Jump to content
Brad

The Nintendo Switch Thread

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, PSI Wind said:

The fact that EA is basing their sports games on apparently the PS3 and 360 games but Ubisoft is porting STEEP TO THE FUCKING THING, they have no excuse if this is true. We know for a fact the system is capable of X1 and PS4 game ports. Guess it just depends on how much the company actually gives a shit.

Let's be real here.

You're not going to buy those sports games. I'm not going to buy those games. Practically no one who has an interest in a Nintendo console is going to buy those games. People who will buy those games will buy them on other systems. Why the hell would they bother?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Pawn said:

I haven't kept up with many of Emily Rogers' leaks but I was referring to reports on the hardware. "Specs" wasn't really the right term to use, so my bad. As far as consequences go, that really shouldn't extend beyond a decrease in trust. I don't think there's any reason for her to receive 'lumps' (verbal abuse, threats, whatever you're referring to) for doing her best to provide us with information.

Emily Rogers leaked the Switch specs in September I believe, and she was proven to be nearly 100 percent correct today. While I agree, she's said she's more than ready to receive the backlash for being wrong. Props to her for being thick skinned.

10 minutes ago, Josh said:

Let's be real here.

You're not going to buy those sports games. I'm not going to buy those games. Practically no one who has an interest in a Nintendo console is going to buy those games. People who will buy those games will buy them on other systems. Why the hell would they bother?

As sad as it is, you're completely right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya know, if I can at least have a longer charger, as well as a car charger like the PSP system used, I'll be content with the battery life. I could just buy a couple of car chargers, then go my merry way. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People worried about the online service should remember we're going to get several months of it for free at launch to find out whether it's better than Wii U's, if not firsthand then from word of mouth.  It seems a bit presumptious to assume it's going to be the exact same quality as current Nintendo online but charged for.

30 minutes ago, Dejimon11 said:

-Splatoon 2 isn't called Spl2n. Seriously it was so perfect you had it and then you blew it up

I know you probably weren't entirely serious but aside from the fact that Spl2n looks utterly hideous as far as written words go, try saying the name of the first game out loud and then say your proposed name for the sequel out loud and you'll see a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, JezMM said:

People worried about the online service should remember we're going to get several months of it for free at launch to find out whether it's better than Wii U's, if not firsthand then from word of mouth.  It seems a bit presumptious to assume it's going to be the exact same quality as current Nintendo online but charged for.

I know you probably weren't entirely serious but aside from the fact that Spl2n looks utterly hideous as far as written words go, try saying the name of the first game out loud and then say your proposed name for the sequel out loud and you'll see a problem.

Considering the negative connotations associated with paying for online, and Nintendo's track record, i think it's fair people are hesitant, and a bit disappointed with this direction even if we're getting it free for a few months. This is kind of similar to when steam tried to suddenly charge for mods. People used to things being just free for like ever, aren't suddenly going to adapt and appreciate them being told "that thing that was free since the Wii is now a paid for service". If they wanted to mitigate fears, they should have detailed a bit more the service and give us reasons to not be worried. So far, what we've heard isn't sounding that enticing.

@Indigo Rushother companies do it, but it's still a crappy practice there too. Gating off online play sadly people have become accustomed to. Doesn't really matter the price in my eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

12 minutes ago, JezMM said:

People worried about the online service should remember we're going to get several months of it for free at launch to find out whether it's better than Wii U's,

 What exactly are people going to play on it for that time? Mario Kart comes 1 month after the online free period.

Splatoon is cowing out near the back end of that free period.

Is there actually anything that is going to draw the crowds on mass for the entire free window?

From launch to the end of the period. What is this systems rocket league? Doom (90's), Halo, Call of duty. The one game that everybody will want to play the multiplayer of?

Other than Mario Kart which is just an upgrade, what is the game that's going to be showcasing the online for the whole free period?

Also many people are saying wait until E3. Well... that's 3 months into the party. Unless your a day 1 buyer you won't get the free time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, I am still going to have the Playstation as my main system for online play, but I am rather curious about how much Ol' Ninty will be charging for their online service. Looking at the possibilities of how the Switch's online could potentially be the next step in online gaming, it really does intrigue me. This makes me wonder what a possible price range for the Switch's online service could be. I may be convinced to pay for it, depending on how much it could cost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Josh said:

Let's be real here.

You're not going to buy those sports games. I'm not going to buy those games. Practically no one who has an interest in a Nintendo console is going to buy those games. People who will buy those games will buy them on other systems. Why the hell would they bother?

Well considering how this move only goes on to paint EA in as shady a light as usual, they'd be better off not even releasing it on Switch at all. (Again, how about some Battlefield 1 action instead?)

Seriously, self-fulfilled BS vicious cycles like these and Ubisoft's back in 8th gen need to be put to rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jovahexeon Joranvexeon said:

Well considering how this move only goes on to paint EA in as shady a light as usual, they'd be better off not even releasing it on Switch at all.

Seriously, self-fulfilled BS vicious cycles like these and Ubisoft's back in 8th gen need to be put to rest.

I mean, even if these games were top quality, they wouldn't be bought by us, so I don't see why we're bothering to talk about them personally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Josh said:

I mean, even if these games were top quality, they wouldn't be bought by us, so I don't see why we're bothering to talk about them personally.

