But if it was a more powerful console, you could play games that are not Nintendo games on them too.
Does anyone feel less interested in gaming when Nintendo goes under-powered?
- Thread starter CrazyHorse
- Start date
But if it was a more powerful console, you could play games that are not Nintendo games on them too.
i can also do this on nintendo platforms.
Gamer @ Heart
Member
I didn't know Nintendo went from little third party support to having zero third party games.
Interesting.
More power does not mean better games.
Most of my gaming time over the past decade has been on Nintendo systems, woefully underpowered compared to their competitors.
Smash Brothers, Pokemon, Animal Crossing, Splatoon, Zelda...
Power doesn't mean shit, IMO.
Most of my gaming time over the past decade has been on Nintendo systems, woefully underpowered compared to their competitors.
Smash Brothers, Pokemon, Animal Crossing, Splatoon, Zelda...
Power doesn't mean shit, IMO.
Or you could buy a PC.
You joke, but you haven't been paying attention these past few years.
Major companies have their development teams making games for PS4/Xbox One level hardware (and soon moving to Pro and Scorpio), it is the workflow they have been using for the past few years. The idea that they would invest in a new title just for Switch, or have a team port an existing PS4/Pro/Xbox One/Scorpio game to Switch is unlikely; especially when they barely did it back when Nintendo had one of the most successful game consoles ever made with the Wii.
Of course Nintendo will make games, and make them great, for their system. But why should someone need a gaming PC, or a PS4, or an Xbox to play games just because they are not coming to the system you have? The system you bought should be designed to offer the gaming experiences the market is providing.
Weltall Zero
Member
Yeah! Remember those thousands of non-Nintendo games on the N64 and Gamecube?
Gamer @ Heart
Member
To be fair....the GameCube got ports of a ton of stuff (sometimes montgs late) until 2003....then it died
it's weird because after the frankly disastrous 7th gen that crippled so many publishers and bankrupted many more, you'd think that the quest for power that's left us with fewer games at retail and really only one demographic third-parties care for would be seen as a bad thing. undertale might actually be the best game that's ever produced during this period and it's something made by one guy, sold for ten bucks, looks like a low budget super nintendo game. yet it wouldn't actually work as intended on anything other than a pc (at least without twisting several arms). it's a game that's incredibly thoughtful in its design and execution.
it's super disheartening when gaming experiences don't matter just because the game has a jaggy shadow or some shit. we're not getting dramatically different experiences just because the games look better.
at the risk of sounding like i don't care about presentation - i do. i really like the way horizon, breath of the wild, the last guardian, final fantasy xii, and so on actually look. it has more to do with art direction though, and while a lot of open-world games require a level of power in order to make their worlds more believable, i don't know if that's true for a majority of games out there. there's all this extra umph and i haven't seen it used very well to be honest. i think that what makes games good tends to come more from game design.
it's super disheartening when gaming experiences don't matter just because the game has a jaggy shadow or some shit. we're not getting dramatically different experiences just because the games look better.
at the risk of sounding like i don't care about presentation - i do. i really like the way horizon, breath of the wild, the last guardian, final fantasy xii, and so on actually look. it has more to do with art direction though, and while a lot of open-world games require a level of power in order to make their worlds more believable, i don't know if that's true for a majority of games out there. there's all this extra umph and i haven't seen it used very well to be honest. i think that what makes games good tends to come more from game design.
i think there is a very real scenario where the switch gets a lot of japanese support by the virtue of the vita dying and the ps4 being unable to sustain that audience all on its own. it's also the next logical home for something like monster hunter, pokemon, and dragon quest, which will guarantee a base level of support. i would look at the 3ds when considering third-party support, because you'll definitely see square-enix, sega, capcom, level-5, and koei-tecmo there.
Great post. The race to the "top" of the visual ladder has really fucked mainstream development over the past few years.
Visuals are great, and I'm a sucker for good eye candy, but that's why I have a PC.
I expect solid, polished gameplay from Nintendo titles in addition to a pleasing art style and I have yet to be disappointed. If the hardware is not hampering the artistic vision, I don't see what the problem is to be frank.
DealWithIt
Member
Personally I don't buy Nintendo for cutting edge technology. What had cutting edge tech done to make a game fun lately anyway? Cutting edge technology is for the PC space.
thebisonxrc
Member
No, I'm not less interested. I don't need cutting edge graphics to enjoy a game as long as it's fun to play. Hearing that the Switch is "underpowered" means nothing to me.
