General Gaming thread

bbill335

it's spec'd like a midrange tablet from 2017, of course it's gonna chug here and there. it's still much better for loading times than the old ps1/2/3

nero1701

Asserto Corsa on steam deck plays very well

menamestom

Would be good if they brought Switch out that could handle AAA titles.  At least series S type power as a non-portable machine.  Access to the Nintendo World but without the out-of-date hardware.  

I never loved the switch hardware.

PolarityMan

Nintendo havent played the cutting edge hardware game for several decades though

RaymondLin

The other 2 (Sony and MS) sells their console at a loss leader to get you into the ecosystem and try to lock you down with subscription service which is where they make their money.

Nintendo don't lose money with their hardware, they sell it at a profit, however small.  They have been for ages, and then they still make money from their exclusives and trying to sell you Super Mario 3 for the 5th time.

menamestom

PolarityMan said:

Nintendo havent played the cutting edge hardware game for several decades though

True.  That’s why I said Series S, not overly powerful, way behind series X, PS5 and gaming PC’s.  The current Switch is less powerful than the original Xbox One, and even by Nintendo’s standards is getting a bit long in the tooth.

Sporky

The Switch is fine for Switch games. Nintendo aren't daft enough to go head-to-head with MS and Sony, and the strategy is clearly working. 

menamestom

Sporky said:

The Switch is fine for Switch games. Nintendo aren't daft enough to go head-to-head with MS and Sony, and the strategy is clearly working. 

True. I wouldn't expect them to go head-to-head, and yes the hardware is fine for Nintendo titles.  For me it would have been better if the ports weren't so poor, because it's not only Nintendo titles that they sell in the store.

That said they sell bucket loads so why would they change that. 

Much as I liked some of the Nintendo titles, the console just felt a bit tired.  It's six years old and I guess some kind of refresh is on the cards anyway.

TeleMaster

Sporky said:

The Switch is fine for Switch games. Nintendo aren't daft enough to go head-to-head with MS and Sony, and the strategy is clearly working. 

Yea they're not in the COD market, they're in the Mario and Zelda market, and those games run great on the Switch and that's their audience so that's what they produce.

If people want COD and other AAA titles get a Series X or a PS5, that's what they're there for.

bbill335

stuff like mario oddysey and animal crossing look fantastic on the switch, then you have Zelda BOTW with a chugging framerate, Zelda link's awakening with a TANKING framerate, the new pokémons that look unfinished they're so badly optimised and directed.

beefier hardware can help but ultimately it's "polish" that makes the good stuff look as great as it does.

TeleMaster

Never noticed any issues with Zelda BOTW. It ran flawlessly when I played it. No issues with Awakening either. Isn't BOTW locked at 30 fps? 

menamestom

TeleMaster said:

Sporky said:

The Switch is fine for Switch games. Nintendo aren't daft enough to go head-to-head with MS and Sony, and the strategy is clearly working. 

Yea they're not in the COD market, they're in the Mario and Zelda market, and those games run great on the Switch and that's their audience so that's what they produce.

If people want COD and other AAA titles get a Series X or a PS5, that's what they're there for.

So you think the Switch will never need upgrading because it has already reached a level where it can play anything the Nintendo market might want to see on it?

I don’t think it needs to compete with PS5 or Series X, they are at least 10-15 times as powerful. I just think it’s now at the bare minimum. I had one it was nice to be able to play things like Grid Autosport and Fifa, but they are now better to play on ipads and phones.

I’m sure better hardware could be well utilised for even Nintendo type titles. Anyway, will be interesting to see what happens, perhaps they will stick with the hardware indefinitely.

bbill335

TeleMaster said:

Never noticed any issues with Zelda BOTW. It ran flawlessly when I played it. No issues with Awakening either. Isn't BOTW locked at 30 fps? 

i won't post links to them because, if you can't see the framerate issues, then i don't want to be the one to curse you with this sickness, but there's plenty of technical analysis videos on youtube demonstrating the technical issues with these zeldas specifically. great games, love them to bits, but they have these technical issues that do occasionally detract from the experience. (especially Link's Awakening. a bloody game boy game! no reason that isn't a solid 60fps).

