| CrazyGamer2017 said: Good for Nintendo, but not good for those who care to have better hardware. If one can expect flaws in one's system of choice to be improved on the next time they release new hardware cause they want to keep motivation of people to buy it, well Nintendo does not have to worry about that. Why improve hardware, just create new concepts (which is fine, don't get me wrong on that) Why improve current flaws? People are going to buy the machine anyways. Examples: Why better battery life? 3 Hours for games like Zelda is fine, people buy it regardless, Why choosing better CPU's and GPU's. The Tegra 1 chip chosen was already outdated by the Tegra 2 chip when the Switch was released. But Nintendo still went for the inferior Tegra 1 and did that stop the sales? Nope. Why making a home system, a dedicated one I mean? People don't seem to care about that, they seem to think some kind of cross system is the same as an actual home system. About chatting, everybody including some Nintendo fans agree that their solution to chat in online play using cables and a smart phone, is bad, really bad but does that stop the system from selling? Nope, so why even bothering to implement a simple chatting system as you see on PC/PS4/Xbox? No reason since people buy it anyway. Ok then at least this hardware means a cheap retail price? Nope, it's as expensive if not more expensive than other systems that are way more powerful like the PS4... Bottom line is that the only true winner here is Nintendo, fans not so much and hardcore gamers, not at all. Too bad cause I would have loved to one day explore the realms of BOTW or play Mario in his Odyssey or play that 4th episode of Metroid Prime as I really enjoyed the first 3 episodes back when I had a GameCube and later on a Wii. My hopes so far were that one day Nintendo would make better hardware that would bring their games to modern day graphics but Why would they do that? What motivation for them to do that? There's always a slim chance that they do cause no one can tell for sure what will be done in 5 or 10 years from now but the chance is small really small... |
First of all you have 2 other stationary systems + PC to choose from if all you want is power. Secondly, how are people that like portable systems not winning here; are you implying that we are not important and ought to be ignored and Nintendo should just copy what Sony and MS are doing with better specs (why do that when Sony and MS are already catering to stationary game fans)? Third, I can also complain about why the PS4 used Jaguar cores and why it included a mid-range GPU (the argument would be just as flawed as yours); the truth is Sony (much like Nintendo) had to balance the price with the specs. Now I am sure you will counter this by saying that Switch is less powerful than PS4, but the reality is that one is stationary and the other is portable so you cannot directly compare the two. The Switch is powerful for a portable device, and that is a huge win for hard core gamers and Nintendo fans that like to play on the go (moreover, you can be a hardcore gamer that owns a PS4, Xbox One, PC for playing at home and purchase a Switch for playing on the go or in bed; which is what people have done with systems like GB, GBA, PSP/DS. Vita/3DS, etc.; people are not tied to one style of gameplay or one system).
I know I will never convince you based on your past comments, but there are plenty of people that like playing console quality games on the go. Smartphones do not have the ecosystems to support such titles. For many of us, the Switch is a huge boon. Why can't we have a powerful portable system when you guys can have powerful stationary consoles? Why can't both co-exist as filling different needs?
