• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Nintendo Switch Discussion Thread (Question of the Day, Countdown, etc)

Status
Not open for further replies.
EA should consider to port the Mass Effect trilogy to Switch. The Nintendo audience would a fresh start in the franchise. And multiplatformers with switch could replay the games on the go. Double win.
 

ponziacs

Banned
Anyone else concerned how easy it looks like it will break when dropped? Also if you put a case on it you will need to remove it each time it's docked and how would a case work with detachable controllers?
 

18-Volt

Member
Dammit..Mass Effect Andromeda is not planned for Switch...

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/mass-effect-andromeda-not-planned-for-nintendo-swi/1100-6446569/

Switch is looking more and more like a repeat of the Wii U when it comes to 3rd party software. I'd love to buy one, but I'm not getting another Nintendo console that lacks the 3rd party games I want to play.

Even if it does come to Switch don't expect it from BioWare directly. Those guys don't like Nintendo, and will never get a devkit. Same as Mass Effect 3, EA needs to find someone else to port the game and this should happen sometime after game releases for other consoles.
 
My bundle listing was speculation based on what was leaked ($250-300, Splatoon Switch included in the Deluxe Bundle, 32GB for the Basic Bundle, etc.). 64GB for the Deluxe Bundle is just my educated guess.

thanks, I am pretty hyped for a 64GB bundle. I'll pay a reasonable price for it
 

Vic

Please help me with my bad english
EA should consider to port the Mass Effect trilogy to Switch. The Nintendo audience would a fresh start in the franchise. And multiplatformers with switch could replay the games on the go. Double win.
I agree. As you said, it would be the best way to establish the series on the platform.
 
EA should consider to port the Mass Effect trilogy to Switch. The Nintendo audience would a fresh start in the franchise. And multiplatformers with switch could replay the games on the go. Double win.

After seeing how poorly ME3 sold on the Wii U, I'd be surprised to see any Mass Effect game on the Switch. For EA I imagine it doesn't make much sense.
 
Anyone else concerned how easy it looks like it will break when dropped? Also if you put a case on it you will need to remove it each time it's docked and how would a case work with detachable controllers?

Hopefully we get the same level of Nintendium put into the hardware would hate to have broken shit threads
 

Trago

Member
Y'all better get hyped for that Fifa Switch port. All EA/Nintendo relations will be riding on the success of that port.

If it does poorly, then EA will be like 'but y'all didn't buy Fifa!', and Switch users will be like 'We didn't ask for that shit! Where was Mass Effect yo?'
 

Vic

Please help me with my bad english
After seeing how poorly ME3 sold on the Wii U, I'd be surprised to see any Mass Effect game on the Switch. For EA I imagine it doesn't make much sense.
Almost everything sold like crap on the Wii U. The Switch is a much better proposition from the start for 3rd parties. Not saying that they'll take action on the opportunity though.
 

Scrawnton

Member
EA sabotaged any chance ME3 Wii U had of making a profit themselves.

I still want to read the book about what the heck happened between EA and Nintendo which led to EA turning their back on Nintendo after their "unprecedented partnership" talk.

It wasn't just the Wii U they abandoned. They were practically a non factor on 3DS as well, which is crazy because that sold well.
 
Lol because 1 game isn't planned, Nintendooooomed

It's one game, but it does feel symbolic. For the past few generations, there are game you simply stopped expecting to see on Nintendo platforms. During the WiiU generation, that expanded to mean virtually all AAA third party software.

With the Switch, Nintendo has already made some big progress. They're clearly in a better situation than the WiiU was at launch, if we're only going off confirmed developers and industry word-of-mouth.

But if a game like Andromeda isn't even being considered, it still means a clear separation between Nintendo and Everyone Else. The third party situation will improve for Nintendo this year, but it will not be fully remedied. Not just yet.
 

Hieberrr

Member
How about a limited edition Zelda Bundle

$350
Extras are, pro controller, BotW amiibo, and what ever else is in the premium bundle

By limited meaning you better preorder fast

You're expecting Nintendo to give out all these things for free when launching a new console? Come on...
 

