 Hey everyone, today we're going to actually have a talk about a grander issue I see happening in the gaming world where Nintendo Switch is being misconstrued by either people who claim to be Nintendo fans or maybe it's just people who are Nintendo haters. I'm not really sure, but it's misconstruing where Switch fits in the marketplace and what they're trying to do from a business perspective and I want to focus in, there's actually a thread on the Nintendo Switch Reddit that I'm going to focus on here for this video, but I think this actually encompasses a larger conversation and brings up a lot of points I commonly see brought up in either our comment section or on social media platforms like Twitter or Facebook or whatever. I see these comments all the time, especially after Steam Deck was announced, so there are some things to talk about here, but before I do, I want to mention we are giving away a Nintendo Switch OLED. We're giving away a white version of the Nintendo Switch OLED and all you have to do to enter is be subscribed, we will announce the winner during a live stream in early October. So here is something that I want to focus on for this. I'm going to kind of go paragraph by paragraph and respond, read some of the comment responses as well on Reddit, but this post came from someone named Silly Doggo and I have seen these sentiments mentioned many times and I want to correct some of the misinformation, but also have a broader discussion on this. So let's just get into it. It says, I'm extremely disappointed and tired with Nintendo and the Switch and I wish it were better. Seriously, what the hell happened to Nintendo? This is absolutely ridiculous. The Switch at launch looked quite promising actually. There was a good library of games lined up, although the lineup of games at launch had plenty of red flags and all looked well-ish, but now they flat out just don't make games anymore. It's either low budget games that look like they be sold for $399 on a cell phone and for $60? Ridiculous. Most of the games Nintendo makes should be sold for $30 or less nowadays and no, COVID-19 isn't the issue here. A good game takes three-ish years to make. This just shows Nintendo's management is completely falling apart from the inside, plus there's tons of studios still making high quality games consistently throughout the pandemic. So this notion that Nintendo is making shitty mobile style games, I find to be fascinating. You could look at the most recent release WarioWare Get It Together and that might be the closest example of a close to minigame party style mobile game, but even then if you play that WarioWare Get It Together game and then you play a comparable game on a cell phone for $399 or free to play, you're going to notice that the WarioWare game is significantly more polished and it just happens to be a more fun overall experience. Now the phone game might be more popular because it's on a platform that has billions of users in comparison to the Switch with its, you know, $85-$90 million, but still I find this to be really interesting to argue about the value of a game and I think a lot of this has to do with the art direction of Nintendo's games more so than anything because you don't see arguments like this tossed out at something like the Order 1886 on PlayStation 4. Very short game, some people felt it was too short, but nobody before launch was saying that's not a $60 game and they were saying that because of how the game looked rather than judging the game based on the content. I would argue something like Mario Golf Super Rush, as much as I said it's not the Mario Golf game I want and I was disappointed with it, it's a much more premium experience than say the minigolf game I'm playing on my phone, you know, every other day or so for a few minutes, like it's just a better game than that by a long shot and so is Mario Tennis Aces, so is, you know, even when you think the Bowser's Fury mode, like Bowser's Fury mode itself felt like that could have been a $60 experience. It was definitely a premium gaming experience and that just came this year. Monster Hunter Rise, of course, as well, although Nintendo only paid for it, they didn't make it themselves. Metroid Dread coming out, I mean, are people still trying to argue that games that were $60? I'm sorry, you are literally just holding your own biases against the game at that point. So I don't understand this perspective obviously on the price point of the games and obviously just saying that games take three years to make like most AAA games take longer than three years. A good game can be made in three years, but most take longer than three and to argue that COVID-19 is on an issue because other studios have gotten games out. Yeah, they have. And other studios have also massively delayed games for like Horizon Forbidden West. Boom, it's supposed to be a game for this holiday. It's coming next year, right? Like we have seen oodles of AAA game delays across the industry just because some games still came out. Those games were mostly done before the pandemic. That's the truth of it. A lot of the AAA games that have released in