Nintendo probably will screw up the transition from Switch to Switch 2

The big question with Nintendo now is how they’ll handle Switch 2’s release. While some are speculating and reading the supposed leaks about the hardware, all that’s more or less secondary for now. What the big question holds is all about the games. Nintendo had to save face and their market after the massive failure that was the Wii U, and hitting both the home and handheld console markets in one swing was a hit. Games followed after, and the Switch has been a rather popular machine across the board. This is why Nintendo is afraid to move to the Switch 2.

Nintendo has a weird thing where they falter about every second console they put out when it comes to games. Transitioning from a generation to another has always been difficult for them, and more often than not it has been the competition that has forced their hand. In the same breath we should remember that there really is no end-date to a console; the provider can support it as long as they want to keep making games for it. In an age where backward compatibility seems to be on everyone’s lips, everybody seems to miss how there’s no reason to keep supporting an old system if it still has an active market. South America’s love with the Sega Master System is a great example of this.

Backwards compatibility is probably a must for Switch 2 though, and an easy way to move from the older system to the new one. We have precedents for this, with the Game Boy Advance supporting the Game Boy library and the DS supporting the Advance library in turn all the while taking extra advantage out of it. 3DS supported the DS library in turn, but these are just extra points in the pot. Switch 2 must have appealing games to justify buying the system. Switch owners who already can play their games won’t be shaken by the new system’s better hardware alone. Nintendo has to deliver a handful of near masterpieces in order to ensure moving onwards with the systems is a good idea.

I’d argue that outside the NES, which was a generational transition from Nintendo’s Pong-clones, the only really good start they’ve seen have been the Game Boy and the Wii. Super Mario World may be loved, but wasn’t a system seller. It was arguably too similar to Super Mario Bros. 3. The Nintendo 64 bombed. 3D Mario, as revolutionary as the media likes to cite it, wasn’t exactly wholly embraced. PlayStation was the 3D platform after all. GameCube made a lot of corrections, but suffered a similar end result as the N64. No Mario game at the start is like having no Sonic game on your console’s launch. The DS tried to be a portable N64 and had a slow start, until Nintendo laxed the necessity to use the touch screen, after which it effectively became a portable Super NES. The Wii had the opposite problem. Big damn start with games people wanted, then a few years later in Nintendo just dropped it. Wii U bombed every which way, something everyone hopes they learned something from. Switch 2 should have a clear, separate name and design, not be confused as an addition to the Switch, like what happened with the Wii and Wii U.

All this is relevant for the Switch 2. Three things can happen; good start, sad end. Sad start, pretty good end. Or the worst, it’ll become Wii U 2.

The history of Nintendo’s consoles hasn’t been linear though. They’ve always had a step on the way, which is the handheld market. As the Switch is both a dedicated home and a handheld console, they’re on empty space now with no backup to rely on. This will put a lot more emphasize on the starting lineup, which most likely will have a Mario game on it. The Switch had the benefit of seeing Wii U titles being ported to the Switch, making the Wii U obsolete in every sense, but Nintendo doesn’t have that leverage here either. If the system is backwards compatible, there’s very little reason to port any game to the new system.

However, Nintendo also has to temper the amount of games for the Switch 2, at least on launch. Carefully picking the best of the bunch and presenting them first would sidestep the issue of current generation of gaming, where the overall quality of titles is on the low side. The very reason you see so many remakes is that even a seven years old title is better than what’s currently offered on the shelves. People yearn for older games because of their quality. Companies afford to sell them at their current higher price points because of the demand, and customers deeming them to be worth more over modern titles. The industry is playing it safe, and it has become very dull because of it.

If we’re completely honest, having a Pokémon at the starting line-up would be decent business decision just to get the whole thing going. Nintendo still has strong IPs they own, and that’s gonna make or break the system. Though that’s a double-edged sword, as these games need to excel. Not every game can be a diamond, chances are most of them will be rough games. Not because of the hardware or the like, but Nintendo has a history of forcing themselves on the player rather than allowing other developers to explore different ways to play games, or letting the consumers play the games the way they want. The high emphasize on the DS’ touch screen early on locked tons of games into a certain paradigm that was a disservice, as mentioned.

Online is a big mystery to me though. Switch Online ties all the retro titles to your subscription. If Nintendo would apply to this to the Switch 2 games, that might kill the console in its crib. Imagine purchasing a game, then needing to purchase Switch 2 online subscription to play that game at all. I don’t think this is going to happen, but the current Switch Online’s retro library is a precedent.

If we take the rumours as valid to some extent, Switch 2 will be a conservative system. Something like a Super Nintendo to the NES. Hardware rarely makes or breaks the system, but at least Nintendo and other developers will have a comfortable time making their games. HDR and HD haven’t really done anything to make games better, just more expensive to produce. Everything’s unoptimized and uncompressed nowadays, nobody seems to play it dangerously and innovate on play. Developers are afraid of consumers missing content, so they’ll put as much as they can out in the open without any play needed for them. Handholding has went from invisible element to in-your-face design so nobody could ever miss a turn on a road or miss how you could climb over a fence. Exploratory element of just playing and seeing what’s out there is vanishing.

With the economy continuing spiralling down slowly but surely, Switch 2 has to justify itself in terms of new games. The system has to be presented with new games that are bold and innovate somehow. These games need to make older games obsolete. Of course, these titles need to be system exclusive.

 The Switch 2 has to be neutral when it comes to how it can be played, just like its predecessor. There’s no time to waddle being a DS at start, or Wii U at all. It can’t afford to be too expensive either, and base itself on mature technology in order to keep general costs down.

The biggest threat to Switch 2 is Nintendo itself. They have no competition on the handheld market at all. There’s no Game Gear or PSP to challenge them. Microsoft has effectively gone third party with Xbox brand, which fulfils their steps as Sega’s sequel. I honestly don’t know what’s Sony’s current plan is with the censorships and Helldivers II fiasco going on, but they still seem keen to let exclusive games to go onto Steam. Sony’s synergy between their Hollywood and gaming sections hasn’t really served either.

What about Nintendo still wanting a walled garden, a closed system? The media really likes to sound this bell, telling the readers that the time of exclusive consoles are over. Microsoft and Sony have failed as first party developers in the console market, as the reason for console is to offer a platform for the provider’s games. The games validate the existence of the console. Nintendo is both hardware and software developer, that is their business. This offers simplicity to the consumers, who simply want to play games without needing anything extra. The PlayStation and Xbox systems aren’t in a direct competition anymore. Apple is like Nintendo. They are a combined hardware and software developer. If their OS, or the ecosystem in general, was freely ported to generic PCs and mobile phones, it’d destroy their business model completely. This applies to any corporation that produces their own software and hardware, including companies like John Deere, who manufacture their own tractors and forestry machinery alongside the software that goes with them.

