xxbrothawizxx63 said:
The Switch is first and foremost a handheld. Nintendo is the only one that wants to call it a console, and it's being judged as one becuase of it. As a handheld, things have never been better. There was never much of a value proposition for the Switch as a Wii U owner. You either bought because you wanted portability or becuase you wanted to be able to play the latest Nintendo games. The situations aren't the same. The Wii U was a full fat console going for the Wii approach without a killer gimmick. |
I know what Switch is... check my posting history. Second, Switch is more capable than Wii U, even as a portable so my comparison is fair and valid. Hell, Switch has improved on the Wii U ports it has recieved.
Your other points have nothing to do with anything. You completely avoided the crux of my post which is to say if I told you Wii U got this exact same port, being a weaker console than Switch is, would it be well recieved? Should people be claiming Nintendo has solved their third party problems despite the game being:
Overpriced.
Lacking content.
Sub par graphically.
Reduced in gameplay by 50%.
Released more than a year later.
Basically what I am saying is that the standards have changed because people actually like Switch. They adjust the narrative as things go along. Now, playing it portably is a big selling point for some people, but a lot of people on this very site argue with me every single day that this console is a home console or even a hybrid (laughable) and those same people are willing to accept games that they would never accept on Wii U and are even going as far as to claim Nintendo is back with third party developers despite the same issues showing up and the number of games being significantly lower.
01000110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01001001 01111001 01101111 01101100 01100001 01101000 00100001 00100000 01000110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01000101 01110100 01100101 01110010 01101110 01101001 01110100 01111001 00100001 00100000