the last year are games that were mostly done development and just in polishing stages before the pandemic. That's reality. We have seen game delays across the industry to argue that just because some games have come out, yeah, and some Nintendo games have. At the very beginning of the pandemic, we got Animal Crossing New Horizons. Like, I don't, you know, we got Paper Mario the Origami King. You know, yeah, Nintendo hasn't been delivering a lot of the first party goods during the pandemic, but we're in the middle of a pandemic and they just crushed it in 2019 before the pandemic. So right when they're beginning their development cycles over again, they just crushed it in 2019. I think it's just being a little disingenuous. Nintendo, you can argue, should put out more games and I can agree there. But also we have to be considerate of a pandemic. It's just we can't ignore that impact that it's had on the whole industry. Moving on to the next paragraph. I don't know if it's a conflict of interest or sheer managerial incompetence or even caving the industry standards with monetization, but it's getting bad with Nintendo too. Their games are a low effort. I mean, again, I have my criticisms of something like Mario Golf, but it's also made by Camelot not Nintendo. And if they're on mobile, they're a low effort. What? I mean, let me we'll talk about the Nintendo's mobile strategy in a moment here. It says it has insane amounts of microtransactions, pay to win and gambling. Honestly, I feel like this is due to the old management and Nintendo all retiring or literally dying, resting piece of water. Yes. One, let's not bring up the, you know, the now deceased Satoru Iwata. Obviously we all miss him as gamers, just his bubbling personality that he brought to the industry, let alone his amazing code work and everything and how he made a lot of games possible that weren't possible without him. So yeah, amazing person. But here's the thing. He wasn't even part of the old guard at Nintendo. Miyamoto is still there. Aji Anomo is still there. Takahashi is still there. Most of the upper brass running Nintendo, including the current president and CEO of Nintendo, Shintaro Furukawa, have been there for 20 plus years. Nintendo is literally ran by the old guard that hasn't changed at the top. Nothing has really changed at the top outside of us losing, unfortunately, a president and CEO that was actually younger than most of the old guard at Nintendo. So this was just a downright silly notion that managerial changes have affected things. And when you want to talk about the mobile aspect, Nintendo tried with this current president to launch a game on mobile that used traditional gaming format. It was called Mario Run. They tried charging $9 or $9.99 really to own the full version of Mario Run. And what happened? It didn't sell. People on mobile refused to spend $10 for what was a high-quality mobile game experience compared to a lot of other runner games on the market. Nintendo invested all this money to make a high-quality game. And guess what? It didn't fit. The marketplace on phones is just different. You talk about earlier games for $3.99. People aren't spending $3.99 on games on phones. They want free-to-play micro-transaction city and supported. That's what people on phones want because they don't want to feel like they have to spend money. And then when they do, they want to feel like they are gaining an advantage in the game that other people are not. This is just the user base of that platform. It's not Nintendo's fault that they try to do a more traditional approach with a high-quality experience. And it was rejected by that market because that's not what that market expects. If you want to be successful, you have to kind of do what that market is expecting you to do. And they're expecting free-to-play. They're expecting micro-transactions. They're expecting ads. They're expecting paid to win. That's what they expect. That's why Fire Emblem Heroes came out. And the Gacha mechanics ended up being massively successful. And by the way, Fire Emblem Heroes, if you're going to call that a low-effort, low-quality mobile game, then you literally haven't laid it. And I feel like you could say the same about Nintendo's other mobile efforts. Mario Kart Tour is actually pretty damn good. Have you ever bothered to actually play it after launch? They consistently add new content to it. Sure, there's micro-transactions and paid to win. But again, we just explained why that's just what you do in this market if you want to be successful because doing it the traditional way doesn't fit. So I don't understand it. Even like Animal Crossing Pocket Camp, yeah, what were you expecting? Animal Crossing New Horizons on a phone? Is that what you wanted? Did you want Nintendo to fully develop a triple A game for a phone? Is that what you wanted? Is that what you're asking? Because if you just compare Pocket Camp compared to all the other comparable games like it from other developers on phones, it's literally one of the highest quality versions of that style of game on mobile devices. Like what do you want? It's almost like you