The original Banjo didn't stand out to me as a child much. But Tooie and 64 I still have incredibly fond memories of. Both some of my all time favorite games. I still want a 3d DK game like 64 again! I wanna collect golden bananas, learn new skills, be able to explore more areas as I learn new skills, and play in some local multiplayer!

I think Nintendo should double down on more AA titles in this sense, the AAA third party developers (with the exception of Square Enix) do not appear as interested in developing new titles for the Switch. I mean look at Capcom. Besides Mega Man 11, I believe most of Capcom's support are just ports; controversial ones at times. That's a far cry compared to the 3DS support.

Tokyo Games Show and previous shows have not giving me much confidence in the Japanese developers to develop new games for the Switch, even though its doing really well. Hell, even though the Switch is dominating Japan, I think there are more games coming out on PS4 (Japan-only and other games) than Switch. Which is unfortunate because there is an opportunity that most Japanese developers are not taking advantage of.

What I enjoyed about N&B has really nothing to do with how I feel about the other Banjo games. I just see N&B as its own thing. I guess N&B is perceived as a platformer because of the world you explore, but THE REAL GAME is building vehicles to complete missions. I would even replay missions just to get a better time.

I don't care for the original Banjo games but I honestly didn't enjoy a lot 3D games of that era. I argue much of it didn't age well because it wasn't very good to begin with but I still think it has value for moving the industry forward.

I haven't played Sea of Thieves since it released. I really should revisit the game given it has had many updates and it became a hit. Either way, it might just be not for us. If a game is popular and there isn't anything inherently wrong with it, its just not for me.

Barerely anything was announced at TGS this year, so you can't use it as proof of anything. The September Direct and E3 were much better representations of third party support from Japanese developers. Also keep in mind that the PS4 is 5 years old while the Switch is 2. Game development takes a long time, so the Switch will seem port heavy early on. The good news is that Japanese developers already take it seriously, with most non-AAA games announced for the Switch alongside a PS4 version, some outright exclusive.

Yes, they should.
Done, next topic.

Agreed, Western support for the Switch is better than Japanese support. 

Witcher 3, DOOM, Wolfenstein, Mortal Kombat, FIFA, NBA 2K, Cuphead, Ori, Minecraft, Civilization VI, Crash Team Racing versus Dragon quest XI which is a nice get to be sure ... but the rest is pretty lackluster. Where's stuff like even Soul Calibur 6? 

Even Nintendo's AAA games feel somewhat like "AA" games to me, and I do mean that in the most positive way you can interpret it. Super Mario Odyssey does not feel like Nintendo chucked obscene amounts of money at it - instead they did exactly what they needed to do to make a supremely fun and unforgettable game and left it at that. Even BotW, which I believe is Nintendo's most expensive production to date, has a certain beauty to its restraint.

I liked DK 64 a lot more than Tooie.  Yooka Laylee is a decent spiritual successor, although it isn't as polished.  Hopefully the sequel will do a better job.  

I tend to judge games based on how well they hold up today.  Because, sadly, I can't have the experience of playing them in their time again.  If I'm going to play it again, it's going to be now, so I feel it should be judged based on how much enjoyment it will give me now.  If I had to choose right now between BK and N&B it'd be a toss up.  But I'd take Nuts&B over Tooie 90% of the time.

Haven't played Rare's other stuff post Nintendo.  I've been curious to check out Kameo but still haven't gotten around to it.  Other than that, the games just don't seem like my cup of tea.

I loved the games from that era. At the time.
Now it's a chore to go back and replay any title, but I still value the titles highly that moved the industry forwards.

The same criticisms I have for Halo 5 generally apply to Sea of Thieves, whilst neither are a terrible game, both were light on content on release, resulting in me getting bored rather rapidly and moving onto greener pastures.
There are way to many games to stick around and hope something gets good with updates... And chances are, the multiplayer population would have likely imploded in Oceania anyway.

I don't necessarily disagree, but there are some things games do well during a generation that we cringe at later.
I mean Goldeneye 64 was an amazing title for the era, it set records, it was fun, it had great graphics and an immersive story... And the best local multiplayer on any platform until Perfect Dark came along and refined things.

Today? Not so much, the fact you can't jump feels limiting, the visuals have aged poorly and more. - It's still a game that led the FPS console pack during it's time, but other titles like Halo and Call of Duty are far better titles when judged by modern standards.

So it's best to judge Goldeneye (And other titles of the era) within an appropriate context.. And that is by keeping in mind the era the games originated from.

Kameo visually aged fairly well considering it was a 2005 (14 years!) launch title for the Xbox 360 and was originally intended for technically inferior platforms, RARE's art direction really paid off there.

It's gameplay mechanics are fairly unique as well and a ton of fun when you get a grasp of it all.

Give it a shot if you get the chance, been years since I played it, but it was tons of fun.

I think Nintendo typically prefers to have a more conservative development budget anyway, it allows them to focus on the important aspects like gameplay... Also not having industry-leading visuals in it's titles generally means less investment is required to push the envelope on that front anyway so they can get away with a smaller budget.

I mean, Breath of the Wild is a very well made game, with some amazing gameplay mechanics, solid story and an expansive world. - But graphically it's a pretty average game.

AAA has nothing to do with graphics, it is the development process behind a game which involves a lot of time, a lot of money, and a lot of resources. Graphics have much more to do with the hardware level than the development status, this is why AAA games on consoles with lower power aren't as graphically impressive.

Most AAA games have multiple releases per generation: especially sports titles who use each new year as an excuse to release a new GM'd an iteration of the same game they released the previous year. So in reality, while a certain game may have annual releases, the development for the game may have begun 5-10 years ago; they get to a point with the features, then branch it after a beta signoff (or whatever designation they use for a full feature set for the next iteration) and put it through the pipeline all the way to Gold Master while continuing to work on the trunk - which in turn will be branched for next year's release.

Personally, I am not a fan of AAA games as they tend to be conservative in their approach to creativity. You don't get an easy signoff on being original. Some companies like EA actively discourage originality because it isn't a tested commodity, and those high paid executives don't know how to do their job when it comes to something original.