More than I remember the Nintendo games, actually.
bishopcruz
Member
More power means more options. The whole power doesn't matter argument has been around since at least the NES era, and it's lazy. Just because a system is more powerful, of course it doesn't magically mean that games are better. But graphics matter to a lot of games, what sorts of systems are running in the background seamlessly matter for a bunch of games. If power didn't matter why would we even CARE that new systems come out?
Of course it matters.
HiredN00bs
Banned
The Nintendo Switch is an impressively powerful portable game system. What makes it a home console, really? Because Nintendo is marketing it as one?
Nah technically there were no PS games in the same league as the very best N64 games such as Mario 64, Zelda, Conker and 1080 Snowboarding. Even multi platform games ran better on the N64; such as Quake 2, Forsaken, Shadowman and Mortal Kombat 4. The PS versions of those games were often lacking effects such as coloured lighting and suffered from warping from the lack of perspective correction. The only exceptions were when the developers made half arsed ports of PS games that did not take advantage of the N64 stuff like Nightmare Creatures.
Yeah. Maybe if you grew up with PS1 games you might prefer it's aesthetic of pixelated textures and unstable polygons; but in technical terms the N64 was doing far more advanced stuff even with the AA and texture filtering (which the PS1 couldn't even do) making things look blurrier.
The N64 was a powerhouse for Western games, including dominating the console FPS market; and the Gamecube routinely got the same multiplats seen on PS2 and Xbox. That support got a massive hit when Nintendo made systems that couldn't run the games 3rd parties were making.
Thousand no ... but HOLY SHIT San Francisco Rush 2 and Viewtiful Joe are probably top 3 most played games on each console.
the wii had a lot of third-party support. let's not kid ourselves here. there were more third-party games sold on the wii than games sold on the n64 and gamecube combined. the wii u in particular was a huge mistake from essentially every angle and the reason their console line had to come to an end.
Warablo
Member
Pretty much
That's not my argument though; the Wii was a powerhouse for 3rd party games, but those were 3rd party games usually unique to the Wii system itself. That's a convenience the Wii had because it was the market leader. What if it's not? What if it's just a competing equal like the Xbox One is to the PS4, or a third wheel like the Gamecube and Wii U were to their competitors? Games are more expensive to develop, it's not business sound to make a new game for scratch.
Yes. I haven't really loved a Nintendo console since GameCube.
I've owned every console of theirs, including every GBA, DS & 3DS, and I haven't liked a single one since GameCube. I've probably spent $2000 on Nintendo games in the last decade and I haven't really enjoyed very many of them.
I just keep coming back to the well but their games are so damn tired and not even the novelty of competitive graphics can draw me in.
I'm in day one for Switch in hopes that something changes. Really want to love Nintendo games again.
I've owned every console of theirs, including every GBA, DS & 3DS, and I haven't liked a single one since GameCube. I've probably spent $2000 on Nintendo games in the last decade and I haven't really enjoyed very many of them.
I just keep coming back to the well but their games are so damn tired and not even the novelty of competitive graphics can draw me in.
I'm in day one for Switch in hopes that something changes. Really want to love Nintendo games again.
Patrick Young
Member
I refuse to play new IP on Nintendo hardware. It's not worth it.
Mario and Zelda only have me because of nostalgia... though after Skyward Sword, the Zelda series is hanging on by a thread.
Mario and Zelda only have me because of nostalgia... though after Skyward Sword, the Zelda series is hanging on by a thread.
On this topic, I was (justifiably, I think, I was being unproductive) junior'd when I wrote this thread in July 2015. I felt at the time it was almost certain Nintendo would choose ARM and optimize for battery/thermal over graphics.
On one hand I'm just glad this thing is going to be more powerful than the Wii U, I was honestly expecting a handheld to be weaker. On the other hand, the reason I had the impulse to make that damned thread in the first place is because I'm so sick of Nintendo being stuck making games that are mostly retread on hardware that's unexciting.
I don't know what to think. I'll buy a Switch and try to like it but I'm really going to struggle to get much use out of it, I imagine.
On one hand I'm just glad this thing is going to be more powerful than the Wii U, I was honestly expecting a handheld to be weaker. On the other hand, the reason I had the impulse to make that damned thread in the first place is because I'm so sick of Nintendo being stuck making games that are mostly retread on hardware that's unexciting.
I don't know what to think. I'll buy a Switch and try to like it but I'm really going to struggle to get much use out of it, I imagine.
You're missing out on amazing games like The wonderful 101 (goty 2013) and Splatoon(goty 2015), your loss.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
You won't get any GTAV.
Astral Dog
Member
I feel more interested, actually.
Astral Dog
Member
Why not? Thats weird
Yeah my exact thought when I read the title.
The Master System and NeoGeo say hello.
How dare you!?
