@GameboyColor
Because while the system was held back by the kinect, it's not nearly as held back as Switch is doing to their 1st parties. Switch/Wii U is flop captain.
Golden Sun 4 hell yeah.
Wii did horrible for them overall though. It led to less software sales because most of it was shovelware and didn't get touched by gamers, rather physical therapists and soccer moms. They lost their core audience and led to the Wii U, a disaster. Wii was definitely a failure overall.
I can totally see Switch following this same route albeit all in a shorter timeframe(one gen, rather than two, actually it could be argued Nintendo has been making stupid decisions sinc...
I'm considering a Switch for the first party, but I can't get behind it's poor performance. Mario Odyssey looked amazing except for the impressive aliasing. Mario Kart 8 doesn't look like anything but a resolution upgrade(still no real AA either). Zelda had wtfbad graphics. S-E gave them a gimmicky retro game.
The only presentation that looked awesome was Xenoblade 2 blending anime and 3D awesomely, no aliasing, and great art direction, but it's ob...
Here's what I see. They should have done separate console and handheld systems for sure. Even a $250 console would have 3-4x the power at a lesser price... Imagine if they waited until Holiday season as well, they'd have AMD's 14nm which would be even more power at the same/lesser price, and that's when most of their heavy hitter games are releasing anyway.
Things I noticed:
Super Mario Odyssey- a ton of aliasing, and graphics not even be...
I still say the console would have been better as a stationary $249-299 console. I mean we'd be dealing with 3-4x the graphics, an impressive leap no doubt. That Mario game would look pristine with no aliasing and near-pixar level graphics. Zelda would look way, way nicer. Square-Enix may have put more energy into an RPG that didn't look so gimmicky just because of it's retro design. I will say that Xenoblade 2 looked very good, no aliasing, and the anime style was blended near pe...
I still say the console would have been better as a stationary $249-299 console. I mean we'd be dealing with 3-4x the graphics, an impressive leap no doubt. That Mario game would look pristine with no aliasing and near-pixar level graphics. Zelda would look way, way nicer. Square-Enix may have put more energy into an RPG that didn't look so gimmicky just because of it's retro design. I will say that Xenoblade 2 looked very good, no aliasing, and the anime style was blended ne...
Core gamer literally refers to the bulk gaming audience, by definition. And I believe that's what the new Mario is aiming at. If you don't like it, that's you, but tons of gamers are.
Honestly I can't stand the Aliasing on Mario Odyssey. I'd think for $299 you'd get those type of graphics with no jaggies in this day and age.
It would look pretty nice on emulator with forced AA though.
That's what I'm thinking. I'll buy one but no network subscription for me. Yeah, that means no Splatoon online but seriously, I have a PS4 for online games.
I'm definitely interested. Yeah, graphics could be a bit better(I think it's worth $250 personally) but hell yes I'm in. I'm waiting for more games to be released though.
But for Japan it's about 11am. They could have done this earlier at 8-9 and they'd be able to watch while/when they wake up. Japan is a workaholic society. They're not sleeping in at 8-9 anyway.
It's not about speed, it's about latency. Your internet speed might transfer 50mb/sec, but if it's delay is a second off, that interupts gaming. Simple. It's like saying this.
Situation A- Car is moving 50lbs of stuff to location, but is a second off
Situation B- Car is only moving 1 lb of stuff to location, but is on time
For gaming situation B is better, because it's not about overall data movement, it's about being o...
Yeah but Wii wasn't a success among gamers, it was a fluke success among physical therapists and soccer moms. Their success wouldn't have carried on for Square-Enix...
If I like what I see, I'll consider $250 and a game or two. If the graphics look weak, count me out though, even if it's $199.
@FleeceJohnson
You're right, value is subjective. But if enough gamers find it doesn't have value for them, it's going to turn into an objective problem for Nintendo, and the answer to this issue is all too clear, quit making us pay for features we consider to be a gimmick, when objectively, not many people are going to use the portability features.
I mean, imagine, this thing would require a mini-suitcase to bring with you on the bus, to wor...
Exactly, it's all about value. If the graphics aren't good, why am I investing unreasonable money into a gimmick I'll hardly ever use? I paid $399 for a PS4-Pro and will consider $499 for a Scorpio. But I'm not going to dish out $250 for something that has 1/3 the power of PS4 at $299(sometimes at $249). Yeah, I get it, you're paying for portability, but I can't fit this in my pocket, I can't bring this with me on the bus, to work, to school. It's portabil...
Depending on the amount of power, yes, yes it could be. If it's only a step above Wii U I'm not paying $250 for outdated graphics. Now if it's comparable with XB1, I'd pay upwards of $350-400 for it.
The problem is that it's too weak to compare with main consoles, and too big to be a portable like 3DS/Vita. It absolutely should have been a $250-299 stationary console in my opinion.
It would need more than one supporter to get their attention, more like a couple thousand... But hey, it's worth a shot, right?
The graphics looked really rough around the edges. A $249 stationary console would have 3-4x the graphics at a cheaper price, and really hit it out of the park. As always, Mario team and other 1st party studios are making interesting games on a really crappy system.
Honestly I hope Nintendo Switch flops in the first year and we get Nintendo games on Scorpio and PS4-Pro now.