Topic: Nintendo Switch --OT--

@themcnoisy How are the components cheap?

@Octane The reviews I've watched online; the stand, switch dock, cartridge holder and screen are cheap.

To be fair I should get my hands on a switch first; at this point after launch there's no excuse not to and I really should before posting again.

But my original comment stands that I do want Nintendo to make a powerful console.

I think it feels durable. Definitly more than the tablets I bought to my daughters. I can sort of understand if someone thinks a plastic screen is cheap, but it fills 2 functions. 1. it doesn't crack if you happen to drop it. 2. less reflections on the screen, which I feel is important for a console.

From what I have read, the overall console (at least the tablet portion) feels quite solid. The kick stand feels somewhat cheap and flimsy. The railings to slot the joycons in are metal in design and the screen itself, whether plastic or not, is capable. The dock is somewhat lacking and the slot to fit the switch in offers minimal protection. Its as if they expect you to use the console primarily as a handheld and the dock occasionally - more to charge.

I do agree with @themcnoisy that I had hoped Nintendo would have made a more competitive 'home' console. I am not arguing its the most powerful handheld console but the reality is, its only competing against the Vita and 3DS in that area. With modern day electronics, its hardly difficult to beat both of those.

Its not 'just' resolution at all but with 4k TV's becoming increasingly popular in peoples homes, it means that the picture will need to be stretched at least 4x its size to fit the screen and in the case of Zelda at 900p, it needs to be blown up 600% to fit. This will show up the lack of Aliasing. Its akin to releasing a 'standard definition' console as everyone is beginning to move into HD. As I said its not just the number of pixels that are being drawn either. Extra power can improve the visual settings (shadows, lighting, particle effects etc), aliasing, draw distances etc. Extra Power can also improve the performance of games without sacrificing visual quality. The more 'simplistic' the visual style the easier it is to hit 60fps.

As a PC gamer, @Therad must know about having to optimise games for the hardware. Whether you can increase the quality in one area without having too much of a negative impact in another. Its not always about pushing up the resolution to the standard of the monitor but what level of shadows, lighting, textures etc and virtually every increase brings down the performance. In some cases, depending on hardware, it maybe that you drop 'resolution' down a notch or two to maintain a minimum frame rate and keep the visual settings at a high-max level but increase the GPU power, you can push the visuals and/or performance further - not necessarily the resolution. Most GPU's are tested at varying resolutions and with the settings maxed out and it seems that most PC gamers want 'native' 4k, at least 60fps and as many of the settings set on Max as possible and are 'not' content to have to play at 1080p (or less). The amount of PC gamers I see mocking the PS4 Pro because it can't (always) offer 'native' 4k. Its even worse when it comes to 'frame-rates' with games that run at 30fps on consoles - more power would mean less performance issues whilst maintaining a decent resolution and visual settings. Power for 'just' resolution isn't necessarily the most important but it is important.

Incidentally, I doubt the Switch would be 'good' for fighting games with its Joycon d-pad - so not good for FPS, probably 3rd person action adventure/shooting games in fact most/all '3D' movement games where one analogue stick controls the camera/aiming etc and the other the movement etc in Split screen. Yes it maybe 'OK' for games like Mario Kart, Mario Bros 2D old school games, relatively simple party games etc. Maybe that's fine and enough for some...

The only reason to spend £20 more on a game that looks and/or performs worse on Switch, really comes down to whether or not you want to be able to play that game on the go. Why buy Skyrim (for example) on Switch? Its not because you want local MP on a rooftop or at a convention? The 'cheaper' console/PC versions will look better (not necessarily just resolution - but draw distance, textures/lighting, foliage etc etc) if not play better too. The only benefit is 'portability'. I bet games like Fifa will offer some form of link to other Switch users - I wouldn't want to play split-screen on a 6.2" screen with half a controller but I doubt it will be as complete or expansive as the 'cheaper' PC/XB/PS version and 'more' fun online. If I was not disabled, I would prefer to meet my mates for a proper kickabout in the park than meet up to hook up a couple of Switches to play Fifa. I would rather play online from the comfort of my home and chat with friends in a Party. I would rather invite friends round than meet up in 'public' to play games and its not as if no console games offer couch co-op...

