Switch Discussion Thread

[marurun]

I saw this somewhere else, maybe here. In a lot of ways, it's a Super Vita. Outside of the Shield, I don't know that we've seen a handheld quite this powerful.

The problem with this is that there are more powerful tablets and phones. I realize they aren't used for gaming the same way, but some more traditional style title are available on tablets and phones. Not so many that I think people will see them as competition, fortunately for Nintendo.

[isiolia]

The thing to remember about the pro controller is - correct me if I've misunderstood something because that's entirely possible - it will have motion control capabilities. The PS4 controller has this to an extent, but IIRC that function based on tracking the light bar with the camera, a cheaper but less accurate and less reliable method of motion control.

I think you've mixed some things up.

The Dual Shock 4 (and Dual Shock 3 for that matter, and Steam Controller) have a gyroscope and accelerometer in them, allowing for motion control on the same level as a Motion Plus Wiimote (the original Wiimote only had an accelerometer, the Motion Plus addon tacked on a gyroscope too).

What they don't do is track where the screen is, which may be what you were thinking of. Wiimotes "see" the sensor bar (or candles, or whatever) via IR, where Sony's (and Oculus's, HTC's, etc) approach is the opposite, tracking the controllers with camera(s). Sony's approach there is rudimentary when compared to other VR setups (which have multiple cameras and an array of IR LEDs on the controllers), but compared to the Wii, I wouldn't say so.
MS, of course, just tracks everything with a camera and doesn't build sensors in.

So, what it sounds like to me is that the Switch controllers are building on what the Wiimote did, whether via a better sensor, or simply more capable software. As cool and interesting as it might be, I doubt it adds much to the cost.

[marurun]

The Joy Cons have an IR camera on them that doesn't require an LED bar, so they probably operate more like a lower quality Kinect camera, but on the controller instead of stationary on the TV.

[ElkinFencer10]

The thing to remember about the pro controller is - correct me if I've misunderstood something because that's entirely possible - it will have motion control capabilities. The PS4 controller has this to an extent, but IIRC that function based on tracking the light bar with the camera, a cheaper but less accurate and less reliable method of motion control.

I think you've mixed some things up.

The Dual Shock 4 (and Dual Shock 3 for that matter, and Steam Controller) have a gyroscope and accelerometer in them, allowing for motion control on the same level as a Motion Plus Wiimote (the original Wiimote only had an accelerometer, the Motion Plus addon tacked on a gyroscope too).

What they don't do is track where the screen is, which may be what you were thinking of. Wiimotes "see" the sensor bar (or candles, or whatever) via IR, where Sony's (and Oculus's, HTC's, etc) approach is the opposite, tracking the controllers with camera(s). Sony's approach there is rudimentary when compared to other VR setups (which have multiple cameras and an array of IR LEDs on the controllers), but compared to the Wii, I wouldn't say so.
MS, of course, just tracks everything with a camera and doesn't build sensors in.

So, what it sounds like to me is that the Switch controllers are building on what the Wiimote did, whether via a better sensor, or simply more capable software. As cool and interesting as it might be, I doubt it adds much to the cost.

Ah, yeah, you're right. Well, mostly; I forgot about the gyroscope in the DS3 and didn't know there was on in the DS4 (I've had a PS4 Camera since the system came out, so I always just assumed it used the lightbar).

[Tanooki]

I think reprise is on it there.

It's about marketing and message. The system itself needs to be seen by the mouthy media, the big mouthed buyers, and just retail in general as not just another console. It has to be seen as a dockable handheld that gives a (micro)console experience -- basically the Shield tablet/console setup. If they end up playing it off as another console, it will be another underpowered stab by Nintendo who has no clue.

I think they do though, but it comes down to perception. The fact they have some players they lost years ago in the mix talking it up and showing something of what they have planned already is more encouraging that third party development is more promising than it has been since the Gamecube if you think in console terms. Handheld wise though it looks like they have the backing the DS's and Gameboy's had out of the gate.

There are other factors development side that help. This is supposedly the easiest system ever to make games for and to port from the Android like environment. You can fairly well pop and drop and it works, just needs system customization level tweaks to eek out better performance and put in Nintendo technical standards to it. That's huge because it makes it an easy cash cow to shovel games onto the eShop and in many cases those cards too. The cheapest card reported now is $30 for the Binding of Isaac, and that's straight up handheld pricing going back to the late 80s through the DS era.

They need to stay on message publicly, and privately they need to keep pushing indie and long lived developers to see it as a money maker that's stupid easy to code and carry coder over to to make money off of with minimal investment. The less going in, the more you can get out from sales and WiiU failed that hard which ran off game makers.

