Topic: Nintendo Switch --OT--

@Kidfried Aiming for a wide demographic is a necessity if you're making a movie based on a toy and don't want it to end up having niche appeal. So it really just depends on the sort of film you're making.

I tend to align with critics more when they diverge on mass consumption films, but I've seen plenty of critical darlings that were boorish and clearly just catering to the whims of that category of moviegoers, who tend to have their own preferences in terms of content.

Review that mentions the Mario movie's 3D experience.

https://www.3dor2d.com/reviews/the-super-mario-bros-movie-3d-...

Also, apparently the 4K Steelbook will be Best Buy exclusive in the US.

Agreed, very much so. Unless there's some fantastical innovation they've got up their sleeve, which we simply aren't seeing. You're right, though; I remember thinking that the 3DS was a game-changer and sure, the whole 3D thing hasn't been a total failure, but it also hasn't fully transformed the entertainment landscape like I reckon people hoped it would... but then the 3DS wasn't a total failure like the Wii U was, suggesting that some of Nintendo's swing-and-miss moments aren't so wide of the mark after all.

Whatever happens, and despite some of my own personal opinions, I really hope Nintendo can maintain their current level of success, and that their next console isn't dragged down into the quagmire of internet hysteria and stat-shaming that so often ruins a good reveal. It'd be nice for fans to be able to look forward to something, without having to feel anxious or defensive.

@RogerRoger Itd be nice to have a reveal that's positive. I could understand the skeptical nature for Switch but even then some took it too far.

It doesn't help you've got developers at the time slagging the machine off before it's even out, or hell, the president of the Pokemon Company saying he told Nintendo it was going to fail and they wouldn't develop for it.

Of course there will always be derision for it, it's a Nintendo system. There will always be some level of "It doesn't count because". Look at regulators, they don't even count Nintendo as part of the core gaming market which...is absurd because they compete in the gaming market.

And when you've got developers and government bodies doing that, the consumers will largely follow. Nintendo, much like PC, is off on its own separate from what has now been defined as the core market of PlayStation and Xbox.

And you know what, looking at how those markets are doing with live services, ballooning budgets and monetization, I'm happy being in a weird niche instead.

@Haruki_NLI Exactly. We live in an age where everybody's got a platform, but all that means is that you'll hear a lot more folks get a lot of things wrong, no matter their position or perceived expertise. I'm not saying that Nintendo is perfect (heck, that's kinda been the point of this entire conversation) but there comes a point where you just have to stand back and let Nintendo be Nintendo. The ultimate proof will be in the console's post-launch sales and lifespan longevity, so why freak out about it beforehand?

Having said that, the whole regulator market definition thing frustrates me no end. Gaming's a business and sure, that means success is measured in dollar signs, but just because Company A isn't doing quite as well as Company B doesn't automatically mean that Company A has failed.

@RogerRoger You would think Nintendo has a fair share of market in terms of dollars, with having one of the best selling home consoles and exclusive games that sell more than most other titles on a single system.

The only thing they are not competing in is being able to offer a comparable next experience as MS and Sony. Which is a weird thing for a regulator to focus on.

@JohnnyShoulder ...and yet, Nintendo's net worth is the lowest of the Big Three. Which you're right, is more than a little surprising, given the state of the weekly sales charts.

But I also agree that the regulator's recent choice of focus has been very weird indeed.

@RogerRoger @JohnnyShoulder The regulator focus was interesting.

Sure Nintendo takes the least revenue of the three, and also the least profit, but the percentage of profit to revenue if I remember rightly is higher than the others because of how lean the business itself is.

Plus when your games sell as well as Nintendo's titles, all that profit can go into smaller niche titles to broaden the appeal of the overall platform, no need to worry about each game funding the next.

Then you get the teams in Nintendo who are quite frankly not only some of the best designers in the industry (just look how some western AAA devs are gawking at Tears of the Kingdom for instance) but also some of those teams are full of technical wizards that, given the power of the platform, seem to get more out of it relative to bigger teams on more capable hardware.

I always believed, to the great annoyance of my university teachers, that working within limited power constraints is the most freedom you can have because it makes your designs tighter and focused while also forcing you to come up with solutions to problems you could brute force through sloppily elsewhere.

Granted I also told them in 2014 that the future of gaming was hybridization and they failed me on that aspect. So you know, still waiting for that grade to go back up. 🫣

Please correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't "high-end console market" (ignoring Nintendo resulting in just Xbox and Playstation) a construct created by Sony to avoid arguments about how Switch is the 3rd best selling console of all time (only PS2 and DS are higher) despite not having a single CoD game?

Then regulators agreed to using that approach.

@Grumblevolcano I guess? I can't remember if Sony pulled the card first or not.

And then Xbox played them at their own game and said "Well by that logic you have 98% of Japan" and now they can't really argue it.

Honestly the whole thing has just been one big game of chess and it's almost as telling of Sony than the Epic V Apple case. Almost.

@RogerRoger The 3DS was white successful I thought.
For me personally, it was a game changer for what it was. And I’d argue it falls under the VR umbrella now with pure 3D. Same with the Wii’s motion stuff. Really, a lot of “stupid” gimmicks are now beloved by anyone who enjoys VR and had their start elsewhere.

But for me what really made the 3D special on the 3DS, was the way it drew my eyes in. It focused me in so the small screen didn’t matter. It didn’t feel small because of the 3D. I think people really underestimated the 3D on it and how cool it was.

@Grumblevolcano I mean, to be fair, it’s been a separate category for a long time now, and isn’t super relevant for the CoD discussion. The landscape is very different, and MS’s is using monopoly tactics that affect Sony completely differently than Nintendo.

@Grumblevolcano Sony hasn't ever mentioned "high-end gaming market". Though they do mentioned that the Xbox and PS's are high-end homeconsoles

First there's the difference between "high-end home console " Sony's words) and "high-end gaming" (lawyer's words), which are not the same thing. High-end gaming also entails pc.

Then there is the fallacy of equating "high-end console" and "high-end console market". The fact that some products have distinctive features doesn't mean they are a market to themselves.
By that logic the US might want to do something about the PlayDate having a monopoly on the "handhelds with a crank market".

But even aside from that, whoever used what words by which company, we all know these arguments being made are crap. Sony and Microsoft and their lawyers both make crap arguments in this case, and they can get away with it, which is why they're making them, not because they believe them to be the truth.

The high end console phrase was most likely cooked up by some suits to try and conveniently over look Nintendo when bringing up CoD, as when some governing bodies passed the deal they pointed out that Nintendo have managed OK without it for the Switch so far.

Totally agree with this. Playing Ocarina of Time on the original 3DS was definitely one of the best 3D experiences I've ever had!

So, yeah, this was the trailer I wanted all along.

Absolutely looks like a proper sequel.

Can't wait!

Glad it’s won over some of the doubters, it’s looking awesome. To be fair I wasn’t too excited a few weeks ago, I knew it would be good but I just wasn’t feeling the commitment. But now I am all aboard, choochoo.

It's nice to see that enormous, terrifying bosses are back. Including Gleeok, who hasn't starred in a console entry since the NES original.

A weirdly large emphasis is being paid to battle companions as well. Some returning icons from BotW, but also some just... ordinary people? Makes me wonder if they're just around for setpiece battles, or if there's some sort of fleshed out system behind this.

There's a lot of non-field environments being shown off, which initially makes one think of dungeons, but looking at the footage, they could also hint at an explorable underground realm of some sort. Which would be interesting, since the game would then feature three open world layers: the sky world, the surface, and the underground.

Actually, while people have noted this looks almost identical to BotW visually (because it does), the scope of the world is becoming increasingly impressive. This might end up being one of the densest games ever made. And it's running on piddly 2017 tablet tech.

Also, the vehicles they showcase seem to get more outlandish with every trailer. Presumably, like every other vehicle in the game, you can fuse it yourself, which makes me wonder what the limit is on how crazy the player can get with their designs. Presumably there's some sort of hard cap on the number of items you can attach.

This game looks bananas. At this point, the only announced title that seems like it could rival it in 2023 is Starfield, and my faith in Bethesda is on the low side after Fallout 4. Although I'd love for Microsoft to get at least one W this year.

@Ralizah I may never play this as I never finished Breath of the Wild, but one of my main complaints about that was how empty the world always felt. If there really is a big emphasis on what you said in your second spoiler, then that would hopefully go a long way into remedying that problem and you wouldn't feel so alone out there most of the time.

Like I said, the first one never clicked for me, but I will admit that was a really good final trailer. If I was a fan, that would have upped my anticipation for the game.

@KilloWertz I'm guessing the bulk of the game is still solitary exploration/puzzle-solving/etc., but it'd be cool to go into battles against encampments with some homies I made friends with. Of course, it's heavily possible that battle partners will be confined to battlefield setpieces.

NPC density will probably still be light overall compared to something like Skyrim, HZD, etc., though. Despite misconceptions, BotW was always more akin to something like Minecraft than it was open-world RPGs like The Witcher and Fallout, and it feels like they're doubling down on that aspect of the experience.

For me, it helped that the NPCs I met were generally likeable or funny. Souls games always felt sort of empty and isolating to me, since the few people you met generally liked to babble cryptic nonsense (although Elden Ring improves on this aspect a bit). Same issue with SMT: Nocturne, where everyone you met was either a demon or becoming increasingly insane over the course of the game.