Just because the Switch 2 is coming out, it won’t stop sales for the Switch. It may end up topping the PlayStation 2 in sales in the end, but that’s still a tall order. God help Nintendo if it does, because that’s when shit hits the fan. Then Nintendo will have a legacy they can’t live up to in their current state.

Switching the market

On an occasion on social media, and elsewhere, I see people mentioning how the Switch isn’t competing with one of the HDR twins. Sometimes it’s that the Switch can’t compete with the HDR twins, but the core message is basically the same, pointing out the hardware between the consoles are far apart. I can’t help but to point out how the weakest console of its generation has constantly come at top, so the hardware argument doesn’t have history to base on. People are fast to note that the SNES had better hardware than the Mega Drive, but of course they’d ignore 32X and Sega CD. The Switch can compete with the HDR twins just fine, but is it?

The first question we have to ask is In what market are these companies in? Out of all the three companies only Nintendo is purely a video game company. Both Microsoft and Sony have their fingers in other electronics and media. However, as long as they put out a box that is intended for playing video games, we can say all three are in business of providing a video game console. Nintendo has an extensive library of games they develop themselves for their console, something that both Microsoft and Sony have historically faltered doing. Microsoft’s acquisition of developers recently is surely to change their consoles lack of recognizable titles outside Halo, with Sony managing to kill their recognized IPs every generation. Nintendo keeps certain core franchises in circulation every generation, so they have arguably better track record with this. However, IPs like StarTropics are essentially dead in the water and go unrecognized.

Nevertheless, we should note one important thing; whatever these businesses think they, produce is worth nothing if it isn’t in line with what the customer thinks. If customers think the Big Three are in business of making consoles and video games, they will not find success if they do something else.

Markets aren’t something that just grow out of nothing. A market forms when business satisfies a need or want a group of customers have. When I started this blog ten plus years ago, video game market had some history we could examine and view critically. I believe the market has matured enough that we have electronic gaming has become mundane. It’s not exiting to anyone, game developers aren’t special rock stars. What we’ve seen is something classical; electronic games market was borne when the business recognized there is potential in selling a box playing games, and thus a customer is created. Business is all about understanding human behaviour. Examine and understand why and how people behave, act and react, and you’ll have much easier time producing successful goods. Ignore your market’s behaviour and you’ll find losses.

If you look at what the function of video games is in its market, you should find that it’s about entertainment, the same as films and music. The point of games is to entertain the people buying them. You could describe this as the job of games. Viewing video games from this point of view, the separate market of electronic games vanishes. Sony’s and Nintendo’s competition in the entertainment market becomes more apparent, as Nintendo produces games and toys. Sony produces music, films and games. Both companies have seen global success as entertainment businesses. Microsoft’s history is very different, and so has their approach with the Xbox. I believe this is the issue why Microsoft constantly fails in Japan. A real example would be the time when Microsoft used one of their E3 presentation talking about music, television and streaming on their console. The more other forms of entertainment you have, the more direct competition you have with your games. In hindsight, we can see why Nintendo didn’t allow other forms of entertainment on their console. People might hate purchasing multiple devices, but when the games are desirable enough, they’ll sell anyway.

Markets and demographics often go hand in hand. This is a terrible mistake, as businesses will always start getting ideas to pander to certain kind of people rather than keeping an eye on the market’s motions. When a market starts getting goods that are defined by its target demographic, you’ll find things like Star Trek getting immature with its showcases of tits and ass because the demographic is mostly younger men. There’s a reason why Enterprise didn’t see much success.  Luckily, the showrunners have admitted they failed with Enterprise, but I doubt we’ll ever see that with nuTrek. When you start hyper-focusing and pandering to certain sect of people, the market you’re producing goods to will continue to diminish until you find some kind of floor-level of demographic, a small group of people the good works for and for nobody else. Star Trek used to entertain more people than just certain niche or particular demographics. Nowadays, we can’t say the same.

Take a look at the 1983 US video game market crash. The main reason why the market crashed in in the US was that the games offered weren’t entertaining. In Europe and Asian markets you could find games that entertained the locals just fine. The NES was absolute magic when it hit the US as games were entertaining again. Super Mario Bros. was supposed to be the ultimate cartridge game and was better than anything the US market had seen. In Europe, the crash never occurred and gaming was in a healthy state. The NES was mishandled across the Old Continent and Nintendo wouldn’t find the pole position until Donkey Kong Country. Japan’s game market never really faltered. I have no real answer why the US market failed where European and Asian gaming markets continued to find success.

Let’s turn back to the original question; Is the Switch competing with either of the HDR twins, or can it even compete with either one? The answer is yes, as the Switch competes in entertaining the market, the customer, with games. That is its first, primary function. Its hybrid console nature makes it more accessible than either of the two HDR consoles, and is alone in offering a new portable video game library. While all the hand held emulator consoles are nice, they’re offering the same games we’ve already played. Steamdeck is an outlier, but its main purpose isn’t to run emulation; it’s a laptop with controller bolted into its face.

When market, the people, become spreadsheet pie-charts and quotas to fulfill according to demographic, you know the developer has lost their touch with the flesh and blood customer. All they see is charts and numbers. If you’re not competing with anyone, your good will end up being lousy. When an entertainer loses their hunger for success, they lose their passion to stride forwards. This applies to any form of entertainment, especially G.R. Martin. He’ll never finish that book series. When all you have is demographic at your table, you generally can say that a thirty-years old guy has this and that taste in games. What about forty-something housewife? As a demographic, they don’t have many targeted games. The function of the game as the entertainer has to something else than a multiplayer war simulator. What kind of job a game should have for this housewife? Look at the Wii and the DS, there’s the answer. It’s not easy to make games for housewives, or in the sense of this point, for everyone. It essentially requires developers to make games they might not want to, abandon the “ultimate game” they dream about.

The Switch is very much competing with the HDR twins. A console doesn’t win with its hardware, that’s just means to an end; to play games, to be entertained.