I agree, but if this is WiiU+ then it needs to be priced accordingly. Like $150 or some such.
I feel like your argument (unless I misunderstand it) self-disproves.
PC is the potentially most powerful platform by far, and -- as indicated by your choice of example -- it's also the one with the greatest variety of game design, budget, and experiences.
Hardware power presents a ceiling on the quality of graphical experiences achievable -- it does not enforce a floor on the budgetary requirements of a game. Furthermore, with the same financial outlay, higher hardware power allows you to achieve more. Your programmers can spend more time writing gameplay code rather than optimizing it, and your artists don't need to worry about each polygon they use but just about making things look good.
Caipirinha
Member
I'm disappointed every year Nintendo doesn't go third party, and I say that as someone who loves Nintendo games and was raised exclusively on Nintendo consoles.
GiantBreadbug
Member
Literally couldn't give less of a shit about the power. The obsession with it really bums me out but it's fine, and I get it.
Mexen
Member
I have always been interested in seeing how far Nintendo can go with the very latest tech out there. Like I understand the pebble-weapon philosophy
they have going on wherein the fun + play aspect is simply complemented by the power of the machine as opposed to defined by it per se. What I mean is the need to develop photorealistic games just because the tech allows it vs creating enjoyable experiences on age old tech.
But say they do have the tech.
Do they develop photorealistic Zelda games or simply add more puzzles in a Mario game and super polish the cartoon aesthetic?
I cannot help but wonder what would happen if the Switch were on par with Pro or even Scorpio.
But I guess we will know when they release such a system in 5-10 years from now.
A pebble in the hand of a master is a deadly weapon
But say they do have the tech.
Do they develop photorealistic Zelda games or simply add more puzzles in a Mario game and super polish the cartoon aesthetic?
I cannot help but wonder what would happen if the Switch were on par with Pro or even Scorpio.
But I guess we will know when they release such a system in 5-10 years from now.
My main issues with the weaker specs, if true, is it gives their detractors talking points against their console. And it also affects the amount of 3rd party ports or even new IP's being considered from 3rd parties. Now even if the Switch is under powered if it sells real well 3rd party's will make games for it. It is all about the number or potential consoles out there in peoples hands. Also Nintendo has made it a lot easier for the devs to make games on this console with the architecture/game libraries and CPU/GPU they chose to include in the system. I just hate that for the whole life of the console most of the internet will trash the system due to it being a weaker option for a home console. If all goes well there should be a F-ton of games if all of Nintendo is working solely on this console. Something I am not yet sold on, I find it hard to believe they won't make another handheld only system. They have ruled that market for a long time, hard for me to buy the idea they will abandon it on such a risky venture as the Switch.
So much this. Yet let us ride that horse off into the sunset throwing packages it can't carry off to the side as we go!
Sometimes, or rather quite often, I wish more development backed Nintendo's alternate approach. We'd have more games. We'd have more good games. We'd also have more games that appeal to me, in particular rather than the audience AAA is targeting
.IronicSonic
Member
I buy Nintendo consoles for Nintendo games.
Why we need 4 identical systems?
Why consoles exclusives are good to buy a PS4/xbox but no Nintendo consoles?
If you want to play AAA third party games and exclusives in 1 console, why asking just Nintendo and no Sony and MS to bring one major all-in-one console? (thats my dream anyway as I have One, PS4 and Wii U and I think, as, consumer, it makes no sense)
Nintendo hate always amuse me
Why we need 4 identical systems?
Why consoles exclusives are good to buy a PS4/xbox but no Nintendo consoles?
If you want to play AAA third party games and exclusives in 1 console, why asking just Nintendo and no Sony and MS to bring one major all-in-one console? (thats my dream anyway as I have One, PS4 and Wii U and I think, as, consumer, it makes no sense)
Nintendo hate always amuse me
How much do you think a Switch will cost?
I just bought this exact system the other day...great price for a fabulous system. HELL if I wanted to buy a new Wii U that damn thing is still 299.99. It is literally insane..
PC is an odd platform. I think it has a lot more room for quirk and niche than corebox consoles. That's part of its charm.
It also is a place where things seek to work on multiple power tiers as a general business model.
PS/XBox are much more in the throes of where AAA is.
Not I. Nintendo's own style of graphics aren't going to get much better even if you put them on a Scorpio level platform. Sure I'd like to have all my gaming requirements filled by one system but that's just not the world we live in.
Personally, I'm excited for Switch and the different experiences it will bring moreso than I am disappointed by it not being bleeding edge Tech.
Personally, I'm excited for Switch and the different experiences it will bring moreso than I am disappointed by it not being bleeding edge Tech.
Similar threads
- Poll