You say he's a PlayStation fan, and count that as a reason to discredit him. You're a Nintendo fan who always defends their every moves. I'm saying it's an equally valid reason to discredit your input.

There are plenty of things that can be criticized about the Switch. There are also a lot of things that are compelling about it. Acting like it's just one way or the other is annoying. It's certainly not all crap, but it's not all sunshines and rainbows either. 

Except I'm not spending all my time making posts shitting on a console I have no intention of buying. You say I defend their every move in a post I complain about how terrible of a product the 3DS was? Yeah, at least try and make sense. 

If it was the same old Nintendo we'd be looking at a handheld that was two generations weaker than their current home console. 

3DS --> less powerful than a GC (3DS shared most of its life-time with the Wii U)

DS ---> less powerful than an N64 (shared most of its life-time with the Wii)

GBA ---> slightly more powerful than an SNES (shared most of its life-time with the GC)

GB -----> weaker than the NES (shared most of its life-time with the SNES and N64)

The 3DS should have been slightly more powerful than the Wii and they still could have sold it at $250 if they dropped the lame 3D technology. Notice how the Switch uses something from every single console EXCEPT the 3DS? I found this to be pretty funny, Nintendo even high-lighted that fact in their own presentation. 

Like you do with him, I'm gauging you based on your bahaviour around the forums as a whole. Not just this here thread. 

And let's not act like the comment I quoted from you was talking about the 3DS.

And if we were to talk about your 3DS comment, I would point out the hypocrisy. After all, you say the 3DS is a terrible product and complain about it, like Norm complains about the Switch. But do you know what it takes to make a good game console? Why don't you go and make one?

See? Those comments are silly and achieve nothing.

Esqueezeme?

"Your post is pretty much exactley what I'm saying. Nintendo probably saw that maybe half of all Wii U owners didn't also own a 3DS, realized that they could provide a better product to that 50-60 million person block of gamers by leaving behind a 6-7 million block of gamers.

It makes total sense for Nintendo. But if you're like me, as in someone who just wants to sit in front of his tv with a normal controller and play Nintendo games, you'd be paying for a lot of stuff you're never going to use by buying the Switch."

I was actually really excited for the Switch event last week and had every intention of picking up the system. Maybe not at launch, but probably around when Mario Odessy came out. Now? I don't know...certainly not anytime soon.

I already said what I would change about the 3DS. Drop the 3D effect to cut down on the price and make it more powerful at the same time. I don't know how that 3D gimmick made it out of their R & D phase, it's simply not impressive at all, they should have realized that before they released the 3DS. It's also impossible to market as its something you need to see with your own eyes. You can market motion control and touch screen controls, but good luck making a decent TV ad about the 3D effect. Nintendo pretty much gave up on the 3D effect themselves eventually. Sun & Moon don't even use it. 

Norm says it should have been an easy home run, as if developing a new console is easy. He doesn't even say what they should have done differently. Just a post with no substance. If the Gamecube showed anything, it's that making a powerful traditional console is not the answer for Nintendo for making a succesful console. It's not that simple. What works for Playstation doesn't necessarily work for Nintendo. 

Whether the Switch will be succesful I don't know. If it's too expensive Nintendo can always cut the price. I don't know if they will make good use of the motion controls this time, or the HD rumble effect. If they do, then they didn't make the same mistakes as they did with the 3DS. I doubt the HD rumble tech is all that expensive anyway. Motion controls won't be expensive anymore either. The joy cons cost $80, which is around $15 more expensive than the PS4 controller when it came out. But since the joy cons can function as two controllers it has a better value proposition anyway. 

Their new IP, Arms, is at least a good indication on what they want to do with the motion controls this time around. Seems like a solid new IP. I hope more games like that are coming out. 

The only major mistake (we currently know of) is imo not having a pack-in game. I can't see 1-2 Switch selling well at full retail price. It simply doesn't look like a full-priced game and it would have been an ideal pack-in game to show of the new tech. I can't see many people buying this party game. 

I've had some time to let the Switch Presentation sink in. And although I still think they should have included the Joy-Con charge grip with the system, instead of that shell they packed in, I think what comes packed in is enough to enjoy the Switch on your TV without having to buy anything else.

The Joy-Cons have a 20 hours battery life. So you play all day, and when you go to bed, you simply put them back on the docked Switch. If you like to play with a normal controller configuration, you have the grip, and if that's not enough, for whatever reason, there's always the option for the Pro Controller. Which I still think costs too much (like all the optional peripherals).

You don't need to buy anything else.  You get those if you're not happy with what's already packed-in. But before you decide that you're not happy with it all, can you wait until you've actually tried the actual setup?

It's called the Gamecube, it's Nintendo's second worst selling console. Sounds narrow-minded to me by the way. How do you know a game like Arms won't be fun unless you try it? How do you know the HD rumble doesn't add value to the overall gameplay? Immersion is an important element of playing games. 

The GameCube is their only failed attempt when they went after good specs. The Wii U is their first failed attempt at trying to be disruptive with a controller gimmick. If the Switch fails (personal opinion: I don't believe it will), will you agree that their record for going after specs is better and they should get back on that route?

I personally thought the hybrid console was enough innovation and it didn't need the motion technology or the HD rumble tech, but I'm not going to criticize it before I've experienced it myself. $250 would have been the ideal price, I hope they can cut it soon. I'll buy it anyway as I don't really care about the extra $50, but a lot of consumers probably do, at least I think so. 

If I get a new Metroid Prime game that controls as well (or likely better) as Prime 3 you won't hear me complaining about the motion controls though. :) 

In fact, I'm glad the gyro controls return as I hate playing shooters with twin stick aiming. I love the hybrid control method that is provided with Splatoon. It should become an industry standard imo.