Does anyone feel less interested in gaming when Nintendo goes under-powered?
- Thread starter CrazyHorse
- Start date
I would love to see a Nintendo device that matches or exceeds the levels of the current consoles...ultimately it doesn't impact my choice. I have a PS4 Pro but if I cared about power that much I wouldn't waste my time with it, I would get a gaming PC instead (which I also have). I love Nintendo games so it doesn't matter if it's a handheld, console, or anything in between.
But Nintendo almost always gives solid frame rates (whether it's 30 or 60) at a locked resolution (again, whether 720 or 1080). The only thing they're not doing is native resolution or prettier looking graphics.
But Nintendo almost always gives solid frame rates (whether it's 30 or 60) at a locked resolution (again, whether 720 or 1080). The only thing they're not doing is native resolution or prettier looking graphics.
I mean, 90% of the games I play are either on the 3DS or indie, so no, can't say I care much.
The big draw of the Switch for me is being able to play the stuff Nintendo sticks on handhelds (Fire Emblem, Animal Crossing, Kirby, Pokemon) without having to hunch over a tiny screen. They're not the sort of games that need a shitton of power.
The big draw of the Switch for me is being able to play the stuff Nintendo sticks on handhelds (Fire Emblem, Animal Crossing, Kirby, Pokemon) without having to hunch over a tiny screen. They're not the sort of games that need a shitton of power.
axisofweevils
Holy crap! Today's real megaton is that more than two people can have the same first name.
Don't see the problem. The Switch will be the most powerful portable on the market. Graphics =/= gameplay. Two of my favourite PC games from the last two years have graphics that could have been done years ago. (Undertale and Pony Island.)
I'd also argue that the focus on power this gen has given us a lot less risky games.
I'd also argue that the focus on power this gen has given us a lot less risky games.
Ghostshark
Member
If it has good battery life, and at a low cost, I'll buy it. Nintendo are masters of using good art design to overcome hardware limitations. If it has the reported 3 hour battery life, I will be disappointed.
Nose Master
Member
It's been 20 years since Nintendo was cutting edge. Why would you expect different, especially with the pseudo portability of switch?
The art style more than makes up for lack of power, it just means we get sloppy ports by third parties.
The art style more than makes up for lack of power, it just means we get sloppy ports by third parties.
KojiKnight
Member
Nintendo has always used under powered hardware. Always. NES? A cheap machine based on a processor from the 70's. The SNES? A 16-bit extension on that same 70's tech with the ability to accept add on chips in the cartridge. N64? Modern arch hobbled by a tiny texture cache and slow memory. GameCube? Well, I guess one exception. Wii? An overclocked and very poorly aged gcn processor. Wii U? A tricore overclocked VERY poorly aged
Portable time. Gameboy? Another cheap 1970's cpu. Gbc? Overclocked 70's cpu, pushing 25 years old. GBA? A 16 mhz arm7 cpu in an era when modern pda at the time were pushing 400 mhz (I know, I had one and even EMULATED the gba on it). DS? A slightly updated variant at 66 mhz, at a time when it's rival was pushing a 333 mhz with dedicated video and audio accelerating hardware. I don't even think I need to cover 3ds versus vita our iPhone.
There has never been a moment in Nintendo history where anyone should reasonably expect a hardware pushing masterpiece from Nintendo.... And yet they still make some of the best games.
Portable time. Gameboy? Another cheap 1970's cpu. Gbc? Overclocked 70's cpu, pushing 25 years old. GBA? A 16 mhz arm7 cpu in an era when modern pda at the time were pushing 400 mhz (I know, I had one and even EMULATED the gba on it). DS? A slightly updated variant at 66 mhz, at a time when it's rival was pushing a 333 mhz with dedicated video and audio accelerating hardware. I don't even think I need to cover 3ds versus vita our iPhone.
There has never been a moment in Nintendo history where anyone should reasonably expect a hardware pushing masterpiece from Nintendo.... And yet they still make some of the best games.
Stone Ocean
Member
I'm tired about power discussions when it comes to consoles. It's never gonna be nowhere near enough so inflating the price to give me a seemingly good setup that will still chug when trying to run certain games got old for me.
All I care about now is pricing.
All I care about now is pricing.
Vital Tundra
Member
None of my favorite games have ever been on the higher spectrum of visual or technical levels. It doesn't bother me what their hardware is, their games are always great fun.
SpiceMelange
Member
I have a PC for that, I buy nintendo consoles for the nintendo games.
RichiRamjag
Member
And in a world where people like to see the technical envelope pushed, it shouldn't be that crazy to imagine why they would want to in this case. It goes further than graphics and pushes into what a game can or can't do. The only real retort to this for everyone seems to be "it's how Nintendo does it".
