| RolStoppable said:
We've reached the point where you are rambling. 1. You make it sound like it's a herculian task to put the label "Dock for Switch Mini" on a box. There's no need to re-label games, because I already addressed that point of yours by refering you to a comparable case where a patch was an easy solution. 2. Considering that I have a better track record in predicting the success or lack thereof of Nintendo consoles than most CEOs of major publishers, it isn't even arrogant of me to claim that I know more than them, because I do. I predicted that Wii U will fail long before its launch, but the Nintendo bosses believed it was a good idea to make that console. How do you call the fallacy you are using here? Appeal to authority? 3. You don't need to tell me that this is a rumor. I am speculating based on the details that have been given: The name is "Mini" and it's expected to lack features in comparison to the regular Switch. Being without Joy-Cons is a logical conclusion, because otherwise the only dimension in which the console can be made smaller is width. It's hilarious how you berate me about my suggestions and then propose a Switch Lite that is less wide and thus wouldn't fit into the dock to charge the Joy-Cons. The dock is exactly as wide as the regular Switch, so if you reduce the width of the console, the Joy-Cons wouldn't fit on anymore, because the dock would get into the way of the sticks, buttons and most importantly, the curved angle that Joy-Cons have for their shoulder buttons. 4. This is going as usual. Everytime that it's clear that you can't back up a point, you fall back on refusal and condescending attitude. You were asked for the simple task to list a few games. That was all. But you can't do it. |
1. It's not a herculean task, of course not. But it is more difficult to market and sell, and make your product more difficult to educate consumers on. this is obvious.
2. It's not an appeal to authority since Nintendo spends tens of millions of dollars every year on market research which the heads of Nintendo would clearly have access to. I'm appealing to the data which the head indirectly shared. Do you have any data that would refute that? No? It's just your armchair anonymous internet message board user opinion? Okay. They know more about the market than you do. They know more about why products sell and don't sell than you do based on data that you do not have. If you knew half as much as you think you do, you'd be making a comfortable living off of your experience and authority. Instead you're posting on a message board making paranoid narratives in your head about how the mods conspire against you instead of taking the time to actually look at the facts. When it comes to why Nintendo products did or did not sell, I'll defer to the heads of Nintendo and their data, not you, since you know, they have credibility.
3. The product I proposed is a smaller form factor than the switch. Hence "mini" still applies, doesn't it? In fact, doesn't the word "mini" and not "portable" imply smaller unit with complete Switch functionality and compatibility instead of a limited portable device? Why is it a problem if the only dimension that can be made smaller is width? A smaller switch is still a smaller switch. Heck, maybe they're fine with it looking like a Switch with the NES joy cons attached. It doesn't stand to reason that we automatically lose joy con attachment ability just because the Switch is made smaller. You're just asserting that it must be because you don't like the other possibilities as much as you like the one you've settled on.
Just take a good look at a Switch with joy cons in a switch dock. Notice how the limiting factor is actually the ridges on the back of the joy cons, and they aren't all the way to the edge of the joy con. You actually have about a quarter inch on either side of the Switch dock where the switch can be made smaller and it still fit in the dock, of course, they could also make it marginally thinner.
4. I can back up the point just fine. I can easily list the games. Again, you keep asserting that because I don't address every single one of your points, I am conceding the points I don't address to you. This is not the case. I'm just not willing to play your games where you get hung up on some nit-picking nonsense that doesn't matter. We've been through this before and you clearly haven't learned that just because I'm not playing your games doesn't mean I can't answer your questions, it just means I wont. So, I don't care if you think I'm conceding the point to you. if that's what you gotta do to feel better about yourself, have at it.