CavemanGrogg

bbill335 said:

it's spec'd like a midrange tablet from 2017, of course it's gonna chug here and there. it's still much better for loading times than the old ps1/2/3

That's not what I mean, I have no issues with frame rates, games feeling clunky, or even the load screens, but using Trials Rising as an example - a digital download game, I can load up the game in under 10 seconds, then have to wait close to 5 minutes for it to contact Ubisoft and other Nintendo online features before I can load up a single player race against AI opponents.  It's the same for Immortals Fenyx Rising - another digital only game, loading up the game is very fast, no glitches or frame rate issues, but getting a game to start takes ages as it contacts Nintendo's online stuff and the developer - also Ubisoft, first, which is very slow, before it will let you either start or load a saved game.

stickyfiddle

BOTW has minor frame rate issues if shit gets really busy onscreen but it's fine for the most part. I don't remember any issues in LA either. And let's not pretend that the Pokemon games look shit for any reason other than lazy developers who know they don't have to try hard because they're mostly selling to 10 year olds. It's plenty capable of looking brilliant when devs put the work in - Luigi Mansion 3, both Ori games, Mario Kart & Odyssey, Alien Isolation etc

But Nintendo has always made it very clear that they toys and they want to make them for everyone. They could probably make a Switch Pro with PS5 specs if they wanted, but it would cost £700 and either have utterly shit battery life or weigh a tonne. People would still complain and it may not even make them any extra profit. AND it would split the player base, so devs would have to make 2 versions of every game because Pro players will complain if they don't get a shinier version of everything. There's been plenty of speculation that the Pro was in development and they've canned it - most likely because it was too expensive for what it was and they're better off focussing on the next platform entirely. 

The point of the switch is great games that you can play anywhere. It's unquestionably one of the best & most successful things Nintendo has ever made, and that's astonishing from the company that did the NES, SNES, Gameboy, DS/3DS and Wii.

They'll release something new in the next coupe of years and it'll be brilliant and either a global smash hit or complete disaster, because that's Nintendo. I'd love to see a Switch 2 that's a real powerhouse with massively better Joycons, 1080p OLED screen and 4K/60fps docked mode. But it's Nintendo so I doubt they'll be that obvious. 

Sporky

menamestom said:

So you think the Switch will never need upgrading because it has already reached a level where it can play anything the Nintendo market might want to see on it?

That's not what anyone said. There will, of course, need to be a successor at some point, but I'd not be surprised if it lags the XB and PS by a generation and a half.

I don't think it'd hurt Nintendo to cap resolution at full HD for example - that's a quarter of the pixels to render compared to 4KUHD.

monquixote

Sporky said:

menamestom said:

So you think the Switch will never need upgrading because it has already reached a level where it can play anything the Nintendo market might want to see on it?

That's not what anyone said. There will, of course, need to be a successor at some point, but I'd not be surprised if it lags the XB and PS by a generation and a half.

I don't think it'd hurt Nintendo to cap resolution at full HD for example - that's a quarter of the pixels to render compared to 4KUHD.

The rumours are it will be next year which is why the pipeline of first party switch titles has gone weirdly dry.

TeleMaster

Sporky said:

menamestom said:

So you think the Switch will never need upgrading because it has already reached a level where it can play anything the Nintendo market might want to see on it?

That's not what anyone said. There will, of course, need to be a successor at some point, but I'd not be surprised if it lags the XB and PS by a generation and a half.

I don't think it'd hurt Nintendo to cap resolution at full HD for example - that's a quarter of the pixels to render compared to 4KUHD.

Yea. It will need an upgrade at some point and a new one will come out. But not to compete with other consoles and to play games that its audience isn't interested in, but to meet the demands of the games they do want to play. I don't think that's FIFA, it's more Mario games and Japanese RPG's. And if its much less powerful, but able to meet the demands of the games they do want to produce, then that's what it'll be. 

CavemanGrogg

Anybody here have a micro SD card in their Switch?  I've got a San Disk Extreme 1TB one in mine, not that I've filled up the internal memory yet, I just managed to get a bunch of the 1TB micro SD cards at a dirt cheap price that would have been extremely stupidity to turn down.

RaymondLin

Yes.