a pain to put on compared to glass and for the price it is not good value at all.

I think 'Awful' is far fetched. On The contrary, the tempered glass protectors are superior over plastic. Hori has decent reviews for the most part.

Sometimes the issue is, that the screen protectors are not applied correctly By the user, thus they feel the need to degrade the product. Hori's are plastic, not tempered glass, which they are thinner and show fingerprints, but they clean up easily. There are Disadvantages and advantages to both types of screen protectors. To each their own based on experience with Hori.
 
Last edited:
Hawkeye is actually correct, the reviews have been good with Hori.

The good reviews were in reference to 'amFilm Tempered Glass screen protectors'.

However, I must say that i've never used 'tempered glass' screen protectors before. I've only ever used the flimsy plastic types, and apart from being difficult to put on, they've served their purpose well IMO.
 
The good reviews were in reference to 'amFilm Tempered Glass screen protectors'.

However, I must say that i've never used 'tempered glass' screen protectors before. I've only ever used the flimsy plastic types, and apart from being difficult to put on, they've served their purpose well IMO.

You're correct, you did say Amfilm. Hori still has good reviews, but there are other competitors just as good as you mentioned.
 
I think 'Awful' is far fetched. On The contrary, the tempered glass protectors are superior. Hori has good reviews.

Sometimes the issue is, that the screen protectors are not applied correctly By the user, thus they feel the need to degrade the product. Hori's are plastic, not tempered glass, which they are thinner and show fingerprints, but they clean up easily. There are Disadvantages and advantages to both types of screen protectors. To each their own based on experience with Hori.
Glass is definitely superior in several ways. First is less contrast loss compared to many plastic film protector. The glass protectors which have an oleophobic coating will feel very smooth to glide your finger on, will probably be smoother than the Switch's own plastic screen. I know the glass protector I put on my iPhone 7 feels smoother than the phone itself. Lastly glass protector you can wipe clean without worry about scratching it. Cleaning a plastic protector will eventually cause scratches and need to be replaced.

Also, some plastic protector (like Zagg) gives a nasty orange peel look. I applied a full body Zagg kit on my Nintendo DSi and the whole thing had an orange peel feel to it.
 
Glass is definitely superior in several ways. First is less contrast loss compared to many plastic film protector. The glass protectors which have an oleophobic coating will feel very smooth to glide your finger on, will probably be smoother than the Switch's own plastic screen. I know the glass protector I put on my iPhone 7 feels smoother than the phone itself. Lastly glass protector you can wipe clean without worry about scratching it. Cleaning a plastic protector will eventually cause scratches and need to be replaced.

Also, some plastic protector (like Zagg) gives a nasty orange peel look. I applied a full body Zagg kit on my Nintendo DSi and the whole thing had an orange peel feel to it.

That's why mentioned glass is superior over plastic from the previous post. And Zagg's reputation struggles with consistency, but they have been around for while. And for the extra money, I would certainly invest in glass over plastic any day for reasons you mentioned. I think the difficulty is finding a reputable manufacturer that makes a good product to protect your investment that you trust, because there are so many of them and some of them have quality control issues.
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Huh?
The Hori screen protector has a 1.5 star rating (out of 5) on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/Officially-L...&sr=8-3&keywords=hori+screen+protector+switch.

Then either I or you must be looking at something different. Because these reviews are not All bad on the link listed below. I know a few people that have Hori, and they haven't had any issues with them. Again, It must be based on experience or preference.

The demo models of the Nintendo Switch at Gamestop use these, but they are applied correctly, which I think still plays a key role how these uphold.


https://www.amazon.com/Officially-Licensed-Screen-Protective-Nintendo-Switch/dp/B01MR725H2
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1027.PNG
    IMG_1027.PNG
    711.8 KB · Views: 109
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
I don't think the "two audiences" can be as strictly separated as stated. First, there wasn't sth. like the switch available before so obviously devs had to decide whether they wanted to go mobile or stationary (homeconsole). If we go back in time a little, those that played the NES at home enjoyed equally playing on the Gameboy - I'd go as far as saying that audience was almost 100% the same. That obviously changed a good bit I guess the more graphical demanding games became and the more casual gaming became. I personally have zero interest in playing outside for example - but there are a lot that would / do. But if you look at some of those Switch games already I don't see why 1-2 Switch and so on couldn't be released as 'mobile' games. Now yo can play Zelda BotW everywhere and I see zero reason why people wouldn't want to make use of that option.

Totally agree. While I bought my switch first day, I still play both my WiiU, my 3DS and also sometimes some of my much older consoles. I have started to neglect my NES Classic a bit though since the switch came out (but that's more just a case of when i get my head buried in a Zelda game, it would take literally an earthquake to prize it from my hands!) But I'll still continue coming back to quite a few of my older consoles though. I even still buy games for the original Wii now quite often, even though that's over 10 years old. But some developers still make games for it though, even though it has long been discontinued as a console. (Just dance 2017 for example was the most recent one I saw that got brought out on the Wii) They did bring it out on all the newer ones aswell, but it's not at all uncommon for people to make their games multi-platform, and to support machines you'd assume had gone completely extinct, but many people still play. (the beauty of it is they're quite cheap too, and many of them aren't that complicated for them to port.

When you consider that all any console essentially is, is just a hard drive with an operating system, and that a controller is simply an input device, if you already have the software and the knowledge to create games in the coding languages that communicate with the peripherals and drivers of a machine you have programmed for before, and you've already written the program logic of the game, it's simply a case of copying over your existing code to the syntax of the code of the other device, and (with the exception of games that have too much overhead for older machines to handle processing), it's pretty straight forward, and alot easier than having to write a completely new game from scratch. So is nice easy money for them with alot less effort than all the development time it takes to create a brand new game from the ground up. ;)
 
Then either I or you must be looking at something different. Because these reviews are not All bad on the link listed below. I know a few people that have Hori, and they haven't had any issues with them. Again, It must be based on experience or preference.

The demo models of the Nintendo Switch at Gamestop use these, but they are applied correctly, which I think still plays a key role how these uphold.


https://www.amazon.com/Officially-Licensed-Screen-Protective-Nintendo-Switch/dp/B01MR725H2

I have plenty of experience with screen protectors as anyone in the alternatives section of the fora will attest based on the number of devices I've bought last few years.

My Hori was applied correctly. It was still subpar in my opinion.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.