Totaling The Hidden Costs Of Owning A Nintendo Switch

SixFootDuo said:
What on earth are you talking about. Sorry but you do not get to re-write history to serve some sort of agenda. Do you have any clue ( of course you don't ) how many times gamers have asked for a game on a past Nintendo console only to be told no, it was too under-powered? time and time again in the past devs said they could not bring whatever game to Nintendo. If you would open your eyes you would see that it's already happening with the Nintendo Switch lol. People, a lot of people have started to ask for games and already the Devs are saying the same thing they have always said.

Look, between Nintendo and Xbox, I would def keep a Nintendo, especially if it could play more games. A lot of people feel the same way. But, you're missing the larger argument altogether and that is, The Switch is another gimmick, not my words, everyone elses. Parents are already invested with the "portable' 3DS for their kids, in the millions. So ... parents are expected to buy their kids yet another portable system on top of the portable system they have already invested in? This is going to be very confusing to potential buyers of which many happen to be parents. Remember, Nintendo is larger bought and paid for by parents, not teens like the Xbox and PS4. Oh, lets not get started on all the addons that jack up the hidden costs of the Switch.

I am pretty damn positive The Switch is going to fail.

I think the best chance Nintendo had was going back to the basics, increasing horse-power and launching with an incredible library of all their classics. Why you zeroed in on just my high powered comment and took my entire argument out of context was very rookie of you. lol.
Click to expand...

The fuck are you ranting about? What does ANY of that have to do with what the market could or could not support? Did you even fucking read my post?
 
TIL: I have to buy two extra controllers, a charger for one of those extra controllers, and extra storage on a console that already has 32GB integrated and comes with a controller (with a built in charging docks/rails for said controller, on the console itself).

Also, somehow a "game" is a "hidden cost."

I am not a fan of the Switch (both in concept and in execution - though I understand where Nintendo is coming from on this), yet I feel there is some extreme bullshit in OP.
 
jeremyshaw said:
TIL: I have to buy two extra controllers, a charger for one of those extra controllers, and extra storage on a console that already has 32GB integrated and comes with a controller (with a built in charging docks/rails for said controller, on the console itself).

Also, somehow a "game" is a "hidden cost."

I am not a fan of the Switch (both in concept and in execution - though I understand where Nintendo is coming from on this), yet I feel there is some extreme bullshit in OP.
Click to expand...

Well it is Polygon, there is some extreme bullshit in everything they write.
 
Derangel said:
Unless you plan to play games for more than 20 hours straight, that is not a concern.



Because that would be fucking retarded of Nintendo to do. Name ONE successful 3rd high powered console ever in the entire history of the game industry. Xbox? Failed. Gamecube? Failed. Dreamcast? Failed. Saturn? Failed worse than the Wii U. 3DO, Jaguar, etc, etc, etc, etc. The market barely supports two high powered consoles it will NEVER support a third.
Click to expand...

The problem with your list is the reason that they "failed". I also would have to question if they actually failed like you claim also. The original Xbox was Microsoft's first attempt at a system so they had put a lot of R&D into the system, as they had nothing to start with. Even then it sold better than the Gamecube by a few million. So in that case you are saying that both the Gamecube and Xbox failed, meaning that only PS2 "won" that generation. I wouldn't exactly call either of those systems a failure. Even then I wouldn't call it a failure. They just didn't make a huge amount of money. Move up one generation and you have the Xbox 360, Wii and PS3. All of those did alright in their own way. However each had their own stumbles. At first nobody wanted the PS3 as it cost too much, many that did buy it only did so as it was the cheapest Blu-ray player out there, Microsoft was off to a good start till the red ring of death, once they changed the warranty to 3 years instead of 1 that set them back some money but they made that up within some time, and the Wii sold a lot of units. So in that case all 3 did ok and the market accepted all 3 as they all had their place as they all made money. Some of those failed because of their cost. The 3DO launched at a rate of $700 in 93, Saturn was similar in that it launched at $400. That hurt those systems. Jaguar was one of those systems that you never really seen advertised much. I seen it in video game magazines but never recall seeing it in stores or on tv. So that was more of Atari just being shit at trying to get it out there by then. If all 3 are comparable the market would support them within reason. They won't all be making trillions a year in profits. But all 3 can make a profit. Last generation people bought normally a Wii and either a PS3 or Xbox 360 to start with, by the latter half of the generation they owned all 3. As there was exclusives that they wanted to play on all 3. I know a few people now that own a PS4, Xbox One and Wii U. Although normally it is just a PS4 and Xbox One as they have started to care less about Nintendo systems due to fewer and fewer games to buy on it to make the purchase justified in their minds.

