Deku Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 Did I even mention Splatoon 2? Man, they announced so much awesome stuff. Quote Link to comment
Mocha Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 Yeah, Punchy. It's probably just PS+. But it's worded really weirdly, and I can see how you can read it that way. Quote Link to comment
ace Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 Just now, Schmengland said: I highly, highly doubt that. Common sense dictates that they will be ports with added online features, the latter of which will require the subscription, if anything. I'm betting that you'll still be able to play those games in their original form. If I'm wrong, I'll eat those words, but for now, that's my wager. It specifically says "for free for a month" that sounds like it's free for that month and that's it Quote Link to comment
Punchy Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 1 minute ago, Kodiack said: You sure about that? I'd imagine that most people that are interested in the Switch are interested in it because of Nintendo's first-party games. You're not going to be getting those titles anywhere else. WiiU already set the precedence. Everything you stated, one could replace Switch with WiiU and the outcome would be the same. I don't think Nintendo wants a repeat of the WiiU. Quote Link to comment
Cryptic Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 Just now, Yuki said: Yeah, Punchy. It's probably just PS+. But it's worded really weirdly, and I can see how you can read it that way. They should probably clarify this soon. Not that the clarification will make their paid online service THAT much less shitty. Quote Link to comment
Carl321 Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 (edited) Even if Nintendo manages to catch the eye of the casual audience this thing is gonna be hella expensive. I fear that even if they get the software aspect right for once people will be turned off by that alone. Console could very well flop just because of $70 controllers. I was planning on maybe getting a Switch SOME DAY as a home console, not as a portable. If some kind of brand new Smash game comes out down the road you bet your sweet bottom I'm not playing on a single Joycon. Those Pro controllers need to drop HEAVILY. Edited January 13, 2017 by Carl321 Mystearica and AGES 2 Quote Link to comment
Punchy Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 1 minute ago, エース said: It specifically says "for free for a month" that sounds like it's free for that month and that's it But for $10 you can have it forever. Until the system after the Switch (if there is one), in which case you can buy it again. For $10! Quote Link to comment
Penance Fracture Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 1 minute ago, エース said: It specifically says "for free for a month" that sounds like it's free for that month and that's it Yes, it does. The wording is fucked up, I'll admit, but I'm almost positive that one can download a given NES or SNES game for free as long as you do it in that first month. After that, you can play it in perpetuity. There will be some kind of new online feature to those games--probably cloud saves--that will require the paid subscription. Otherwise, the game itself will be local. The only way I could see it working otherwise if Nintendo are trying to answer PlayStation Now. Which, in this context, would indeed be fucking dumb. Quote Link to comment
Igneous42 Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 (edited) So that was pretty neat. Here are my thoughts The Good: Zelda looking pretty great, really optimistic about how good it's looking Super Mario Odessey being compared to SM64 and Sunshine. I have been wanting a sandbox 3D Mario game to make a return. Fire Emblem Warriors Splatoon 2 Overall decently strong initial first party announcements. Price Point about where I expected The Bad: A lot of gimmicky stuff going on, much more so revealed than the initial impression let on. Not that they are always bad, but oftentimes the "gimmicks" are the reason Nintendo's systems are weaker and being weaker is often why they lost out on 3rd party games. 2 1/2 - 6-hour battery life is pretty rough. If it was normally closer to the 6 I'd be ok with that but I expect that is only on simpler games. 3rd party support still seems meh. A lot of the games are ports, the ones that were not shown were just barely mentioned. Requiring a phone app for stuff that the other consoles and even individual games can do natively seems really dumb. If it's an additional option that would be cool but The Hilarious unexpected best part of show Suda broke the translator, just straight up savagely broke him. Edited January 13, 2017 by Igneous42 AGES and Kodiack 2 Quote Link to comment
ace Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 (edited) @Schmengland (since I forgot to quote like a fool) I like how you're explaining this like you know for sure. I don't think any of us can do that. I'd like to think I'm wrong but with the way they blundered through everything else I don't think I am. Edited January 13, 2017 by エース Punchy 1 Quote Link to comment
Kodiack Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 2 minutes ago, CHAINMAILLEKID said: They'll stay interested a lot longer if it can play the games their friends are playing. What about the lack of cross-platform play in the current-gen consoles anyways? Just having the same game isn't enough. Everyone will need to have the same console too. I suppose that's why I see the Switch as a companion console of sorts. I'll continue to play many of games on my platform of choice, but the Switch will be there when I feel like playing what it has on offer. I don't see why you guys believe it's necessary for Nintendo to directly compete with Microsoft and Sony here. Nintendo's not trying to cannibalize that market. The Switch should be able to thrive quite happily on its own merit. Anecdotally speaking, I've seen the Switch drum up quite a lot of hype among people that otherwise have zero interest in the Xbox and PlayStation platforms. Quote Link to comment
purple_beard Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 If they are going to charge for a online service then I need to know PRICE and what I get.... and I would need to see some real return on my investment with hook ups and a more stable online multiplayer experience. Quote Link to comment
Punchy Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 Just now, Carl321 said: Even if Nintendo manages to catch the eye of the casual audience this thing There is nothing from that presentation that is going to get the casual plebs to drop their iPhones and iPads for this. 1 2 Switch better be like $15 or it should have been a pack-in. This presentation need an RE7 or something substantial. Something that would have made a huge impact. It's just WiiU vibes all over again, down to the unprecedented EA support guy. AGES 1 Quote Link to comment
Kodiack Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 6 minutes ago, Punchy said: WiiU already set the precedence. Everything you stated, one could replace Switch with WiiU and the outcome would be the same. I don't think Nintendo wants a repeat of the WiiU. The Switch has one huge selling point that the Wii U does not: Portability. The Switch should be an effective successor to both the Wii U and the 3DS. Having all of Nintendo's first-party titles available on one uniform platform is a game changer for people like me. AGES 1 Quote Link to comment
CHAINMAILLEKID Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 Just now, Kodiack said: What about the lack of cross-platform play in the current-gen consoles anyways? Just having the same game isn't enough. Everyone will need to have the same console too. Local multi makes up a ton for it. The main thing I've seen that makes it valuable is when a bunch of friends get together to play and hang out. In those scenarios it doesn't really matter what you play the game on when you're by yourself, but if you don't have it at all then it kinda sucks. Quote Link to comment
Doc Brown Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 (edited) 29 minutes ago, Yuki said: RIP Nintendo. Ugh. That's not good enough Ninty. One game a month? Hell even Sony does it better. They offer a handful a month. Step it up! Edited January 13, 2017 by Doc Brown Quote Link to comment
Mocha Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 1 minute ago, Kodiack said: The Switch has one huge selling point that the Wii U does not: Portability. The Switch should be an effective successor to both the Wii U and the 3DS. Having all of Nintendo's first-party titles available on one uniform platform is a game changer for people like me. Not on that battery. Quote Link to comment
Doc Brown Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 2 minutes ago, purple_beard said: If they are going to charge for a online service then I need to know PRICE and what I get.... and I would need to see some real return on my investment with hook ups and a more stable online multiplayer experience. Yep. But to be fair, their online has been more stable in some ways than Sony in my opinion. But it's the only good advantage that it has over it. Quote Link to comment
AGES Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 (edited) 7/10 Okay presentation. Although, if you wanna compete your going to have break your shell a little bit more harder, Nintendo. Edited January 13, 2017 by AGES Quote Link to comment
CHAINMAILLEKID Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 Just now, Yuki said: Not on that battery. You're not going to be carrying it in your pocket. Its not portable in the sense of a traditional handheld to begin with. I don't expect battery 3 hour battery to be really detrimental. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.