So, what do you think? | |||
| No, not at all. Innovatio... | 122 | 33.42% | |
| Not really, but I'd like... | 92 | 25.21% | |
| Don't know. Time will tell? | 11 | 3.01% | |
| Yeah, more less. Traditional is good. | 47 | 12.88% | |
| Absolutely. PS4 and Xbox ... | 52 | 14.25% | |
| What's "traditional" anyway? | 19 | 5.21% | |
| Show me the answers! | 22 | 6.03% | |
| Total: | 365 | ||
RolStoppable said:
You could have pointed out that I have a Xenoblade avatar. |
Or I could use the series that sells a fraction of the already niche Xenoblade.
When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.
Lawlight said:
Correction - the analog stick was done by Dempa first. Similarly d-pad was done by several companies before Nintendo though one was circular to allow for 16 directions. |
They were still the ones to make it a standard.
I wouldn't say Switch is an extension of Wii U..........more like Wii U was a half-assed attempt at Switch.
It sounds like the same, but they are different.
When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.
RolStoppable said:
That wasn't the main feature. It was barely advertised. You can't ignore that other features that were more prominently advertised aren't present at all anymore with the Switch. Those more prominent features were the Wii U concept, it wasn't off-TV play. |
If asymmetric gameplay was really the main feature, why are there only 5 games total in the entire library that use the feature?
Switch is the Wii U idea basically in exact reverse (hardware in tablet, dummy dock, versus hardware in console, dummy controller).
You can RELAX about the market appeal, just because Switch is a (logical) extension of an idea doesn't mean it's doomed to the same sales. Being actually portable instead of semi-portable is a huge difference.
| zorg1000 said: I wouldn't say Switch is an extension of Wii U..........more like Wii U was a half-assed attempt at Switch. It sounds like the same, but they are different. |
Same difference.
Switch is probably what they wanted to make in 2012, they just couldn't do it.
| Slarvax said: Is the Switch really an innovation? Because it's pretty much all past Nintendo gimmicks + portable. There's nothing innovative in the Switch, if you ask me. Should they stop? Should they make a PS4/XBO or PS5/XB2 clone? Hard to tell. I dont think they should. |
That's not entirely fair.
spemanig said:
That's not entirely fair. |
If you're going to assign a negative connotation to it perhaps not, but technically he's not incorrect. Even in the Switch video Nintendo showed step by step that the Switch takes elements from every previous Nintendo system, and it is well portable.
There's nothing really "new", but as such going portable was the right move because it's a fail-safe for Nintendo ... they know they can sell portable systems reasonably well.
It's the best thing they could have done, the only way they could otherwise sell a console is to have a new feature like a Wiimote was for 2006, and Nintendo doesn't have that (if they did it would've been front and center and the whole system would be designed around it).
RolStoppable said:
If you look at the images of all the controllers one after another, you'll easily notice significant differences in the Nintendo line while Sony's and Microsoft's history is pretty much the same thing every time. If you look at Atari and Sega, which I mentioned in my post, they have significant differences too. Whether controllers were good or not is irrelevant here, what matters is that change has been the norm, and having the same controller every time only became more common after traditional console manufacturers were pushed out of the market. But as long as Nintendo remains, the original tradition remains intact and Sony and Microsoft should be viewed as the companies with the non-traditional approach. Peripherals, as you pointed out for PS and Xbox consoles, do not counter the point I've made. After all, peripherals have also been released for PCs, but the standard input methods remained keyboard and mouse while the eventual controller standard became the Xbox controller. I don't consider it a bad thing that Nintendo is not like Sony and Microsoft, although I am unsure what exactly you mean with your question. A Nintendo console is not a dumbed down PC, because the way that games are played as well as how the games are designed is notably different. A Nintendo console is not going to substitute the PC experience and the same obviously holds true vice versa. |
Seeing as how none of the system really use any custom silicon (Switch is a Tegra X1 and ARM CPU ... you can buy a Google tablet and Nvidia Shield that has the same chip, you couldn't buy anything really in 1996 with an N64 chip inside of it), not sure if any of this even matters. The days of companies using exotic, non-standardized tech that was specific to a console and unlike any other product in the market are long over, largely because it doesn't make any damn financial sense to not use off the shelf components anymore.
| zorg1000 said: Can people please stop referring to everything new as a gimmick? |
- "If you have the heart of a true winner, you can always get more pissed off than some other asshole."
Soundwave said:
Same difference. Switch is probably what they wanted to make in 2012, they just couldn't do it. |
not really, being an extension would be having an idea and later deciding to take the concept to the next level.
being a half-assed attempt is coming up with a idea, realizing it's not currently feasible and putting together what you can.
When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
