5 ms·

So this is a good usage model, but I'm not sure people want to carry yet another tablet just for gaming. The only way I can see this thing taking off is if it c

by exelius 10y ago

So this is a good usage model, but I'm not sure people want to carry yet another tablet just for gaming. The only way I can see this thing taking off is if it can fall back into an Android tablet mode for web browsing, e-mail, etc. But as a portable gaming console, it seems pretty boss. I'm curious what the hardware specs are and how they differ from other tablets on the market. Because if it can't do everything else my current tablet can, I'm gonna have to carry a tablet AND this thing. Done right, Nintendo can make this thing the first real challenger to the iPad for mass-market adoption. But they've gotta treat it as a first-party Android device and get updates out ASAP and not muck with the interface too much. I'm willing to bet they could work out a rev-share agreement with Google on the Google Play store and Google Play Apps (and keeping their own Nintendo licensing scheme). But let's not kid ourselves here: Nintendo is a Japanese company and it operates like one. That means they'll try to own the entire value chain and miss out on any network effects, while simultaneously moving themselves from a market with a 5-10 year refresh cycle to one with a 2-3 year refresh cycle. While it means they could sell more tablets to repeat customers, it also means that they have less time to be patient for success (as happened with the Wii and WiiU) since it also increases customer churn. Network effects and platform lock-in are a lot more important when the refresh cycle is shorter, because there are more opportunities for your customers to jump off the train. I wish Nintendo luck, and I think that this is a good usage model. But I'm not convinced it's compelling enough to displace the tablets that people are already carrying around with them unless it can also duplicate the capability of those devices.

mcgrath_sh 10y ago
I'm in the opposite camp as you are. I'm thrilled that this appears to be a gaming only device. I have devices that do what my tablets do. My 3DS has hundreds of hours into it. I love having a portable device that is for gaming only. I don't want notifications popping while looking for Rupees or a phone call when trying to hunt for legendary birds. I also have no issues carrying a separate device for that. IMO, touch gaming for anything beyond the basics is terrible. Even Minecraft is way better with a mouse and keyboard or controller. Having an all encompassing device from a company that has continually nailed portable gaming is something I will continue to buy. The big screen of this, for me, is an added bonus.
- joeax 10y ago
  I'm sure it will be gaming + apps like Netflix and YouTube (maybe Kindle too), the same apps that you see on the Wii U and DS currently. But yeah, it's better if the thing sticks to gaming.
- troncheadle 10y ago
  Yup. I've been bringing my 3DS instead of my Ipad on flights for a couple years now, and it's just a better experience. If I need to get real work done wherever I am flying to, I'll have my laptop with me.
- hendryau 10y ago
  Let's be honest, no one has ever had to farm for Rupees in Zelda :)
  - chongli 10y ago
    Having to farm for rupees is the reason I never finished the Windwaker. That damn reinforce hunt quest sucked all the air out of the room and destroyed the game's momentum entirely.
ocdtrekkie 10y ago
Yeah, this has been my challenge. I've bought basically every Nintendo console ever (Zelda fan here, obviously), but I stopped playing their mobile games/consoles when I turned 16, because I was now driving myself places. Being in my parents' cars a lot, it made sense to carry a portable game console. In the world of working people, it doesn't. I don't have enough free time outside my house to justify hauling a dedicated gaming device around.
- GuiA 10y ago
  > Being in my parents' cars a lot, it made sense to carry a portable game console. In the world of working people, it doesn't. In the world of non US working people, many sit in a bus/metro 2x a day, 30-60 mins each way :)
  - throwanem 10y ago
    US working people, too! Just fewer of us per capita, because a lot of cities' public transit infrastructure isn't what it might be.
  - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
    That's totally fair! I'm in the suburbs, so public transit isn't an option here, and I rarely think about it unless I'm traveling.
    - amyjess 10y ago
      Thing is, I'm in the suburbs too, and while public transit is an option here (North Texas), it's a very slow one. What would be a 15 minute commute by car takes me an hour by bus. That sounds like the perfect excuse to carry a gaming device on me. The idea of being able to block out two hours every day for playing video games makes the kid in me very happy. I'd been dragging my feet on getting a 3DS to save money (whenever I've felt "hey, I've got $200 I can drop on something", I've had something more important to spend it on), but I might give in and get a Switch. Hell, it'd probably save me money in the long run since being able to game on the bus means I'd be much less tempted to take Uber or Lyft.
maxsilver 10y ago
> I'm not sure people want to carry yet another tablet just for gaming. The only way I can see this thing taking off is if it can fall back into an Android tablet mode for web browsing, e-mail, etc. Done right, Nintendo can make this thing the first real challenger to the iPad for mass-market adoption. If Nintendo did what your asking, it would be a pretty compromised experience. The hardware for gaming is significantly different than generic tablet hardware. (For example, high-res displays are great for Web / Facebook / Twitter / e-Books, but are drawbacks for a gaming console. High power GPUs are great for games, but are often underutilized in tablets. Any non-casual game needs high quality, thick controls, but traditional tablet users favor very thin hardware). Perhaps in the future, technology will advance, and there won't need to be a trade-off between these two usages. But today, by asking Nintendo to make this a generic Android tablet product, your asking them to compromise something their fairly good at (gaming), to give you a tablet experience that still likely won't be competitive with the iPad anyway. --- I think it's better to position the Switch as a gaming console (as Nintendo is doing). That way, the Switch doesn't really need to do any tablet stuff to be successful. The Switch only needs to provide a great gaming experience that convinces the 65 million people who own a 3DS or Wii U to buy a new Switch in the future.
timdorr 10y ago
> So this is a good usage model, but I'm not sure people want to carry yet another tablet just for gaming. The only way I can see this thing taking off is if it can fall back into an Android tablet mode for web browsing, e-mail, etc. I'm sure I'm wrong about this, but the video didn't show any touching of the screen or a stylus (which the 3DS and Wii U both have). I wonder if this thing is even capable of being used without the controllers.
- Fej 10y ago
  According to the unconfirmed spec sheet, 10-point capacitive touchscreen.
ndesaulniers 10y ago
> The only way I can see this thing taking off is if it can fall back into an Android That's actually a great idea. Someone else pointed out this press release [0] from Nvidia saying they're making the chip. Tegra's can run Android (Nexus 7, 9) which has the latest OpenGL ES and Vulkan support. [0] https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2016/10/20/nintendo-switch/ https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2016/10/20/nintendo-switch/
- pbhjpbhj 10y ago
  Running Android would provide competition at the bottom end of the game spectrum. I could see them having a [virtualised] Android that was not openly Android so they can run Facebook and such without giving people access to put Android games on the thing.
  - ndesaulniers 10y ago
    > without giving people access to put Android games on the thing it's trivial to not install apps unless they've been signed with Nintendo's key, a la iOS.

by exelius 10y ago

mcgrath_sh 10y ago

I'm in the opposite camp as you are. I'm thrilled that this appears to be a gaming only device. I have devices that do what my tablets do. My 3DS has hundreds of hours into it. I love having a portable device that is for gaming only. I don't want notifications popping while looking for Rupees or a phone call when trying to hunt for legendary birds. I also have no issues carrying a separate device for that. IMO, touch gaming for anything beyond the basics is terrible. Even Minecraft is way better with a mouse and keyboard or controller. Having an all encompassing device from a company that has continually nailed portable gaming is something I will continue to buy. The big screen of this, for me, is an added bonus.

joeax 10y ago
I'm sure it will be gaming + apps like Netflix and YouTube (maybe Kindle too), the same apps that you see on the Wii U and DS currently. But yeah, it's better if the thing sticks to gaming.
troncheadle 10y ago
Yup. I've been bringing my 3DS instead of my Ipad on flights for a couple years now, and it's just a better experience. If I need to get real work done wherever I am flying to, I'll have my laptop with me.
hendryau 10y ago
Let's be honest, no one has ever had to farm for Rupees in Zelda :)
- chongli 10y ago
  Having to farm for rupees is the reason I never finished the Windwaker. That damn reinforce hunt quest sucked all the air out of the room and destroyed the game's momentum entirely.

ocdtrekkie 10y ago

Yeah, this has been my challenge. I've bought basically every Nintendo console ever (Zelda fan here, obviously), but I stopped playing their mobile games/consoles when I turned 16, because I was now driving myself places. Being in my parents' cars a lot, it made sense to carry a portable game console. In the world of working people, it doesn't. I don't have enough free time outside my house to justify hauling a dedicated gaming device around.