Yes, the SNES was the most capable popular system, by a country mile, during that period. The N64 was more powerful than the rest in some key ways, but worse in others. Anyway, it could be argued that the N64 was the most powerful of the bunch.
And maybe not gameplay wise, but of course graphically a Mario or Zelda game would look better on a ps4 level gaming system: more detailed textures, more assets (ex: more trees in Zelda), no foggy viewing distance, etc.
Starsunder
Member
The "charm" may have been lacking, but the level design shits all over Mario world. And I love Mario world to fucking death.
What the hell are you talking about. Of course Nintendo didn't put super computers in their systems, but during the nes-snes-n64 eras, they were always competitive hardware wise, in terms of raw power.
Feeroper
Member
I'm not too concerned about the power level of the Switch, although more power would be nicer. However, at the end of the day I'm more concerned about the games and the Nintendo quality.
However there is a dark cloud over the Switch for me - maybe a little too early for it, but I'm concerned that most places are going to have like 10 to 20 consoles at most for launch and once again most fans will be left out in the cold. I certainly want a Switch console, but I don't know if I have the energy to put up with Nintendo's nonsense (if that ends up being the case). They have definitely created a buzz around this machine which will be amplified even more after the January showcase I imagine. So we will see.
However there is a dark cloud over the Switch for me - maybe a little too early for it, but I'm concerned that most places are going to have like 10 to 20 consoles at most for launch and once again most fans will be left out in the cold. I certainly want a Switch console, but I don't know if I have the energy to put up with Nintendo's nonsense (if that ends up being the case). They have definitely created a buzz around this machine which will be amplified even more after the January showcase I imagine. So we will see.
AcademicSaucer
Member
Buy a PC if you really care about power
This is all true. Gamecube was really the only console where Nintendo went all out... and they managed to do so for the cheapest MSRP of the three consoles. It was impressive for sure, but definitely not the norm.
NES, SNES, and N64 still kept up with (and in some categories often surpassed) competitors though in terms of raw power.
You should play New Super Mario Bros U + Luigi.
Charm won't make up for game design.
Teletraan1
Banned
What a revisionist history. The PS2 was the most powerful console when it was released. Once the GC and XBOG showed up on the scene they outclassed the PS2. This is like releasing a GC that is 1/3 as powerful as a PS2 for the same price as the PS2. Withered tech for too high a price has been my issue with Nintendo for a while. If you are going to go this route then price the shit accordingly. If it is 1/2-3/4 the power of a shield tablet released in 2013 for $199 then it should be priced accordingly.
I dont understand this narrative people try to push that Nintendo never cared about power?
The Snes was more powerful than the Genesis overall.
The N64 despite some texture issues and storage was more powerful than the the PS1 overall
The GameCube despite not coming close to the original Xbox in terms o power was more powerful than the PS2 and its not even close.
Unless we are talking about cutting edge tech overall available at the time then yes i agree but people are mostly comparing Nintendo to their competitors.
The handheld line is another story but at least there you get some sort of benefit like longer battery life. But honestly not one trade off was worth it for weaker hard ware in the console space Nintendo just usually slaps a gimmicky controller and calls it a day. I cant think of a single instance where most of their 1st party games could not of benefited from being designed with a traditional controller.
The Snes was more powerful than the Genesis overall.
The N64 despite some texture issues and storage was more powerful than the the PS1 overall
The GameCube despite not coming close to the original Xbox in terms o power was more powerful than the PS2 and its not even close.
Unless we are talking about cutting edge tech overall available at the time then yes i agree but people are mostly comparing Nintendo to their competitors.
The handheld line is another story but at least there you get some sort of benefit like longer battery life. But honestly not one trade off was worth it for weaker hard ware in the console space Nintendo just usually slaps a gimmicky controller and calls it a day. I cant think of a single instance where most of their 1st party games could not of benefited from being designed with a traditional controller.
Nameless
Member
No, Nintendo has never had that much sway with me but I do find it unfortunate. Last time they had capable hardware we got Wind Waker and Metroid Prime, two of my all time favorites that also blew me away visually/technically. It's not just about graphics, though. Look at what Ueda pulled off with TLG and Trico. It's just feels wrong for Nintendo to keep all those great gaming minds trapped in such a limited box.
AstroNut325
Member
Haven't bothered with Nintendo anything since N64. Don't plan on starting anytime soon based on what I'm seeing for Switch.
/thread
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
Power doesn't matter. It's never mattered.
Ploid 3.0
Member
I grew up with nintendo gaming as well, but I have long since moved on to more exciting, for me, gaming with PSX and whatever else. At the time, the games and variety found on the original Playstation was incredible. Haven't looked back since, Dreamcast also had some amazing gems, and of course PC is insane especially with mods.
dragonlife
Member
Nope. Nintendo balances out my PC rig.
