https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuC4YLLkqME

11PM ET / 8PM PT

Prepare the bodies, the late 2010s start tonight!!

Just to inform everyone incase they haven't heard The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild has been reinstated as a lunch title! Could your faves ever?

http://68.media.tumblr.com/6bd3c6425c1238ade2ea8a5338085e12/tumblr_o83met2Cxb1ql5yr7o1_500.gif

Not region locked! A DS late 2000s revival! :D :D :D

Hmm, 2.5 - 6 hour battery life on handheld mode *sweating* :(

Playing handheld local multiplayer looks like a blast though. :D

The controller has motion controls, and all sorts of sensors. I've lost track!! I'M DEAD. MY BODY WASn'T READY

This Arms game looks like a neat Wii Boxing+Smash Bros mix. :o Looks insanely fun.

SPLATOON SLAYS ALL YOUR FAVES. Why does Call of Duty still exist. End iT.

Omg the game developer wearing the chemist coat is cheesy af.

SUPER MARIO ODYSSEY

NEW 3D MARIO PLATFORMER

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH we do not deserve it!! we truly don't! I'm crying!

-Xenoblade 2
-Fire Emblem Warriors
-Dragon Question 10 and 11 ports.
-New Shin Megami Tensei
-Skyrim
-No More Heroes 3
-Everything you could ever want.

Mess! Not it ending early without Zelda!! What kind of cruel fate


eqgnjnqowjadskapsofjapofnpasfmásfa'f[wf[s;afldkfnlk spoke too soon!! Could your Gods ever?

HOLY SH*T THESE GRAPHICS!!! Is there any question as to who is the one true God?

Yooo the pointy boobs fairy from Majora's Mask really packed on some pounds.

#dead

I  was only able to see the last 20 minutes of the presentation last night, but I also watched a few trailers I missed. Overall I was not that impressed, I'm strangely more skeptical about the Switch than before this conference. When I first saw the announcement trailer back in October, I thought the concept had mass potential and could realistically compete with the Big 3 (Microsoft, Sony, & Steam).

But since the initial teaser I started hearing so many conflicting reports on the Switch's capabilities. Some developers claiming that the Switch's power is a slight tier down from the standard PS4 & XBone. Others claiming the Switch could handle Unreal Engine 4. Some claiming that the Switch is using a NVIDIA Tegra X1 GPU. Others claiming that the Switch only has 1 Teraflops of performance. Some rumors made the assumption that the Switch was also going to compete within the space of VR, with various patents making it seem like the Switch tablet/controller could be plugged into the lens of a VR helmet (similar to the Samsung Galaxy via Galaxy VR).

With all of these major reports that conflict with each other, I was expecting Nintendo to fully address all of them. Go in depth of how powerful the switch actually is, the long term capabilities, bombshells on new IPs & franchises or the return of old ones, more variable third party support, etc.

I like the concept of the Switch, I really do. I MAY buy one for Nintendo's exclusives like Zelda Breath of the Wild, Super Mario Odyssey, & uhmm... that's it for now....? I'm going to be brutally honest, but I do not think Nintendo truly understands the modern gaming industry and this conference showed me that Nintendo isn't fundamentally changing course anytime soon.

I wish I could go on, but I think this article from Forbes articulates what I am trying to say, and more!

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2017/01/13/why-im-worried-the-nintendo-switch-is-just-another-wii-u/#6caf681951f0

I was a bit disappointed my self. Super Mario Odyssy, I don't know. There's something about it I just don't like. Nintendo is truly becoming a gimmicky franchise.

Give me Pokémon Stadium 3 and we can talk.


-Xenoblade 2
-Fire Emblem Warriors
-Dragon Question 10 and 11 ports.
-New Shin Megami Tensei
-Skyrim
-No More Heroes 3
-Everything you could ever want.


If you don't have a PC, there is no reason to buy Skyrim anymore. Especially for a Nintendo console.

I was a bit disappointed my self. Super Mario Odyssy, I don't know. There's something about it I just don't like. Nintendo is truly becoming a gimmicky franchise.


They've been doing the same gimmicks ever since the Wii U was released. It's debatable during the Wii era, but it was one of the most best selling consoles of all time.

Give me Pokémon Stadium 3 and we can talk.

