By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
EricHiggin on 08 January 2019
Edit Thread
Biggerboat1 said:
Intrinsic said:

It only sounds silly if you are still trying t define the switch by the old standards.

Its a hybrid.

Nintendo is still in the game making business. Its just that right nw they are a hybrid console company. Their software teams will still d what they do They will sell their hardware to portable and home gamers alike. But that is because they have a hybrid system now.

Lets look at the facts.....

NS is underpowered to be a traditional home console. Its too powerful to be a  traditional handheld console. S it falls somehwere in the middle. 

That they still are present in both home and handheld markets with one device doesn't change the fact that that its not either one of those devices but a new kinda device. I think that is the main draw of the switch....... and if you ask me I think its genius. Nintendo long realized that they can't match sony or MS blow for blow in a hardware race. Or they just felt that business model isn' for them anymore. That is why they made the Wii. And then the 3Ds showed them that a dedicated handheld desn't have the kinda draw handhelds used to have so it had t be more. 

They have ended up with a marriage of both platforms and that is the NS. Its more a handheld than a home console cause it can exist perfectly without the dock but that it can get games that typically were "too big" for mobile is what makes it a hybrid.

Yes, it's a hybrid - but what does that actually mean?

It mean that it functions as both a home console and a handheld.

If it functions as a home console and a handheld, how on earth does that equate to Nintendo leaving the home console and handheld businesses???

And power has nothing to do with defining the nature of a system - that's just your own subjective views at play.

One PC gamer is rocking a RTX2080. Another uses a GTX 760. Are they both PC gamers?

This sounds a lot to me like the XB1X 'true 4k' debacle. MS markets the XB1X as a 'true 4k' gaming console when it is, but it's not. It does play some games in 4k, but not all of them, and not the large majority of them. So is it a 'true 4k' console or not? Either way, you can still play the XB1X and say regardless that it's a good console, partial 4k or not.

If you try to do the same thing with Switch you end up realizing it's not a very good stand alone console. Why? Because it's performance is weak even compared to the 2013 XB1. It's like trying to say the PS4 slim is a decent handheld because it's more portable than the OG PS4 due to it's reduced size and easier transportation. PS4 slim in this case, would be considered the worst handheld ever, if you would even dare argue that in the first place.

Now as a hybrid or handheld, Switch a good/great device. So to push the Switch as a console first, and everything else second and third, makes it seem like a crappy device, for those who understand and care about console hardware performance. To casuals who simply want a new Nin device to stick under/beside the TV, Switch seems like a great idea, because you can also take it with you when your leaving. Those same people also likely think game streaming is the greatest idea ever, not understanding the potential downsides.

There is a reason the PS3 and 360 lasted as long as they did, and why the Pro and XB1X were seen as necessary upgrades only 3-4 years into the gen. Performance. When you throw Switch into that, in 2017, it doesn't fit at all, considering it's less powerful than the 2013 XB1.

Calling Switch a hybrid makes sense. Calling it a handheld makes a little less sense, and calling it a home console makes almost no sense, other than for marketing purposes that is.