CrazyHorse
Junior Member
Yes!! I have. But that could be age too. I tend to favour Nintendo games above all. So I bear the droughts.
I guess OP misses the days when it felt like Nintendo made games that pushed the technological boundaries of what people were used to on consoles: Mario 64, Ocarina, etc. I guess that's a valid opinion to have. Since Gamecube Nintendo's game designs have kind of either settled down or moved in horizontal directions, as if the basic foundations for its 3D game designs were pretty much already in place by the end of the N64 era.
Personally I don't think console games in general have been pushing the technological envelope in a while. New ideas have appeared, but with the exception of GTA I struggle to think of successful games that originated on consoles that made me admit the core gameplay systems couldn't have been done on a Gamecube or original Xbox with worse graphics. Current-gen-wise Witcher 3 is the only game I so far that makes me think this. Some seemingly next-level stuff has tried to emerge on PC in recent years, but from developers that barely have the money and resources to really see it through.
Personally I don't think console games in general have been pushing the technological envelope in a while. New ideas have appeared, but with the exception of GTA I struggle to think of successful games that originated on consoles that made me admit the core gameplay systems couldn't have been done on a Gamecube or original Xbox with worse graphics. Current-gen-wise Witcher 3 is the only game I so far that makes me think this. Some seemingly next-level stuff has tried to emerge on PC in recent years, but from developers that barely have the money and resources to really see it through.
I know everyone's going to call me a Nintendo fanboy for this, even though it's not an observation specifically related to Nintendo, but I'd much rather manufacturers and developers (and players) move away from this obsession with power and start focusing on gameplay and hardware experimentation. The graphical difference between console generations has been consistently shrinking and games are getting ever more unwieldy and inconvenient in size, with the big developers seemingly more interested in putting their resources behind differentiating each new release with incremental visual upgrades than refining gameplay and properly testing launch versions of their games without enormous patches. It baffled me how people acted as though the switch from PS3 to PS4 (same for XBox) was some big graphical leap when, to me anyway, it looked not significantly better than increasing the graphical settings on a PC game. I know gameplay and visuals are by no means completely separate, that games need to keep up with display technology, etc, but so many of today's big games are largely indistinguishable in gameplay and far too big and costly to take the kind of risks that make really special experiences. Nintendo releasing underpowered hardware doesn't help any of that and is in many respects not ideal, and while criticising them for those choices is perfectly valid IMO, acting like the console becomes worthless because it doesn't look like being up to X1 or PS4 standards is ludicrous.
The Albatross
Member
While I don't usually buy them, I like that Nintendo makes different consoles. They usually offer something that Sony and Microsoft don't offer, while what Sony and MS offer is largely the same. I'd probably like if Nintendo consoles still offered something different, while matching competitors or coming close on power, but I don't care that much.
GurgleBot20
Member
The SNES had a significantly slower CPU, and had slowdown in plenty of games. It was a trade-off in order to boost overall image quality and sound.
Sword Of Doom
Member
No and I think people are hyperbolic when it comes to. Nintendo and power. The only thing to me that power has an effect on is third party support and that will be there if the system sell.
Like the hat?
Banned
I haven't cared about what is more powerful since the 16 bit days. I don't play games because they are technical marvels, I play games because they are fun. I can easily play a game that's new to me on my gameboy and have as much fun as a game on my ps4. They are different experiences, sure, but fun is fun.
Do I wish Nintendo would keep up with Sony? Sure, but not because I need more technological prowess, only because I want Nintendo to remain in a position in gaming.
Do I wish Nintendo would keep up with Sony? Sure, but not because I need more technological prowess, only because I want Nintendo to remain in a position in gaming.
TheDarkKnight774
Member
No. They're just one facet of gaming. I have plenty of interests without them. And it's been since the GC since they tried to push powerful HW tech
Xbox One S with Fifa 17 is dirt cheap
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
I enjoy this hobby because I love videogames, not strictly Nintendo. They're just another player in the industry, and I barely play their games as it is.
CrazyHorse
Junior Member
Yeah I do have a gaming PC. Great value for money.
I guess what I want to see is Nintendo/2nd party devs trying to make AAA games on powerful consoles. It is a waste that a studio like Retro doesn't get that opportunity. Look that what they achieved with Metroid Prime or how Rare made Goldeneye or how Nintendo was leading he way with Mario 64 and Star Fox. Now I feel like Nintendo neglects it's core gamers and tries to attract families/kids too much. Even SM3DW was simplified to make it easier for their target audience.
Similar threads
- Poll