Pokemon Stadium 3 would just be the same as PKS1 and 2. Except it would have over 700 Pokemon that would be a big pain in the ass.


If you don't have a PC, there is no reason to buy Skyrim anymore. Especially for a Nintendo console.


I don't think there's anything worth getting a Nintendo Switch for.

Pokemon Stadium 3 would just be the same as PKS1 and 2. Except it would have over 700 Pokemon that would be a big pain in the ass.

It really wouldn't. Its a pain in the ass right now because you have to put in hours of dedication searching. While in Pokémon Stadium 3, majority would already be in the game. I miss the days of selecting rental Pokémon to discover new move strategies.

It really wouldn't. Its a pain in the ass right now because you have to put in hours of dedication searching. While in Pokémon Stadium 3, majority would already be in the game. I miss the days of selecting rental Pokémon to discover new move strategies.


There was Pokémon Battle Revolution for the Wii in 2007. It was terrible though: you couldn't even select your Pokémon, they were selected at random!

It really wouldn't. Its a pain in the ass right now because you have to put in hours of dedication searching. While in Pokémon Stadium 3, majority would already be in the game. I miss the days of selecting rental Pokémon to discover new move strategies.


Yeah, but that was when Pokemon had only about 150 to 250 species.

Yeah, but that was when Pokemon had only about 150 to 250 species.


If you didn't enjoy the Pokémon Stadium series, that's unfortunate, but its come back is commonly requested.

If you didn't enjoy the Pokémon Stadium series, that's unfortunate, but its come back is commonly requested.


I enjoyed Pokemon Stadium, but not as much as the main Pokemon games.

"Hardcore gamers" want Call of Duty 27 and Battlefield 14. A tea. ☕

Don't confuse "hardcore gamer" for good taste. It's a catch all term for (usually male) gamers in their 20s, 30s, and 40s who account for a disproportionate amount of the revenue generated from high end video game sales. The Switch with its gimped specs and resulting lack of multiplats is not doing enough to appeal to this demographic.

"Hardcore gamers" want Call of Duty 27 and Battlefield 14. A tea. ☕

Don't confuse "hardcore gamer" for good taste. It's a catch all term for (usually male) gamers in their 20s, 30s, and 40s who account for a disproportionate amount of the revenue generated from high end video game sales. The Switch with its gimped specs and resulting lack of multiplats is not doing enough to appeal to this demographic.


Isn't that what Nintendo fanboys are like? 20-40 year old men who keep obsessing towards the new Mario or Zelda game every now and then?

Isn't that what Nintendo fanboys are like? 20-40 year old men who keep obsessing towards the new Mario or Zelda game every now and then?


Your point?

Your point?


Nintendo fanboys are simply the worst type of people in the video game community. They're also hardcore gamers, in which you mentioned before.

Nintendo fanboys are simply the worst type of people in the video game community. They're also hardcore gamers, in which you mentioned before.


1) Hardcore gamers are most the gaming industry.
2) Most Nintendo fans are hardcore gamers.
3) Nintendo has a hard time attracting most hardcore gamers.

These are not contradictory statements. To figure out why is left as an exercise to the reader.

1) Hardcore gamers are most the gaming industry.
2) Most Nintendo fans are hardcore gamers.
3) Nintendo has a hard time attracting most hardcore gamers.

These are not contradictory statements. To figure out why is left as an exercise to the reader.


You even admitted towards that post. Just face it, Nintendo fanboys are really godawful. Not that I'm saying it towards you, but it's just cringeworthy to see most of them rant about the newest stuff by Sony and Microsoft.

You even admitted towards that post. Just face it, Nintendo fanboys are really godawful. Not that I'm saying it towards you, but it's just cringeworthy to see most of them rant about the newest stuff by Sony and Microsoft.

I never said I disagree with what you said, I'm just saying it doesn't contradict what I said. In fact, it reinforces what I said and makes it all the more true. Most the gaming market are hardcore gamers -> Most of Nintendo's market are hardcore gamers is what you'd expect to occur. It doesn't mean anything if most hardcore gamers are still not interested in Nintendo. Subsets, supersets, how do they work?

I never said I disagree with what you said, I'm just saying it doesn't contradict what I said. In fact, it reinforces what I said and makes it all the more true. Most the gaming market are hardcore gamers -> Most of Nintendo's market are hardcore gamers is what you'd expect to occur. It doesn't mean anything if most hardcore gamers are still not interested in Nintendo. Subsets, supersets, how do they work?