Review: Nintendo Switch Docks, Official, DIY and HORI

Designing a game console in itself is sort of stupid hard on itself. There are no real rules to govern them. Sure, it needs to sit nicely and be as stable as possible while in use, offer good airflow and all that, but there are no ergonomic rules to follow. Not even the buttons are required to follow any set standard. The Famicom was designed to look like a toy, with short cords to the controllers and such, whereas the NES could be mistaken for a grey VCR at a quick glance. The Mega Drive was supposed to be cool with its sleek lines and shapes, contrasting shiny bits with stark black plastic. The PlayStation was supposed to sit among other grey AV station equipment, something all the subsequent PlayStations followed. Things like that, but never anything truly set in stone. What if you have some clear-cut necessities and rules determined by use? The Switch has its official docking station that is designed around the necessities to house the console and offer HDMI stance. It’s also far from being the only dock, or stand, the system has, as third parties and DIY groups have put out numerous iterations. I’ll be covering three in this review, covering the best and worst parts of each of them.

Let’s start with the Nintendo official dock.

Your normal waste of space and plastic

I have to say that from the start this has been a disappointing hunk of plastic. It has weight behind it, but that’s because it is just a huge hunk of plastic. The way the Switch sits inside of it, and how the front covers it, means that whenever you move the console up or down the front will have hard plastic pushing against the screen, scratching it at worst. Only at the very base there are itty bitty rubber pads to keep the console in place, which is laughable. You’d imagine there had been some more effort to prevent scratching. At least it guides the console in just the right way, as the USB-C port at the bottom is rigid and does not move.

That’s all the soft bits you have to hold the console itself down. Not the best solution

At the back we have this this cover flap for whatever reason, perhaps to make it look more uniform. It’s really another useless piece of plastic that should be thrown away. You can see the air vent slots there, which don’t really do much. The other vent actually goes through the PCB housing on the right, meaning the heat that it puts out goes directly inside the dock’s most important bits. A single USB and HDMI ports, with USB-C for power. Nothing much to see here. You don’t see any of them here, because I’ve already taken the stuff out and put them into another dock.

You can throw the lid away and replace it with a fan from a third-party

The stock Nintendo dock is pretty terrible. It doesn’t look attractive and is mostly just waste of resources. You could cut its size down by half and not lose in stability or usability. It’s like a last minute idea that just had to be pushed through, a necessary evil. That doesn’t excuse it from being excessive.

The PCB from this went into a DIY kit that’s sold all around the net, from Amazon to eBay and some random Chinese auction sites. I picked this one from eBay for about seven euros.

This being DIY, I’ve added those soft pads to keep the console from shifting around to any extent

In terms of size, it is one of the smallest docks for the Switch, and it of course brings some stability issues. The dock itself sits down just fine, but due to the design necessitating taking the main connecting parts from the stock dock itself means that the Switch will rock back and fort just slightly enough to make you worried. While the idea to make this DIY dock portable, it should have a base that extents whole of the main body of the console. This would have made it a very clear choice for all situations. The extensions could have been optional or foldable for added portability, but either option would have raised the price. Then again, perhaps not a bad idea.

It is very bland overall, but you can always paint it or add stickers. The HDMI and other USB ports are on the other of the dock

You really get what you pay for. You are required to do some work because it is DIY, but taking the Switch dock apart and installing the PCB into this one takes about five to ten minutes. The airflow is better in every respect and the ports are easily accessible. It’s a very straightforward dock, which can be made even better with some additional work. It is DIY after all, no reason to just leave as-is if there are additional ideas how to make it better. The only major problem is that the Switch, as mentioned, does wobble a bit while sitting on it, and this can cause some stress to the USB-C connector, as it is rigid as ever. Well, those added softpads help a lot.

Everything’s black. It’s then again, everything is black

Sure, it has more mass and size than the DIY dock before it, but considering it has a folding design means it is carries easy. It’s air vents on the back do not obstruct airflow at all either. The Switch sits on the console without any real wobble despite having no locking mechanism present. This is because of the two rubber pads put on the dock that keep the console in place just fine. There is no moving accepting level like with the stock dock. The USB-C connectors moves back and forth instead, meaning it takes more stress to break it accidentally. This is a grand design choice and shows how HORI understands some of the more important details that the Big Three often miss.

When folded, it also covers the USB-C connector, adding protection

The dock sports four standard USB ports, meaning each of the four players can plug in their own USB controller, though none of them are USB 3. Sadly, HORI’ s PS3 controller’s don’t work with it. USB-C port means you can charge the console on this dock as well, or just use it to play any game in portable mode. The dock has multiple angles that will do the job more than fine. This would be an excellent dock to the point of replacing the Nintendo’s official one, except it has not HDMI port. While this is a dedicated portable mode stand, the addition of HDMI capability would have made this probably the best dock the Switch has. Now, that goes to many of the other variants that recycle Nintendo’s official PCB in their housings. Well, it does advertise itself as Portable Table Mode on the cover, so perhaps it is a bit unfair to harp on the lack of HDMI. Despite having a folding design, it just bulky enough not to fit with any of them smaller Switch carry cases. Still, far more portable than the base dock.

Another losing point is that it has no support for vertical mode whatsoever. You can put it sideways and have the whole contraption sitting rather awkwardly and somewhat unstable on the table, but it’s far car what it should be. HORI missed this altogether, which drops the dock’s overall score a bit. Sure, none of the other docks to either, but this is supposed to be dedicated tabletop mode dock.

This isn’t recommended. I’m pretty sure adding some sort of additional leg to the bottom that can be folded out or something would be easy to implement, but haven’t got around seeing how to mod it in yet

Out of all these three, there really is no one better over the other. They all lack something, while beating others in some aspect. It all depends which mode you enjoy your Switch the most. If you’re all about portable mode, Hori’s tabletop dock is your best choice. For TV play, you could do worse than the small DIY dock. Ranking it higher than Nintendo’s own product may seem cheap, but the sheer bulk is its downfall. I have to say that it is disappointing that none of the docks I’ve seen thus far have not taken vertical mode into account to any significant extent, meaning playing games in that mode is still difficult.

I’m really starting to get tired of all of my electronics being black, grey or white. Where’s the use of colours? All we get nowadays are LED highlights and such. I miss the 90’s colourful devices

Review; Switch Joycons

Two reviews, in the same month? That’s what I call Lack of proper topics but mainly because the Joycons themselves are rather interesting piece of hardware once you get around how they’re spun around.

 

Why grey? Because I intend to change the shells on the controllers and the grey one cost me twenty eurobucks less

The JoyCons are essentially Wiimote 2.0. When attached to the main unit/screen, it becomes the second most unwieldiest portable console after the Lynx. It’s general shapes follows Sony’s handhelds and the Wii U pad quote closely, but at this points its more a necessity of ergonomics than lack of ideas. After all, pretty much all controllers follow the same core design nowadays rather than having widely different takes.

Of course, the main gimmick the JoyCons have is the ability to detached them and use them in tandem or individually. This is very neat, but at the same time these controllers are small by necessity. While slightly wider than the Hori Commander Mini I reviewed on the Famicom, everything else is in smaller scale. When used as single controller, you have access to the stick, four face buttons, two “shoulder” buttons L and LZ, and “top” buttons SL and SR. You can see these on the railing. Depending on the controller, you have Home or Capture button, and Plus and Minus (essentially glorified Start buttons.) The button that exist as shoulder buttons when JoyCons are attached to the main unit or grip rest awkwardly near your palm. The ergonomics are also lacking, but that comes with the size.

The most important part with the shoulder button there is that there is no sharp corners or danger for you finger to be pressed between the shell and the button. This is done by giving the button very short travel. Also, notice how the release button is tucked away into a corner

The sticks aren’t exactly the best, and it could use some some of the clickiness NeoGeo Pocket has. They lack any sort of tactile feel, despite the cutouts on the rubber. You simply don’t feel it. It has very short travel distance, which means control with tension becomes a must with certain games that require extensive stick control.

As the controllers have to work both as single entities and in tandem, the placement for the action buttons are sacrificed. They’re very much in the middle of the controller, which works when in tandem, but in single mode they’re just too far from the left edge, though larger hands could probably find this comfortable distance. This is also the reason why there’s no D-Pad on the Switch; everything has to do dual task, and these facebuttons, that use N64 controller’s C-Stick directions, work as D-Pad when used in tandem. It’s awkward and lacks the same smooth use as with normal D-Pad, and sadly its serviceable by a hair. Their dimensions and placement has been worked to its optimum. The buttons themselves are of better Nintendo standard, where the travel is pretty spot on, perfectly raised above the level and have nice tactile feedback.

It must be said that accessing the SL and SR buttons are surprisingly accessible, as index fingers seem to naturally hit their place. On themselves, they’re a bit too flat to use properly, but that’s why Nintendo gave us the wrist attachment people seem to put the wrong way constantly.

Plus and Minus are tucked away in the corner nicely so you don’t hit them, but whatever mode of control you use, they’re awkward to use. Think of Xbox’s Duke’s black and white buttons and you get somewhat similar idea.

 The wrist attachment slide the opposite way you slide the controller into the main unit, corner symbol meeting corner symbol. This adds some heft to a JoyCon and makes it somewhat nicer to hold in your hands, but its main use really is to make the SR and SL buttons more accessible with the larger pass-through buttons.

While you can use JoyCons in tandem separately like with the WiiMote and its nunchuck, Nintendo shipped the console with the grip attachment. It’s not exactly the best however. It’s like they wanted everything to stay straight and have the JoyCons sit like they sit on the main unit. This means whenever you use this, accessing the left face buttons for D-Pad use and the right stick requires either over-extending your thumb downwards or move the whole whole on the handles. Supposedly, the prototype was in an angle to give it more ergonomic shape, but for whatever reason this was dropped. There are many custom attachments on eBay that fix this and make this the most viable option to use the JoyCons in tandem. It would seem that the JoyCons will see rather large amount of optional accessories and attachments down the line. Here’s hoping Hori will do some good ones in the future, like the upcoming D-Padded JoyCon.

So, bottom line? The JoyCons are not the best controllers out there. The whole thing of them working as a single unit or in tandem forces just enough compromises to make all of them feel somewhat awkward. As usual, once you get used to them, muscle memory handles moving your hand up and down as needed. If there had been some concessions for functionality over visual design, these would have been winners as first hybrid console controllers. As they are now, JoyCons do their job, but the alternatives are probably better.

I must admit that the JoyCons have one thing over all other controllers; Switch has the most satisfying feel of clicks and clacks whenever you are attaching them to anything.

Expanding Switch

With the recent Nintendo Direct, which I’ve just manage to watch thanks to life, we can say that its first year of games is pretty damn good. Very rarely does a console get this sort of first year. For example, the DS’ first year was abysmal before Nintendo turned the console around and made it the top selling console. Perhaps the only consoles that can compete with the Switch’s library as it is now compared to their first year are the NES and SNES. Famicom had pretty terrible first year, which the NES managed to avoid to some extent.

Switch’s success is tied to three or four different elements, depending how you want to count them. First is, without a doubt, that it is a hybrid console. Its portability without a doubt  is part of the Switch’s charm. Much like all previous handheld consoles that had extensive support, namely the Game Boy series and the DS, Switch is enjoying consumers carrying it around, though in somewhat limited extent due to its size. Sony could’ve taken few lessons from Nintendo how not to drop the ball with handhelds. Poor Vita, people had such high expectations for you. Being handheld is not really a reason for Switch’s success, but it is certainly part of it. Hardware, that is. Switch seems to be easy to develop for and allows more ‘portable’ games to be made that don’t require to be stupidly expensive Triple A. They have their own slot in the fray.

Nintendo bringing their old arcade games to the system is great. While some will scoff at them, and never remember that Nintendo started as an arcade game company before entering the home console market, these titles will have their audience. The more Nintendo brings their older titles that have not seen a release in years, the better. Just tie all of my past purchases to an account I can carry between consoles, so I don’t need to buy the same game again and again for new systems.

Of course, Nintendo releasing a Switch/ Super Mario Odyssey bundle will see more sales. The game, despite whatever personal issues I have with it, does look fun and may see good amount of sales. Now if Nintendo put the same effort and quality into a 2D Mario game, we’d be golden.

The second reason is that Nintendo’s own software has been of high quality. Breath of the Wild has gained loads of support from the consumers and generally has been accepted one of the better Zelda games. Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, while certainly mainly just an upgraded edition of the Wii U game, it has made it rounds. The Battle Mode and included DLC really showed Nintendo that doing a complete release with some extra characters thrown in and tweaked gameplay pays the bills better than trying to what Capcom did with Street Fighter X Tekken. These games, especially Breath of the Wild, are keys to why Switch has been successful thus far. Hardware’s prowess doesn’t come from it being extremely good or able to push out incredible graphics, but something that can keep costs low and still be able to deliver easy environment to develop for. Develop games, that determine the success of the console.

This third reason could be counted with the second reason, but it really deserves its own slot, and that is third party titles, including all the smaller releases. While some of the titles are ports and some pretty low quality, but the fact that they are there makes the deal. Once you have the Big Titles in your library, you will want to look at the smaller and cheaper titles you might want to pick up. Indies (oh there’s that term again) will drop this sort of titles into the store from time to time. The more you have titles of at least decent quality, the better. Call it shovelware if you want, but all winning consoles had the most shovelware people could choose their favourites from.

The fourth reason is expansion. All consoles require their userbase being expanded at some point and it must be constant. Switch has been a success among Nintendo fans and general audience, but it still lacks certain appeal from its library. For example, Rocket League may be another port, and for a good reason gets dropped few notches because of it, but it offers something new not in other versions of the game. Same with Skyrim. The game may be six years old at this point, but there are still people who have not played it. It will also tap to the same core fantasy group that might find Breath of the Wild appealing, just with less Japanese feeling to it. Both Doom and Wolfenstein II both fall into a similar category with Skyrim in that they open doors to different interests the console currently offers. Back in the day, the media would say that the Switch is finally getting mature games to its library. It would have been preferable to have completely new entries to Switch in these franchises, but those can always follow if these are successful on the platform first and manage to solidify the userbase further.

Switch’s library is being expanded with these ports, like with L.A. Noir‘s updated one. While these are ports of past titles, they have an audience that will check them out, and another part will return to them if they’ve gotten rid of the previous version.

With this sort of tactic, the Switch has seen, and will see, a healthy game library from where both high-end and low-end product consumers will find something to enjoy. The problem of course with this is that it needs to be maintained. The Wii lost its steam halfway through due to Nintendo essentially dropping the support (Wii Music essentially killed the console), and looking at how Nintendo has released software on their previous systems, we can see that their main support is pretty much lost few years into a console, before things gear up for the development of its successor, with third party following in suit. As useless it is to hope that this time around that support wouldn’t vanish just like that, I highly doubt that’ll happen. While a console doesn’t have an expiration date other than when the developer drops their support, this five to six years cycle has become a standard of sorts. This is why we can be glad to see the Switch being expanded like this during its first year of existence, as that should lead into second and third year of further support and expansion.

 

Switch inherits Wii’s philosophy

Nintendo Everything has an interview up on regarding the inception and design of the Switch. We’ll take it at face value for now, all this sort of interviews are mix of hard facts and PR after all. It’s a bit on the long side, four pages in total, but a good read nevertheless.

The first thing they quote with big blue font is how the Switch was designed to bring everyone together and play. Remember Wii’s We’d like to play ads? The Switch encompasses the same idea, which incidentally is shared with the NES (which they specifically mention and want to go way back to the hanafuda cards) and to some extent with the SNES. Can’t forget the Game Boy and the DS. It’s sad to see Koizumi saying that playing together is core essence of Nintendo, when they’ve done so much do disregard this. It is also not the full extent of Nintendo’s core, but this is neither here or there. What Koizumi is saying with his little speech about getting strangers into gaming is expansion of the market, something that Nintendo’s successful consoles have done.

The idea of Nintendo’s home console being a device that could be turned into a sort of game-presentation/sharing device on its own probably shaped the console all the way through the development. The Switch is chock-full of technological things that aren’t really needed, like the HD Rumble that the upcoming Senran Kagura is probably going to use somehow to imitate the physics of female body. The split wireless controller would’ve been enough to allocate this, but Nintendo does have a history of obsessing with useless WOW!-factors, like the 3D screen on the 3DS or the tablet controller on the Wii U.

While the Wii wouldn’t fit into this console-presenter idea, it had much easier time penetrating the wall that modern controllers put up. The Wiimote is an easy contraption to handle and use, which made the Wii an excellent console to boot up and have people playing games without worrying much how to control a given game. The rest was up to how well the game itself was designed. There certainly was a WOW! factor in Wiimotes without a doubt, but at least they saw use.

I should note at this point that the Switch is mentioned began development about three years ago. This is about the same time Nintendo’s main support on the 3DS and Wii U started lacking in major releases (or on VC for the matter) and fits their modus operandi. Just like with the Wii and previous consoles, about half of the predecessor’s life cycle is dedicated for the development of the successor.

Both Takahashi and Koizumi mention how Iwata helped them with engineering challenges, as both of them have design backgrounds. While they paint designers’ life as a daydreamer, it’s much more closer to constantly trying to solve a puzzle but having jack shit idea how to proceed. You just gotta make things work, and it helps if there are people in your team who can tell you what’s possible and why. Giving a designer total freedom only asks trouble.

I’m also calling bullshit on the fact that single-player games saw a rise on the N64 because only one controller was included. Knowing how Nintendo has gone on the record how they don’t follow their competitors’ actions (which is probably bollocks as well), how can they determine whether or not N64 was the reason for this supposed rise in single-player games? If Nintendo is worried about lack of multiplayer games and support this view, they should’ve dropped the price of their controllers and adding multiplayer elements to games like Super Mario Sunshine rather than bitching how third party is doing the same. It could be also argued that a game that can be played both single- and multiplayer and can stand on its own in single-player mode is superior to a game that requires two or more players at any given time.

Naming your product something that could attract the consumer is no easy deal. Sometimes you find a perfect name that has nothing to do with the actual product, like how Uncle Ben’s has nothing to do with rice, yet it’s a good name due to branding and all that. A PlayStation does give some hint what done with it, as does GameCube. Switch on the other hand doesn’t, but with the marketing and branding Nintendo’s doing, the idea of switching things up on the fly seems be associated with the system. Whatever else they had as candidates would be interesting to see, but at least it’s something simple and memorable. Like GameBoy.

One thing that will make the Switch stand apart from its competitors… actually, I’m not sure if the Switch has any competition per se. Because it’s a hybrid console, it doesn’t compete in traditional game console field. It competes against whatever Sony and Microsoft will dish out next, but they’re on weaker legs due to decentralisation of home entertainment. On handheld markets it has absolutely no competition with Vita being dead in the water elsewhere but in Japan. I hope you like importing for that little bugger. What a load of wasted potential Vita was. Whatever it is the competition will offer probably won’t be a pure bred game console. Consoles as home media centres is a ruling paradigm Nintendo has mostly gone against, and the Switch continues to do so. It’s main thing is to play games and dammit it needs to do it fast.

Takahashi’s argument that they didn’t want to fight smartphones and wanted to make friends with them makes no sense. Nintendo’s games and smartphones are two different markets, but I guess this is where the whole DeNA thing steps in. The whole social media aspect is what they gunned for, and seems to be the reason online chat and numerous other aspects of their online seems to be less than screwed up. Now that their online will actually cost money, I really do hope they’ll up their game in every aspect. I know it’s a futile wish, but it’s good to live with hope.

Nintendo also knows VR is terrible but still claims to be researching in it.

What strikes hopeful in Switch’s development is that it took in young people, to an extent. While it is good to take in new blood in order to rejuvenate your company and get in some new ideas, this is a generation that has lived with game consoles their whole lives. Unlike with the first three or four console generations, there is a preconception with high-end consumers what a game console needs to be like nowadays. It’s like how Zelda fans who jumped unto the ship with Ocarina of Time tend to rewrite Link’s Adventure as some sort of terrible aberration from the form. That’s Majora’s Mask.

Perhaps the last bit that garners a mention in this post is how Takahashi agrees that Switch should have more software than what was on the Wii or Wii U. Wii might be a bit hard to overcome, but Wii U’s statistics aren’t anything to write home about. Bloomberg seems to think that the Switch will sell more than the Wii, which is a tall order. While the initial reaction to Switch was essentially the same as with any other successful Nintendo console, i.e. dead on arrival, its sales show otherwise. Because the Switch sits in the handheld console market, it has the possibility of selling higher numbers than the Wii without a doubt. If it hits both home console and handheld markets with equal force, it’ll outsell the Wii. If the devs have games half-assed, it’ll sell less.

The Switch had a similar launch to the DS. It was big, with big sales left and right. Then came about a year long slumber, after which it was revised as a portable SNES of sorts. The Switch could have a similar cycle, where after this big start it trails off, and when enough and certain kind of software is release, blows up in sales again. Most likely during a holiday.

Monthly Three; The Game Boy march

While reading on materials on the history of the Game Boy, there was always two things that popped up; people saying it outsold like no other despite having technological disadvantage and the fans of the its competitors calling each others’ favourites a piece of overpriced garbage. Unlike the NES, the Game Boy was a much larger success in all three main regions, despite it still seeing shortages in Europe overall. However, going into GB’s market success is not the point here. The design philosophy is, and how pretty much all ‘victorious’ consoles reflect this.

While I tend to give Gunpei Yokoi loads of credits about his philosophy about mature technology, he was no different from any other Japanese business executive. The corporate culture is that the man upstairs gets the glory over the hard-working underling, and this can go well up to the main chairman if it benefits them. Such was the fate of Satoru Okada in Nintendo’s R&D1 under Yokoi. In an interview with Retro Gamer (shortened here) he goes over the main design points that the Game & Watch, the Game Boy and the Nintendo DS had. Even in this small bit you see that Yokoi’s Game & Watch series was a good starting point for what was to come, as the Yokoi’s group first wanted to downsize it and make more pocket fitting. Indeed, while Game & Watch was led by Yokoi, and the D-pad design is credit to him, Satoru Okada deserves the same amount of credit for creating said device when he handled the technicality of things. A designer is only part of the solution, unless he is a jack of all trades, master of none.

The point of this group wanting to do technologically better game system is nothing new, and while on surface is all about the cutting edge technology, nothing in the Game & Watch games was new when it came to hardware. This is where the design sets in with the D-Pad and the overall shape of the unit. These are the hardware design choices that matter more than how powerful the CPU is or the architecture of the machine in terms of what makes things tick right. It’s not exactly about bringing in something new. I hate to use this term, but innovating based on existing facts. The D-Pad was, and is still a great solution to a control problem. Single buttons don’t really give the most intuitive feeling out there, unless they’re in a cross shape like on the PlayStation controller. The wrong kind of design can make it feel terrible, like on the Dreamcast and Xbox 360. In the end, the D-pad really is a very downscaled, flattened joystick in its core form.

As for the Game Boy, what is a surprise that Yokoi’s initial pitch is essentially a continuation of the Game & Watch, which Tiger Electronics’ games essentially were in many ways. Indeed, the Game Boy as it came out is the child of Satoru Okada’s ambition to push the envelope further. If Yokoi had not given in to Okada’s persistence to develop a far more robust and ambitious handheld gaming machine, we might be calling any other handheld game console a Game Gear.

This is one of the elements of the silver bullets in creation a successful console. It’s not enough it to use existing, mature technology and innovate with it, but it also is required to innovate. The Game Boy’s legacy for future handheld consoles is in its careful design to be cheaply produced and sold, while offering a lasting housing that can be carried easily and take serious damage before being decommissioned (or even survive a missile strike in Gulf War), but also offered games that last more than few minute at a time. The hardware was not cutting edge for these reasons precisely, but was good enough. Good enough is a magical term that is more successful than cutting edge. Game Boy didn’t succeed because it was like the Game & Watch, it succeeded because it used the same ambitious model the FC and NES had… at least in Japan and US. We know how well Nintendo handled Europe.

There is nothing special or magical in Game Boy’s victory march over Atari Lynx, Sega Game Gear or PC Engine GT/TurboExpress. It sold for $99 at launch and was packed with Tetris, the only game that could be called perfect in design. Atari’s Lynx was out at $179.99 two months later, with lesser titles in its launch library. Game Gear launched at slightly lower price of $149 with the usual marketing campaign of it being the cooler option for mature gamers who liked hardcore titles. Like the PSP. While Game Gear was essentially a Sega Master System in a smaller box, the PC Engine GT really was a portable PC-Engine and able to play the same card based games as the home version. Its $249.99 price point was stupidly high, and this is 1990 money we’re talking about. Taking account devaluation of the dollar, the price equals around to $453.00 modern day money.

Paying $99 for a console that came with a game, earphones and a link cable to play with your friend was an option that couldn’t be beaten. Better, more robust hardware with backlit and coloured screens lost to a console designed to be enjoyed en masse by everyone, everywhere. Batteries ain’t cheap, and the fact that you got a whole lot more bang for you buck with the Game Boy than with any of its competition. The successive sales encourages more third party developers to develop games of the Game Boy over less popular options, and the rest is history. Nintendo would replicate the grey brick’s success with the DS… after they stopped treating it like portable N64 and tackled it as it were a portable SNES.

Yokoi left Nintendo at a point in the mid-1990’s and developed the WonderSwan, a terribly Game Boy-like console, for Bandai. Other than its extremely slim form and monstrous battery life of over 24h on a single AA-battery, it was also completely out of date and had no driving ambition behind it. Even its buttons were inferior in design, especially the loose D-pad that had no feeling to it. For a handheld console that came out in 1999, it had no legs to stand against Game Boy Color that was released a year prior. SwanCrystal, the best version of the console with colour LCD, saw a release in 2002, but with little support and mostly Bandai’s own games on the system, it was a relative niche product overall. Sure, it saw one of the best versions of Final Fantasy I, II and IV before modern era remakes, and even that is debated sometimes. WonderSwan is something what Game Boy could’ve been if Yokoi’s original idea had been implemented instead of Satoru Okada’s; a system standing on old ideas, re-using concepts rather than innovating based on them and creating something new.

To return to the opening to the start of the post, the very reason why people are astonished by the fact the Game Boy was so successful is because it was good enough, but still better than its predecessors. You don’t need to be cutting edge, just ambitious to have the good stuff available for everyone, and keep the quality high while delivering all sorts of games across the spectrum.

With this, I’m officially putting Monthly Three’s on hold. Whenever I get a subject that requires more than one post, it’ll return.

The 9th console generation hits in March

Nintendo has a strong start with the Switch as it stands now. While the event did show numerous titles, in the end it left yearning for more. Seems like Nintendo’s intending to keep  a hype train going until the launch hits.

Overall, I have to say that the presentation itself was rather professional. No outlandish theatrics or anything like that. No real bullshit dead air, just proper and interesting presentation. The clothing was a highlight in itself, showcasing that most of these people are professionals. There was class in this event that is absent from most. Well, outside some choices, like Nogami aiming for funnier style that was more worth a facepalm than anything else, and Aonuma really needs to stop wearing that terrible looking hoodie. Actually, remove Aonuma altogether.

Having Tatsumi Kimishima on the stage in the very beginning was what was needed. He might not be Iwata or Yamauchi, but the public does not yet know who he is. He took the stage in a very sure and confident manner. Mikishima had a proper stage presence, which was enhanced by the fact he had an interpreter. Having a Japanese businessman speaking in broken English is jarring, as you have to concentrate on the words rather than on the content. Shibata of course went in with broken English as an exception.

Shinya Takahashi is another new-ish name. As with Kimishima, the public got to know him better. While Miyamoto has been the face of the company alongside Iwata for some time now, it seems Nintendo has been progressively been pushing to give a face for their franchises. After all, Nintendo has been becoming a company of IPs in few ways.

The info about the Switch goes from pretty damn neat to weak. First of all, region freedom is a welcome change in how Nintendo handles their machines, and this tickles all the importers’ nuts just the right way.

Paid online is hit on the system, but then again a game that relies solely on online multiplayer will become obsolete in number of years solely because of that. Like it or not, a game still needs to have a solid offline mode stand the test of time. Hopefully the subscription for the online is less than what either of their competitors prices theirs at, and is more usable than before.

Switch’s battery life is no worse than 3DS, but at least I can throw in a battery bank. However, the main hardware showcase, the real piece of hardware that really matters when it comes to game consoles, is the controller design. While I personally love all the stuff they managed to pack into the Joycons (the name is still terrible) the fact is that they are over-engineered. The reason the Switch retails at $300 is probably partially because the controllers. I intending to do a longer piece about the controller design itself sometime later, so let’s leave the rest for later.

I admit that the size of the controllers seem to be on the smaller side.

The Pro Controller will retail at $70, which further reminds me how tired I am to pay stupidly high prices for controllers. The price point will hurt Switch’s sales, and with what looks like a Mushroom Kingdom-less 3D Mario, the Switch has few things going against it already.

I did expect to see more gameplay footage rather than promotional trailers, but I guess that was a foolhardy wish. 1-2-Switch is no WiiSports and won’t drive system sales. It probably works the best as a tech demo of sorts and a party game for some, but overall there will be no large interest in it. Arms won’t fare any better, but I hope it’ll have better controls than most of Wii’s boxing games. The logo’s also too industrial, something that would fit on a DeWalt drill. It needs to be punched up a bit. Splatoon has its fans, but a system seller it is not, and the sequel really doesn’t seem to change things around one bit.

Super Mario Odyssey is a surprise in that it reminds more Sonic Adventure than previous Mario titles. There is nothing special about 3D Mario, and moving to the “real world” instead of expanding on Mushroom Kingdom is a mistep. Now if they could put the same amount of effort and money into 2D Mario games, things would be great. 3D Mario hasn’t really driven high sales with Nintendo’s past consoles, and with the changes Odyssey has to the world, it’s doubtful this will drive sales either.

Xenoblade 2 looks nice and all, but I doubt it will be a huge hit either. Fire Emblem Musou will stay a niche title still. Only Japan cares about Dragon Quest, there are numerous reasons why Final Fantasy has always been more popular. Shin Megami Tensei‘s 25th anniversary title hopefully visits the roots of the franchise a bit more and hopefully gets a fully uncensored release in the West. Let’s be honest, RPGs is what Switch needs, which is why something like Skyrim will probably see at least decent sales. Project Octopath Traveller left people largely cold as it showed jack shit.

It was fun to see Suda-51, Sega’s and EA’s representatives come to the stage and mention they know the Switch exists and intend to develop for it. Props to EA’s interpreter. Europe loves FIFA, so this bit felt more fanservice towards soccer fans than anything else.

Despite the lineup we saw towards the end of the event, we didn’t get launch lineup, but we got confirmation for numerous titles, including a Street Fighter II (now confirmed as Ultra Street Fighter II: The Final Challengers) and a new Bomberman. Goddamit, a Bomberman title on launch? Sign me in. The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild goes for the epic, and it still needs to convince me that it’s more than what the trailer show (i.e. less plot and more adventure content to play with lesser emphasize on puzzles.) However, between it and Super Mario Odyssey, it’s BotW that has the edge.

Thou the edge needs to be cleaned up, it’s rusty and needs polishing

3rd of March is when the 9th console game generation hits. It was a nice ending for the show, though more info came soon after.

For example, the Switch Online Service as a free trial period and seems to have the usual stuff you expect from modern online services: free games, exclusive deals and online multiplayer. However, the inclusion of device application for phones and tablets is stupid. Why would you need to use their dedicated application to call your friends to play an online game? You can just phone them. Online play for NES and SNES games can be good, if its implemented right and connection is up to it. Then again, not many retro game is worth online play, if we’re brutally honest. Co-op is fun and all, but without direction connection to the second player, it’s missing something essential from the mix.

News are pouring in all the time, but I’ll take the slow route with them. Little consideration and taking it easy instead of insta-blogging should do some good for the thought.

However, from what we already have here can make an educated guess that the Switch won’t probably be the same success story as the NES (sans Europe) or the Wii, but won’t be a bomb like the Wii U either. It’s going to do just fine, meandering on the more positive side of the story.

Switch the talk from hardware

I really do sound like a broken record at this point. With the leaks about Switch being less powerful than the PlayStation 4, things have gotten on the overdrive again with calling it a failure on the launch. None of Nintendo’s more powerful consoles have been a success. As Yamauchi said, a game console is just a box to play games on.

