Nintendo Switch

[Austin]

Quadruple post; should of used the multiquote feature but too busy hammering out replies as the flew off the tips of my fingers. LOL!

 

Damnit, forum noob! Get with the program!

[Andromeda Stardust]

 

Given the utter lack of Wii U supply I'd be pleasantly but very surprise if we still saw a physical release of the thing. But hey, a guy can hope, eh?

If it do come out, I leave it sealed and play the Switch version!

 

 

 

Damnit, forum noob! Get with the program!

Anyone with 10k posts on a forum is hardly a "n00b..."

 

And look, I used multiquote this time!

[xenomorpher]

I bet they were all white 8Gb models too...

Nope, a bunch of 32Gb models too. I still got the 8Gb because I wanted to get the Batman game instead of Nintendo Land.

[Schizophretard]

 

Given the utter lack of Wii U supply I'd be pleasantly but very surprise if we still saw a physical release of the thing. But hey, a guy can hope, eh?

 

The marketing material they have been sending out shows a physical release:

 

[Andromeda Stardust]

^^So Zelda BOTW IS coming to Wii-U. Excellent!

 

Also where is this preorder link?

 

EDIT: PAL Region [PEGI 3 logo]

[Schizophretard]

^^So Zelda BOTW IS coming to Wii-U. Excellent!

 

Also where is this preorder link?

 

EDIT: PAL Region [PEGI 3 logo]

 

That is marketing material for after Nintendo's big reveal.

 

Edit: I think it coming out for both would make it easier for people to see the benefits of the Switch being a hybrid because they would see a hyped up new Nintendo console game running on a handheld. In other words, it shows off that the handheld is at least as powerful as the Wii U and a step up from that instead of being confused that it is more of a step up from the New 3DS.

[Andromeda Stardust]

IMO if they are going to make this a true Wii-U and 3DS successor, they need to release two SKUs, a full size tablet plus dock for home use and a cost reduced phone sized SKU for full portability, and the ability to sync save data and gameplay progress between both units. Otherwise I see the 2/3DS hanging around for a while as a portable console.

[Austin]

IMO if they are going to make this a true Wii-U and 3DS successor, they need to release two SKUs, a full size tablet plus dock for home use and a cost reduced phone sized SKU for full portability, and the ability to sync save data and gameplay progress between both units. Otherwise I see the 2/3DS hanging around for a while as a portable console.

 

I figured this is probably the ultimate goal for Nintendo. It might not be achievable at the moment however. They may need a year or two of design updates/cost cutting for it to happen, but it would make perfect sense if this is where they are eventually going to head with the device.

[Schizophretard]

IMO if they are going to make this a true Wii-U and 3DS successor, they need to release two SKUs, a full size tablet plus dock for home use and a cost reduced phone sized SKU for full portability, and the ability to sync save data and gameplay progress between both units. Otherwise I see the 2/3DS hanging around for a while as a portable console.

 

I assume that presently the goal is that it is mostly a Wii-U successor with the 3DS remaining supported as the fully handheld console but later if the Switch is massively successful as both a home console and seen as their main handheld they will discontinue the 3DS in favor of the Switch. Something kind of like how the DS originally was backwards compatible with the GBA but then when they saw how well the DS was performing the GBA being supported was no longer necessary. In other words, drop the Wii-U because it failed and release the Switch as primarily a home console successor to that with portability being a secondary feature compared to docked being primary, keep the 3DS around because it is doing well, and then if the Switch does very well and people don't just view the portability as a secondary feature but as their prefered handheld over the 3DS then the 3DS would be discontinued with all the focus switched to the Switch with the identity of it switching from primarily a home console to a fully hybrid half home console and half portable.

 

Concerning your idea for two SKU's, I have a feeling that currently the Switch is as small as it possibly could be considering the size of the Joy-Cons needing to be big enough to be playable, needing room for a big enough battery, needing vents, etc. And if they could have made it smaller they would have because they obviously want it to be as portable as possible. Besides, the 3DS has models like the 2DS that is always opened and big along with XL versions so phone sized isn't always required. However, later they may figure out a way to slim it down slightly or maybe keep it the same size but fit more in it like bigger battery, more power, higher resolution screen, etc.

[godslabrat]

Having Super Mario Maker pretty much confirms that the screen is touch-capable. Nintendo just isn't making a big deal about it because they want to avoid it being confused with the Wii U.

[Gentlegamer]

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ WII-U ZELDA OR RIOT ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

[Schizophretard]

Having Super Mario Maker pretty much confirms that the screen is touch-capable. Nintendo just isn't making a big deal about it because they want to avoid it being confused with the Wii U.

 

If you are talking about the marketing I showed that is Super Mario Maker for the Wii U. However, it most definitely has a touch screen. The question is will it be primarily used for navigating menus and using a few built in apps or be used for gameplay when that may mean that some games wouldn't work properly when docked and/or may only have a portable mode?

[omegadot]

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ WII-U ZELDA OR RIOT ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

 

Yeah, I've had way more good memories with the Wii U generation than basically any other. It's the first console I played with my kids and actually I've bought the most games for it at retail. I think 22 or so physical. Then whatever on the e-shop. My son loves Link and really wants to play the new one. I've love to cap off a generation I really enjoyed with LoZ even if I'm set on getting the Switch.

[Andromeda Stardust]

 

If you are talking about the marketing I showed that is Super Mario Maker for the Wii U. However, it most definitely has a touch screen. The question is will it be primarily used for navigating menus and using a few built in apps or be used for gameplay when that may mean that some games wouldn't work properly when docked and/or may only have a portable mode?

Analog stick and/or Dpad in conjunction with touchscreen is entirely possible. It will like playing Puzzle-De-Pon on DS. Gamers playing said title had the option of touch or buttons, and dual controls could easily allow buttons when docked and touch OR buttons when played in portable mode. Analog stick controls the cursor, and diamond buttons would select, place, move, or delete objects.

[Schizophretard]

Analog stick and/or Dpad in conjunction with touchscreen is entirely possible. It will like playing Puzzle-De-Pon on DS. Gamers playing said title had the option of touch or buttons, and dual controls could easily allow buttons when docked and touch OR buttons when played in portable mode. Analog stick controls the cursor, and diamond buttons would select, place, move, or delete objects.

That makes sense but I'm curious if Nintendo would allow entirely touched based games without a controller option that could only be played in portable mode because if a game isn't required to work in both modes then it takes away the option to "switch" which is the point of the hybrid.

[Andromeda Stardust]

That makes sense but I'm curious if Nintendo would allow entirely touched based games without a controller option that could only be played in portable mode because if a game isn't required to work in both modes then it takes away the option to "switch" which is the point of the hybrid.

I think button controls would be a requirement for any game since it would be required to work in console mode, with optional touch screen support when in portable mode.

 

Meaning all games must work out of the box with button configuration, and if developers want to add touch support to enhance the portable side of the experience, they are welcome to do so, but I imagine touch support would be recommended but not required. Some games might use touch only for menu selection while others may use alternate gameplay options in some fashion.

 

I can't imagine using the web browser without touch support though. It would be nice if the default Switch controller and Pro controller incorporated a small touchpad for gestures like how Ouya and PS4 did.

[Schizophretard]

I think button controls would be a requirement for any game since it would be required to work in console mode, with optional touch screen support when in portable mode.

 

Meaning all games must work out of the box with button configuration, and if developers want to add touch support to enhance the portable side of the experience, they are welcome to do so, but I imagine touch support would be recommended but not required. Some games might use touch only for menu selection while others may use alternate gameplay options in some fashion.

 

I can't imagine using the web browser without touch support though. It would be nice if the default Switch controller and Pro controller incorporated a small touchpad for gestures like how Ouya and PS4 did.

I think the Joy-Cons are suppose to have motion controls for some touch screen functionality on the big screen that may be used for things like web browsing.

 

Anyway, what would be your opinion not on games but on touch only apps? I don't mean streaming apps like Netflix that may have a TV interface for controllers but apps they may be included to add a little more functionality when on the go that would be prefered to be touch based like calculator touch buttons, apps with writing with a stylus, messaging apps with on screen keyboards, and others of a similar type? I would think if apps like that are included then it may be acceptable for them to only be touch based and used only for portable mode because their context is different than that of games that should work on both because with non-gaming apps it would still fit with the concept of "switching" because there are apps that are more appropriate for the big screen while others are more appropriate in a portable form factor and therefore you can "switch" which kind of apps you are using based on which form factor/mode you are using.

[Andromeda Stardust]

I think the Joy-Cons are suppose to have motion controls for some touch screen functionality on the big screen that may be used for things like web browsing.

 

Anyway, what would be your opinion not on games but on touch only apps? I don't mean streaming apps like Netflix that may have a TV interface for controllers but apps they may be included to add a little more functionality when on the go that would be prefered to be touch based like calculator touch buttons, apps with writing with a stylus, messaging apps with on screen keyboards, and others of a similar type? I would think if apps like that are included then it may be acceptable for them to only be touch based and used only for portable mode because their context is different than that of games that should work on both because with non-gaming apps it would still fit with the concept of "switching" because there are apps that are more appropriate for the big screen while others are more appropriate in a portable form factor and therefore you can "switch" which kind of apps you are using based on which form factor/mode you are using.

I have no idea, but if certain software are limited to console or portable mode only (for instance a "console only" may require the extra horsepower the docking station provides and not work otherwise), it would fragment the userbase. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that apps designed around touch controls could have button mode hardwired in but play better on the pad, and likewise a graphics heavy game might perform much better on the big screen. To deny operations though would fragment the userbase, as some gamers may prefer to play on the pad while others prefer the big screen.

 

Perhaps software that utilizes the touch screen for more than just menus could have a "touch enhanced" logo on it, meaning you could technically play it while docked but it was designed for portable use. Likewise those that use motion controls could indicate that on the box as well. We don't even know if the Joycons and tablet have motion sensing capability, but it would be wise, and open up the possibility for ports of Wii games.

 

That said, I'm fairly certain there won't be any sensor bar nonsense with the Switch. One "hidden feature" of the Gamepad was you could use it's docking station and utilize the built in sensor bar in the Gamepad and play Wii games on the tiny 7" screen, but that is hardly what I would call ideal use.

[D.Daniels]

I have no idea, but if certain software are limited to console or portable mode only (for instance a "console only" may require the extra horsepower the docking station provides and not work otherwise), it would fragment the userbase. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that apps designed around touch controls could have button mode hardwired in but play better on the pad, and likewise a graphics heavy game might perform much better on the big screen. To deny operations though would fragment the userbase, as some gamers may prefer to play on the pad while others prefer the big screen.

 

Perhaps software that utilizes the touch screen for more than just menus could have a "touch enhanced" logo on it, meaning you could technically play it while docked but it was designed for portable use. Likewise those that use motion controls could indicate that on the box as well. We don't even know if the Joycons and tablet have motion sensing capability, but it would be wise, and open up the possibility for ports of Wii games.

 

That said, I'm fairly certain there won't be any sensor bar nonsense with the Switch. One "hidden feature" of the Gamepad was you could use it's docking station and utilize the built in sensor bar in the Gamepad and play Wii games on the tiny 7" screen, but that is hardly what I would call ideal use.

 

I think your point about some games being more portable and some more docked is right. But I don't think there is a requirement for dev's to have to make every game portable and docked, I think the option is simply there and dev's can do what they like. If a game has to be docked it won't be fragmenting anyone because you have either option and I Imagine there may come a time when some games work only docked if there graphic intensity and need a steady framerate, like trying to play a new 3DS game on an old 3DS. Otherwise dev's would be making games for a lower spec undocked Switch which in 3 years time the only option is docked to keep up with current gen titles.

Edited January 4, 2017 by D.Daniels

[Austin]

My bet is that Nintendo is not going to allow much flexibility in the matter. They have a tendency to impose requirements upon developers, forcing them to take advantage of certain aspects of their hardware (as examples, forced motion controls on the Wii, or forced touch controls on the DS). However, unlike those previous requirements, I think it will make even more sense to have a strict requirement on the Switch. If games are only playable a single way, it defeats the purpose of the unit.

[D.Daniels]

My bet is that Nintendo is not going to allow much flexibility in the matter. They have a tendency to impose requirements upon developers, forcing them to take advantage of certain aspects of their hardware (as examples, forced motion controls on the Wii, or forced touch controls on the DS). However, unlike those previous requirements, I think it will make even more sense to have a strict requirement on the Switch. If games are only playable a single way, it defeats the purpose of the unit.

 

your probably right, but I can see it putting off dev's in the long run

[Austin]

 

your probably right, but I can see it putting off dev's in the long run

 

You might be right, but I also think that potentially confusing the consumer won't do Nintendo any favors either ("Some games work in this state, others don't.."). So, constant/expected compatibility across the board is likely the only way to go here.