expect Nintendo to make their triple A console experiences on mobile devices and that just was never going to happen. At that point Nintendo might as well just stop having a home console. They were never going to put full triple A experiences like that there. But when they have made mobile games, they've been very, very good. They just are tailoring the content delivery, the marketing strategy, and obviously the microtransactions to what the community expects because when you go outside of that expectation, Nintendo found out that people just won't buy your game. It is what it is. Nintendo's just doing what they have to do but their games are still really high quality compared to most mobile offerings. Alright, moving on, he says, the hardware is insanely underpowered. It was at launch. Look at that moment. I know Nintendo isn't about powerful systems. To hell with that, that's completely ridiculous. You could get a smartphone from the time and have it be as powerful if not more powerful than the Switch. Even the launch games couldn't run well. Doom on Switch, under 720p, under 30 FPS with compressed audio? Are you kidding me? That was the standard seven plus years ago. And now we have these games being released by third parties and people are blaming the developers for the performance issues and bugs. Really interesting comment. And again, I've seen this said by a lot of people. The hardware is insanely underpowered. I can agree by today's standards, obviously it's underpowered. I'm not going to deny that. But to say, you know, you could get a smartphone back in 2017 and have it be as powerful as the Switch. Not really. iPhones weren't as powerful as the Switch back then. The latest Android devices weren't as powerful as the Switch back then. At least not when we're talking about gaming. You could find ones that, oh, maybe it had more CPU cores. Oh, maybe this one had more storage. Obviously that was a thing. Or these ones had more RAM. Sure. But when it came to a pure gaming experience, the Tegra X1 was actually a factually better gaming chip in 2017 than pretty much anything that was on phones and tablets. The problem is that phones and tablets are constantly innovating or at least progressing their technology forward year over year. And by 2019, yeah, pretty much every mobile device that came out was more powerful than a Switch. But again, that had nothing to do with it at launch. Tegra X1 was a very, we're like misremembering now. Tegra X1 was a very powerful gaming capable chip even in 2017. It was only a two year old chip. Like it was definitely a very gaming capable, one of the best, one of the most powerful mobile gaming capable chips in the world in 2017. It's just, if Nintendo entered the world of mobile technology and mobile technology is always moving super, super fast. Which by the way, if you want to start talking about, oh my gosh, most mobile devices. Okay, well, guess what? The PlayStation 5, right? And the Xbox Series X are using modern RDNA2 technologies, right? Guess what? As of today, right now, there's more powerful components out there. They're not using the latest and greatest anymore. They're behind. They're starting to get weaker and weaker and weaker as the months and years go by. But nobody gives a shit. So we shouldn't necessarily care that mobile phones are more powerful than Switches. Yeah, it's using 2015 technology and we're in 2021. Of course they're more powerful now. They should be if they weren't at this point for shame on the mobile phone. Like, but Nintendo is a console maker. They make a platform that's going to exist for five to six years. Phones are getting replaced every year. Every two years for most people under contracts or paying per month, right? A lot of people replace their phones every two years. You replace a gaming console like once every five or six. So what did you want Nintendo to do? Release something with technology that didn't even exist in 2017? That seems a bit unrealistic, I know I've heard, you know, use the Tegra X2. I mean, the Tegra X2 that was still in development and then never even really came out outside of smart cars. It's a little bit ridiculous sometimes. Some of the arguments that come up here. As for obviously games that launch couldn't run well, yeah, Breath of the Wild had a bit of a rough time, but that was pretty much it. Most of the Switch launch library was running at 60 FPS and running very, very well. Mario Kart 8 Deluxe came out and ran very, very well. Splatoon 2 came out and ran very, very well and then you bring up Doom, which was a surprise release late in the year. Well, Doom was made for platforms significantly more powerful than the Nintendo Switch, made for things like PC and Xbox and PlayStation. Yeah, it ran at sub 720p and at a hard time hitting 30 FPS. Okay, your point. I'm confused. What's the point? Did Mario plus Rabbids Kingdom Battle not exist at 60 FPS and looking all fine on that platform? You know, ZMA Chronicles 2 was a bit of a rough spot. You could bring up, I'm guessing there's better examples, but you could bring up, you know, Doom at under 720p and 30 FPS. Okay, well, how about the locked 30 FPS plus of Mortal Kombat 11 day one? What about how well other third-party games, what about Monster Hunter Rise at 60 FPS on Switch? Like, you could cherry pick bad examples here and there. And by the way, that Doom port by Panic Button was actually really, really good, but Doom had no business being able to run on a Tegra X1 in the first place. And yet Doom Eternal is also here and running almost better than the original Doom did. Sometimes I think we're just not being fair. I agree the Switch is underpowered today, but it should be. And guess what? In five years, in four years from now, PlayStation 5 is going to be massively underpowered as well. What's your point? That's technology. We don't buy gaming platforms planning to replace them every year. Let's get, let's get, oh, honestly, talked about, you know, blaming developers for performance issues and bugs. Yeah, we're blaming developers for performance issues and bugs on games that was running on hardware worse than this, like Sonic Colors Ultimate. Yeah, we blame the developers for the bugs because Sonic Colors Ultimate was a Wii game. If it can run on Wii, shouldn't be a problem on Switch. Newsflash, Switch is significantly more powerful than a Wii. Shouldn't be a problem. Ball, though. Yeah, did you see that game? There's no reason that game has the bugs it does. It has nothing to do with the power of the platform. Don't use the fact that the platform is weaker as an excuse for the bugs, because by the way, Sonic Colors Ultimate has bugs on PlayStation 5. I guess PlayStation 5 is not powerful enough. Blame the platform. See how ridiculous that sounds? This is a Wii game. Come on now. It ran on, turn on the 3DS. Just say it. All right, who and I, do you really think that the developer cares enough to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars into porting a game that is essentially an outdated phone? Four gigabytes of RAM, 32 gigabytes of storage, a Tegra X1 with a horrible small memory bandwidth that should have just made the system 450 to $500 using a Tegra X2. Oh, he does bring up the Tegra X2, with at least 128 gigabytes of storage and a better bandwidth for streaming in sound textures, et cetera. Six to eight gigabytes of RAM. This would have made it roughly similar to the Xbox One at launch. That would be more than enough to potentially carry it through even on the next generation. Battery life wouldn't be amazing. But what does battery life even mean if the system can barely run games as is? So when you ask for the impossible, it's just, I can't really take it that seriously. Do you really think developer cares to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars into porting a game that's essentially an outdated phone? They do with the carable game sales, because game sales on the Nintendo Switch are absolutely phenomenal. We have a number of third-party and indie games selling over a million copies on Switch, let alone Nintendo games selling 30 plus million. We have two of them that have done that, several that have gone over 20, a ton more that have gone over 10. It's just, I don't really understand this logic. You know, when you say it can barely run games as is, I don't know what games you're playing on your Switch, I think it just sounds like you're on the wrong platform. Like if you want to play third-party games, you literally said, who cares about battery life? Then you don't care about the Switch being portable. And if you want to play games like Doom and you don't care about portability, what the hell are you doing owning a Switch? Go own an Xbox, PlayStation, gaming PC, wait for the stream deck. Like, I don't, oh the steam deck, I called it a stream deck. Like seriously, what are we doing here? You're asking for this system to be something that already exists and has the games you want at the way that you want them. So go play that. I don't, what are you doing? What are, like, are you even a Nintendo fan? Like I'm confused. Now, Steam Link, which it's not Steam Link, it's Steam Deck, but that's not it here on Earth, which starts at $400 is way more powerful than the Switch and will be able to play a massive library of games more than the Switch with its outdated hardware and even fathom of being able to play. Outdated hardware has nothing to do with why the Switch doesn't have that library. It's because Steam is a gaming PC and gaming PC have libraries dating back 30, 40 years. The Switch has a library that only dates back like four years. That has nothing to do with the power of the platform that has to do with what Steam Deck is versus what Switch is. Steam Deck also will have zero exclusive games and Steam Deck will also be significantly outdated in four years. Remember, you're talking about a platform that's four years old and Switch, Steam Deck four years from now is going to be the same thing phones are going to pass its in capability. Like this, this is the world we live in. Steam Deck is basically the Switch of 2017. Next, he says Nintendo still hasn't fixed their utterly horrible netcode in their games and they haven't improved their virtual console, 3DS, Wii U and Wii all have better virtual consoles still. The UI sucks and has no creativity. Why else does a My Switch UI concept post get to the top of every other month when they should realize that Nintendo clearly doesn't give a damn anymore? Hackers have done much more and creative things with the Switch than Nintendo ever has. Hackers haven't really built video games. I think, I think we're, let's get lost. Like I enjoy UI redesigns of Switch and everything. I'm all cool with that. I think there are prettier possible UIs out there and just the base UI of Switch, by the way, most people don't really care about the base UI of Switch. They think it's fine. We just want folders, maybe themes and some music. We're not really asking for that much of a change to the current UI. They already let us reorganize the order of our games, which that was a big thing at launch and we can do that now. No one really has a fundamental problem, I think, with the base UI of Switch. It's fine. It's functional. It's form or it's function over form. A lot of the UI redesigns are form over function. It's making things look prettier but not necessarily getting you to the game any faster. So yeah, it is what it is. We like our pretty UIs but we prefer function first and it's very functionable. Again, minus the folder aspect, which was something we need for organization purposes. But yeah, I honestly don't understand this. The Virtual Console Complaint, they never had Virtual Console. Nintendo never pretended it was going to have Virtual Console. They said from day one it was going to be a subscription service that was going to have all these games playable and this has also taken some credit away from Nintendo while they have NES and SNES and we believe Game Boy games coming. The thing is all these games are playable online today when they used to not be available to play online. So they've updated the games as well in a way that Virtual Console games used to not be updated. And by the way, I do prefer the old Virtual Console being able to buy the games and just having a bigger library of them. But still, it's a point of criticism indeed. They need to be updated in the Nintendo Switch Online service more. As for never improving the netcode, what exactly do we think has happened with Monster Hunter Rise? It's running on their brand new server infrastructure and it's amazingly awesome. So yes, Nintendo has factually improved it. It's just you don't play the games that have those improvements in it. The old games don't. I fully expect Splatoon 3 to be running on their new infrastructure. So yeah, they've done what you've asked with netcode and the entire online infrastructure in terms of playing games online. They just haven't released a new game since it was built that uses it yet. Mario Party might even use it too this year. We'll see. It hurts. It really does. I love Nintendo. This comes from a place of passion. But to see them being the way they are breaks their heart or his heart, I believe. I used to get excited for directs. I used to get excited for games. I used to be so much more passionate. I have hundreds of hours on my Switch, which at this point, by the way, four years and hundreds of hours isn't a lot. But I mean, if it's a newer Switch owner, I suppose I can get that. And I've went through six pairs of Joy-Cons. Yeah, Joy-Cons is a problem. Joy-Cons drift that. We all can kind of admit Joy-Cons are a problem with the Switch. I want this system to be good. I want to be excited about a new game for the Switch. But every single damn time a game is announced, the first thing anyone has to ask is, how does it run on Switch? I know the answer. Unless it's a small indie game, you should expect under 720p below 30fps with shitty audio. Audio nut was standing, which by the way, there is supposedly audio improvements on the Switch OLED. We haven't had extensive testing to see. People say it sounds pretty good, but we have to have it on hand and use a pair of headphones and really compare the speaker quality and all that. So it's one of those things where it does sound like they are addressing the audio, but that's another here nor there. Obviously, that doesn't necessarily change how it's streamed, even if it sounds better. What I will say is, when you talk about not being exciting for games, I know the answer. Unless it's a small indie game, you should expect. So you don't care about the battery life. You just want power. And the games that you are talking about that are 720p, 30fps are not Nintendo's games. Those are third-party games. You want Switch to be something it's not. You want it to be a PlayStation or an Xbox. And the games you want to play on the Switch are the same ones available there. So if you don't care about it being portable because the battery life, you literally admitted, I want this thing to be a super powerful beast with shitty battery life, which means you don't care about playing the games portably. You only would play them dock. And if that's the case, buy the platforms that exist for you to play the games on. Are you actually a Nintendo? That's what I say. You used to get excited for directs, do