Dulfite said:
Nintendo anticipated people using the Wii U mainly for maps and stuff, not off screen play 100% of the time. Their estimates with the Switch are far more reliable, therefore, due to people ONLY using it for off screen play. The switch joy cons are amazingly small for what they do, so I'm not unhappy about their price. But yes, the rest of their stuff is ridiculously expensive and I don't know why. Japan alone makes the convenience of this device worth it. That country has massive amounts of people that love to play games on the go. Also, if I'm taking my switch over to my friends house, it may not be in order to put it on the tv. Maybe he has a switch too and we want to do multiplayer? Maybe I want something to do while we are watching a movie, or while he is playing another game? Also, let's say I am going over to hook it up to the tv, the sheer size and weight of the switch objects makes it far more convenient than some massive clunky and heavy ps4 or xbone. |
Then why did they spend so much time advertising and demonstrating the ability to play the wii u while something completely different is being shown on the TV its connected to? Sure not every game supported this feature, but many Nintendo published games did. Of all the scenarios you describe at your friends house as reasons to buy a switch you can also do with a Wii U with marginally longer set up time. In fact, bringing over a controller to use on your friends Wii U is definitely easier than bringing over another switch.
Also hilarious you find the Joycons worth the price. I personally think spending $110 to get a joycon pair and the charge base for them is totally unacceptable but whatever. Then again, you're willing to spend over $300 for what amounts to an extra minute or two of set up time vs bringing your Wii U over to a friends house, so there's that.







