By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
RolStoppable said:
DonFerrari said:

It isn't the same, but evolving a concept or idea isn't the same as making it a home console.

And besides nintendo saying it's a home console on their reveal they took almost all the time on the presentation showing it as a handheld and not as a home console, so their narrative doesn't fit.

I don't consider Switch an evolution of the idea to play handheld games on a TV, because in such a case the games would still work like handheld games and don't offer things like splitscreen multiplayer. This is really a redefinition of what it means to be a home console or handheld, just like Nintendo said. Of course you can't say that Switch is solely a home console, but at the same time you can't say that it can't adapt to work like one either, so the thread title is nonsense.

If you cite Nintendo, you should get it right. IIRC the exact quote was "Switch is first and foremost for home use", so that isn't a claim of it being a home console and actually a pretty reasonable statement because for one, Switch can work like a home console, and two, studies have shown that most of the time that is spent on handhelds happens at home. But the main point of that Nintendo PR statement was to not hurt 3DS sales this holiday. That most of the preview trailer was focused on portable mode has more to do with showing off new features (detachable controllers, various multiplayer options on the go) while the home use is fairly straightforward with sitting in front of the TV and using a dual analog controller.

Still it is a disconnection between what is said and show.

I do agree that no handheld have done 4 player shared screen multiplats yet (but seems like psvita have done 2 players... and using PSTV to stream PS4 games you could also do that) so it isn't entirely new. But liking it or not, most features showed are showing handheld and not home console (even their explaning of the dock).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."