Topic: Nintendo Switch --OT--

@Octane Of course the Razor Edge is similar too but I picked the Linx as it appeared to have more in common and basically an Xbox controller system (compared to the more PS style of the illustration). These Tablets though are already portable and capable 'gaming' devices - just often more mobile style games due too the limited inputs. These tablets though are more designed for more complex games. The Linx for example can play XB1 and Win10 games streamed to it. I bet the Razor Edge works with Steam so access to a LOT of the games console owners are able (or were in the case of older games) to play.

Then of course we have tablets like the nVidia Shield K1 (although a speculated reason for the cancellation was product conflict with the Nintendo Switch, which uses similar technology) and I wouldn't be surprised if other tablets come out with the ability to link a games controller to them. I am surprised that Apple hasn't released an iController to link with its iPad's for gaming...

@Octane That design is hideous. Good thing Sony will never make it.

Maybe if Sony did make a console handheld hybrid, maybe it could be cheaper than the switch with less tacky gimmicks, have more power, and probably get more 3rd party support. IDK, it could end up the same like the PS Vita

Watched a few unboxing videos by a few Youtubers tonight and I liked what I saw. I am excited for The Switch and almost found myself thinking about preordering one now, but then I am reminded about getting excited the same way with the Wii U and then how much of a disappointment it was in the lack of games. So if anything maybe this fall when I go to New York I will pick one up.

@KratosMD The Dock was only ever described as a way to transfer the image to the big screen and charge the device. ALL the power is contained in that small tablet. Its getting a boost because of the 'power' supply the Dock provides rather than from the battery which essentially just upclocks the GPU. If it ran at those speeds, the battery wouldn't last long at all.

What you are essentially getting is a 'portable' WiiU that when 'docked' will be a more powerful WiiU. Unconfirmed 'specs' indicate actually that undocked, running at the leaked clock speeds, the GPU itself isn't as powerful as a WiiU BUT because of better architecture etc, should deliver at least similar performance. The reason 'some' games may drain the battery quicker than others, is because 'some games can run the GPU at 'higher' clock speeds. I guess the test will be to see what 'difference' Zelda offers on the WiiU and the undocked Switch as both will be 720p. It maybe that the small screen will help the game perform better - they could reduce the draw distance for 'detailed' objects for example on the Switch because its too small to see compared to the bigger screen on a WiiU.

The cost does seem 'expensive' when compared to a PS4 or XB1 but not that more than a Vita or WiiU. Its coming with the two controllers, the dock, a controller thing to plug the two joycons into and the wrist-straps too. How much does an iPad Mini 4 with 32GB cost? OK the screen is larger and higher quality but that doesn't come with controllers etc either and wouldn't be surprised if it costs more than a PS4 Pro. Yes you could buy a Vita or a 3DS for that money but neither are as powerful as this. Here in the UK, the difference in cost between the WiiU and Switch is about £30 (although the Wii does come with a game) so for an extra £30, you are getting a more powerful console that offers portability and of course access to all future Nintendo games - Zelda is the last game Nintendo are making for the WiiU.

Personally, I won't be getting a Switch - certainly not for the foreseeable future.

@KratosMD Turns out its temporary.

So the switch is a tablet with dodgy controllers which can hook up to a tv, but its not great at that either.

Sounds absolutely dreadful, but I can see it selling a bucketload to teeny boppers.

@themcnoisy Ehhh in fairness its the most exciting Nintendo since the Gamecube. I do want one

A guy at my work got his today. He is going to bring it in on Monday so I can have a play but it was actually a lot smaller than I thought it would be. I've been trying to get him to lick his Zelda cartridge all day but he wasn't falling for it.

@kyleforrester87 But its an underpowered tablet?

I can see my kids loving this though.

@themcnoisy Underpowered compared to a home console, this isn't a home console though..

@themcnoisy Not too fussed about the power to be fair, if mobile phones had games like Zelda I'd probably bother playing them haha. Will do a trade in/wait for a deal of some sort I reckon.

@Octane Its underpowered compared to some tablets.

Obviously way more powerful than the ds family, so Nintendo can do alot of good work on this platform.

But the reality is, its just a tablet with uncomfortable faddy controller parts. Maybe I'm miffed that I and a lot of old nintendites have been asking for a relatively powerful console gimmick free when in fact we have been gifted a tablet with tidgy controllers. Screw that noise. Its the 3rd faddy console since the Wii and its doesn't whet my appetite at all. But could it be a success? Sure, but its Nintendo leap pad teenager version to me. I'm half expecting some buttons on the side which make animal noises.

@themcnoisy The Wii U was fairly traditional, apart from the screen. It was just underpowered. The Switch however is both a handheld and a home console in a way, that's something. And there's the Pro Controller too, just like how there is a Wii U Pro Controller.

This'll very likely be the first Nintendo console that I'll ever completely skip. I don't want Nintendo to get confused and think we all want tablets rather than actual video game hardware. I don't even own a cell phone because I believe they're incredibly intrusive and tablets usually have dreadful controls so I don't touch them with a 100 meter pole. While the Wii U "Tablet" notice the air quotes, feels like an actual controller with decent weight and sturdy buttons, the Switch tablet is a tiny tablet with no weight and flimsy little third party "controller" attachments...

I dont feel like wasting 300$ on a rushed console.

_{Watch the language please -Tasuki-}

Where do you find a 6-8 inch tablet more powerful than switch around 300? If there isn't any, can you really say it is underpowered?

An observation i have noticed about the switch, PC gamers seems to embrace it, it is mostly console fans complaining.

@Therad Dedicated gaming Tablets are not that common place - there is the Linx Vision (£120) and Nvidia Shield Tablet (£170 - but stopping because of the Switch) that are cheaper. Both have 8" higher res screens but the truth is, there isn't really any 'dedicated' handheld/tablet device that can compete at this price. Its certainly more powerful than the 3DS and Vita. You can buy an iPad Mini or one of the other 8" tablets for around the same price or less (if you don't buy the latest version) but they are not really dedicated gaming tablets but more for a range of uses (like a PC) and whilst can do gaming, its not like they are AAA quality games - maybe old AAA games but not the latest. Most 8" mini tablets though offer more versatility - access to internet, movies, music, netflix/amazon as well as countless apps inc gaming. Its very difficult to find a 6-8" dedicated gaming tablet because their aren't many but we can look at the Nintendo Switch and how it compares to other 'consoles' - the way it is marketed.

However as a dedicated games 'console', its incredibly under-powered. The Xbox One was under-powered compared to the PS4 and the Switch is not even close to the XB1 in terms of power. In every area, the CPU, GPU and RAM, it can't match-up to these over 3yr old machines. Undocked, its likely to be less powerful than the console it replaces but having a Portable WiiU isn't necessarily a 'bad' thing - docked though, its certainly more powerful but at most around half as powerful as the XB1.

Nintendo opted to market this as its next console that can 'switch' into a handheld device - not a handheld that can connect to a TV and become a 'console' - maybe because of their 3DS and didn't want this to appear to be a 'replacement'. Its marketed as the 'replacement' to the WiiU.

Point is though, with the Switch marketing itself as a Nintendo 'Console', its pitching itself against the competition - in this case Sony and MS. Its releasing between the PS4 Pro which for £70 more gives you a much more powerful beast and the Scorpio which is likely to be even more powerful again. The majority of 'multi-platform' releases are those you are more likely to find in the 'indie' store. Yes Skyrim may be coming, but that was originally a last gen game but you won't see games likes Mass Effect or Red Dead Redemption 2 coming. No doubt Skyrim will be a £60 cartridge that doesn't run or look as good as the other console versions, let alone the PS4 Pro version that also costs a lot less

Maybe not that important as those with the other consoles and PC's will play on those devices. However its repeating the same thing we saw with the WiiU where the 3rd Party support amounted to porting old generation games or indie/arcade titles and any 'new' 3rd Party releases will be scaled back for the Switch. The only advantage of Fifa will be its portability but for the complete package and best 'home' version, you need to buy it on an another device.

Maybe PC gamers are 'embracing' it more because they are interested in the 'Nintendo' exclusives and actually wanting a relatively powerful mobile gaming device. Considering the cost of PC's - at least if you want the 'best' system, the Switch isn't going to appear that expensive. Buying a PS4 is likely to be 'just' for exclusives and there is little point in buying an XB1 (unless you want a 4k HDR Bluray player and take advantage of 'cross-buy'). Its not like PC gamers already have the 'extra' costs of PS+ or Gold either - something that console owners already have so adding in Nintendo's option later in the year is another factor.

In virtually every way, the Switch is more expensive than the other consoles and offers 'less' in terms of power/performance. The 'Pro' controller is more expensive than a standard XB1 controller - which it closely resembles and more expensive than a DS4 too - in fact you could probably buy 1 of each of these for the cost of the 'Pro'. Lets not forget the Memory capacity too - You can buy an XB1s for under £200 with 4k HDR Bluray, 500GB of internal storage - easily expandable, access to both this and a lot of last gen Xbox games or if you already have a XB1, buy the Linx Vision and stream games from your Xbox One/Win 10 PC or play from Steam/Win10 store for £120.

It maybe the most powerful handheld - but its really only competing with the 3DS and Vita in that area but as a console it is under-powered and we saw what happened with the WiiU. The advantage this has over the WiiU though is that 'Handheld' option...

Portability has always had trade-offs. I heard the exact same argument in regards with laptops, and it is a way to try and simplify the argument that it isn't good enough, but yet, everyone has laptops today because they are sleeker and can be moved without a trouble. Of course it won't have BluRay or an harddrive, because that would drive up cost and it would be much much bigger. Switch is about the size of two harddrives duct taped together. It is freakishly small, it is smaller than my daughters 7" tablets. Another thing, since carts are faster than discs, it isn't necessary to install anything from games on the HDD.

Comparing it with linx vision only makes the linx vision look worse. It seems really clunky compared with the switch and not especially portable. If anything it seems like they are trying to emulate the Wii U with off-screen play. Only that you need a gaming computer + the linx.

Thanks to Breath of the wild, we already knows it is more powerful than wii u when it is handheld. But power isn't everything, it has become a mantra among console gamers. Wii U problems was multifaceted, it had poor marketing, it had low specs for the price and it didn't support modern game engines. The last one combined with install base is the most important when it comes to third-party support.

You only need to look at PC to see that many of the AAA titles can run on less powerful hardware. And as a primarily PC gamer, I always find the power argument hilarious when it comes from console owners. If graphics were your primary drving force, you wouldn't play consoles at all.

Just adding graphical power to consoles won't be viable in the long run. We are rapidly reaching the diminishing returns territory. The more details you add to a game, the higher the cost to produce. Adding more stuff adds much more work. Adding more triangles requires more GPU-power and it won't even be noticed by most. You can cheaply add resolution and frame rate, there is a reason companies boost these properties. But those aren't really worth it in most living rooms, especially resolution.

We could use power advancements for better AI. We have heard the mantra about "better AI" since 20 years back, but they are still dumb enough that a human can calculate what they are going to do. If any of the three added a simple to use neural network it would be a game-changer. I don't think it will happen for a long time though.

So the console owners need to do something else. It seems like MS are trying to make Xbox a default platform for PC-gaming, while Sony are dipping their toes in VR. Nintendo is trying to add portability and local multiplayer.

Most people seem to think portability is the main ability, but this is wrong. Local multiplayer is what is going to sell the console. Local multiplayer anywhere is a game changer. It has 2 controllers out of the box which means every game can add it without it being a waste of reasources. The ability to take it to a gathering of some sort (convention, roof-top-party) and just give a controller to someone is a super-effective way to sell consoles.

@Therad The Switch has a better CPU and double the RAM of the WiiU but the GPU itself is not as powerful undocked as the GPU of the WiiU. It's also capable of using 'half-floats' which may help give better performance as not every instruction needs 32bits. This may be why Zelda runs better on Handheld mode. Texture streaming is the same - a few 'metres' around the character but maybe the extra CPU power helps with the performance. Not every game is purely GPU bound.

The Linx may seem 'clunky' but then its only £120. You can buy an iPad Mini for the price of the Switch and that feels very snappy and responsive as well as having a much more impressive screen, longer battery life etc - maybe not so good for gaming as its not optimised or have the same range of releases. Point I was making though is that in terms of Tablet based gaming systems, the Switch is pretty much out on its own.

Laptops may be less powerful than Desktops - but that rarely impacts on what people use their laptop for. To get a decent gaming Laptop, one that can match up to a high-end PC, then you need to spend a lot of money but they do exist. Most laptops though are perfectly powerful enough for the majority of people and the usage they use them for. You don't need a Titan type GPU if you don't play games and as long as they are powerful enough to access the internet, run Office etc with a decent screen to watch netflix on etc, a Laptop is more than powerful enough. You aren't going to see many people buying or using a Laptop for gaming.

Its not just 'graphics' that are important with gaming. Frame rate is also important. Trying to say that Console gamers would/should buy PC's if 'power' and graphics were important is also another 'ridiculous' comment that PC gamers make. There are many more reasons to buy a console than a PC than 'just' graphics/power. However when it does come to 'consoles', console gamers want the 'best' available for the money and ease of use. Most are not under the illusion that a Console can match up to a high end PC but still want to know which will offer the best visual experience or more importantly, best performance. People also buy a console, safe in the knowledge that all the big Multi-platform releases will be playable. You aren't going to see many people buy a 'Switch' as their 'primary' gaming system.. Power is also an 'indication' of potential so something that 'seems' weak is more likely to struggle. Its lack of power is why it won't get the latest big games because they can't run adequately on the system.

MS went for the multi-media all in one device which you could argue hurt it. Focusing more on that side than as a gaming device had a big negative impact on the brand. Sony have only just entered into the VR space but sold the PS4 as a 'gaming' device first and foremost.

The switch may have 'local' multiplayer anywhere - well for as long as the battery lasts and you can't charge it easily in tabletop mode. The controllers may 'split' into two 'mini' controllers for local MP but they are 'basic' and you wouldn't want to play a FPS game with these - at least not one as complex as those we see on other consoles. There is a reason these use dual thumbsticks. Its as cheap to buy 2 XB1 controllers as it is to buy a complete set of Joycon's or just 1 Pro controller. The thumbsticks on the Joycons are more limited too. Given the choice of sitting comfortably on a Sofa, playing split-screen on a large TV or trying to play splitscreen on a 6.2" screen on a 'table-top' - NO contest. I certainly have NO desire to go to party or convention to sit and play local MP. I would rather take an iPad mini to a convention as that offers gaming as well as the opportunity to check emails, watch TV, take photos etc etc during 'quiet' moments but if I was going to a party, convention etc, gaming not exactly my main reason to attend these. Maybe as a PC gamer, the Switch with its portability and 'local' MP is a bonus - after all its not easy to sit comfortably around a 20" monitor on a desk and share a keyboard. The cost of the Switch its 'negligible' compared to the cost of their 'set-up' - even compared to the cost of some of the components. However when compared to a XB1, PS4 or Pro, its a lot of money for something that can't compete. Even the 'few' games that will be on both won't offer the same level of performance and/or visual quality so it really comes down to whether or not you want or will benefit from portability and therefore sacrificing visual quality and gaming performance for the privilege - as well as having to spend more for the game too.

Each to their own of course....