you? Do you? Because you have yet to mention a Nintendo game running at 720p 30fps. You just bring up third-party examples. That doesn't sound like you're a fan of what Nintendo's doing from a game perspective. It sounds like you bought the Switch for the wrong reasons. Unless it was to play third-party games on the go, that's great. But then asking the system to be more powerful back in 2017 to the point that you can't play them on the go means that's probably not what you bought it for. You probably wanted to play Nintendo's games and have all these third-party games, but you're not acting that way and then you're also saying Nintendo's games suck anyway. So moving on, the Switch is an amazing concept. I just wish it were tapped into with the correct hardware. Again, it was the correct hardware in 2017, but moving on and software support to back it. They've actually put more exclusive games on Switch in the given time period than they have on any other platform in company history. And this is not counting ports, just new games. Moving on. Again, I can't even get through some of these paragraphs. It's just full of misinformation. I've played all of the systems, PlayStation 5, Xbox Series X, Nintendo Switch, PC, and their last-gen counterparts. The Switch conceptually was the one that caught my interest the most. Imagine playing all of your favorite games in school, run a long car ride, bring a mobile charger, and you'd be good to go. So basically, he wants to play portably, but with a cord. I mean, that is possible. We actually have a normal AC outlet in our car that our kids do use sometimes with their Switches. So it's not common and there's obviously car chargers. Okay, I get it. It's not like we didn't do that with Game Boys back in the day. But it literally has no games besides some really solid first-party games when the system came out and a lot of little indie games. Feel free to discuss below. I'm interested to see what everyone else is saying. No games besides some really solid first-party games. Luigi's Mansion 3 isn't good. Astral Chain isn't good. Damon X Makada isn't good. Super Smash Bros. Ultimate isn't good. Monster Hunter Rise, that came out this year. That's not good. Let me just type in Switch exclusives. And yes, year one 2017 was phenomenal. But let's not pretend that that was the only time good games came out. Whoops, that only has 10. We want to list bigger than 10 here. Here we go. Let's go on Wikipedia. That has all of them. So let's see here. I'm going with ones that are already out, not ones that are still to come because we obviously know like Metroid Dread and others are still to come. So I'm just scrolling down the list here. Let's see here. I mentioned Age of Calamity already. Kirby Star Allies, that wasn't year one. Link's Awakening, the remake game. That wasn't year one. I already talked about Luigi's Mansion 3. Obviously Mario Tennis Aces, Mario Party Superstars, Mario Golf Super Rush. Let's see here. Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3, the Black Order. Let's see here. New Pokemon Snap. Ninjala is technically exclusive to Switch right now. Obviously the Labo stuff, which they might not be interested in. No More Heroes, which recently came out. Paper Warrior, the Origami King. Let's see here. Obviously Pokemon Sword and Shield. And we could say, let's go Pikachu, let's go Eevee, but I can understand if like, oh, you know, maybe they'll end up, but technically that is an exclusive version of those games on Switch. Let's see here. We got Ring Fit Adventure, which may be only going to be a cup of tea, but obviously is a high quality experience. Let's see here. I'm just going outside of year one. So I'm like Splatoon 2 doesn't count, Splatoon 3 would, but that's next year. Although the Otto expansion, you could argue counts, but that's neither here nor there. Let's see here. Obviously Super Mario Party, WarioWare Get It Together, the Torna DLC, Yoshi's Crafted World. So like, that's just an example. There's actually, I don't know how many Nintendo Switch Only games here. There's a lot of them listed here. But some of them, I just made over a lot of the, I guess the bigger named ones. There are other ones out there, you know, that, like hasn't even got a sports story or golf story as an example. Although I think golf story was 2017. You know, Super Mario Bros. 35, Super Mario 3D All Stars. There's a number of other ones on this list that I'm not really going over. And as I mentioned before, Astral Chain and Daemon X Machina, like there's a number of this stuff, Bowser's Fury, even though it's attached to a Wii U game. I just, I don't understand these arguments. It really doesn't sound like someone who actually enjoys Nintendo. It sounds like someone who wants the Switch to be something that it has no business being. In 2017, it was the right technology. The technology he thinks it could have been a portable X, he literally thinks the Nintendo Switch should have been a portable Xbox One in 2017 when the technology didn't exist to do that back then. Like even the GPD win at the time couldn't do that back then. Like I get confused at times. And