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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Nintendo president essentially confirms Switch is a handheld

DonFerrari said:
GoOnKid said:

But they didn't show just one thing, they showed both.

But focused on portability, while putting almost no time on docked but then talk how it's first a home console (even when they assume the dock have very little use) so their message is crossed on they trying to hide that it's more of a HH than a console and it makes sense since they have a 60M HH market versus 10M console market.

This would make NO sense because they would kill their winning product and replace it with smething else while remaining it's underperforming console.

I assume you would accept it as a hybrid if the trailer showed the Switch half the time in the dock and half the tme outside. Is that right? But the trailer showed it in the dock, and that's okay. What else should they have shown 1 more minute? More people playing it at home? HOw would that make a difference? The trailer rather showed a) it's use as a home console, b) that you can take it out and play wherever you want, and c) that the controllers are detachable. C mostly makes sense when it's outside of the dock. So the trailer is completely fine.



Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
Miyamotoo said:

You have some huge assumptions here, he comparing Switch with 3DS only because 3DS is still selling and Switch can be used like real handheld too, he didnt said that Switch is only handheld or that isnt hybrid or console.

 

Here you go one very clear statement about what Switch is from Kimishima without any assumptions:

"Nintendo Switch is a home console-type video game
system that can be played at home or on the go. You
can take the system away from your TV and play
anywhere, alone or with friends. We are bringing this
unprecedented entertainment experience to fan".

WiiU is still selling as well, just poorly... and No one understood yet how it's more of a home console-type that you take on the go instead of a handheld that you connect to TV.

Wii U is dead for them, they almost didn't mention at all, only Zelda left for Wii U, but 3DS is still selling and still has games, that's why they still mention 3DS and make comparison to Switch.



You're a console, you're a handheld!

You're a console, you're a handheld - you're a console - you're a handheld - you're a console - you're a handheld - you're a console - you're a handheld - you're a console - you're a handheld - you're a console



"You should be banned. Youre clearly flaming the president and even his brother who you know nothing about. Dont be such a partisan hack"

Veknoid_Outcast said:
Isn't this just semantics? You can hook it up to a TV and friends can hang out and play together in the living room. Or you can take it on the train or plane and play solo on a portable device.

It functions as both. Why do we need to label it?

By the time there is a released product, it will be semantics. But as to now, this is the kind of distinction necessary in order to know what to expect of the device so hype can be built.



Miyamotoo said:
SvennoJ said:

The problem with the switch is that it's not a very good handheld (large, awkward controls, fears about short battery life) and not a very good home console (under powered, low storage, screen is useless while playing on tv)

So neither fan base (console vs handheld) wants it to be either/or. Let the 3ds continue with possibly a real successor, and give the switch a proper home version with extra power without paying for a useless screen.

It's great for those that love both the console and handheld experience. Hopefully that cross-over crowd is big enough to make it a success.

 

I think hole point of Switch is to be "jack of all trades, but master of none" at price of a just home console. With good price, good marketing and good launch lineup, can be very attractive for both home console and handheld lovers, not to mention that will certainly be interesting for some casuals also.

Lets be honest the main buyers for this thing are going to be 3DS owners. This isn't going to compete with a PS4/XB1, with the revelation of no HDD today, it likely cannot even run a lot of the big AAA home console games as some of those games are the size of an entire 128GB SD Card. 



Around the Network
GoOnKid said:
DonFerrari said:

But focused on portability, while putting almost no time on docked but then talk how it's first a home console (even when they assume the dock have very little use) so their message is crossed on they trying to hide that it's more of a HH than a console and it makes sense since they have a 60M HH market versus 10M console market.

This would make NO sense because they would kill their winning product and replace it with smething else while remaining it's underperforming console.

I assume you would accept it as a hybrid if the trailer showed the Switch half the time in the dock and half the tme outside. Is that right? But the trailer showed it in the dock, and that's okay. What else should they have shown 1 more minute? More people playing it at home? HOw would that make a difference? The trailer rather showed a) it's use as a home console, b) that you can take it out and play wherever you want, and c) that the controllers are detachable. C mostly makes sense when it's outside of the dock. So the trailer is completely fine.

Every time a generation change you start from 0 sales. So I don't know what you are trying to imply. What I'm saying is that they are focusing more on the HH aspect of the machine because there is were they have better chances.

I would accept it as hybrid if the dock had any relevant function. But it only does anything, so for me it's just a HH that you hook to your television, and the worse part is that you lose the screen when docked while they could just have it transmit the data to the TV and it working as mirror screen. The most we can guess from the dock is that it may cool and give more energy so the chip would increase it's perfomance, still, everything needed for it to work are really inside the HH part.

The point about the trailer is that it really showed it working as HH even if their PR says otherwise (perhaps showing more it's capabilities as home console would help... but when the games seemed just equal on both stances it doesn't help nintendo claim).

Miyamotoo said:
DonFerrari said:

WiiU is still selling as well, just poorly... and No one understood yet how it's more of a home console-type that you take on the go instead of a handheld that you connect to TV.

Wii U is dead for them, they almost didn't mention at all, only Zelda left for Wii U, but 3DS is still selling and still has games, that's why they still mention 3DS and make comparison to Switch.

Yes, that is why they pretend this isn't 3DS successor so they can still sell hw.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

SvennoJ said:

The problem with the switch is that it's not a very good handheld (large, awkward controls, fears about short battery life) and not a very good home console (under powered, low storage, screen is useless while playing on tv)

So neither fan base (console vs handheld) wants it to be either/or. Let the 3ds continue with possibly a real successor, and give the switch a proper home version with extra power without paying for a useless screen.

It's great for those that love both the console and handheld experience. Hopefully that cross-over crowd is big enough to make it a success.

you havent even played it!



i look forward to the debates of whether this is a home console, portable or both.



DonFerrari said:

Every time a generation change you start from 0 sales. So I don't know what you are trying to imply. What I'm saying is that they are focusing more on the HH aspect of the machine because there is were they have better chances.

I would accept it as hybrid if the dock had any relevant function. But it only does anything, so for me it's just a HH that you hook to your television, and the worse part is that you lose the screen when docked while they could just have it transmit the data to the TV and it working as mirror screen. The most we can guess from the dock is that it may cool and give more energy so the chip would increase it's perfomance, still, everything needed for it to work are really inside the HH part.

The point about the trailer is that it really showed it working as HH even if their PR says otherwise (perhaps showing more it's capabilities as home console would help... but when the games seemed just equal on both stances it doesn't help nintendo claim).

Okay man, I guess we're just wasting our time here. Have fun.



SpokenTruth said:
Landguy said:

THere have been a few threads about Nintendo's announcement about selling 2 million Switchs in March.

The real bit of info is that Nintendo itself believes that it is comparable to the 3ds, not the WiiU.  

So in reference to sales -

Nintendo CEO said he is confident that "consumers would understand that [the Switch] would be different from 3DS." That said, Nintendo will continue to produce and support the 3DS for the time being rather than immediately letting the Switch serve as a replacement, Kimishima said.

 

I think the debate about console or handheld has been decided...

 

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/10/nintendo-pins-financial-hopes-on-selling-2-million-switch-consoles-at-launch/

This and your thread title don't concur with each other.

Being different than 3DS, well it's, it have dock (even 3DS was different to DS or GB, and they all were still HH).

It won't immediately be a replacement, but from the wording it will replace it.

So how they don't concur?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."