I never heard of Nintendo fanboys being godawful, but that's because I don't pay attention to the fanboys. I just want to know how the Nintendo fanboys do. Why did NewYorkEagle called the Nintendo fanboys godawful and cringeworthy?

I never heard of Nintendo fanboys being godawful, but that's because I don't pay attention to the fanboys. I just want to know how the Nintendo fanboys do. Why did NewYorkEagle called the Nintendo fanboys godawful and cringeworthy?


Because they keep obsessing over their most critically panned games ever made, while they don't realize is that what they're playing is actually sh*t.

Because they keep obsessing over their most critically panned games ever made, while they don't realize is that what they're playing is actually sh*t.


What games are you talking about? ???

And I thought you said you don't even play games anymore?

I just realized I made the post in the wrong thread too. Mess!

What games are you talking about? ???


Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, Star Fox, etc.

Have you even seen any Nintendo forum that complains about that sh*t everyday?


And I thought you said you don't even play games anymore?


Yeah, but that doesn't mean I'm an Nintendo fanboy. I haven't even been interested into getting a new console since the Wii U was released, which is a POS console if I might add. Nothing from Nintendo interests me nowadays, except for games made for the NES-Wii eras. If you ask me, I'm more into Sega Genesis games.

Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, Star Fox, etc.

Have you even seen any Nintendo forum that complains about that sh*t everyday?

Yeah, but that doesn't mean I'm an Nintendo fanboy. I haven't even been interested into getting a new console since the Wii U was released, which is a POS console if I might add. Nothing from Nintendo interests me nowadays, except for games made for the NES-Wii eras. If you ask me, I'm more into Sega Genesis games.


Those games are all highly critically acclaimed (except Star Fox which I didn't hear anyone raving about), so I'm not sure what kind of "panned" you're talking about.

Those games are all highly critically acclaimed (except Star Fox which I didn't hear anyone raving about), so I'm not sure what kind of "panned" you're talking about.


I meant the sequels that they kept rushing in with the Wii U. Especially when their consoles now are performing worse than their competitors. In which I think is important for any video game company, because they need to show their rivals who's boss. And what did Nintendo do? Absolutely nothing than ignore what their normal fans are saying. That's sad because it just proves Nintendo that they're boring as hell. Especially when their truly last good console (the Wii) is now 10 years old. 10!!!

Do you think maybe Nintendo should just realize that they aren't in the 90s anymore? Because that's what I think. The only decent console that's not discontinued from them is the 3DS, and that is what's making them financially stable now. Back in the 90s and even the 2000s, they used to be loyal towards anybody in the industry. And now, they just ruined it after 2 years we've been into this decade, when they released the Wii U.

I meant the sequels that they kept rushing in with the Wii U. Especially when their consoles now are performing worse than their competitors. In which I think is important for any video game company, because they need to show their rivals who's boss. And what did Nintendo do? Absolutely nothing than ignore what their normal fans are saying. That's sad because it just proves Nintendo that they're boring as hell. Especially when their truly last good console (the Wii) is now 10 years old. 10!!!

Do you think maybe Nintendo should just realize that they aren't in the 90s anymore? Because that's what I think. The only decent console that's not discontinued from them is the 3DS, and that is what's making them financially stable now. Back in the 90s and even the 2000s, they used to be loyal towards anybody in the industry. And now, they just ruined it after 2 years we've been into this decade, when they released the Wii U.


What sequels did they rush? You mentioned Mario/Zelda/Pokémon but there's no recent game in those series that got panned, quite the opposite.

The Wii was flaming hot trash, you only liked it because you were a kid. The Wii is the actual reason the Wii U tanked, not that Wii U itself isn't awful either. That console went straight into people's closet right after people realized Wii Fit wasn't going to help them lose weight. People's opinions on Nintendo completely soured thanks to the PiiWii. It's been 20 years since their last great console. Gamecube was okay because of Mêlée, and the Wii U's Smash is pretty good too tbh.

