Kuwka_Atcha_Ratcha
Superstar
but if they had a console power of ps4 at least they'd have 3rd party support and multi plat games. Nintendo only started failing once they started with shyt gimmicks.
Nintendo aiming to be 2nd place
- Thread starter SNG
- Start date
So tomorrow the Switch gets a spec bump which causes all third parties to go full in. You forgo The Last of Us 2 and all other of their games in favor of just owning a Nintendo console only?And that's what people are complaining about
Why has Nintendo just given up? They are literally choosing to be a "secondary" console. That's some bytchass shyt
The whole point is that I would prefer to spend $300-400 once
The way I see this is if you only buy a single console and this is really your hobby you're missing out an a decent chunk of good and great games.
It's going from 1.3 tflops to over 6. That's a drastic leap and is more than a simple upgrade. It's a new generation even if it is temporarily tied to the old.
I dunno if it's that clear cut. It's true that the compute power of the new variants is significantly higher, but the architecture's the same. I don't know if I'd call that a new gen since basically they're all running PC hardware (right down to intel/AMD64 chipsets for CPUs) and so the same machine code runs on the new iterations of these consoles. The CPUs themselves aren't that much different, and that's generally where the code execution actually takes place (with the exception of shaders, which run on the GPU's Shader Processing Units to transform texel data as quickly as possible across a parallel process).
That being said, this can open up a situation where devs will have to configure their games to enable and disable graphical fidelity based on which version of the console you have, which is kind of silly.
That being said, this can open up a situation where devs will have to configure their games to enable and disable graphical fidelity based on which version of the console you have, which is kind of silly.
that's not true at all. There's no guarantee the 3rd parties would've flocked to them. GCN/N64 were pretty much "standard" consoles, and third parties really didn't do shyt for them. @Prince Luchini's right that 3rd parties still feel some type of way because of the NES/SNES, and to a lesser extent N64 era.
Looks like Nintendo will be first place in Japan, their home country. So second place in sales is only relative to where you live.
Japan: Take A Look At Nintendo Switch Pre-Order Lines
Japan: Take A Look At Nintendo Switch Pre-Order Lines
The Japanese games market is much smaller than that of the US. Nintendo achieved dominance in the 80s and early 90s precisely because it was able to successfully move units out here in the west. So their being #1 there would not matter at all if they were #3 or so here. The US market is less static and predictable though, so make of that what you will.
Of course, they don't need to be #1 to make some serious cheddar, but context is everything.
Of course, they don't need to be #1 to make some serious cheddar, but context is everything.
They haven't strived to be number one in the US in years because they're using a Blue Ocean Strategy. It worked with the Wii, misstepped with the Wii-U, but back on track with the Nintendo Switch cause there is nothing else out there like it. Blue Ocean Strategy - Wikipedia
Time will tell if the Switch will work out like the Wii did. The Wii's killer success was brought upon by a low price and a glut of decent 3rd party support even if a lot of that support was just shovelware. I'm honestly not convinced that the Switch is really novel enough at this point in time to make a splash for them in the same way that the aforementioned Wii (and, to an extent, the Gameboy) did. The Switch has a couple of factors working against it as a true blue ocean tactic:
1. It's not unique. The shield already exists, and gives you a greater variety of games
2. The price point is just expensive enough to make potential buyers balk if they're put off enough by its technical capability and lineup
3. Some of the announced features are already clunky, like the pay-to-play online app thing
So it's not carving its own market niche with the Switch, it's a bit past the point of an acceptable expense for a novelty, and they're demonstrably behind the times with features everyone else has. It won't be a death knell—Nintendo's made of sterner stuff—but it's really difficult to tell what kind of thing they're actually going for here. It's like a turbocharged version of the WiiU concept, which people were hesitant to buy into. With the Wii, Nintendo appeared to have a clear set of goals for the product and wound up meeting those goals and then some.
They can salvage what could be a list of pitfalls by opening up their dev tools a bit to interested parties and giving themselves a volume advantage with quality software. If they can court good 3rd party devs, this could turn out very well for them (like the 3DS is).
1. It's not unique. The shield already exists, and gives you a greater variety of games
2. The price point is just expensive enough to make potential buyers balk if they're put off enough by its technical capability and lineup
3. Some of the announced features are already clunky, like the pay-to-play online app thing
So it's not carving its own market niche with the Switch, it's a bit past the point of an acceptable expense for a novelty, and they're demonstrably behind the times with features everyone else has. It won't be a death knell—Nintendo's made of sterner stuff—but it's really difficult to tell what kind of thing they're actually going for here. It's like a turbocharged version of the WiiU concept, which people were hesitant to buy into. With the Wii, Nintendo appeared to have a clear set of goals for the product and wound up meeting those goals and then some.
They can salvage what could be a list of pitfalls by opening up their dev tools a bit to interested parties and giving themselves a volume advantage with quality software. If they can court good 3rd party devs, this could turn out very well for them (like the 3DS is).
sounds like a bunch of underachievers...
1. The same people who made the Shield, helped Nintendo make the Switch. They are in this together.
2. It's sold out everywhere, but you still might be able to get it at Wal-Mart.
3. No one's buying a Switch for it's online service. No one.
1. That doesn't mean that the Switch and Shield aren't competing in a similar space, thus not disproving my point. nVidia can get away with it because they make money either way as they are providing Nintendo a good portion of their hardware for this product
2. Fair point, I haven't done any research on the numbers but selling out can be a good portent (let's not forget the same happened with the WiiU though)
3. Again, fair point, but it doesn't excuse them implementing it in the worst possible way
1. The shield has been out of stock for months, no new content, rumors are that it's been discontinued. It's not competition for the Switch maybe if they had lauched at the same time it would be.
2. Only reason it's probably selling out is cause they are only shipping out a limited number of systems.
3. Part of their Blue Ocean Strategy is not to reveal features too early that may be stolen by the competition.
Microsoft has said they plan to continue using this architecture indefinitely so from an architecture standpoint there aren't ever plans to abandon it. I'm still saying that given the performance difference that it's their new generation console so it's a 9th generation. In terms of TFLOPS the Scorpio is 4.6x as many TFLOPS as an Xbox One vs 2.6 times for the PS4 to Pro.
The Xbox Scorpio has an objective to actually being able to run current gen games 4K games at 30FPS or so. The Xbox One can barely manage 900p in many cases.
Cryptocurrency Scarface
Coinbased
how so?
