←back to thread

781 points HelloUsername | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
nerdjon ◴[] No.42725322[source]
Happy to see that Nintendo is treating the switch more like how they traditionally handled their mobile platforms instead of their consoles.

Iterating instead of throwing out everything with each new version. There is a part of me that is going to miss the, do weird shit and see what works, Nintendo that brought us some really fun ideas. But a stable Nintendo just being able to continue putting out great games has its advantages.

I am curious about the specs, but honestly don't care much. The only real issue the Switch had was being able to keep up with some of the games put on it with FPS but it still had beautiful games (like Tears of the Kingdom). So as long as it is actually a decent spec bump I am happy and have zero care to compare it to the other consoles (but I am sure people are going too and scream that it is "underpowered").

The biggest thing I am curious about, will it be OLED since that will be disappointing to go back to non OLED from the OLED Switch. And Price.

replies(14): >>42725406 #>>42725620 #>>42725623 #>>42726594 #>>42727079 #>>42727591 #>>42727785 #>>42728681 #>>42728750 #>>42729685 #>>42729885 #>>42731412 #>>42733275 #>>42837431 #
koromak ◴[] No.42725406[source]
I just hope its powerful enough that Indies can target it along with the Steam Deck, rather than just hope an pray like they did for Switch 1's late lifecycle. The amount of <30fps indie titles on there was sad.
replies(3): >>42725481 #>>42725604 #>>42727754 #
MetaWhirledPeas ◴[] No.42725604[source]
Man that's 100% on the indie dev. Most people don't buy indie games for cutting-edge graphics. You start pushing the envelope, you get what you get.
replies(3): >>42727130 #>>42727583 #>>42731606 #
kbolino ◴[] No.42727583[source]
The Switch was weak when it came out. Decent PCs from that same year can handle most of these games just fine. It's not really the developer's fault when the Switch is the only platform with issues, and they're usually not "pushing the envelope" in any way. The fault here is Nintendo's, they didn't prioritize support for ported games, though admittedly they couldn't really foresee the indie game boom, since it wasn't nearly as big of a deal at the time, especially in Japan.

First-party Nintendo titles are more or less the only games that actually manage to "push the envelope" on the Switch, and that's because they have the resources and experience to do it. Even then, some games end up constrained compared to the original vision, because the hardware can't handle it no matter how much insider knowledge you have about how it works and how to use it right.

replies(1): >>42729303 #
drawkward ◴[] No.42729303[source]
Witcher 3 was an amazing port.
replies(2): >>42733758 #>>42738152 #
1. kbolino ◴[] No.42738152{3}[source]
Thanks to the success of The Witcher 3, I wouldn't call CDPR an indie dev anymore. I'm sure porting that game wasn't easy, but it had a well resourced studio behind it. Not all games can even make the tradeoffs that were necessary for it to work, though. Factorio, a 2D game, also made by a pretty competent but still indie developer, was ported to the Switch, but its expansion pack Space Age couldn't be.
replies(1): >>42743017 #
2. drawkward ◴[] No.42743017[source]
I agree with all of your points, but they dont merit a logical conclusion of "therefore the switch was a weak console"
replies(1): >>42743908 #
3. kbolino ◴[] No.42743908[source]
Sorry, I only meant that the hardware was weak. As a product, the Switch was an overwhelming success, and I don't really think Nintendo made a mistake by choosing weaker hardware at the time. However, it's 9 years later and things are different now. The new platform should try to be more accommodating for ports IMO and the issues with the original are just backdrop.