Derangel said:
Welcome to non-PC video game systems, man. PS4, PS4 Pro, XB1, PS3, 360, PS2, GCN, Xbox, none of them have had every game play at the full possible resolution of the system. Supporting a resolution does not mean every single game will run at it. This isn't even exclusive to consoles. The RX 480 and GTX 1060 support 4K resolutions but I sure as heck wouldn't want to run games at 4K on either of them.

Name a single phone game that is remotely close to what Zelda is offering. There aren't any. Mobile games make a ton of sacrifices to run on phones. For as damn good as some of them look, it's not hard to see the cut corners.
Click to expand...

That is true that not every game will run at the max possible res. However the one issue with your comparison is technology at the times of its release. When most of those systems were released it was harder at a decent price point that they needed to stay at to run the games at the max resolution without giving up something. Trying to find hardware today to run a game at 1080 isn't as hard. That is why people had a similar mindset for the PS4 Pro. it is new hardware designed for no other reason than to allow higher res gaming and they didn't put good enough hardware into it that would allow the games to actually run native at the resolution they were talking about. They came out saying it is a 4K gaming machine, then had to start saying well... it can support 4K however no game is actually able to get that high, we just have to upscale it to get it to 4k. Where as Microsoft came out saying that with their next console games are currently running native at 4K and that they don't understand why Sony didn't put a little better hardware in there to get better results. Given how much everyone says that Nintendo makes hardware around their games and how the two are married very closely, you would expect that they would have known what they had to develop for on both sides. You also would expect a Wii U game to be able to run on the next gen console at a higher resolution and quality, if the game can't that means that there isn't much of a change in processing power. Which like others said means that the system is just a gimmick and not a true attempt at making a console anyone wants.
 
I have the Wii U but only because I'm a collector and have every main line system and handheld (more of the fringe handhelds then consoles, they were always my thing). I am waiting on the switch tho, I'll get one later for the collection but it will likely collect dust like my Wii and Wii U, the later of which I only have 4 games for I think, maybe even just 3. With all these people saying they won't put stuff on it (and why would i get it there vs one of the better consoles or pc anyways) I'm guessing it'll die a long death just like the Wii U did.

299 doesn't seem too bad but it still seems like too much based on what I get and the limitations with that requiring me to get a few extra things to play the way it seems a system should be played
 
This is precisely why I stated I'm sticking with the Wii U in the other Switch thread, I have so many damn peripherals for it already.
 
Prod1702 said:
But it is also a handheld that can play on a TV what other handheld can do that.
Click to expand...
The Shield (no surprise since Switch is just the new Shield), along with most Android and all IOS devices (connected either wired or wireless) to name probably a few dozen or hundred. The PSP had the ability as well (I played around with it and found it pointless); people loved it so much* that Sony left it out of the PS Vita. Any handheld could easily implement TV/monitor output if they thought people really wanted it.

*sarcasm
 
^^This. I thought it was a joke point tbh. I hate the casting on Android, and it's actually impossible to disable lol. Watching tv, then someone accidentally hits the cast icon, womp tv gets taken over. WTF!
 
thesmokingman said:
^^This. I thought it was a joke point tbh. I hate the casting on Android, and it's actually impossible to disable lol. Watching tv, then someone accidentally hits the cast icon, womp tv gets taken over. WTF!
Click to expand...

it is that easy to do from android phones? My TV has a special input channel it has to be on to cast to. I know the Roku is an instant thing but at least from my windows phone and laptop I have to go to connect and select the device so it is a easy thing but not something I could bump when surfing the web to cause it to cast.
 
Exavior said:
it is that easy to do from android phones? My TV has a special input channel it has to be on to cast to. I know the Roku is an instant thing but at least from my windows phone and laptop I have to go to connect and select the device so it is a easy thing but not something I could bump when surfing the web to cause it to cast.
Click to expand...

For a phone, not sure but if you see the casting icon it means the phone can connect to a device that can receive the cast like my son's shield, ugh! He for a while was clueless and kept hitting the cast icon, then the tv would blare out whatever he was watching on youtube. And hell man, random youtube stuff a 13yr old watches should not be displayed on a 70in 4k tv. I then googled it, how to disable etc and apparently you cannot disable it! WTF Google? Then I was forced to disconnect the TV from the network because there is no way to disable casting on an android device. We use a Roku 4 anyways, so I don't need no damn casting.
 