EatChildren

Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Completely disagree about porting the trilogy. I get the intention, but it's at odds with what Andromeda is trying to accomplish anyway, which is more or less a soft reboot for fans new and old. The trilogy is entirely self contained and while yes does a wonderful job of introducing people to the Mass Effect universe will not be necessary in any way to enjoy Andromeda. Andromeda is being built and written specifically to detach from the trilogy arc and baggage an exists as its own entity, so much so that the entire game takes place in a different galaxy.

As much as I adore the trilogy it doesn't change the fact that the original is ten years old and its sequels are aging too. They hold up in my opinion, but an overwhelming majority of people intrigued by the series have since been exposed to it thanks to proliferation across three major platforms, four if you count the port of Mass Effect 3 to Wii U. The franchise is well established in gamer groupthink that most people know Mass Effect even if they're yet to play much of the games themselves.

If EA were legitimately serious about establishing Mass Effect as a brand on Nintendo platforms they'd be far, far better off going in with Andromeda; the latest entry built with modern rendering sensibilities and scope attuned to modern hardware, at the same time built to be accessible to people who haven't played the trilogy. Rather than digging up the legacy trilogy with intent on appealing to an extremely niche group of gamers (Nintendo-only-hardware owners), failing to accommodate the (assumed) more modern hardware of the platform in favour of technically dated assets, without offering anything particularly fresh or new to what will likely be a majority of Switch owners.

Nintendo for a long time now has played the companion hardware place in the market. I don't feel we're in a state that anywhere resembles the old SEGA/Nintendo or PS1/N64 era where one-console-ownership was very common. Nintendo only hardware gamers are a niche, and any publisher looking to establish a presence on modern Nintendo hardware would be better off bringing their current games to the platform rather than dredging up old stuff.
 

J@hranimo

Banned
Y'all better get hyped for that Fifa Switch port. All EA/Nintendo relations will be riding on the success of that port.

If it does poorly, then EA will be like 'but y'all didn't buy Fifa!', and Switch users will be like 'We didn't ask for that shit! Where was Mass Effect yo?'

I'm buying 20 copies fam

I'm kidding, I don't play Fifa haha. I will try and get like one 3rd party game at launch though.
 

Discomurf

Member
  • What kind of subscription service? Nintendo doesn't really have the third party support to justify us paying for online.
  • I wouldn't buy too much into the VR statements, especially when Laura apparently said that she didn't vet such statements.
  • No Splatoon Switch for that bundle?
  • Even disregarding any rumors, how would VR work with a 720p screen? Would the VR headset itself have its own (1080p+) screen & some extra horsepower to power said VR experience?


Online would still be free, subscription would be for games, exclusives and features, similar to PS Plus. VC classics would be included and would switch out every month or so.

I imagine Splatoon would have its own separate bundle.

I'm suggesting a lower level VR device somewhere between a phone and PS VR. Maybe the screen can do higher resolution for video VR and simpler geometry games? Even if not experiences are still possible @ 720p 60fps.

The headset would just be something that the Switch screen can slide into-- similar to: https://store.google.com/product/daydream_view except would also include an extended cord for the option to plug into a power source while using.
 

Trago

Member
Completely disagree about porting the trilogy. I get the intention, but it's at odds with what Andromeda is trying to accomplish anyway, which is more or less a soft reboot for fans new and old. The trilogy is entirely self contained and while yes does a wonderful job of introducing people to the Mass Effect universe will not be necessary in any way to enjoy Andromeda. Andromeda is being built and written specifically to detach from the trilogy arc and baggage an exists as its own entity, so much so that the entire game takes place in a different galaxy.

As much as I adore the trilogy it doesn't change the fact that the original is ten years old and its sequels are aging too. They hold up in my opinion, but an overwhelming majority of people intrigued by the series have since been exposed to it thanks to proliferation across three major platforms, four if you count the port of Mass Effect 3 to Wii U. The franchise is well established in gamer groupthink that most people know Mass Effect even if they're yet to play much of the games themselves.