the thing is, all these arguments he's made, all this he brings up, are stuff I see constantly from various different people every single day on the internet. And while I'm all for valid criticism, and I think a lot of this stems from the fact that the Switch Pro hasn't happened or won't be happening. So I understand that the Switch OLED announcement has frustrated some people. And I think if there was a Switch Pro announcement and the Switch OLED was the Switch Pro, and it was more powerful, I think a lot of these arguments wouldn't exist anymore. But I feel like that's why they're coming to a head. Because people forget that back in 2017, the Switch was impressive. They can't help the technologies always evolving and moving. Nintendo jumped into a space that involves yearly releases of new technology. So going down to the comments, you see like, you know, a good game takes three or years to make. And the the showmaker says, they said having never made a game themselves, obviously just trolling him. Celery says they purposely compromised performance for lower cost and portability. It wasn't an accident. They were targeting a different market and reasons that their games don't depend on performance. So they can give us better experience to more people if they reduce hardware capabilities. Sounds like you want an Xbox, so just go get an Xbox and don't see the problem, which the guy admitted he plays on everything. So then what's it matter? I get that he argues he wants the portability, but then he wants the portability using a charger. If you have the ability to plug in your system, there's portable screens. Do I have one? Yeah, I got a portable monitor. It's just out of my reach to grab. There's portable screens that you could just bring your Xbox or PlayStation and just plug it in. If you have the ability to plug in to play your thing, you can just plug those systems in as well and play them. Yeah, it's a bit more unwieldy, I guess, because you have a big box, especially the PlayStation 5. That's like massive, but it's just confusing to me. You know, like the cover one comes out and says, once again, Nintendo's not going to make us an uber powerful game system regardless of how much you bitch and whine about it. It just doesn't fit into the business model. Nintendo has been complaining since the GameCube era. Complaints of the GameCube era that games are getting too expensive to make and they're really careful about assigning budgets to games relative to how much they think they'll make. If they make games graphically on par with Sony and Microsoft, you wouldn't be getting epics like Breath of the Wild or Mario Odyssey. You'd get short 10 hour glorified tech demos. I don't know about that. I don't know about that. I think that's a bit of a misconception of Nintendo. They do do their budgets based on sales, but that's a little that's a little bit like Breath of the Wild sold 20 plus million copies that obviously could have a bigger budget and be a lot longer than 10 hours. Anyways, the reason for all of this is because unlike Sony and Microsoft video games, it's all Nintendo does. They can't afford to f up on that front and keeping game budgets controlled is one way for them to reduce risk and increase return. That is one thing that Nintendo does do lower lower budget. Nintendo also has a different development strategy. They don't hire a bunch of contract employees outside of like retro studios. They hire a bunch of it like just salaried employees. They plan to be there for a long time and their game budgets aren't like other companies where they say, Oh, this game has $500 million, you know, budgeted aside for it. There are budgets for the temporary stuff like they don't own a professional orchestra as an example, right? So that is part of a game's budget, whether it's going to have orchestrated music. But the actual game development team is just employees they already have that are being paid, whether they're making Zelda, whether they're making Mario, whether they're making Animal Crossing, whether they're making Splatoon, Mario Kart, it doesn't matter whatever game those employees are assigned to, they're paid the same. That's what makes Nintendo different is they don't hire new employees based on budgets for games. That's just not how Nintendo runs. They just shift employees around to different projects as those projects need extra help. Monolith South has now a dedicated Zelda team that helps out with the core's Zelda team that happened because of Breath of the Wild. Like, that's what Nintendo does. So yeah, the Switch is weak. I wish a Switch Pro was coming that we're aware of. I wish, you know, that we had a more powerful Nintendo branded handheld. Obviously we have Steam Deck coming that could help fill that void for some. And if you want to play third party games the best they can look, then that's what these other platforms are for, including Steam Deck. In fact, this particular person and others like them, I highly suggest you go pick up a Steam Deck. It's going to be the platform that you wish Switch was. Its battery life is not going to end up being that fantastic. It's going