Exavior said:
it is that easy to do from android phones? My TV has a special input channel it has to be on to cast to. I know the Roku is an instant thing but at least from my windows phone and laptop I have to go to connect and select the device so it is a easy thing but not something I could bump when surfing the web to cause it to cast.
Click to expand...
It depends on the TV's OS. For example, on my mom's Sony I could take it over in about 10 seconds (and she was quite annoyed the first time I effortlessly cast a YouTube video to her TV without warning). My cheapish Samsung Smart TV requires setting it up to receive before it will work.
 
Babbster said:
The Shield (no surprise since Switch is just the new Shield), along with most Android and all IOS devices (connected either wired or wireless) to name probably a few dozen or hundred. The PSP had the ability as well (I played around with it and found it pointless); people loved it so much* that Sony left it out of the PS Vita. Any handheld could easily implement TV/monitor output if they thought people really wanted it.

*sarcasm
Click to expand...

Connecting my phone to my TV is a epic fail. It just doesn't work well and and isn't he same. I am forced to buy a tablet to play the games on a bigger screen. Still no the same as my 60in TV. The switch isn't the Xbox or PS4 but it is something different. The $300 price tag isn't that bad. Isn't the 3ds $250. So think of extra $50 is for connecting to your TV. The extras like the controllers could be less but $70 for a pro controller to be isn't a big deal. You also do not need to buy it. I do not have a Wii U so I am ok with the cost of the games because they are all brand new to me. Over all I am ok with the cost of the switch and what I paid for it. If ppl do not like it, then do not buy it, but the pre order numbers themselves show that the switch is something ppl want. If the switch fails, hopefully Nintendo will bring their games to other places but until that happens we are stuck with their stuff to play some of the great games they have.
 
Prod1702 said:
Connecting my phone to my TV is a epic fail. It just doesn't work well and and isn't he same. I am forced to buy a tablet to play the games on a bigger screen. Still no the same as my 60in TV. The switch isn't the Xbox or PS4 but it is something different. The $300 price tag isn't that bad. Isn't the 3ds $250. So think of extra $50 is for connecting to your TV. The extras like the controllers could be less but $70 for a pro controller to be isn't a big deal. You also do not need to buy it. I do not have a Wii U so I am ok with the cost of the games because they are all brand new to me. Over all I am ok with the cost of the switch and what I paid for it. If ppl do not like it, then do not buy it, but the pre order numbers themselves show that the switch is something ppl want. If the switch fails, hopefully Nintendo will bring their games to other places but until that happens we are stuck with their stuff to play some of the great games they have.
Click to expand...
1. The "you don't need to buy it" argument is a pathetic one that should be retired from these kinds of discussions on the basis of "duh."
2. It took 30 seconds for me to fire up Amazon and find out that the 3DS is $200. The 3DS XL is $250.
3. If the Switch was a competent portable I'd probably be on board (though the dearth of announced games would probably see me waiting for at least a year). It is not a competent portable if one can only play its flagship game for 3 hours before requiring it be hooked up to additional power. That's the final straw for me, piled on a large amount of straw, including Nintendo's utter online incompetence.
 
Babbster said:
1. The "you don't need to buy it" argument is a pathetic one that should be retired from these kinds of discussions on the basis of "duh."
2. It took 30 seconds for me to fire up Amazon and find out that the 3DS is $200. The 3DS XL is $250.
3. If the Switch was a competent portable I'd probably be on board (though the dearth of announced games would probably see me waiting for at least a year). It is not a competent portable if one can only play its flagship game for 3 hours before requiring it be hooked up to additional power. That's the final straw for me, piled on a large amount of straw, including Nintendo's utter online incompetence.
Click to expand...

3 hours isn't bad its more then the Xbox and PS4 can do if you unplug those. :)
 
I love Nintendo. I do. Always have.
I fell in love with video games the first time I played an NES.

Yes, as a kid, I would sit in my room and play my Atari on a black and white TV for hours. Hours I tell you. HOURS!

But the NES, oh my good lord. The COLORS! The MUSIC!

I would record NES music to tape to play on my walkman as I walked around doing my paper route every day. (yes, I know I'm aging myself)

The SNES, I purchased at launch with my paper route money.

