Nintendo Switch (NX)

Strangelove

AI Researcher
AKA
hitoshura
ngl i am kind of glad it is not a ‘pro’ version that’d split the user base. i hated that they did that with the 3ds and released stuff like xenoblade that you couldn’t play without new hardware (and then basically released nothing else afaik), and releasing incrementally better versions of essentially the same tech feels wasteful to me. at lease it’s not as bad as smartphones pushing for annual updates but still

and how about fixing the joy con issues
 
AKA
Azzure, Hyades
I actually have a hard time playing the switch in handheld mode for some reason, so a bigger screen makes no difference for me.

Pretty much the only reason I would even bother grabbing another one is to have it in my living room so my nieces and nephews would have it to play on there when they come over. But buying another switch isn't even a thought for me right now before I can actually get a PS5 and a 3000 series card, or even a 6000 series card at this point.
 

Prism

Pro Adventurer
AKA
pikpixelart
Splitting the user base would've been a really questionable move with the colossal number of Switches out in the wild, but I feel like they still could've done an upgrade that doesn't create a gulf between the consoles. If they gave it a performance upgrade with the intention of boosting performance in already existing games, they theoretically could've done so by overclocking the Tegra-x1 already inside the system. I'm sure that would reduce battery a decent bit, but it would definitely be worth it to avoid some of those really big frame dips in certain games.

Honestly, the OLED Switch is looking pretty good for what it set out to be. But the reaction shows that people are ready for more.

Maybe rumors for the Switch's successor got caught up with rumors for the OLED model?
 

Prism

Pro Adventurer
AKA
pikpixelart
The Switch's biggest flaw is that it's basically just port central. The business model makes sense, especially for Nintendo - they have all of this game dev time they put into the Wii U just to face a really small install size, so porting the games over introduces them to a new, giant audience for the fraction of the cost making a new game does. It makes sense for third parties, too - they can make portable versions of their heavy-hitting games like Witcher III or whatever.

Still, I think if one were to look up a list of recommended Switch games, I think most of them would be ports.
 

Cthulhu

Administrator
AKA
Yop
For some it's understandable though; Minecraft is a classic. Stardew Valley, Hollow Knight are Nintendo games but far better.

But I think a huge factor is that it's the ONLY dedicated portable gaming system out there at the moment, with a huge market penetration. I mean sure, many people have phones, but phone controllers are uncommon and docking stations for the TV even moreso.

And with those controls, I can imagine it's easier to port a game to the switch than to a phone (even if things like the CPU are comparable to phone hardware).

Anyway, that said, come to think of it, the Switch only has a handful of top games / system sellers; I can think of BotW of course, Smash Brothers, and Mario Kart (which they could / should have done a lot more with if you ask me). Probably generic mario game #1573574564 as well, idk what it's called, it's more of the same.
 

Strangelove

AI Researcher
AKA
hitoshura
the switch online ~expansion pack~ (lol noooo don't call it that) is $50 a year. in addition to the original subscription offerings and the n64 and mega drive/genesis emulation you also get the new paid dlc for animal crossing, but i've seen people saying both that it's yours forever if you get it and also you lose access if you stop subscribing. and i haven't looked into it myself to know for sure.

if it regularly gave you dlc as part of it, that'd be something. it's kinda annoying but it's at least something different. but if it's just one dlc for one admittedly big-name title, that's also annoying. the dlc is $25 and i can't help but think it's meant to make the extra $30 cost of this seem worth it.

also will they do the irritating thing of just giving you a slow drip of new n64/mega drive games like the nes/snes ones which might add 2 a month if you're lucky.

i never had an n64 so i would be interested in playing some of the games, but also i'm suspicious and not convinced yet
 
AKA
Rishi
the audacity to release DLC for a game a lot of people don't play, and many that do have already gotten bored of, for an extra subscription charge.

I have the base Nintendo online, but this is irritating enough to make me want to cancel. Granted, $20 (even $50) a year is quite a bit cheaper than PS+ and XBox Live... but I think PS and XBox are delivering more in terms of quality content. Also their online actually functions.
 

Strangelove

AI Researcher
AKA
hitoshura
honestly, if you're going to restrict access to these things for no apparent reason, that are now difficult to get or play without old hardware and the recent price hikes of old games that turned into a speculative boom during the pandemic

well

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

it's not like they haven't already taken the piss with their virtual console nonsense, where you could buy a rom for an old game for a kinda tall price. and then it only worked on one system, and if you wanted it on a newer one you had to buy it again. at least with the ps1 game archive stuff on psn you could play almost all of those one three generations of consoles (but i am still bitter and salty that they haven't apparently figured out how to make a 20 year old playstation one game work on 8th and 9th generations of consoles, get on that shit you lazy hacks)
 

Pandemonium

Pro Adventurer
AKA
Nate
honestly, if you're going to restrict access to these things for no apparent reason, that are now difficult to get or play without old hardware and the recent price hikes of old games that turned into a speculative boom during the pandemic

well

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

it's not like they haven't already taken the piss with their virtual console nonsense, where you could buy a rom for an old game for a kinda tall price. and then it only worked on one system, and if you wanted it on a newer one you had to buy it again. at least with the ps1 game archive stuff on psn you could play almost all of those one three generations of consoles (but i am still bitter and salty that they haven't apparently figured out how to make a 20 year old playstation one game work on 8th and 9th generations of consoles, get on that shit you lazy hacks)
Why not just get the ps classic though? My cousin DL many ps games that weren't on the classic, and put them on a usb for me. I get it's not being able to have past generation games all centralized, but at least you don't have to deal with the discs on a normal ps one.
 

Strangelove

AI Researcher
AKA
hitoshura
the mini ps1 they released? i didn't think that had usb ports, i thought you were limited to what was preinstalled. i might look out for one if that's the case
 

Makoeyes987

Listen closely, there is meaning in my words.
AKA
Smooth Criminal
You can hack the PS1 mini to add additional games.

The mini-consoles are great ROM hubs because they're essentially emulator machines and are easy to tweak to give them the capability to play additional ROMs. That's what I've turned my SNES mini into. :monster:

The SNES mini is my answer to Nintendo Switch Online.
 

Nanaki Skywalker

The Symptom of the Universe
AKA
Tarkatan Trash
Want a reason NOT to pay an additional $30 a month for the NSO Expansion Pack?

May I present Exhibit A?

And Exhibit B?

Or how about Exhibits C, D, and E?

The half-assed N64 emulation Nintendo offers for an additional $30 a year is an advertisement for piracy. I mean, this is AtGames level of emulation at the First Party level. Fortunately, I have stock original hardware running into a Retrotink 5x with an S-Video cable. All I need is a flash cartridge and I'll get my money's worth.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom