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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendo Switch is perfectly viable as a primary or even only gaming device...

OP has set a bunch of parameters that makes the discussion worthless, especially by excluding people who have different preferences. Basically, all arguments are invalid because they can be applied to other devices, and software aspects are subjective. What's the point of this thread?
If you prefer Nintendo games, the Switch is viable as a main, or sole platform, if you prefer other games, it's not, there's not much more to it.

For my part, all three consoles get very little playtime and I can't really see that any of them are anywhere near viable as the sole platform for me, or even main platform.



Around the Network
Mr Puggsly said:
Shiken said:

I have already seen a good number of people in other threads showing the contrary, and a few of them within this very thread as well.  I mean the fact that some 3rd party games that come out on Switch seem to outsell X1 versions is evidence that portability matters to many.

Fact is, even the majority of an online forum does not come close to accounting for the general public.  To think otherwise is lying to yourself.

All 3 are valid primary consoles based on the needs of a gamer, and as it stands, I see no evidence of the contrary.  Only arbitrary arguments made by people who wish it to be unviable, or thise who refuse to look outside of their own personal needs.

Some certainly sell better on Switch but its not an equal library, the X1 audience has more major titles to choose from. For example the average X1 may not enjoy the same type of games as the average Switch users and more importantly the Switch isn't getting the same major releases. For example, Crash and Dark Souls did better on Switch but how did RDR2, CoD, BFV, AC:Odyssey and Soul Calibur VI do on Switch?

You're correct about saying forum doesn't reflect the general public. But I do know the PS4/X1/PC will move many of the same games we don't see on Switch. So I could argue Switch is less reflective of the general public.

I'm not arguing Switch couldn't be viable as an only console. But I highly doubt people who just use a Switch are avid gamers or just enjoy few IPs. I bet people were content with the Wii as their single platform for a period, but I suspect many of them eventually upgraded to 360 and PS3. Which would explain why games like Call of Duty declined on Wii while growing on other platforms.

I couldn't agree more.

The average gamer just can't find games on Nintendo since the last years of Wii at least. So many genres, so many basic 3rd party games that Nintendo lacks, plus the prices and the technology. You can get a full entertainment machine from PS4/Xb1 and dozens of great games in a reasonable price, while many average gamers out there would only get Zelda on Switch. For most gamers out there, 2d platforms, indies, FE, Animal Crossing, Pokemon, octopath, don't mean anything.

I guess that's why many say "Nintendo doesn't have games". It's not as if it really doesn't, but it just lacks too much of the games that the average gamer looking for a console expects from a modern current generation console.

Munn75 said:
I think the devil is in the details. Viability simply means that it can be successful as a console. Any of the current or previous systems released would fit that description in the sense that they can all play games. A better question would be is the Switch an equally optimal single gaming solution compared to the Xbox One, PS4, or a gaming PC. That is to say, is the Switch the best or most favorable single option.

In some cases yes the Switch is most viable but not equally so. I believe that if portability or a preference to Nintendo franchises are your primary preferences in gaming, then the Switch is the most optimal console for you. The Xbox One, PS4 and gaming PCs offer many advantages over the Switch that should factor in to which console is the best single optimal choice.

Xbox and PS4 obviously have specific first party titles that appeal to their fans and also have many more third party titles including almost all of the previously mentioned AAA titles. Many of these third party titles are not available on Switch and those that are available on all three consoles run better on X1 and PS4.

A gaming PC is optimal for those that want to run the available games at the highest resolution, frame rate, effects, etc. and also tends to be optimal for software price and availability of many older games. Of course a gaming PC will run AAA titles better than current consoles. Gaming PCs lack any of the first party titles from PS4 and Switch but have several of the high profile X1 titles.

So viability as a single console solution is heavily dependent on your gaming preferences. If you love Nintendo games, JPRGs, portability, then the Switch is the most logical choice if you can only choose one console.

If you love games like GTA 5, Red Dead Redemption 2, Fallout, Madden, Uncharted, Halo, Spider-man, God of War, Witcher 3, etc. or if you want to play games at higher resolution, frame rate, etc. then Switch is not logically the optimal system for you. It cannot play these games and it will always run third parties in lower resolution and lower frame rate when compared to PS4, X1 and a gaming PC.

I thought that the question of this thread was exactly that: is Switch an equally optimal single gaming solution?

I agree, not equally so. All the third party games and franchises that one can think of you can find on both current generation consoles. Not on Switch, plus all other benefits that current gen consoles offer and switch doesn't.

Current gen consoles (ps4,x1) are like your regular grocery store. They're Walmart of sorts.

Switch is just that vegan, organic shop with a few of the items you can find on Walmart, but with its own quality stuff for its own public. Others can go there to buy posh 95% cacau chocolate once in a while, but when they need to feed, they go to Walmart.



God bless You.

My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?


Wyrdness said:
WhatATimeToBeAlive said:

I disagree. These are AAA games that I have bought and have been released this year (and none of them either has no microtransactions, or those are not an issue in them):

Monster Hunter World

Shadow of the Colossus

Kingdom Come Deliverance

Far Cry 5

God of War

Detroit Become Human

Vampyr (AA/AAA)

Divinity: Original Sin 2 - Definite Edition (AA, but got physical release)

Spider-Man

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

Assassin's Creed Odyssey

Red Dead Redemption 2

Just Cause 4

 

That's 13 games and there is more, from which only Vampyr is going to Switch. I wouldn't call that diminishing, since it's about as much as last year or even more. In fact, AAA-wise (quality + quantity) this year has been one of the best years ever. So what are you talking about?

Going by what people on this very site say (some whom are the same people here) games like SOTC, Just Cause, Detroit, Kingdom Come, Divinity etc... are not AAA titles otherwise a number of games on the Switch become AAA by default.

How are they not AAA titles (I already said that Divinity is AA)? How do they noticeably differ from other AAA titles? They have similar graphics, sound, amount of content, etc. as other titles that are AAA.

But Octopath Traveler for example is not AAA. Or are you saying that it has similar production values as Just Cause 4? Or what Switch games do you mean?



"The rumours of my death have been greatly exaggerated."

- Single-player Game

Well my phone has crapped out and I lost my damn reply to half of the quotes.  So annoyed at that, and I have no time to type it all out again right now.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Animal Crossing NH Dream Address: DA-1078-9916-3261

WhatATimeToBeAlive said:
Wyrdness said:

Going by what people on this very site say (some whom are the same people here) games like SOTC, Just Cause, Detroit, Kingdom Come, Divinity etc... are not AAA titles otherwise a number of games on the Switch become AAA by default.

How are they not AAA titles (I already said that Divinity is AA)? How do they noticeably differ from other AAA titles? They have similar graphics, sound, amount of content, etc. as other titles that are AAA.

But Octopath Traveler for example is not AAA. Or are you saying that it has similar production values as Just Cause 4? Or what Switch games do you mean?

AAA according to people on this very site (some who are in this very thread) and definition is not graphics, content or quality it's purely a high mainstream and high budget which those games don't fall under, they're AA titles which is what I touched upon earlier and also what the person you responded to is highlighting. AAA releases are diminishing but it's not as much of an issue as AA titles are matching them blow for blow as far as the product goes.

If you're going to go by content, quality etc... then that means a whole host of Switch games as well are AAA.



Around the Network
0D0 said:
Mr Puggsly said:

Some certainly sell better on Switch but its not an equal library, the X1 audience has more major titles to choose from. For example the average X1 may not enjoy the same type of games as the average Switch users and more importantly the Switch isn't getting the same major releases. For example, Crash and Dark Souls did better on Switch but how did RDR2, CoD, BFV, AC:Odyssey and Soul Calibur VI do on Switch?

You're correct about saying forum doesn't reflect the general public. But I do know the PS4/X1/PC will move many of the same games we don't see on Switch. So I could argue Switch is less reflective of the general public.

I'm not arguing Switch couldn't be viable as an only console. But I highly doubt people who just use a Switch are avid gamers or just enjoy few IPs. I bet people were content with the Wii as their single platform for a period, but I suspect many of them eventually upgraded to 360 and PS3. Which would explain why games like Call of Duty declined on Wii while growing on other platforms.

I couldn't agree more.

The average gamer just can't find games on Nintendo since the last years of Wii at least. So many genres, so many basic 3rd party games that Nintendo lacks, plus the prices and the technology. You can get a full entertainment machine from PS4/Xb1 and dozens of great games in a reasonable price, while many average gamers out there would only get Zelda on Switch. For most gamers out there, 2d platforms, indies, FE, Animal Crossing, Pokemon, octopath, don't mean anything.

I guess that's why many say "Nintendo doesn't have games". It's not as if it really doesn't, but it just lacks too much of the games that the average gamer looking for a console expects from a modern current generation console.

Munn75 said:
I think the devil is in the details. Viability simply means that it can be successful as a console. Any of the current or previous systems released would fit that description in the sense that they can all play games. A better question would be is the Switch an equally optimal single gaming solution compared to the Xbox One, PS4, or a gaming PC. That is to say, is the Switch the best or most favorable single option.

In some cases yes the Switch is most viable but not equally so. I believe that if portability or a preference to Nintendo franchises are your primary preferences in gaming, then the Switch is the most optimal console for you. The Xbox One, PS4 and gaming PCs offer many advantages over the Switch that should factor in to which console is the best single optimal choice.

Xbox and PS4 obviously have specific first party titles that appeal to their fans and also have many more third party titles including almost all of the previously mentioned AAA titles. Many of these third party titles are not available on Switch and those that are available on all three consoles run better on X1 and PS4.

A gaming PC is optimal for those that want to run the available games at the highest resolution, frame rate, effects, etc. and also tends to be optimal for software price and availability of many older games. Of course a gaming PC will run AAA titles better than current consoles. Gaming PCs lack any of the first party titles from PS4 and Switch but have several of the high profile X1 titles.

So viability as a single console solution is heavily dependent on your gaming preferences. If you love Nintendo games, JPRGs, portability, then the Switch is the most logical choice if you can only choose one console.

If you love games like GTA 5, Red Dead Redemption 2, Fallout, Madden, Uncharted, Halo, Spider-man, God of War, Witcher 3, etc. or if you want to play games at higher resolution, frame rate, etc. then Switch is not logically the optimal system for you. It cannot play these games and it will always run third parties in lower resolution and lower frame rate when compared to PS4, X1 and a gaming PC.

I thought that the question of this thread was exactly that: is Switch an equally optimal single gaming solution?

I agree, not equally so. All the third party games and franchises that one can think of you can find on both current generation consoles. Not on Switch, plus all other benefits that current gen consoles offer and switch doesn't.

Current gen consoles (ps4,x1) are like your regular grocery store. They're Walmart of sorts.

Switch is just that vegan, organic shop with a few of the items you can find on Walmart, but with its own quality stuff for its own public. Others can go there to buy posh 95% cacau chocolate once in a while, but when they need to feed, they go to Walmart.

I think the OP used the word viable at first but the context of the post was more in line with optimal.

As a vegetarian myself, your example is spot on. All of the veg/vegan options are for the most part viable for everyone in the sense that they could survive on them and enjoy good health. The vegan stores, eateries, etc. are definitely not for the masses though and that is all down to personal preference. So it is safe to say that something can be viable but not optimal, mostly based on personal preference. These same arguments could be made for cars, houses, or just about anything else where choice and preference are involved. Best overall is almost always subjective. Best for specific, well defined needs and preferences is much more fact based and can be supported by data and specific examples.



"There are things which, if done by the few, we should refuse to imitate; yet when the majority have begun to do them, we follow along - just as if anything were more honourable because it is more frequent!"

-Seneca

WhatATimeToBeAlive said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

I think the reason for this thread is because Wii/Wii U and initially the Switch were often just considered as a "secondary" console due to lacking so many AAA games. But with the number of AAA releases diminishing every year and them showing them choke-full  with lootboxes and microtransactions, they are not getting missed nearly as much as they did 10 years ago, and some are getting ported anyway.

I disagree. These are AAA games that I have bought and have been released this year (and none of them either has no microtransactions, or those are not an issue in them):

Monster Hunter World

Shadow of the Colossus

Kingdom Come Deliverance

Far Cry 5

God of War

Detroit Become Human

Vampyr (AA/AAA)

Divinity: Original Sin 2 - Definite Edition (AA, but got physical release)

Spider-Man

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

Assassin's Creed Odyssey

Red Dead Redemption 2

Just Cause 4

 

That's 13 games and there is more, from which only Vampyr is going to Switch. I wouldn't call that diminishing, since it's about as much as last year or even more. In fact, AAA-wise (quality + quantity) this year has been one of the best years ever. So what are you talking about?

Divinity: Original Sin 2 is also going to Switch.  Also, Spider-Man, God of War, Shadow of the Colossus, and Detroit Become Human are PS4 exclusives.  That's like making a list of Switch games that PS4 and Xbox One aren't getting and including Legend of Zelda:  Breath of the Wild, Super Mario Odyssey, Fire Emblem Warriors, Xenoblade Chronicles 2, etc. on it.



