ResidentToxy said:
If the Xbox division wanted to, they could have easily released games that could only be played on the Xbox One X. That is how big of a difference it is to the base Xbox One. |
IF is the big point. They decided that X1X is this gen, and that is it. Nintendo decided to launch Switch not as a mid-gen upgrade, but next gen even if they kept their own idea of underpowered machine that they are using since Wii.
And funny enough even though you couldn't play the N64 and Genesis game without the add-on, you can play the same game on X1 that you play on X1X (so far 100% of them) so you could say that X1X is even more same gen of X1 than the Ram Boost and SegaCD or Sega32X.
Xbox division almost don't support X1 anyway, they barely release any game for it. But for their strategy they kept it on the same gen, so no point saying it could be a new gen if they wanted... if they wanted they could have released a console with the same power of X1 and say it's next gen as well (Wii was just 2x more powerful than GC, while WiiU and Switch can't even be stronger than the consoles that were on the gen before then on competitive companies).
And if you want to play IF cenarios, Nintendo could have made Switch gen 8 and totally compatible with WiiU back and forward as did MS and Sony with their mid gen upgrades or they could have launched stronger console.
There is no point in when you need to apologize for power say it's portable and when you have to apologize for let's say bad battery say it's because it is also a table console and other flip flops made between being one or another when wanting to praise or apologize for... it must have the cons and benefits of both sides, you can't just turn a blind eye and pretend there are only good sides and say the bad doesn't matter because sometimes it's hh and others console.
My point in saying Switch is a NVidia Shield is just to remove this interpretation that Switch is great and innovative because Nintendo made it.
Medisti said:
To be fair, you do realize the Xbox One X version is invisible with just the console, right? You need a television (or monitor). 4K if you want the best picture quality, and larger if you want to really take advantage of the 4K. It's not optional. The Switch handheld-mode comes with its own screen. Console mode is optional. And screens aren't free, even if they are only 720p. Which is a perfectly fine resolution for that screen size. Am I being a Switch defender right? |
The screen used on Switch is very cheap, so I don't see that as mattering, but sure remove the 30 bucks it add or even make the price bigger and say the price of X1X is double of Switch, doesn't change Switch is said by Nintendo fans to be 9th gen and is still weaker than gen 8... We could even use base X1 to compare since it is even cheaper than Switch (even if you had to buy a small screen to play it).
Sure X1X needs a screen, that is the purpose of home consoles and what a lot of people prefer anyway. Would you analyse the difference in price/performance between the streaming/cable TV/BD saying streaming is cheaper because you can use the cellphone you already have or the opposite that since a good cellphone cost a lot more than a cheap TV?

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."