Shitty corporate behavior deserves to be called out as such?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Josh said:

I mean, even if these games were top quality, they wouldn't be bought by us, so I don't see why we're bothering to talk about them personally.

Talk about which personally? EA themselves or their shoddy business practices that shouldn't go unchecked for the flimsy reason of "eh, not many people will probably not even get this"?

Again the point stands that this line of business isn't justified. And yeah, you make a shoddy effort? No shit, the games aren't gonna be obtained!

EA's brand of cruddy behavior towards consumers is why they have that stupid mentality of putting pure 7th gen software on a 9th gen run as an official release in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, KHCast said:

Shitty corporate behavior deserves to be called out as such?

 

3 minutes ago, Jovahexeon Joranvexeon said:

Talk about which personally? EA themselves or their shoddy business practices that shouldn't go unchecked for the flimsy reason of "eh, not many people will probably not even get this"?

 

I don't get what's shady about this in the first place. EA's not putting much into the Switch cause they know they're not going to get much out of it.

And we've already confirmed none of us would buy these games so it's not like we're in a position to argue that more effort should be put in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Josh said:

 

 

I don't get what's shady about this in the first place. EA's not putting much into the Switch cause they know they're not going to get much out of it.

And we've already confirmed none of us would buy these games so it's not like we're in a position to argue that more effort should be put in.

And what about those that do want these games and own Nintendo systems? Do they're wants not matter? Look, acting like they care about the switch, promising support only to release last gen software, shouldn't be acceptable and looked over just cause some don't care about the game. Otherwise, we may as well all be hypocrites for giving Konami shit 50% of the time 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KHCast said:

And what about those that do want these games and own Nintendo systems? Do they're wants not matter?

If they can't cover the cost it would take for the effort to be put in, then no, their wants literally do not matter. That's not shady, that's basic business. 

Nintendo avoids making new entries in entire franchises for the same reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Josh said:

If they can't cover the cost it would take for the effort to be put in, then no, their wants literally do not matter. That's not shady, that's basic business. 

Nintendo avoids making new entries in entire franchises for the same reason.

This is EA. I severely doubt they "couldn't cover the costs" when other companies no problem, even with less money then them can port over current gen versions of their games even if it's a niche audience. I'm not about to give ea of all companies the benefit of the doubt

i mean why put the game on the system in the first place if there wasn't really a point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Josh said:

 

And we've already confirmed none of us would buy these games so it's not like we're in a position to argue that more effort should be put in.

Related image

Ummm, I believe you are missing the proof of evidence where I said anything of that sort.

Also, which games are you referring to? Sports games? FIFA? I mean considering how FIFA for goodness sake at last is actually doing something as new as a storymode. Maybe poeple might actually be interested in the newer current games which can very well be ported to the Switch.

C'mon man, you can't rely on hypothetical conjecture like that to defend stupid crud like EA's shitck here when EA themselves haven't even given the effort to prove the "we won't even buy this game no matter what" exucse as factual, let alone credible as opposed to a poor man's defense of EA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

This isn't a negative. Motion and gyro controls are a good addition to a console, it just requires developers to know when and when not to use them.

 

That it's correct I guess I'm just worried about another Star Fox Zero/Skyward Sword situation. I just want them to be optional and not forced ya know?

48 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

It's like Wii Sports or Nintendo Land, a casual-friendly minigame collection to demonstrate the console's unique features.

I loved both Wii Sports and Nintendo Land and I understood the point of those games but looking at this I can't see who the audience for this game is especially with stuff like this 

Switch-2.gif

 

29 minutes ago, JezMM said:

I know you probably weren't entirely serious but aside from the fact that Spl2n looks utterly hideous as far as written words go, try saying the name of the first game out loud and then say your proposed name for the sequel out loud and you'll see a problem.

It's more of a nitpick on my part. I'm disappointed in it but I get why they didn't go with it. I wish they kinda came up with a more creative name than that but it's not going to affect my enjoyment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, KHCast said:

This is EA. I severely doubt they "couldn't cover the costs" when other companies no problem, even with less money then them can port over current gen versions of their games even if it's a niche audience. I'm not about to give ea of all companies the benefit of the doubt 

I'm not saying they can't. I'm saying there's not actually a profit to be made, so they won't. EA may be shady, but there's not many publishers period that just release games out of the goodness of their hearts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dejimon11 said:

I loved both Wii Sports and Nintendo Land and I understood the point of those games but looking at this I can't see who the audience for this game is especially with stuff like this 

Switch-2.gif

This is the kind of thing I could totally see being in a WarioWare game, so...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Josh said:

I'm not saying they can't. I'm saying there's not actually a profit to be made, so they won't. EA may be shady, but there's not many publishers period that just release games out of the goodness of their hearts.

So what's the point in releasing the last gen version? Either way that audience is small. If there's no money to be made either way, why not just throw the current version on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jovahexeon Joranvexeon said:

Again, that is a self-fulfilled prophecy on their part. And it continues to be inexcusable and majorly consumer-hostile.

Yeah, this is already going in circles so I'm bowing out. 

1 minute ago, KHCast said:

So what's the point in releasing the last gen version? Either way that audience is small. If there's no money to be made either way, why not just throw the current version on?

It costs less to port the last gen version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.