I've played a friends Switch when remote (not docked) and it is a nice little system. I don't think the build feels any less than a mid range tablet or any other handheld.

I played a little of BOTW and while it looks like an ace game, coming off the PS4 Pro to the Switch, I felt the stepdown was really noticable and I wondered how it would fare when docked on a larger tv. What I think it means for games is that developers are going to have to develop for the Switch rather than offer any kind of port. Power isn't everything but I felt like it was an amazing handheld but a limited home console.

I still quite want a switch - I like portable gaming and I quite like the idea of playing Skyrim for the first time on the move and having that full console experience. But, I think I want to see the quality of third party support first.

Regarding the kickstand, it's also designed to snap off in case you try to dock the system and forget to fold the kickstand back. However, I do think a second kickstand and a different viewing angle would've been more useful. I think that should solve most of the issues people have with the kickstand. And yes, minimal screen protection in the dock is a weird decision..

@KratosMD Doesn't mean the game will be flawed. It just means optimisation, and that takes time. Nintendo is very good at this, their games [read: file size] are very small compared to other games.

I would say most will not be able to play 4k@60fps at full detail. Sure, this should be the gold standard, but most won't be able to achieve that. See: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/
If you look at what people actually have in their PCs, you see that most people have a gpu older than 2 years and those simply can't output the best 'graphics' for the newest games. It is simply the brag factor at play. It is the same as Xbox/PS4 players are doing towards Nintendo fans. I think fans should try and have a more critical eye towards their 'own' brand, because they all do things the makers should be called out for.

Tinkering with graphics settings is something I both miss and don't miss with consoles. Sometimes they have too many options on PC. I wish the consoles had at least some basic settings, something like a slider between performance and graphics. Generally speaking, fast-paced games should have higher frame rates, strategy games is usually better with higher resolution, and the rest should be balanced. And all should have as much details as they can muster at their target.

I do question 4k for most living rooms though. Most people who buy it are going to buy something that is overkill since their sofas are too far away from the TV. Most people just assumes 4k is better since that is what they have been told. When PC-gaming, you sit far closer to the screen, so you will get out the most of your screen.

You can do a simple test to see if your TV are at a optimal viewing distance. Have a 4k (or 1080p if you have a fullHD TV) picture on the screen, not something that moves. Stand close enough that you can easily see individual pixels. Then slowly back off until you can't see them. Here is your optimal viewing distance and where your sofa should be placed, tailor made for your eyes, regardless if you have bad eye-sight or not.

But I would say that even if you don't get the resolution benefit from a 4k, 4k TVs often have better panels in them and tech such as automatically adjust brightness on the screen depending on the surrounding light, they have HDR etc.

_{Language -Tasuki-}

The kickstand should have been centered at least. That is a bit of a bummer.

That was one of my main complaints about carts. Simply put, you can press a DVD/bluRay for cents, while a cart needs to be loaded. Most indies will probably be digital only, but nintendo might subsidize some of them to pad out physical release I imagine. The binding of Isaac is a physical release if I remember correctly.

@Therad I have a 4k TV - in fact its also a HDR TV and whilst 'bigger' than the 'average' at 55" (the average being 48") its still regarded as 'small' for the distance I sit - around 2m away. That being said I can 'clearly' see the difference between 1080p and 4k resolution. Its FAR more obvious with gaming than it is with TV/Film but the difference is still very noticeable.

With TV/Film, the focus is often in the 'foreground' with close ups on the actors/action and often there isn't to much difference between 1080p and 4k. Things like hair for example look sharper - especially when at an angle - not vertical or horizontal. However as objects move further away, at 1080p, the details are lost. Fur/hair/pin-stripes etc stop looking like individual strands - even disappear altogether. A lawn looks 'flat' for example but at 4k still retains its 'texture'.

The overall effect is one that's sharper and more defined with better 'colour' accuracy as less 'mixing' or averaging has to be done. This can be seen more with things like Hair/fur for example. Even clothing like denim which is not all made up of the same 'blue' threads. A blue and white thread will end up looking like a blurry light blue and lose the texture.

In gaming, the difference is far more noticeable because the image is generally much sharper than film. If you own a PS4 Pro, you can play games like Horizon at 4k (albeit checkerboard) and 1080p and the difference is easily obvious. Its more obvious than the difference between 900p and 1080p (unsurprisingly). You don't have to see the individual pixels to get the benefit.

As I said, I have a 4k screen and have SkyQ too. I can compare the 4k films/TV etc to 1080p versions and the difference is obvious. Often I watch something in 4k and see things I didn't notice at 1080p - it may only be small things but they are still noticeable. Whether its a Cats whiskers, the veins in leaves, the individual threads in clothes or more detail and texture in objects further away, its still a noticeable difference. It may not be the 'optimum' difference but its still a very clear difference.

What you are also not taking into consideration though is the upscaling of content and the effect that can have. Something that matches up to the resolution - ie the 720p of the handheld mapping 1:1 with the game looks 'sharper' than 720p on a 1080p screen - even if it was the same size or if you calculated the 'distance' equivalent from a larger screen. People with a Pro and 1080p screen will also tell you that a 'downsampled' higher resolution image is 'better' than a native 1080p image.

Maybe most PC gamers are using 'older' GPU's to game but I bet you if they could afford a better one, they wouldn't hesitate to swap it out. Its not 'cheap' to upgrade their hardware as soon as something better comes out. Last years TitanX cost $1k yet beating in benchmarks by this years 1070 for $400. Does that make those with TitanX's want to upgrade to this years Titan or will they make-do with their current Titan until they can afford an upgrade in 2-3years. In 3-4years time, if they carry out a 'new' survey, I bet most gamers will still have GPU's around 2-3years old meaning that they will have upgraded at some point but still won't have 'the latest and greatest'. I doubt many PC gamers have GPU's that struggle to run games at 1080p with some graphical settings on medium at best at struggle to maintain a 30fps at that level. I bet very few have Radeon 7870's - the equivalent to the PS4 or even a 7770 or 7790, the equivalent to an XB1 GPU - let alone a 'desktop' equivalent to Switch or 4GB RAM at ~26Gb/s bandwidth. I would be very surprised if any offer less than 1Tflop - unless gaming really isn't that important. I bet most of those with 3+yr old GPU's will be thinking or wanting to upgrade in the near future.

Granted not 'everyone' wants or needs a GPU that can handle 4k/60 with the settings at Max. Most probably only have a 1440p monitor at best and don't yet have either the finances or need to upgrade to the 'best' on the market. For some, having to upgrade the monitor, GPU and maybe CPU, RAM, cooling etc is just to much at the moment but I bet given the choice, opportunity etc, they would...

If budget allowed, you wouldn't find many people opting to go out and buy a PC with equivalent specs to a Switch or an XB1/PS4 for that matter for gaming and they certainly wouldn't expect it to last a 'generation' (say 4-5yrs) with that spec.

Ok, so amazingly, I've been given a Nintendo Switch by my work as a thank you for a recent bit of extra effort (clearly my gaming passion is obvious).

My wife is exhilarated at having yet another console in the house.

So I am in a unique position of having a new console but not having paid for it. I'm intrigued if this will make a difference on how I play. For a start, I want to finish Horizon before I move on to Zelda. Still, will crank it out tonight and see what its like.

@Rudy_Manchego Obviously you have a generous employer. Switches are pretty hard to find at the moment.

@Ralizah Yes, I am pretty lucky and treated quite well (I have been doing 10 hour days for a good few weeks now on something). Unless they have acquired it from the back of a lorry!

I'm thinking about picking up a switch now MK8 is out, both Zelda and MK8 have been given amazing reviews and with Mario Odyssey due out at Xmas I'm unsure if I can resist picking one up anymore.

Should I or shouldn't I?

@themcnoisy If you can afford it and don't have a Wii U, I'd say go for it. I would.

@themcnoisy Both games are available on WiiU and MK8 is literally just a port of this version. Digital Foundry were a bit disappointed that it really doesn't add anything - apart from an increase to resolution, no Anti-Aliasing for example. When compared to the WiiU version its identical apart from that resolution. That being said, they did say its by far the best Hand-held version of any Mario Kart game. So far, the Switch is the only Nintendo Console not to have a 'new' Mario Kart game.

Of course buying a WiiU for these is not necessarily a good decision either. It maybe ok for the current situation, the WiiU has an OK back catalogue but it won't be getting Mario Odyssey or what ever new releases come.