Take a look at Nintendo’s history with consoles. NES was underpowered compared to its competitors, yet it came on the top. Well, except in Europe, where Nintendo fucked their marketing and Europeans had their computer games. SNES was ultimately weaker than the Mega Drive thanks to the addons and despite them still came to the top, not to mention the other competitors of the time. N64 failed despite having more powerful hardware than the PlayStation or Saturn. GameCube too was ultimately a failure despite topping the PS2. The Wii was a massive hit despite being weaker. The Wii U on the other hand had jack shit when it came to software (just like the N64) and had that huge controller nobody wanted. The same can be seen in the handheld market. The Game Boy slaughtered all of its competition as did the DS. The Vita could have trumped the 3DS if it had any software worth shit, but SONY repeated the exact same travesty they did with the PSP.

The common consumer doesn’t give jack shit about how strong a console is. Why? Because they know hardware does not mean better games. People absolutely hate paying for new hardware, because it’s the games that matter. The hardware race has always been part of the PC culture, not console. Consoles have been about software race. Tech fans no need to apply for console gaming, if we’re being brutally blunt here.

Because Super Mario Bros. was such a success, you saw a lieu of games trying to replicate its success, most notably Sonic the Hedgehog. The developers just need to do their job and optimise the games, and even better, design games from the ground up for the Switch and all is golden. Of course, because everything just runs on the same engine as everything else and nobody bothers doing any extensive optimisation to ensure the smoothest possible experience (or even know how to do that at worst case) we’ll just get sad and hastily put together ports.

Consumers never bought Nintendo consoles for them being Nintendo consoles. Not outside fanboys. People bought them for the software, for Mario and Zelda. People bought PlayStation for the same reason; it had games they wanted to play, not because the hardware. Nintendo is not a niche as some would assume because of their approach. No, on the contrary. Their consoles tended to be cheaper and smaller than the competitors’ because of matured technology. This is again one of those things we’ve gone over so many times, but seems like people are still ignoring the fact when Nintendo uses Gunpei Yokoi’s philosophy alongside Yamauchi’s, they strike gold. Nintendo, when they are at their best (NES, Game Boy, Wii) Nintendo is far from being a niche. Electronic games isn’t just a hobby of selected group of people, but something all can enjoy, and striking that Blue Ocean should be expected and even wanted, not the opposite. Losing hope over lack of hardware prowess is useless. Your life doesn’t depend on a game console, go outside camping sometimes.

Switch has few points going for it that most seem to ignore. One is the cartridges. This needs more fanfare, as it means the games themselves will be far more longlasting than the optical media. The lack of long loading times helps too. Oh now you care about hardware? Oh you. Secondly, the fact that the Switch is a hybrid also means the games are not required to be connected to the Internet all the damn time.

The biggest problem the Switch currently has is the fact that Nintendo isn’t showcasing any of that software. This is the sole reason why people are talking about Switch’s hardware to the extent they currently are and each and every bit of information is torn apart. There’s nothing else to talk about the Switch, and I haven’t seen anyone else to discuss its design either. The latest The Legend of Zelda got pushed back too, so the media can’t discuss that either. So, hardware it is for them to keep the clicks up. I guess I’m no better, commenting on the fact. Unless Nintendo rolls something significant on the software side with the Switch, there’s no valid reason for me to discuss it any further.

One of my New Year’s promises should be to throw this broken record to trash and just re-blog the sentence Software matters more than hardware whenever applicable.

Enter Nintendo Switch

The rumours were mostly true, the NX, named properly as Switch, is a hybrid.

If you haven’t watched the trailer yet, here it is.

This is first impression by large. You should also check Nvidia’s post about the console.

White and black are passé, the colour we’ve shown is grey all around. It has very little sharp corners and overall looks smooth. It’s what the leaks told it was, and the overall impression is very subdued, but rather attractive. I hope multiple colour options are available, and at least one is in NES colours.

The controller design, or Joy-Con as they call it, lacks a good D-Pad on the go. I understand that it’s a sacrifice that had to be made because of the nature of the machine, but it still sucks. I hope third party Joy-Cons will remedy this, and that third party Joy-Cons can add features that are not in the standard ones. The name Joy-Con is awful tho, it should be anything but just ‘con.’ The Switch is following Wii’s example by showcasing the controller itself first, not any of the launch titles. Could we expect something like Wii Sports? I hope the controllers can function as or with a Wiimote.

Not only that, but the buttons overall worry me. The plus and minus are shaped as they are, which work well with the blind or otherwise visually impaired, but the rest of the console isn’t designed them in mind. There’s no reason they couldn’t be normal buttons.

The idea of having the controllers separate is neat, but the obvious question is how much wear and tear the controllers can take before they don’t click in anymore. Is the lock mechanism exchangeable, or moulded? A lot of little questions like that pop up to me. They are mighty small when playing with a friend, but at least it’s a neat feature. I just hope games will be able to make use of it well. Sports titles at least should be able to. 2D multiplayers could make a triumphant return, even when you’d have to use a stick to control the character on-screen. D-pad or an arcade stick will always be better for the likes of Mario and Mega Man than a thumbstick.

The Pro-Controller is business as usual. I just hope the D-Pad won’t suck.

The stand/rack where the screen unit will sit in looks a bit bland, but nothing that decals can’t fix. The best thing about the Switch at this point is not on the go part, but that it uses game cards. That’s great, I’ve always disliked the disc medium for whatever reason. However, the itty bitty stand that makes the screen unit stand (seen in 1:04 in the video) will break easily. These sort of legs are just awful, and it should’ve been full console width.

This being a hybrid console, Nintendo most likely will not create a DS for the time being. This will be the first 9th Generation console, and it’ll last somewhere 2022. Because of the leaks, the surprise is very low. You will see a lot of previous gen games ported to this, as it is per fashion when a console has no defining feature to it. For example, the NES and GBA saw a lot ports from home consoles, but the DS forced companies to think outside the box and make new games. However, the more software the Switch gets, the better. I’m just hoping most of it will be something new. You can expect Nintendo to release their old games on the Switch.

However, the best thing about the Switch’s video is that it shows people playing together, as a group. It follows the same idea of playing together. However, a lot of the people in there were from certain age range, and I hope this won’t mean Nintendo is going to ignore the rest. Make this a NES 3.0.

Price can make or break the console. This one could be on the expensive side, and that could damage the console’s image. The Switch needs to be cheap and easily available, not a high-end market product. However, what’s more important are the games. This console won’t sell on its hardware, but on the games that will make use of the hardware. Nintendo has shown none as of yet, and the moment we see the games we can make further assumptions about what their goals are.