Wyrdness said:
WhatATimeToBeAlive said:

How are they not AAA titles (I already said that Divinity is AA)? How do they noticeably differ from other AAA titles? They have similar graphics, sound, amount of content, etc. as other titles that are AAA.

But Octopath Traveler for example is not AAA. Or are you saying that it has similar production values as Just Cause 4? Or what Switch games do you mean?

AAA according to people on this very site (some who are in this very thread) and definition is not graphics, content or quality it's purely a high mainstream and high budget which those games don't fall under, they're AA titles which is what I touched upon earlier and also what the person you responded to is highlighting. AAA releases are diminishing but it's not as much of an issue as AA titles are matching them blow for blow as far as the product goes.

If you're going to go by content, quality etc... then that means a whole host of Switch games as well are AAA.

How do you know how big budgets those games have? Just Cause 4 for example most likely has about as big budget as most other AAA games. It's atleast much closer to AAA than AA. And money that is spent on developing a game (not marketing) improves its quality and content.

Name those AA games that have been released this year that match these this year's AAA games quality-wise:

Monster Hunter World, Kingdom Come Deliverance, Shadow of the Colossus, God of War, Detroit Become Human, Vampyr, Spider-Man, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Assassin's Creed Odyssey, Red Dead Redemption, Just Cause 4 (and these are only the ones that I have bought).

Those are all good/great games, so how are AAA games diminishing?



"The rumours of my death have been greatly exaggerated."

- Single-player Game

Mandalore76 said:
WhatATimeToBeAlive said:

I disagree. These are AAA games that I have bought and have been released this year (and none of them either has no microtransactions, or those are not an issue in them):

Monster Hunter World

Shadow of the Colossus

Kingdom Come Deliverance

Far Cry 5

God of War

Detroit Become Human

Vampyr (AA/AAA)

Divinity: Original Sin 2 - Definite Edition (AA, but got physical release)

Spider-Man

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

Assassin's Creed Odyssey

Red Dead Redemption 2

Just Cause 4

 

That's 13 games and there is more, from which only Vampyr is going to Switch. I wouldn't call that diminishing, since it's about as much as last year or even more. In fact, AAA-wise (quality + quantity) this year has been one of the best years ever. So what are you talking about?

Divinity: Original Sin 2 is also going to Switch.  Also, Spider-Man, God of War, Shadow of the Colossus, and Detroit Become Human are PS4 exclusives.  That's like making a list of Switch games that PS4 and Xbox One aren't getting and including Legend of Zelda:  Breath of the Wild, Super Mario Odyssey, Fire Emblem Warriors, Xenoblade Chronicles 2, etc. on it.

Well you can add at least Forza Horizon, Battlefield V and Call of Duty to that list (that's 12 games). And Xbox's lackluster exclusive games library is a well known fact and it gets a lot of flak from it. For majority PS4 is the primary console compared to Xbox. So why PS4 exclusives shouldn't count when we are talking about AAA games that are not on Switch?



"The rumours of my death have been greatly exaggerated."

- Single-player Game

WhatATimeToBeAlive said:

How do you know how big budgets those games have? Just Cause 4 for example most likely has about as big budget as most other AAA games. It's atleast much closer to AAA than AA. And money that is spent on developing a game (not marketing) improves its quality and content.

Name those AA games that have been released this year that match these this year's AAA games quality-wise:

Monster Hunter World, Kingdom Come Deliverance, Shadow of the Colossus, God of War, Detroit Become Human, Vampyr, Spider-Man, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Assassin's Creed Odyssey, Red Dead Redemption, Just Cause 4 (and these are only the ones that I have bought).

Those are all good/great games, so how are AAA games diminishing?

Again some of the games you've listed are AA, SOTC for example would of had a budget comparable to games like Octopath which under the logic you're employing would make that AAA, Just Cause is a series that averages 2.5m per game so I highly doubt the development team received a budget comparable to games like RDR and GOW because that would mean huge losses sorry some of those aren't AAA games you're mistaking being good for being AAA, Just Cause is a mid tier title much like the Saints Row games.

Here are the top rated Switch games for 2018 as you can see the are over 50 games that have averaged 80 plus so the platform is hardly lacking in quality releases.

AAA are diminishing in not only release numbers but what set them apart lets look at 2017 where the were 15 actual AAA titles for the time 10 of which average 90+ and these were along side a tonne of AA titles, now days the are less releases from AAA and AA titles are going blow for blow with in everything but budget that's a sign of diminishing.

Last edited by Wyrdness - on 05 December 2018