to need to be plugged in a lot. And it's going to be able to play all those games that you want to play at probably at least 30 FPS, at least according to what they're promising. We'll have to wait and see. Promises don't mean anything until the product's on hand. Also because it's a Linux based system, there will be some PC games you literally can't play unless you flash the whole thing and put Windows on it. And then we don't even know how games would run on it with Windows because Windows has a lot more overhead than Steam OS has. So then that target of 30 FPS might not even be possible. There's a lot of factors to consider. What I will say is this, the Nintendo Switch is a system that is budget oriented that probably needs to drop price at some point, which I know there's a rumor that starts next week. But even if it doesn't, the Switch is just a platform built for Nintendo games that they hope third parties want to put games on. And some have and some have seen success. We just got NBA 2K22 released on Switch and it runs at a locked 30 FPS, no problem. Yeah, is it 720p? Sure. But it runs no problem. And guess what? When you bitch about 720p, the resolution of the screen in portable mode is 720p. So why does it matter? It could be 1080, it could be 1440. It can't display more than 720p. It wouldn't matter. Native resolution, anyways, you could talk about being sub 720p and some of the, it's whatever. At this point, Switch isn't for everybody. And I think we've known this since day one. Everyone wants the Nintendo Switch to be, basically, today, a PlayStation 5 in your pocket. It's just not possible from a technological perspective. It is possible for Switch to be more powerful today. That wasn't really the case back in 2017. There could have been some tweaks and some differences and some extra RAM. But for the most part, Switch was already using the best gaming-capable chip at that time. Especially that was readily available and the quantities they needed it to actually put out a system. So yes, I have my criticisms of Switch. I think there's some, some, it lost in there with some fair criticisms on Joy-Con drift and other things that obviously I totally agree with. But yeah. And I said, and people think that I've been hating on Switch lately because I just said that I really enjoyed PlayStation's showcase. And I think it's better than any direct I can remember. But bottom line is Sony and Nintendo have completely different business strategies. And being able to praise one company and saying they did something better than the other, isn't mean knocking the other company. Sony and Microsoft, or sorry, Sony and Nintendo are at the top in the mountain right now. And they have completely different marketing strategies. And both marketing strategies work for their perspective platforms. Sony has been showing you and teasing you with CG trailers games two to three years out now for like three straight generations. And it's worked for them every single time. Nintendo lately has only been showing you stuff for the next six months and maybe teasing the game a year out and occasionally telling you about a game that's not going to come for a few years. And yet that marketing strategy has worked for them to the tune of 84 plus million Nintendo Switches sold and you know, 600 million games sold. So obviously, both strategies are working for both companies. My opinion is obviously that I preferred what Sony showed in their show because I like knowing what's coming. I would love to know that Mario Kart 9 is coming even if it's not till 2023. I would love to know that kind of stuff. Bottom line is the Nintendo Switch is fine. It's just fine. It's doing well. It's currently the lead current platform on the market. We'll see if PlayStation 5 catches up and surpasses it someday. But right now it is the lead current platform on the market. And Nintendo's doing just fine. It's not going to please everyone. If you want to play third party games, we've always known go elsewhere. I'm not saying you can't. There are some and the ones that are here play okay. They play all right. They're playing a bull. And yeah, we all want it to be more powerful. But we had to live in the world of reality right now. The only reality is that Nintendo could have a new gen or a Switch Pro at some point in the next couple of years. That's real and that's going to be more powerful. But Nintendo's only cared about having enough power for their own experiences and this isn't new. They've been doing this since the Wii and DS. They only care about having enough power for their games. And guess what? Their games run mostly great. I don't understand like the red flags. There's red flags in the first year of every platform. There's red flags with Sony's platform. PlayStation 5 has plenty of red flags right now. It's just, we don't know if those red flags are going to matter yet in the long haul. Anyways, I had a thing to roll with you guys from Nintendo Prime. I know this was a super long video, but it's the only one I think I'm putting out this weekend. So enjoy it. I had a lot of fun making it and I'll catch you guys in the next video.