I like the concept of the Switch, but I feel that its only being different for the sake of being different. You need innovation but you also need practicality as well. This is how the Nintendo SHOULD handle the Switch (but unfortunately will not):




-First Step: Have a motherboard for the docking station as well. The specs I'd aim for would be:

CPU: x86-64AMD "Jaguar" 8 Cores: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113284&ignorebbr=1&nm_mc=KNC-GoogleAdwords-PC&cm_mmc=KNC-GoogleAdwords-PC-_-pla-_-Processors+-+Desktops-_-N82E16819113284&gclid=Cj0KEQiA-_HDBRD2lomhoufc1JkBEiQA0TVMmoqIyY6vbadtg7xfRrArS-fxboNJdrsFVLXdV6ZdZWEaArqt8P8HAQ&gclsrc=aw.ds\

This would be roughly $250


GPU: Nvidia GTX 1070 Founders Edition with roughly 6.5 Teraflops of performance & memory of 12GB of GDDR5X: http://www.pcgamesn.com/nvidia-gtx-1070-benchmarks/#benchmarks

This would be roughly $450


HDD: 1 TB: http://www.disctech.com/Western-Digital-Caviar-Green-WD10EARS-SATA-Hard-Disk-Drives?partner=1011&utm_source=GoogleBase&utm_medium=banner&utm_campaign=product&gclid=Cj0KEQiA-_HDBRD2lomhoufc1JkBEiQA0TVMmq-VUc21J5NekIjI_Ja172YQ7IiJwMSR5UFm1SZ8AhQaAnE98P8HAQ

This would be roughly $40


At the surface this would cost roughly $740 to manufacture, along with the additional $300 they are currently going to sell the console as. So you're probably wondering, 'How the hell would Nintendo be able to sell this many units!?'. Well first things first, Nintendo is a profitable company. Read this article here so you could get a picture: http://mashable.com/2016/07/19/nintendo-worth-more-than-sony/#5locZP6Y9Oqh. In short Nintendo could theoretically sell the console at a lost. I would make the price for the system at $399, an extra 100 dollars more to its current price, and roughly 640 dollars off from its actual manufacture price! That means Nintendo would be selling the console at a massive lost, which for some (I and many others included) is pretty risky, especially since Nintendo has had a stigma for 20+ years for being 'for kids'. However this leads to my second step:


-Second Step: MASS MARKETING CAMPAIGN. Nintendo would need to market the hell out of the Switch. FWIW, Nintendo so far seems to have been doing very well marketing the Switch to the general public. Their announcement video featured people who were in their 20's, living on their own, sociable, and 'normal' people. Not the stereotypical kids or families, like they used to market with during the Wii/Wii U eras. But I would go further, actually have an E3 conference this year, NOT A Nintendo Direct. Have a massive conference showing groundbreaking games. Get gamers, hyped for your system. And of course convince gamers and the general public that despite the hefty 500 dollar price tag, that the consumers are getting a powerful system (much more powerful than the Xbox One & PS4, and even more powerful than the PS4 Pro & the rumored specs of the Xbox Scorpio), along with a WIDE variety of third party blockbusters like Titanfall 2, Battlefield, Assassin's Creed, Watchdogs 2, etc. along with Nintendo's iconic 1st party titles. In other words, variety that YOU COULDN'T FIND ANYWHERE ELSE. Along with the innovation (some say gimmick, but I beg to the differ) to the already awesome idea to continue playing your games on the go and with your friends whenever and wherever, would make the system a bomb dropping success! This leads me to my third step:


Third Step: Bring back long forgotten Nintendo IPs, and again MASS MARKET them. Nintendo already seems to have some killer 1st party IPs this year like Super Mario Odyssey and Zelda Breath of the Wild. HOWEVER, there are so many great IPs Nintendo has that they barely use anymore. I would work on these projects and help ensure the general public the releases of these games within the next 1-2 years:

A New Metroid: Based on the gameplay style of the Prime series

A New StarFox (I know we just got the mixed review Star Fox Zero, but I do not think Nintendo should give up on that property)

A New F-Zero (Last F-Zero we had was back in 2004!)

A New Pikmin

A New Pokemon Stadium

Earthbound 3 (this would be a major bombshell, technically there's already a Earthbound 3 on GBA but ONLY in Japan, a Earthbound 3 in the West would be pretty major)

A New Sin & Punishment

A New Kirby

A New Donkey Kong Country (along with an HD Re-Creation of the original Donkey Kong Trilogy from the SNES, that would be badass!)

etc...


If Nintendo were to do bring back these franchises I assure you that hype for the system would be insane, and it may finally convince to people that Nintendo is not just a secondary console, but a formidable primary gaming platform with a wide array of first & third party titles (in which those third party games would run much more smoothly than their competition due to much more powerful hardware). Also great gaming sales could potentially make up the deficit of the costs when it comes to the consoles being sold at a lost.


-The fourth & final step would to improve Nintendo's Multiplayer Infrastructure. Create an Achievements system (call it something Nintedony like, Coins lol.). Also allow multiplayer chat in all of your games, a rewards service, offering (not just free NES/SNES games) indie games every month, a wider array of retro games on the Virtual console, & cross game sharing (similar to Sharing on PS4).


If Nintendo were to do these things along with a few bonuses like pushing back the Switch to Holiday 2017 to strategically have the console come out with a 3-D Mario game (along with more marketing for the system), the company would most certainly bounce back to prominence.

A $640 loss would be too much. The point of loss-leader strategies is that you make up the money elsewhere. A $640 loss would require every console owner to buy at least 11 Nintendo games for the system, and that's assuming the games cost $0 to develop/market, retailers get no share of profits, etc. Basically, there's no way you can make a profit. Nintendo can and probably should sell the system at a loss, but it has to be a small enough loss that they can make up for it elsewhere (game sales, peripheral sales, online subscriptions etc.)

I agree though with the root problem that you're getting at: that the system is too weak and the line-up is poor. I don't think graphics is what people actually (truly) care about (or else the Gamecube would have handily defeated the PS2); it's the developers who care about the specs. The gap between the Wii and the PS3/360 was such that porting a game to the Wii was not easy, if it was possible at all (and retain the same gameplay). A game like Skyrim is impossible on the Wii.

The problem persisted with the Wii U and PS4/Bone. If you're developing a game, you want to develop it for the biggest market, that is the PS4, first and foremost. You then ask yourself whether it is profitable to provide it to the second largest userbase, the Xbox One, and the answer is almost always yes. It's very cheap to port a PS4 game to the Xbox One and the profit potential is huge, it's common business sense to port it. Is it common sense to port to the Wii U? The Wii U is massively underpowered. You cannot simply port the game to the Wii U, you have to fundamentally change many aspects of the game so that the game can run on the Wii U hardware. Is this a profitable endeavour? The answer is usually no. And even if it is (somehow) yes, you have to ask – "can the time, money and labour be better spent elsewhere?", and the answer is pretty much, yes. Developing for the Wii U is usually not worth it.

Nintendo needs to not necessarily surpass the PS5/Scorpio/PS4 Pro, but it has to match them. A publisher has to ask the question "is it profitable to make games for the Switch?", and the answer has to be "yes". It should be cheap and not time-intensive to port a game to the system. This is how Nintendo gets multiplats. I actually think the system is too cheap. They should realize that "hardcore gamers" have deep pockets, they are willing to pay up to $450-$500 for a system and they should take advantage of this fact. They should have bumped the Switch specs to match that price.

With strong specs, you get third party support. The first party efforts do the rest of the work. If you're selling at a loss, you actually want to have slow sales at the beginning (to minimize losses), so a dry launch lineup actually makes sense. Zelda would be just fine, imo. The drought in between Zelda and Mario would have been filled up by the third party developers. For online, charge $60/year, no matter how sh*tty the infrastructure is right now. I don't know why, but people are actually willing to pay, and if people want to throw money at you, it's a good idea to allow it. The money should be used to improve the online, of course, because they'll have to compete toe to toe with Sony/MS on that front.

It really isn't that hard to think up. I don't think Nintendo is necessarily out of touch with gamers, but with developers. They made this mistake when they went with expensive cartridges with the N64 despite the protestations of many developers, and again with the Gamecube with its proprietary discs and complicated hardware, and again with the Wii/Wii U with its underpowered hardware which makes it a nuisance to port games to. The problem actually goes all the way back to the SNES, when Nintendo was infamous for charging high licensing fees and had very strict quality control. Most 3rd party games even during the fourth generation went to Sega. When Sony entered during the fifth generation, many developers cheered the downfall of Nintendo, because their rules and ways of doing business were truly draconian and archaic. I'm afraid they're making the same mistake again.