| HoangNhatAnh said: Yeah, because the customers who buy smartphone for only purpose: play all big AAA hardcore games on touchscreen. The end is near for Nintendo handheld/s |
LOL, your thinking exactly matches the past when PUBG or Fortnite are now natively offered on smartphones ...
Anyone will be able to get the very same AAA console quality game experience with streaming technology on their smartphones without having to invest in a Switch ...
| Shiken said: There is a big difference between being able to play anywhere on the go natively with the Switch and using remote play and dealing with input lag, more frequent drops in visual fidelity, and being tied to a spot with decent wifi. Not to mention most of the world is still running off of potato net. Trust me, I used to remote play all the time. I will choose Switch over it everytime. That is why I opted for DBZ fighterZ on Switch and PS4 instead of just remote playing the PS4 version. It is uncomparable. |
Input lag won't matter for many single player games if you're within the relevant distances such as staying inside the continent (I get a ping of less than 100ms with distances of roughly ~4000km) so there's no reason for anyone to invest in a Switch for 3rd party multi-platform games in the next couple of years ... (Ys VIII, VC4, Wolfenstein and Tales could all easily be streamed)
The drop in streaming quality can be solved this year with the upcoming release of 5G baseband modems so we need to stop thinking that telecommunications technology won't ever catch up with regards to game streaming demands ...
Vita's remote play concept was a solid idea but because it only supported the older 3G baseband technology that issue marred it from being able enjoy a seamless console quality experience on the go. When next generation comes around and 5G get's worldwide consumer adoption, Sony needs to officially support remote play on any Android or iOS devices so that their portable play experience can be vastly improved ...