I LOVED that machine.

N64 was meh. I was disappointed in it.

GameCube was ok. I had fun.

Wii, I loved! Had LOTS of fun with it! Bought one a couple of years into it's cycle, and played with my kids. We had a ball for a long time. (then I soft modded it, and played NES and SNES on it every day lol)

Wii U - bought it, tried it, returned it an hour later.

Switch - I wanted it to be awesome. I did. I was hoping, nearly PRAYING the it would be a resurgence of the great NES/SNES are Nintendo that shaped my childhood.

But I'm disappointed. It's way under powered for what it is. For the cost, a large percentage of what I would be paying for goes towards portable, or social, functions.
That doesn't sit will with me. The switch would ONLY be used in home.

I'm sorry, but I am a human being with a life. If I am not home, I am busy. If I were not busy, then I would have no need to leave my home. Therefore the very CONCEPT of a video game console that is able to be played on the go is flawed IMO.
Am I supposed to play while I drive? Or maybe in the checkout line at the grocery store? I know! I can play while I am at my kid's Dr appointment! Yeah! Or in home depot! Even better!

No way. Again, if I am not home, I am busy. And if I am not busy, I am home. So when I am home, and I want to play a video game, why should I play a CRIPPLED game on a console CRIPPLED by tech and features included and paid for but that will NEVER be utilized?

Remove the screen, remove the BS other crap like batteries, etc....and make it a console. Use the cost savings to beef up power, and I'm in.
Or better yet, include that crap for a small upcharge in price, like 50 bucks. But to make it the focus? Let alone the bulk of the price? No way.

Again, I wanted it to be something. I did. I had that dream. And when they made that presentation, where it was revealed? I woke up.

Sorry Nintendo. I wish I could throw money at you. I really do. I love you, and want you to succeed. But with this junk? You leave me no other choice. I have to go somewhere else.

Maybe next time.

(by the way, for what it's worth, many of the same arguments I make above can also apply to my hatred for cell phones. If I'm not home, why in the hell would I want my phone to ring? Someone calling to interrupt me? Good lord. If I'm available to talk, then I will be at home, not busy. Therefore no need for a useless damn cell phone - and yes, I do have one. I begrudgingly gave in last year so my wife could actually pay less on a family plan and let her buy me one. I use it to surf so I don't have to get off my couch to read Hardforum lol but if it rings, it takes every ounce of my being not to smash it with a hammer)
 
jeez this is a real eye opener. From what i can tell from the hardware specs, it looks like they just used an nvidia shield correct?
 
zUg_zUg said:
jeez this is a real eye opener. From what i can tell from the hardware specs, it looks like they just used an nvidia shield correct?
Click to expand...

Both Nintendo and Nvidia claim it's a custom Tegra, but right now the custom part appears to mean "weaker than the full X1". We'll see when the system is actually in the hands of people that are willing to take it apart though.
 
zUg_zUg said:
jeez this is a real eye opener. From what i can tell from the hardware specs, it looks like they just used an nvidia shield correct?
Click to expand...
It appears to be pretty much what Nvidia would have released this year if they were going to release a Shield , except that the screen resolution is lower and the Switch won't output 4K (the most recent Shield tablet had a 1920x1200 screen and did output 4K). And, of course, the reason Nvidia isn't releasing another Shield tablet this year is because they've decided it would be counterproductive to compete against the Switch.
 
ah ic. The new shield tv that was released this seemed to lose some key features like the micro sd card. I wonder if its because of the switch.
 
Prod1702 said:
But it is also a handheld that can play on a TV what other handheld can do that.
Click to expand...

The shield portable had HDMI out, the PSP 2000-3000 both had it If I recall, and it did PS1 games full screen, that was my go to PS1 machine for years, the Vita came out with the TV which was a locked down half a flop in my opinion, and I still have my Nomad which does TV out, hell that even had a second full controller port for 2 player! It's not a new concept at all lol, they made multiple attachments to play game boy games on the big screen, although those did rely on another console to piggy back off of, but plenty had TV out, and I'm talking about dedicated not just the casting from ios and android, although that may count too.

I know someone covered that already but I looked over at where my Nomad sat before It was boxed up for the move and remembered yea, it's not a new thing lol. This might be the most popular version of it so far, just because it's the primary feature vs a secondary feature but i digress, I just wanted to talk about my nomad lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top