[Schizophretard]

I have no idea, but if certain software are limited to console or portable mode only (for instance a "console only" may require the extra horsepower the docking station provides and not work otherwise), it would fragment the userbase.

I think, like some of the leaks/rumors point to, that games would be required to work at the specs of portable mode but when docked they could either choose to run at the same specs or over clock if they need more power. So, if that is the case that would prevent fragmentation of the games because they would at least be required to run at the minimum specs.

 

It's not beyond the realm of possibility that apps designed around touch controls could have button mode hardwired in but play better on the pad,

But there may be some apps where button controls are impractical and/or just the app being on the big screen at all may be undesirable. I'm thinking of apps that Nintendo allows that makes it more tablet like for on the go. Like an app where you use the camera to take a picture and then manipulate it with touch or just something like that where you wouldn't ever want it on the TV anyway.

 

and likewise a graphics heavy game might perform much better on the big screen.

To my understanding, the games are suppose to function the same in either mode but what changes is that the graphics go from a lower setting to a higher one like more shading, shadows, reflections in water, etc.

 

To deny operations though would fragment the userbase, as some gamers may prefer to play on the pad while others prefer the big screen.

I'm in complete agreement with you on that with games not working on both modes but I'm not so sure it would be fragmenting if we are talking about apps. Specifically ones that only make sense in portable mode. For the sake of argument which I highly doubt it has, let's say it gets a GPS app to help you find other Switch users for streetpass. You wouldn't use that app while docked because you can't follow a map unless you are on the go.

 

Perhaps software that utilizes the touch screen for more than just menus could have a "touch enhanced" logo on it, meaning you could technically play it while docked but it was designed for portable use. Likewise those that use motion controls could indicate that on the box as well. We don't even know if the Joycons and tablet have motion sensing capability, but it would be wise, and open up the possibility for ports of Wii games.

To my understanding, Joy-Con R has an IR pointer on the bottom and the equivalent to Wii Sensor Bar is at the top of the screen that still sticks out when docked. That could be used for some touch screen functionality on the big screen as a pointer for menus and such. I guess Wii games could be played in both form factors since you could set up the Switch on its kickstand but would swinging like a bat at a tiny screen 10 feet away be practical?

 

That said, I'm fairly certain there won't be any sensor bar nonsense with the Switch. One "hidden feature" of the Gamepad was you could use it's docking station and utilize the built in sensor bar in the Gamepad and play Wii games on the tiny 7" screen, but that is hardly what I would call ideal use.

From what has already been shown you can see the IR pointer on the bottom of Joy-Con R. I guess it could be something else but I think that is likely what it is. I doubt it is for Wii like gameplay though and more for navigating menus within the GUI.

[Schizophretard]

I think your point about some games being more portable and some more docked is right. But I don't think there is a requirement for dev's to have to make every game portable and docked, I think the option is simply there and dev's can do what they like. If a game has to be docked it won't be fragmenting anyone because you have either option and I Imagine there may come a time when some games work only docked if there graphic intensity and need a steady framerate, like trying to play a new 3DS game on an old 3DS. Otherwise dev's would be making games for a lower spec undocked Switch which in 3 years time the only option is docked to keep up with current gen titles.

I bet they will make the games for the lower specs when portable and use the higher specs for when docked for more graphical detail. As to the New 3DS games on an old 3DS analogy, it may be backwards. In a few years maybe they release a New Switch with its new lower specs being the higher specs of the current Switch to maintain backwards compatibility while increasing the specs.

[Schizophretard]

My bet is that Nintendo is not going to allow much flexibility in the matter. They have a tendency to impose requirements upon developers, forcing them to take advantage of certain aspects of their hardware (as examples, forced motion controls on the Wii, or forced touch controls on the DS). However, unlike those previous requirements, I think it will make even more sense to have a strict requirement on the Switch. If games are only playable a single way, it defeats the purpose of the unit.

 

That makes me wonder what they are going to require with the Joy-Cons being used as separate controllers. They are basically Super NES controllers with a thumbstick instead of a D-pad. That couldn't possibly work with every multiplayer game. Another one is what they will require for local multiplayer with the screens. Will every game be required to use split screen and/or multiple screens? Also, will local multiplayer games be required to use multiple carts, one cart, or allowed to do either? I think what Nintendo requires with these should find a balance between giving gamers what they want in a non-confusing way with a standard while also not being too burdensome to developers which may be a very hard balance to find.