Whether you should get one or not, only you can answer that. Regardless of how good Zelda is, I have no interest in yet another Mario Kart and 3D Mario game, no interest in mobile gaming etc so for me, its a definite NO but my situation is different to yours. I don't know how much use you will get out of it, how much these games are worth it to you. Will you get to play Mario Kart with friends/family as that can make a difference. I would never say to someone that they must/should spend that much on a console and a couple of games at all.

@themcnoisy Hmm tough one. I have a Switch and from a hardware perspective, the system is sound and it works. The form factor is good, I like that it just works docked and not docked.

Software side, Zelda is a very good game if you like huge open worlds and complete freedom. I am not sure it is worthy of the best game ever moniker but it is very good and will give you lots to do for the money. Other than that, there are a few indies and retro titles which are all pretty expensive compared to other systems. MK8 is out this week which looks great but other than that, not many other major releases until Arms and then Splatoon 2 in the summer. Mario Odyssey will be the big system seller towards the end of the year.

I think, if you like Nintendo systems and portable gaming then the Switch is a great buy, I like it a lot. That said, the device and all accessories are expensive as are the games. You'll need an SD card, carry case etc. My advice to a few friends on the fence is to maybe wait till later in the year and see what other titles people like. Up to you - i think the system will be a big seller personally, it really is pretty nice tech. Good local mp too for friends /kids!

@KratosMD So the BULK of the content, the main racing and tracks aspect, is all available on WiiU and has been ported to Switch. The DLC may well be added in from the start with this version but its STILL all ported from the WiiU

If you are looking for a revelatory upgrade over the graphics from the WiiU version, you are in for a disappointment. Shadows, texture maps etc are all identical and no anti-aliasing either. From Eurogamers review - Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, the Switch's port of the 2014 Wii U game, inherits a pretty spectacular package. This bundles together all 48 tracks - including those in the two DLC packs.

Battle-mode has been overhauled and no longer an afterthought but it still has 'revivals' from older Mario Kart games. I am NOT denying that its the 'ultimate' Mario Kart 8 game overall. If the Racing is all you are interested in, you don't get much of an upgrade from the WiiU and DLC content if any at all. Its by far the best hand-held version of any Mario Kart but at its heart - its still just a port of the WiiU version with a better battle-mode than the previous game. Mario Kart 8 was arguably the best game on WiiU and the Deluxe version is the definitive version but the majority of it is just a port of the WiiU with a higher resolution in 'docked' mode.

There's plenty of big PS4 games that are probably more worthy of your time IMO, especially as you've invested in a PS4 Pro and 4K TV. Horizon is a good choice. I will be getting a Switch to play the likes of Zelda at some point in the future when I have a quiet spell with my PS4.

I've played a bit of Zelda, it was just "okay" if I'm honest. I'd have to play more of it. It's the kind of game you need to sink big hours into.

@KratosMD The 'identical' part was referring to the visuals rather than the content and if you read my post properly, it came just after I was talking about how the game stacked up against the WiiU version from that perspective - and apart from the resolution increase - it is identical - no real tweaks - unlike games like Skyrim for example which is also a port this gen but had a lot more attention put on the presentation as well as the increase to resolution. Instead of getting defensive over a few words, read the whole thing and it should make more sense.

Of course everyone, I though, knew it had a revised Battle mode which obviously isn't going to compare directly to the WiiU version as it was poor but the point I was making is that the 'bulk' of the experience is the same as the WiiU version visually identical too! If you own the WiiU version and/or all the DLC, it maybe difficult to justify buying a Switch for what is essentially, the majority of the content. Battlemode was always just a 'novelty' bonus MP mode where as the racing is what Mario Kart is known for. Racing is also the part that people will play on their own and spend the bulk of their time in. Nintendo could have spent a bit more time on the visuals - adding in some AA solution, adding in a bit more detail to the backgrounds etc on the courses as well but they didn't so racing is essentially identical to the WiiU version with a better battle-mode.

Having a few 'extra' characters makes no difference - you only have about 3 different types anyway - the small, lightweight class, the medium class and the Heavy class. Doesn't matter if you play as Mario or Luigi as both are the same - different colour and vocals but still the same. and these few extras will just be more of the same. Most people have their favourite from each class anyway. Its not like a Racing game where a new car can have significantly different characteristics from other cars in its 'class'.