D
And they've never been creative in their hardware design like Nintendo, either. They sold Wii off a few good titles and the fact that a lot of people like lightgun games. Xbox was garbage in its first iteration, the ridiculously huge controller in particular, so it was forced to adapt. Sony hasn't changed their controller design since PSX almost at all, and box design doesn't matter except for airflow. Nintendo is the only one of the three willing to take risks, and when the others try to copy, they always fail.ps4 and xbox one no longer have the exclusives i used to like like halo etc you know how 343 ruined it. better off getting a pc and only buying nintendo consoles.
i still think nintendo were stupid to think the wii u was a good idea the game pad costed a bunch and it only worked when you were near the console and if you had your own tv you would never have to worry about your parents or some one having to use the tv. And it just made games harder to make. All my firends and me thought it sucked as soon as it came out.And they've never been creative in their hardware design like Nintendo, either. They sold Wii off a few good titles and the fact that a lot of people like lightgun games. Xbox was garbage in its first iteration, the ridiculously huge controller in particular, so it was forced to adapt. Sony hasn't changed their controller design since PSX almost at all, and box design doesn't matter except for airflow. Nintendo is the only one of the three willing to take risks, and when the others try to copy, they always fail.
But what could Nintendo have really used other than the Tegra P1 (X2), which in of itself hasn't really had any applications other than for cars? Of course having roughly 50% better GPU capabilities and twice the memory bandwidth would have really helped, but, at what cost? And what about the CPU, which swaps the 4 A53 cores for 2 Denver2 cores? Those are stronger than the A57 cores, but with only 2, I dunno if it would have been feasible to use for gaming applications. The A57s would still likely be used as they are in the Switch and probably kept at the same frequency for battery/heat purposes, negatively affecting the advantage it has elsewhere (but not fully).I hope so, this will drive competition and bring better specs with better prices.
Well, when Wii became a smash with motion controls, both Sony and MS tossed in their stuff. Of course, motion control accessories are easier and quicker to bring out vs an entire system, so we'll just have to see.
But what could Nintendo have really used other than the Tegra P1 (X2), which in of itself hasn't really had any applications other than for cars? Of course having ~50% better GPU capabilities and twice the memory bandwidth would have really helped, but, at what cost? And what about the CPU, which swaps the 4 A53 cores for 2 Denver2 cores? Those are stronger than the A57 cores, but with only 2, I dunno if it would have been feasible to use for gaming applications. The A57s would still likely be used as they are in the Switch and probably kept at the same frequency for battery/heat purposes, negatively affecting the advantage it has elsewhere (but not fully).
I didn't care for the WiiU's hardware design, either, but it still would've sold much better with a different name and different marketing. Nintendo didn't do a good job of demonstrating various uses of the pad to other developers. It felt half-assed after the success of Wii, though I'm sure that wasn't intentional. Switch is what WiiU should've been, though Nvidia hadn't demonstrated their tech in Shield TV yet.i still think nintendo were stupid to think the wii u was a good idea the game pad costed a bunch and it only worked when you were near the console and if you had your own tv you would never have to worry about your parents or some one having to use the tv.
still 4 yeahs later the tablet is smaller and has the techI didn't care for the WiiU's hardware design, either, but it still would've sold much better with a different name and different marketing. Nintendo didn't do a good job of demonstrating various uses of the pad to other developers. It felt half-assed after the success of Wii, though I'm sure that wasn't intentional. Switch is what WiiU should've been, though Nvidia hadn't demonstrated their tech in Shield TV yet.
i think Nintendo just going to just keep making better switches it should work for a long timeThe thing I am wishing for in the successor to the Switch;
1 - Analog shoulder buttons ... memories of the gamecube controller.
2 - A D-PAD ... sad I have to say that in regard to a Nintendo console at all.
3 - While I get the choice for cartridges, I think a lot of parties still see them as a burden of sorts. So discs (bluray just a lone would be wondeful and more the sizeable OR a way better internal storage solution (OR affordable micro SD's of either 512GB or 1TB ... Im already on my second 256GB card now)
Graphic meh suprise me. Im gameplay over graphics all the way.
Besides all that;
A friggin Nintendo ID which allows me to keep playing the games I bought on the next gen system.
THAT my friends would be another game-changer right there.
Sure kinda like the GB became the GBC became the GBA became the ... and so on.i think Nintendo just going to just keep making better switches it should work for a long time
This isn't a very valid criticism any more, you can use nearly any controller with Switch.Sure kinda like the GB became the GBC became the GBA became the ... and so on.
But still I would like to see those changes I mentioned happen. Nintendo with a bad D-PAD ... come one that is just weird.
Well, they half-assed PS4 hardware. Then half-assed PS4 Pro hardware. So you get either 1080p and 30 FPS half the time, or upscaled 1440p and 30 FPS half the time. Both Pro and XB1X need more user freedom for settings in that regard.What I like about Sony (PlayStation) is that they don’t need to reinvent themselves every X couple of years or come up with some lame gimmicks. They are good in their own field and play on their own rhythm. Keep it up.
a) is there a reasonably well accepted game of the year? As far as I can see it is a concept anybody can claim for themselves and nobody particularly takes the term seriously, give or take I think it was 2011 with two worlds 2 where some questioned why it might justify a GOTY version with GOTY in the name. The concept, or a functional equivalent, of the goty version of a game had existed for many years prior (usually being called a gold version, not to be confused with a game going gold). Films technically have the Oscars but even those are not without controversy and a considerable amount of people being completely ambivalent towards them.the switch got game of the year and its selling alot and sony said they can't ignore nintendo so i can see them trying to copy it.