By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Miyamotoo on 02 June 2017
Edit Thread
kappie1977 said:
Miyamotoo said:

Of Course wasn't perfect, nothing is perfect but in any case did great job. Its not hard to release beter version of motion controls couple years after huge Nintendo success with motion controls, Sony wouldnt do that on PS3 whitout huge Nintendo succes, they played safe, same goes for MS with Xbox360 and Kinect.

Wii U doesnt stream like Vita, for Vita you need PS4 and internet, on Wii U you have tablet like controler, difrent things. Also another huge difference is that tablet controller was main point of Wii U, streaming for Vita was just nice addition.

We had few similar ideas before (Sega Dreamcast, GBA and GC, PSP, WiiU), but this 1st that in console gaming we have full home console games that you can play anywhere, anytime or with anyone you want. Something like that wasn't possible before.

I don't know what he said half-baked for Sony console, I just replied to your post. But I disagree that "new real technology and solid quality of hardware Sony and MSFT is really better then Nintendo". Yes Sony usually uses newer technology than Nintendo if we talk only about hardware (but it seem that will change with Switch) but Nintendo use that technology to offer new or different kind of experience of playing, while Sony in most cases use it just to offer stronger hardware. Also I would said that Sony has more quality hardware, stronger yes but quality I dont think so, how many PS3 consoles died on market just after 1st year or two, Nintendo never had something like that, with Nintendo you know that their consoles will last very long.

 

Of Course it's true and fact you talking just about hardware inside Sony consoles proves that, just better and newer hardware that gives bigger power, even PS4 controller still look almost same like PS1 Dualshock, try to compare PS1, PS2, PS3 and PS4 controls with GC, Wii, Wii U and Switch controllers. Sony with PS2, PS3 and PS4 offerd basicly upgraded consoles, Nintendo with Wii, Wii U and now Switch offers something new and different kind of experience. I dont saying that is bad, just that fact is that they have totally different approach and goals in terms of their consoles, MS have same approach and goals like Sony, just look PS3 and Xbox 360 vs XB1 and PS4.

 

Nintendo have less new IPs than Sony or MS, but that doesnt mean they dont have them, Splatoon is new IP and now 2 years later we have another what seems good new IP like ARMS, also Nintendo had some other new less popular IPs like Project Steam or Steel Diver.

I think you are not really good in Console history, because If it would be up to Nintendo we would still be playing the NES or SNES. Because Sega (really the master of new things in console market) and later because of Sony, Nintendo was forced to finally do something. The WII was their last chance to keep in the console business.

They seen the PS2 with the move controller (yes the PS2 already had it) and had their Eye toy to do interactive things, and they (borrowed those ideas) to think of a way not having to pay for patents etc to Sony and tada the WII came with IR mote controller with a gyro (real bad one by the way)!

Furthermore they have borrowed also the streaming feature from PS vita with PS3 and later PS4 in their WII U. But Microsoft already had a tool on your mobile to be able to controll your Xbox and with PSvita you could do really cool stuff like use it as a controller already! So yes Nintendo didn't really invented a new thing for consoles.

Also they didn't with the Switch. This was in the beginning also the idea from Sony with their PS vita 2, but because they didn't want to kill the business of the PS Vita at that time (because with their structure they could earn two times on certain games) and later on they tried to make it up by creating on the PS3 a kind of eco system that when you bought the PS3 game, you got the PS vita game and the other way around. And with cross-Save you could go further where you already was! So in reality it's not really different, but you had to buy two systems (PSvita and PS3 in that time, now PS4) and because third party developers didn't cooperate with this therefore it was a disaster. But therefore Switch is not really new!  Also you can do a lot of gaming on a Tablet in high resolution and connect it to the TV!

The reason I switch will/is a succes, because most people who buy it see it as a (semi) handheld! Nintendo is always the first choice of people as a handheld, look at Atari with their Lynx. It was earlier then Nintendo with the Gameboy, had a color screen (for that time a good one), much better ergonomics then the gameboy. but was killed by gameboy because of the low price of gameboy and people could play mario (many had still the NES or SNES) on the go, not because the quality was good.

Actually I am pretty good at console history. Yes, after GC Nintendo did not see point any more to compete directly with Sony, so they went with totaly different approach and it paid them back. But for instance they were not forced to take different approach with handhelds, but they did take totally different approach in any case after GBA with DS.

PS2 Move controller was not important at all, same like PS2 camera, most people don't even know that exists at all, while Nintendo made whole console around motion controls. Again, Wii motion controls were great for their purpose.

For someone that claim know console history, you forget that before Wii U, and Vita and PS3, Dreamcast had controller with screen and that GBA could be attached to GC and to be used similar like Wii U gamepad. And like I wrote, Wii U doesnt stream like Vita, for Vita you need PS4 and internet, on Wii U you have tablet like controler, difrent things. Also another huge difference is that tablet controller was main point of Wii U, streaming for Vita was just nice addition.

Sony plans about Vita 2 that were similar to Switch!? You don't have any evidence for that, in best case you have some weak rumours. You said it itself, you need two different consoles, one home console and one handheld, you also need internet connection beacuse we talking about streaming (Switch doesnt stream), you also cant play Vita in local multiplayer in split screen. Like I wrote, we had few similar ideas before (Sega Dreamcast, GBA and GC, PSP, WiiU), but this 1st that in console gaming we have full home console games that you can play anywhere, anytime or with anyone you want. Something like that wasn't possible before.

Reason why Switch is successful is because it's one console that aiming home console users and handheld users in same time, at home acts like real home console and outside acts like real handheld, true hybrid of home console and handheld that suits difrenty life styles of difrent users. Also games like Zelda BotW and MK8D and great marketing are also very important for current Switch succes.