If EA were legitimately serious about establishing Mass Effect as a brand on Nintendo platforms they'd be far, far better off going in with Andromeda; the latest entry built with modern rendering sensibilities and scope attuned to modern hardware, at the same time built to be accessible to people who haven't played the trilogy. Rather than digging up the legacy trilogy with intent on appealing to an extremely niche group of gamers (Nintendo-only-hardware owners), failing to accommodate the (assumed) more modern hardware of the platform in favour of technically dated assets, without offering anything particularly fresh or new to what will likely be a majority of Switch owners.

Nintendo for a long time now has played the companion hardware place in the market. I don't feel we're in a state that anywhere resembles the old SEGA/Nintendo or PS1/N64 era where one-console-ownership was very common. Nintendo only hardware gamers are a niche, and any publisher looking to establish a presence on modern Nintendo hardware would be better off bringing their current games to the platform rather than dredging up old stuff.


That's actually a very reasonable way to put it. Reminds me of how CDPR and WB Games pushed Witcher 3 on the PS4 despite previous entries not being on PlayStation platforms ever. And it seemed to work out in the end. Plus, you didn't really need to play the previous Witcher games to enjoy 3.
 

Nanashrew

Banned
I do find it annoying that Wii U never got the trilogy.

And for a reminder for everyone, Mass Effect 3 on Wii U came out November 18th, 2012. And the Trilogy came out November 6th, 2012 (Xbox 360) and December 4th, 2012 (PS3).

They released the trilogy so close to the release of the port, it completely defeated the purpose of owning Mass Effect 3. The trilogy is what should have been on all systems, and there shouldn't have been a single port of the 3rd game.
 
It's one game, but it does feel symbolic. For the past few generations, there are game you simply stopped expecting to see on Nintendo platforms. During the WiiU generation, that expanded to mean virtually all AAA third party software.

With the Switch, Nintendo has already made some big progress. They're clearly in a better situation than the WiiU was at launch, if we're only going off confirmed developers and industry word-of-mouth.

But if a game like Andromeda isn't even being considered, it still means a clear separation between Nintendo and Everyone Else. The third party situation will improve for Nintendo this year, but it will not be fully remedied. Not just yet.

Nintendo can't panic and overreact because some games are not being ported. That is more a Microsoft thing... Nintendo don't sell Windows 10 to the world.

They should secure future stuff, a bit like Sony. They should make From Soft happy. Make Atlus understand this is the ultimate Persona machine. Same with Monster Hunters.


In the west... If that Skyrim is really well done I can see people buying it. Both Nintendo people and double dippers. And then EA will want to follow.
 

Trago

Member
I do find it annoying that Wii U never got the trilogy.

And for a reminder for everyone, Mass Effect 3 on Wii U came out November 18th, 2012. And the Trilogy came out November 6th, 2012 (Xbox 360) and December 4th, 2012 (PS3).

They released the trilogy so close to the release of the port, it completely defeated the purpose of owning Mass Effect 3. The trilogy is what should have been on all systems, and there shouldn't have been a single port of the 3rd game.

I honestly wonder what kind of numbers EA were expecting under this context.
 

Mithos

Gold Member
I do find it annoying that Wii U never got the trilogy.

And for a reminder for everyone, Mass Effect 3 on Wii U came out November 18th, 2012. And the Trilogy came out November 6th, 2012 (Xbox 360) and December 4th, 2012 (PS3).

They released the trilogy so close to the release of the port, it completely defeated the purpose of owning Mass Effect 3. The trilogy is what should have been on all systems, and there shouldn't have been a single port of the 3rd game.

The Trilogy was $10/€10 cheaper then Mass Effect 3 on Wii U too, was it not?
 

Terrell

Member
Wow, pages and pages of hullabaloo over Mario and Zelda being the launch title, something we're going to know with certainty in less than 11 days.

Perhaps - and this is just a thought - when information is contentious, you drop the subject and wait for an official confirmation before discussion resumes?

They're probably just going to continue their cheap eShop games. I wouldn't expect any of their main projects.

Uh-huh. Because the Japanese FGC wouldn't KILL for a more mobile way of playing Guilty Gear. Not at all.

About ED. i still haven't seen a good reason why Nintendo would want to resurrect that ip, the fills the gap point falls apart when you realize they are more interested in having the platforming genre on lock than in diversifying more their lineup.

Uhhh, what? So Last Story, Pandora's Tower, W101, etc. never happened?

Nintendo IS interested in diversifying their lineup, they've just not been very good at making that stick. There's a definite difference there.

The biggest unknown is snake coming back to smash.

No, I think that's pretty well known at this point.

Maybe the conference is somehow scripted and they can translate it to multiple languages before the stream.

"Somehow" scripted? No, they're ALL scripted, with rare off-script moments.

Region lock is not something that bothers me, IP blocking is. And it is hard to believe that Switch will be region free, maybe consoles from Europe and US shares the same region, but I still expect the console to be region locked.

Nintendo has openly stated that they are looking at ending their history of region locking. On multiple occasions. Coupled with the rumours, the first even remotely credible rumours of their kind, I think it's safe to call this a lock.

It's one game, but it does feel symbolic. For the past few generations, there are game you simply stopped expecting to see on Nintendo platforms. During the WiiU generation, that expanded to mean virtually all AAA third party software.

With the Switch, Nintendo has already made some big progress. They're clearly in a better situation than the WiiU was at launch, if we're only going off confirmed developers and industry word-of-mouth.

But if a game like Andromeda isn't even being considered, it still means a clear separation between Nintendo and Everyone Else. The third party situation will improve for Nintendo this year, but it will not be fully remedied. Not just yet.

That's a gross misrepresentation of the facts. It's not being considered NOW, and that's exactly what was said. Not for launch, but not totally off the table.

So no, it's not "symbolic" of anything.
 

EatChildren

Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
I do find it annoying that Wii U never got the trilogy.

And for a reminder for everyone, Mass Effect 3 on Wii U came out November 18th, 2012. And the Trilogy came out November 6th, 2012 (Xbox 360) and December 4th, 2012 (PS3).

They released the trilogy so close to the release of the port, it completely defeated the purpose of owning Mass Effect 3. The trilogy is what should have been on all systems, and there shouldn't have been a single port of the 3rd game.

It was a painfully stupid decision but in retrospect probably highlights how utterly disinterested EA was in investing in the Wii U. It would have cost them sweet fuck all to have a third party port house handle the porting of one game, their most recent one to be fair, instead of the package of all that would have been a greater workload. They went cheap.

It is worth noting that EA had this absurd belief during Mass Effect 3's release that it was welcoming to newcomers. I remember them throwing around marketing that it was a great entry point for new fans. Their delusion at the time was absurd.
 
I do find it annoying that Wii U never got the trilogy.

And for a reminder for everyone, Mass Effect 3 on Wii U came out November 18th, 2012. And the Trilogy came out November 6th, 2012 (Xbox 360) and December 4th, 2012 (PS3).

They released the trilogy so close to the release of the port, it completely defeated the purpose of owning Mass Effect 3. The trilogy is what should have been on all systems, and there shouldn't have been a single port of the 3rd game.

Seriously fuck EA for that.

Like what did they expect?
 
Wow, pages and pages of hullabaloo over Mario and Zelda being the launch title, something we're going to know with certainty in less than 11 days.

Perhaps - and this is just a thought - when information is contentious, you drop the subject and wait for an official confirmation before discussion resumes?
Or how about we just speculate and discuss as usual? There was nothing wrong with that discussion.
 

Gaspard

Member
Seems like the Wii U is only sold by 3rd party sellers though

There used to be units sold directly by Amazon. But then again they see no demand so there's no supply.

Edit: Geez it seems like every iteration of the 3DS is only third party sellers too. I'm thinking it's because of the opposite reason to the Wii U though.
 
Nintendo can't panic and overreact because some games are not being ported. That is more a Microsoft thing... Nintendo don't sell Windows 10 to the world.

They should secure future stuff, a bit like Sony. They should make From Soft happy. Make Atlus understand this is the ultimate Persona machine. Same with Monster Hunters.


In the west... If that Skyrim is really well done I can see people buying it. Both Nintendo people and double dippers. And then EA will want to follow.

I doubt they're panicking. If anything, my concern is that they won't panic at all. The worst case scenario for the Switch launch is another round of mediocre ports (Skyrim, NBA 2K, a few 2016 multiplats) - which are immediately forgotten in the wave of Zelda, Splatoon, Mario Kart, and other Nintendo standards. Major third parties walk away early, and Nintendo shrugs it off without a concern. Within a year, we're back to expecting nothing.

They need to be giving outside games a bigger platform. Buy advertising for a big Spring release that is hitting Switch near its' general launch. Dedicate some portion of the Jan 13 event to a game we haven't seen elsewhere, and are desperate to see more of. If they can secure a developer like From to do exclusive work, that's even better. Just get the messaging out early that this isn't a repeat of the WiiU, both to consumers and creators.

That's a gross misrepresentation of the facts. It's not being considered NOW, and that's exactly what was said. Not for launch, but not totally off the table.

So no, it's not "symbolic" of anything.

From a consumer perspective, Andromeda hitting 6-12 months after the PS4/XBONE versions is as bad as not appearing at all. You do not buy a console to play third party games, if you cannot play said games at launch.

I don't think Andromeda is a deal-breaker. But if EA doesn't put one of their major Fall hitters on the Switch in 2017 (Battlefront 2 would be the one to watch) - they are not seriously considering full support for this platform.
 

Terrell

Member
Or how about we just speculate and discuss as usual? There was nothing wrong with that discussion.

Considering it led to people throwing around accusations of which rumour was and wasn't wrong, who was or wasn't credible, how badly it mudded up the water and how nasty it got in a few spots, I don't really think we can claim that there was nothing wrong with the discussion that was spawned from it.

From a consumer perspective, Andromeda hitting 6-12 months after the PS4/XBONE versions is as bad as not appearing at all. You do not buy a console to play third party games, if you cannot play said games at launch.

I don't think Andromeda is a deal-breaker. But if EA doesn't put one of their major Fall hitters on the Switch in 2017 (Battlefront 2 would be the one to watch) - they are not seriously considering full support for this platform.

And EA has an entire year to figure out what it intends to do on all of those fronts. Considering that the release date isn't even pinned down for Andromeda, there is an opportunity for EA to change their tune on that game specifically and their position on Switch as a whole.
 
Considering it led to people throwing around accusations of which rumour was and wasn't wrong, who was or wasn't credible, how badly it mudded up the water and how nasty it got in a few spots, I don't really think we can claim that there was nothing wrong with the discussion that was spawned from it.
If that is the case, Switch discussion in general should be shut down considering how much that stuff is brought up.

I was specifically talking about discussion around Zelda and Mario as launch titles. The discussion around that was civil.
 

Nickle

Cool Facts: Game of War has been a hit since July 2013
I'm wondering how they'll handle traditionally "portable" games for the Switch, will some games just have a $40 price point like current 3DS games?
 

jdmonmou

Member
And EA has an entire year to figure out what it intends to do on all of those fronts. Considering that the release date isn't even pinned down for Andromeda, there is an opportunity for EA to change their tune on that game specifically and their position on Switch as a whole.
The game is slated to come out this spring. If EA isn't already working on a port then it's safe to assume that a Switch version will not be released alongside the Xbox and PS4 versions.
 
I'm wondering how they'll handle traditionally "portable" games for the Switch, will some games just have a $40 price point like current 3DS games?

THIS is what I want to hear about in January. If I see Switch versions of multiplats for 40 and I see PS4/X1 multiplats for 60, that means I can buy 3 games on my Switch as opposed to only 2 on the PS4/X1 AND they'll be portable.

I think maximizing my cash means a lot more for me than resolution.

The caveat of course is that there will be some games that are graphical masterpieces that I would rather own on my future Scorpio.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom