curl-6 said:
The Switch isn't high end though, it never was, from day 1 it was technically behind the competition. People aren't buying it for its graphics, two of its biggest sellers are Wii U games. |
For a product that's portable, it's pretty high end.
People are buying it because it's just high end enough to be feasible as a console. But if you let that run long in the tooth, that appeal fades and it just becomes a Game Boy type thing with a TV out.
Keeping the discrepancy from modern home consoles to the Switch concept within 1 console generation is the key, that's close enough that you can have impressive experiences on the Switch that people don't associate with a portable machine that are relatively modern. PS4/XB1 are better hardware but Zelda: BoTW is still a game and overall experience that's relatively comparable to what you would see on a PS4/XB1.
When you lose the appeal of "wow, this little sucker can really play some modern style high end games" from the Switch concept, that concept as a whole loses a lot of steam.
PS5/XB2 are going to become the home console standard soon, if you leave the current Switch to have to compare to that, it's too much of a gap, this is not the DS or GB where it's all about low-tech gaming and Nintendo has a monopoly on the kids portable gaming market anymore. That won't work. You want to keep the gap to one gen difference at least, so when they go to PS5/XB2, you should have a Switch ready that can play PS4/XB1 games maybe even slightly better than that.
In other words, Switch should always have a hardware model capable of running a game like a Zelda or Metroid or whatever that is relatively in the same ball park of the other top end games of its day. When you allow a 2 generation gap, that's really not possible, the Zelda Nintendo can offer will look badly antiquated, like BotW would be if it had to run on 3DS tech instead of Wii U tech.
Last edited by Soundwave - on 28 November 2018