By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Otter said:
Shaunodon said:

That strategy only worked because it was the Wii U. It's easy to forget how many in the average gaming public still aren't aware of the Wii U's existence. It also wasn't a soft transition but a hard transition from the Wii U, spending practically it's entire last year in dead silence until finally receiving BotW and a 'farewell' postcard. Trying to implement that same strategy of moving on from a system while quickly porting all it's relevant games to a new one, would have more than a few flaws this time around.

And what compromises are you even talking about? Most best-selling games on the Switch have still yet to utilise the full capability of the hardware. The only games that are compromised are the ones that appeal to a minority of the Switch's market. But that hasn't been a problem for them or Nintendo with the Switch anyway, so why'd they need new hardware to fix this?

The strategy described is just cross gen support. Not porting old games over although high quality remasters here and there would be cool (BOTW1/BOTW2 bundled), I'm just referring to development not being halted as developers try to get to grips with new technology. Nintendo described this as a problem with them moving to HD development and why the Wii U had a weak software line up. Switch 2 will start out the gate with great software support because it will share its libary with Switch, both Switches new and upcoming releases and more. All whilst boasting superior quality. PS4 and Xbox One early adoption was driven by cross gen games like COD, Destiny, Dragon Age, Watchdog, MSG4, FIfa, Far Cry 4 etc. It wasn't until year 2 developers started dropping 360/PS3.

Most 1st party games on Switch do not even use AA. And believe me, 1000s of man hours go into compromises that are made to get 1st party games running well on Switch, but you won't see the difference until Nintendo demonstrates it. DQ9 is one of the Switches best looking games and best quality ports, if it wasn't for the PS4 version we would also say what compromises?

(And this image doesn't even do justice to the res difference)



If Nintendo had a more powerful system you would see a version of Pokemon where the pop-in is not aweful and low quality textures are not everywhere. You would have a version of BOTW which runs at 60fps 1440p-4k and features like far more lush foliage, draw distances, higher textures and more populated environment, more environemnt fx. This is only just the tip of the iceberg. And of course in handheld mode, you could have signifcantly improved battery performance on the new system alongside 1080p for non demanding games.

I can't bring up an actual Nintendo ports because they don't exist but you get a glimpse of how much more immersive a game like BOTW could be at higher FPS/Res alone. 




I mean if you understand the concept a Switch Pro, its that but also with its own exclusives (like new3DS/DSi) but with a longer shelf life, because it will transition into the main platform, which also means Nintendo's future is far secure then a hard reset in 2024/25. Consumers are very familiar with this concept of slowly phasing out aging devices. 

"PS4 and Xbox One early adoption was driven by cross gen games like COD, Destiny, Dragon Age, Watchdog, MSG4, FIfa, Far Cry 4 etc. It wasn't until year 2 developers started dropping 360/PS3."

All third-party AAA and all irrelevant to the Switch market.

"DQ9 is one of the Switches best looking games and best quality ports, if it wasn't for the PS4 version we would also say what compromises?"
"If Nintendo had a more powerful system you would see a version of Pokemon where the pop-in is not aweful and low quality textures are not everywhere. You would have a version of BOTW which runs at 60fps 1440p-4k and features like far more lush foliage, draw distances, higher textures and more populated environment, more environemnt fx. This is only just the tip of the iceberg."

Ok. So your three exmaples here are:

-Dragon Quest XI*-- a game that reviewed far better on Switch, and reviewers all said that the techincal downgrades were negligible and that the QOL improvements all far outweighed them.
-Pokemon-- a game that's been heavily criticised for it's lazy development.
-Breath of the Wild-- a game already judged as perhaps the greatest of all time and setting record sales for it's franchise.

How exactly does any of this argue in favour of better hardware? People don't need Zelda in 4k 60fps. It's already a masterpiece. Switch has shown that devs who put work into a decent port get rewarded with good sales. And devs are always gonna desire porting to Switch while there's a large and growing userbase.

Momentum for Switch isn't slowing. We already know Nintendo have a ton of games gearing up for the next couple years, as Switch basically enters the second half of it's lifespan. Devs aren't dumb enough to ignore all those potential sales, so they have to come to Nintendo, not the other way around. This isn't rocket science.