[Sarge]

The Vita is a fantastic system hampered by Sony's ridiculous choices pertaining to memory, and apparently forgetting it even exists. I get your point, of course, but the Vita could have, and probably should have, been a success.

My overall point is that if you want to view it as a handheld, it's the most kickin' handheld ever.

[Tanooki]

Hey found this, if anyone is concerned about the size of the joycons on their own.

I compared the on the first link to the second and third to get to this:
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/10/h ... -analysis/
https://mynintendonews.com/2016/10/24/n ... ew-3ds-xl/
http://kotaku.com/the-controller-for-th ... 1787386409

Summary to save trouble. The width of the controller is comparable to the Gameboy Color, larger than the Famicom Mini Edition controllers, and bigger than the GB Micro. The buttons and analog on it appear to be borrowed from the New3DS modeling for size.

I don't recall too many people complaining the GB Color controller setup was painful to use. I know the joycons aren't tall, they're around 1 1/2 inches, but if you pop the extra plastic slide on with the buttons and strap attached it should come up to 2 inches in size. That would put it in there with I guess the vertical dimensions of a gb micro or mini bluetooth controller for android while the width is of that of a Gameboy Color.

Small for sure, but it should not cause cramping.

[marurun]

If I didn't know better, nook, I'd say you're becoming a fan.

[Tanooki]

I'm warming up to it.

Truth be told and I'm sure some of you will be amused, I pre-ordered it on a whim through best buy when I saw it selling out immediately on amazon and the rest. I figured I'd do some hard research, watch the news, see how stuff flies, and then on pick up day I'll decide what to do with it then.

My huge concern was a bad case of Wii-itis(especially the flesh eating WiiU disease.) Third party mouth service, or third party half baked year to two plus halfassed ports, while Nintendo makes excuses(or in denial ignores things) while slowly shoveling out stuff to keep the core happy for a time. The launch into this looks quite a lot different so far to me than the build up to the Wii, and definitely the WiiU.

They're not like Wii pandering to the grandmas, fitness types, etc all the non-gamers leaving players ignored as a given. You don't see franchises being rolled out by B-teams doing point and click/light gun knockoffs and other weak sauce. They're not doing the arrogant WiiU angle either of having a smattering of ancient ports with stability problems with many third parties even then talking shit before it's even out, and ignoring them having an expensive system with minimal backing even by the maker.

Switch has brought so far back to it franchises a Nintendo console has not seen since the Gamecube, N64, or even SNES and late NES era. I'm talking Bomberman (GC/N64) to Street Fighter (SNES.) Hell Nintendo hasn't had a Dragon Quest console game since #4 on the old NES too come to think of it. These are the confirmed games so far: http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2017/0 ... ease_dates (and this is missing a couple more announced after that was published)

That's not bad for a 9m 3 week window of 2017, more than WiiU had going for it in quality and quantity. Also you have developers who entirely ignored them for awhile now if not completely with Bethesda and Konami(Bomberman) back in there. Capcom too if you are something other than a Resident Evil port fan. Have they ever had a Shin Megami Tensei console release in the states? Minecraft is new too pretty much. Nobunaga's Ambition is coming back as well last seen on SNES. If you like Zelda Wind Waker, that Oceanhorn blatant knockoff is coming as well.

There are some ports but they're apparently not garbage stuff with Rayman, DBZX2, Cyberia, Skyrim, the 2 known sports games, Sonic stuff, Disgaea 5, and I was surprised to see RiME I had wanted on PS4, and even a physical final version of the Binding of Isaac (seems it will retail for $40 too.)



If I decide to keep it, and these games come to market. Unlike the WiiU and my 2 year history I had with it, there's a sharp difference in what there is to be and what there was. I could buy a game a month and be entirely happy with the device pretty much. Zelda, Bomberman, PuyoxTetris, DQ11, RiME, Has Been Heroes(looks interesting), Sonic, Mario kart (sold WiiU as it arrived), Binding of Isaac, Ultra SF2, Mario, others (but that's 11 interesting titles so far.) I don't care how much horsepower it has, I view it as my shield tablet...a handheld you can dock to a TV. On that it delivers a powerful amount of games and third parties seem warm to it with physical projects not just words.

Had this been just a console, I'd probably ignore it for a year probably and see how things went. But this has stuff announced through the year already and E3 you know they hold out more for. It should be an interesting year for Nintendo that'll make or break them.

[dsheinem]

This is the first Nintendo console I have pre-ordered, ever.

I am not even that excited for it or that optimistic about its future. I think there were a lot of shortsighted choices announced in the reveal that will set up the Switch to probably perform about as "well" as the Wii U in the long run, if it can even do those kind of numbers. I am buying it strictly for the sure stream of quality Nintendo titles (even if it is just 1-2 a year), and that's enough for me at this point. I doubt that is enough for most of the general public, though.