I had a bit of a rant about this a while back when I was playing Splatoon with friends.
The crux of the argument is this “if we stop trying to look at Splatoon as a good game and instead look at it as an entertaining game, the issues we run into make sense. The bugs glitches and bad balancing issues don’t matter as much from an entertainment standpoint. You get in you play and you’re entertained. Even if the match drops you can get back in an be entertained. It doesn’t mean it’s a good game, but it is entertaining.”
My friend’s and I are now freaking out about my prophetic words.
I have to ask then: what’s the difference between a good game and an entertaining game?
From my perspective, games exist to be entertaining so if a game is entertaining then it is a good game. I don’t know what other metric would be used to determine if a game is good.
Unfortunately that’s the part of the rant I don’t remember. I had a pretty decent definition for both a good game and an entertaining game and why they aren’t exactly the same thing but I also had a decent amount of beer that night.
If I think of it I’ll reply to your comment again with the update.
Mobile games, case in point. They often aren’t designed to be good or even fun, they’re designed to maximize playtime over the long term
That means you start off making it fun and easy to advance, but then you start to back off on the rewards and make them grind and wait more and more. It’s the Facebook technique
Nintendo hasn’t even gotten a hold of being a game company in 2023. Maybe they should focus on catching up, as the switch has stagnated and the eshop is filled with trash
yeah, but not like the eshop. the eshop is a dumpster fire of a store. it’s what steam used to be before valve tried to build automatic curation systems. the eshop is 100x worse than every other game store available today. I don’t even look at it because I know that I can’t find anything interesting between all the crap
I can 100% look at other stores, i just look through the new releases on my playstation every few months and generally find something i want
I have not owned a console in a decade or so, i only play on PC. I bought a switch for my nephew to play around when he visits. I literally only ever held a switch once and i didn't really know what to expect. I like a lot of the hardware part. Like controllers are super easy to pair, they even show up in the right colour, i like how you can use them in different ways. Docking and undocking, handheld mode, all very cool. But oh my, the eshop is a nightmare. The nintendo account thing took me a while until it worked for unknown reasons. What i absolutely despise tho is that i bought mario kart and i paid full price for that game that came out in 2014. It had dlc tracks (that was expected i guess) and they just show up as normal tracks with a slightly different symbol. These assholes know exactly what they are doing. Kids keep pressing these tracks until the parents spend 25 or so more bucks for some more tracks on a game from 2014 that still costs full price.
I assume they do that with smash as well an all of these games. I loved nintendo when i grew up, like a lot. But now i really just regret that i gave them money.
Honestly I think Nintendo are killing it in 2023. I loved TotK and Pikmin 4, and have high hopes for Mario Wonder and the SMRPG remake. Yeah the switch is aging out, but it's no big secret that a Switch 2 is deep in development and probably coming next year.
I hadn’t touched my switch in about 6 months before TOTK came out and haven’t touched it since I finished it. I notice I have been using my switch about as much as I used my Wii U. It’s more of a dedicated Mario Kart machine that I occasionally use for a AAA Nintendo game like Zelda or Mario, but it’s mostly just there for when I have friends over and we want to Mario Kart
Sure. I absolutely use my Steam Deck more than my Switch. But still, my favorite releases this year have been Nintendo games (although I hear good things about Balder's Gate 3).
Your anecdotal experience doesn’t really seem to match up with sales numbers.
Speaking personally, I go stretches not playing the Switch and then months where I play nothing else. There are a zillion great games for it, and if they don’t interest you that’s more about your interests than the Switch itself.
Terrible title. “Switch 2 supports ray tracing and will use upscaling” is the summary. Which is obvious, it won’t be anywhere near consoles, it’s like 1/7th resolution.
That’s not what the article says, the values in the patent are an example. It’s not out of realm of possibility to have something that can match at least the Series S when docked while still supporting a portable mode.
Sure, it is a garbage patent anyway, the Steam Deck does upscaling when docked too, woohoo.
This hardware isn’t a mystery, it’s a newer mobile ARM SoC using a newer Nvidia architecture supporting RT and DLSS. It will run at a low resolution. Probably max of 1080p, probably plenty of 720p on more demanding games. All upscaled.
And to be clear that’s fine, it is what a Switch 2 was always going to be.
I mean sure, two outlets reporting it, but I’ll believe it when I see it. With the Switch Pro/2/U/360/Series N in particular, the leaks were always so outlandish and in the end turned out false, while we can clearly assume the overall news about a Switch successor being in development to be real, any specific piece of news I’d immediately discard and put into the “made up stuff”-folder for the time being.
The appeal of Nintendo console is first party exclusives and whatever the new gimmick may be (I don’t mean that word as a bad thing, I have loved most of their gimmicks). Powerful hardware just means that it can potentially have a good third party support, so that you’re not left playing just the first party games.
We all get what that means, and don’t think otherwise for a minute. It’ll be unfinished 70€ titles, requiring 3 30€ dlcs to feel mostly complete, requiring a paid 15€ subscription on top of that. We’ve seen this a dozen times too many by now. Nintendo are just always late to everything
Or it just means Nintendo isn’t going to rely on video games for growth.
The idea of paying anything for video games is already going away, with free to play games doing well in the youth market. And while the Switch is their best selling console, it is effectively a tablet with Bluetooth controllers and standard hardware. I don’t see Nintendo being able to maintain selling hardware after this next generation.
But Nintendo has a lot of IP that it hasn’t really tapped outside of video games. I expect that to change.
No, as that’s fully against their philosophy. They ship complete games, on time, with limited if any bugs and with no microtransactions and large DLC expansions for most games.
He is clearly talking about their expansion into film, theme parks and other entertainment avenues other than games consoles or anything really done prior (Pokémon movies are TPC, rather than Nintendo).
And it’s been true since the very first console. The Master System was more powerful than the NES, and the Genesis/Mega Drive was more powerful than the Super NES (arguably; the Sega CPU was far more powerful than Nintendo’s). Same is true for its portables.
They’ve always prioritized per-unit margins. It’s a conservative approach, but it means profit on every console sold.
So there’s a 0% chance this console is actually as powerful as a PS5. However, there’s a good chance there are hardware and software techniques being used to upscale a lower resolution image.
Evolving? They’ve always been an entertainment focused company. They’ve been around for ages, and got their start making cards, then later electronic games and toys. Nintendo is basically Hasbro.
Breaking news: The company that created the Nintendo Entertainment System and Super Nintendo Entertainment System is evolving into an entertainment company!
Funny, but I think he means they want to take on the likes of Disney. Not necessarily be known for movies; but games, movies, shows, maybe even theme parks.
If any company has the ability to do it, it’s Nintendo.
I compared my wealth to Bill Gates and turns out he makes more money just existing for 1 minute than I will make in my entire life. But we are comparable.
And even if some prototype device is, that doesn’t mean the production device will be, once things like heat and power usage have to really be accounted for.
It doesn't even matter a lot if it does have really good graphics capability. Nvidia is good at that (though whether they'd price that where Nintendo wants is questionable). The question is what Nvidia can give in a CPU, because the only ARM CPU out there that's actually interesting in terms of efficient per core performance is Apple.
There's no such thing as a "gaming chip" when it comes to CPUs. Are you trying to tell me that you can't plug a GPU into the PCIe slot of an Ampere Altra? Do you honestly believe that a game compiled for ARM magically won't run on a server chip due to some kind of hardware block that detects games and says "nope, not gonna run that?"
Also, Nvidia makes the processor in the Nintendo Switch, and I linked chips from two other manufacturers in my comment.
There are performance traits you have to have to be even in the vicinity of functional for gaming, and they're the opposite of what you need for a server. Yes, I'm saying that if you put a gaming GPU into any of those chips, the performance would be fucking terrible. You need fast clocks and IPC with low latency, not lots of cores and high bandwidth. High "Performance per core" in terms of server parts does not mean that it can do anywhere close to the same work per core a consumer, gaming focused chip can do. The design parameters are completely different.
The processor in the Switch chip is the reason the Switch has such a limited AAA library. It's not mediocre. It's not serviceable. It's fucking terrible.
nintendo
Najstarsze
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.