It wouldn't make sense for Nintendo to go fat box console, there's two of them already that are simply too good.
I think it makes sense. It worked out great from 3rd-gen to 6th-gen. And Nintendo was "simply too good" at that stuff well before Microsoft and Sony even got into the video game console market. After 6th-gen Nintendo lost their f*cking minds. They even said they don't like to see what others in the industry are doing, so they fell behind on game development standards and practices, and were late to adopt stuff like online support, and when they did adopt such things they did a worse job at it. Now they are content to just exist off to the side in their own little space. They don't give a f*ck as long as they are still profitable.
It’s all about the games- not the hardware or the tech or the gimmicks or even the price to an extent. And Nintendo has a knack for putting out good ones.
Indeed that is true. The problem is that Nintendo used to have very powerful systems, at times even the most powerful system for the generation, and the hardware wasn't holding back the design of their games, but now that is no longer true. SNES was the most powerful 4th-gen system. Gamecube was the 2nd most powerful 6th-gen system. N64 was the most powerful 5th-gen system, even though it did have some shortcomings compared to the competition (for example, N64 couldn't draw as many polygons as PS1). I miss Nintendo having access to powerful hardware, and their games taking advantage of such hardware.
I love my switch, and don't see much negative issues with it.
As do I, but the weak hardware is quite the sore point. As a successor to the 3DS it worked out pretty well I guess, but as a successor to the Wii U, not so much. I've put in good time with all Nintendo handhelds, starting with the original Game Boy in 1989 (and I've played a few Game & Watches too). My Switch sees some decent play-time each year too (although almost never in handheld mode).
As far as switch remakes, they are usually improved significantly.
Those aren't remakes. They are simply ports to the newer-gen hardware. Not even really remasters. And I wouldn't call the improvements significant. A lot of Wii U games ran at 720p so now they run at 1080p on Switch. Some games like
Bayonettas 2 got framerate improvements (
Bayo2 was already a 60fps game, but on Switch there are less framerate drops).
DKC:TF was re-balanced to be more fair (the original Wii U version was too challenging, though that didn't stop my brother and I from going through the game co-op).
Super Mario 3D World included a new separate adventure called
Bowser's Fury when it was brought to Switch. These are just a few examples. So yeah the Switch ports of Wii U games do get some small additions and improvements, but nothing that is worth charging full price for the games again. The fact of the matter is that a lot of those games are old, and should NOT be sold for anywhere near full price, even when ported to Switch. The real reason Nintendo ported a lot of their Wii U games to Switch is cuz Wii U was a failed system, and those games got a new lease on their sales lives on Switch.
Mario Kart 8 was already quite old by the time it came to Switch, but the Switch port remains the #1 selling game on Switch. It couldn't find its audience on Wii U, cuz no one had a f*cking Wii U. A couple years ago or so, I was lucky enough to pay "only" $30 for
New Super Mario Bros. U Deluxe (the Switch port of the 4th
NSMB game which originally came out on Wii U), thanks to a nice sale from Best Buy. But the game is still an old game from 2012, and honestly the normal price should be about $30. I should have only had to pay maybe $10 for it on sale.
You're right though, the newer ports of older games are just for those people who have not already played the original versions. But some of us still wanna double-dip anyways. What stops me though are my save files. If my save files are stuck on Wii U then it does me no good to get the Switch versions (in some cases I've replayed through entire games again just to have newer save data on the Switch). I got that problem on other platforms too. My
HZD and
GoW4 save data are on my PS4, but I wish I could transfer that data to PC and use the PC versions from now on. If
Ghost of Tsushima finally comes out on PC, I'll still be stuck playing through the DLC on console, because that's where I played through the main game, so that's where my save data is. I'm happy about how prevalent cloud saves are these days, but one thing I really want is to be able to transfer my saves to different versions of the game on completely different platforms. The closest I've seen are games like
Witcher 3, where you can use the same save data on all platforms including Switch, or games that fall under Microsoft's XPA (Xbox Play Anywhere) label, with cross-buy (buy one copy and use it on both 8th-gen/9th-gen Xbox consoles and PC) and cross-saves (use the same save data on PC or 8th/9th-gen Xbox consoles). Of course that involves having to buy a game through the Microsoft/Xbox/Windows/whatever store, rather than somewhere like Steam or GOG. And that means having to deal with UWP sh1t, which I can't stand. But still, props to Microsoft for at least offering cross-saves in some manner.
Meaning their games won't be ported to other platforms.
Which is a d4mn shame. I've often wanted to play native PC versions of Nintendo games. Back during 7th-gen I was thinking about how awesome a 4P co-op
Star Fox game would have been, and X360 would have been the perfect system for that (well except for needing XBLGold to play online). Now with Switch people are getting superior experiences via emulation.
Zelda TotK can't even hit full 1080p on the hardware, and the framerate is 30fps at best, and often drops below. None of that is an issue on PC, and there are also mods to tweak and improve the visuals further. I saw the game running on an LG C2, and it was glorious compared to the native hardware. This is far from the only example. There are a ton of Switch games that look, run, and play way better on PC via emulation. Why pay money for a worse experience? And if you are concerned about supporting the devs, well buy the game, but still play it on PC. But having a game be stuck on one weak platform just isn't very ideal. I'm glad Switch emulation gives people a way outta that.
So if you want to play one of their games... or any of their games... you need a piece of their hardware. The way games used to be.
I never much cared for hardware exclusives. I should be able to play any game on the platform of my choice, and I'm usually gonna choose the one with the best hardware, which is PC. From 2nd-gen to 8th-gen I played by their rules. But I think 9th-gen is gonna be the first generation where I finally feel I won't need a console. Microsoft games always come out on PC these days, and now the Sony games come to PC too. Emulation has Switch covered, and I hope for the same for Switch's successor. At the very least I tend to not mind buying console hardware as much if I can mod the systems. Soft-modding really set the DS, 3DS, and Wii free, and helped bring about their true potential. I might do the same with my Wii U (though I have no real reason to do so), and I'll be looking to do the same with my Switch at some point (luckily I have a first-year Switch with the unpatchable hardware Tegra flaw that makes soft-modding possible). But it would be nice if I could just play all those games natively on PC.
If Nintendo had some serious-@ss hardware then I wouldn't mind their games being stuck on their systems as much. But when the Switch is the best they got, and I have to deal with sh1t like low-framerate objects in the near background, pixel shimmering, and very obvious LoD changes right in front of my face, it can really take me outta the experience. All 3 of the examples I just gave drove me mad when I was playing through
Super Mario Odyssey. That being said, I still think they made the right choice in targetting 60fps for that game, which they do with a lot of their games. On a weak system like the Switch that means even more compromises, but hey at least the games play great at the higher framerates. But for their 30fps games, some of those games like
Kirby Star Allies are games that should most definitely be 60fps (especially given how they look), and it's sad that the hardware isn't capable of it.
3rd-party games would work out A LOT better if the Nintendo had a system that was at least as powerful as last-gen's hardware, if not this gen's. Some 8th-gen games were ported to Switch, and while they didn't work out too well, as a programming and development exercise some of those ports were nothing short of astonishing. It was amazing devs even got those games working on the Switch. But there were many more games that simply could not be ported to Switch no matter how much you butchered them. The gulf between the hardware was too wide. Again, I am reminded of the older gens like 4, 5, and 6, where you could main a Nintendo console and got to enjoy not just the Nintendo first-party games, but 3rd-party games too. Games on Gamecube generally look and ran better than games on the weaker PS2 hardware, and before I had an original Xbox I prefered to buy 3rd-party games on the Gamecube cuz of the controller (for example, the games in the
Prince of Persia: Sands of Time trilogy). It would be nice to get back to a level where Nintendo and their hardware are the equal of Microsoft and Sony. That ship has long since sailed though.