GuiA 10y ago
> Being in my parents' cars a lot, it made sense to carry a portable game console. In the world of working people, it doesn't. In the world of non US working people, many sit in a bus/metro 2x a day, 30-60 mins each way :)
- throwanem 10y ago
  US working people, too! Just fewer of us per capita, because a lot of cities' public transit infrastructure isn't what it might be.
- ocdtrekkie 10y ago
  That's totally fair! I'm in the suburbs, so public transit isn't an option here, and I rarely think about it unless I'm traveling.
  - amyjess 10y ago
    Thing is, I'm in the suburbs too, and while public transit is an option here (North Texas), it's a very slow one. What would be a 15 minute commute by car takes me an hour by bus. That sounds like the perfect excuse to carry a gaming device on me. The idea of being able to block out two hours every day for playing video games makes the kid in me very happy. I'd been dragging my feet on getting a 3DS to save money (whenever I've felt "hey, I've got $200 I can drop on something", I've had something more important to spend it on), but I might give in and get a Switch. Hell, it'd probably save me money in the long run since being able to game on the bus means I'd be much less tempted to take Uber or Lyft.

maxsilver 10y ago

> I'm not sure people want to carry yet another tablet just for gaming. The only way I can see this thing taking off is if it can fall back into an Android tablet mode for web browsing, e-mail, etc. Done right, Nintendo can make this thing the first real challenger to the iPad for mass-market adoption. If Nintendo did what your asking, it would be a pretty compromised experience. The hardware for gaming is significantly different than generic tablet hardware. (For example, high-res displays are great for Web / Facebook / Twitter / e-Books, but are drawbacks for a gaming console. High power GPUs are great for games, but are often underutilized in tablets. Any non-casual game needs high quality, thick controls, but traditional tablet users favor very thin hardware). Perhaps in the future, technology will advance, and there won't need to be a trade-off between these two usages. But today, by asking Nintendo to make this a generic Android tablet product, your asking them to compromise something their fairly good at (gaming), to give you a tablet experience that still likely won't be competitive with the iPad anyway. --- I think it's better to position the Switch as a gaming console (as Nintendo is doing). That way, the Switch doesn't really need to do any tablet stuff to be successful. The Switch only needs to provide a great gaming experience that convinces the 65 million people who own a 3DS or Wii U to buy a new Switch in the future.

timdorr 10y ago

> So this is a good usage model, but I'm not sure people want to carry yet another tablet just for gaming. The only way I can see this thing taking off is if it can fall back into an Android tablet mode for web browsing, e-mail, etc. I'm sure I'm wrong about this, but the video didn't show any touching of the screen or a stylus (which the 3DS and Wii U both have). I wonder if this thing is even capable of being used without the controllers.

Fej 10y ago
According to the unconfirmed spec sheet, 10-point capacitive touchscreen.

ndesaulniers 10y ago

> The only way I can see this thing taking off is if it can fall back into an Android That's actually a great idea. Someone else pointed out this press release [0] from Nvidia saying they're making the chip. Tegra's can run Android (Nexus 7, 9) which has the latest OpenGL ES and Vulkan support. [0] https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2016/10/20/nintendo-switch/ https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2016/10/20/nintendo-switch/

pbhjpbhj 10y ago
Running Android would provide competition at the bottom end of the game spectrum. I could see them having a [virtualised] Android that was not openly Android so they can run Facebook and such without giving people access to put Android games on the thing.
- ndesaulniers 10y ago
  > without giving people access to put Android games on the thing it's trivial to not install apps unless they've been signed with Nintendo's key, a la iOS.