Der_tolle_Emil Comments

Page 1 of 138

  • Did Nintendo download a Mario ROM and sell it back to us?

  • Der_tolle_Emil 20/01/2017

    @the-Uncle-show Sorry, but that's just plain wrong. Reply 0
  • Der_tolle_Emil 20/01/2017

    @bobbycuckoo
    Nintendo know this very well and use it to get fans to pay, over and over again for one reason and one reason only.
    Greed.
    Personally I find that difficult to argue. They are a company after all and making a profit is their top priority. Of course it is incredibly difficult to judge when the price is so high that you can call them greedy. This goes back to the question of demand. There is demand and Nintendo are definitely allowed to use that to sell products - after all, they created the demand in the first place. Ultimately it is still up to the players to decide if they want to give Nintendo money or not. If too many decide against that then Nintendo will have to lower the price eventually. In the end it will all even out.

    Of course asking money again for a VC title that you already bought on a previous generation is highly questionable - because other companies don't seem to care too much about that. That is true for consoles, Microsoft doesn't charge you anything for 360 backwards compatibility and neither does Apple or Google when you switch to a new phone. That could be considered greedy even if we all agree that it did take some work to make the emulator work on the new console. I personally think so, too in that case. However, enough people seem to pay either way and who am I to judge them? The games still work on my Wii or Wii U. As long as Nintendo don't deliberately make them unusable on the platforms I own them on I'm fine with that.



    Reply +1
  • Der_tolle_Emil 20/01/2017

    @Rosseh
    someone a long time ago took the data off the super Mario cartridge and edited it to work on their emulator. Someone then took the game file from the virtual console, analysed its code and found the same edit that 100% indicates that the virtual console release is the same file that was taken from the cartridge illegally
    Be careful with that 100% statement.

    The ROM wasn't edited per se, but has additional data added that describes the ROM. It contains info on the original cartridge, ie. was it NTSC or PAL, how much data do the ROM chips hold, are there any additional processors on there etc. This obviously matches the data found in pirated ROMs as it's the same game.

    This information is included in the same format that existing emulators use, which is peculiar, but FAR from any proof that the ROM Nintendo used wasn't created by them.
    Reply +3
  • Der_tolle_Emil 20/01/2017

    @bobbycuckoo
    However your Picasso analogy is really not applicable (and why use Picasso when an original hard copy of Mario would have suited )
    A lost Picasso would be a one off, rare as fook so the cost reflects that. A digital rom of super Mario demonstrably is not.
    It doesn't matter how many items are in existence, what counts is the demand. People find value in items for all kinds of reasons, the item being rare is definitely one of them but not the only one. The bent paper clip lying in front of my keyboard is one of a kind, too, yet I don't see anyone lining up behind my desk throwing money at me.

    The analogy is perfectly fine, even if a bit extreme.

    Less people would use pirate roms if the 20 odd year old games were a reasonable price.
    To change your analogy: if a gallery was selling Picasso prints (not origional) at £10,000 and on old lady really wanted one, but a shop down the street selling the exact same unlicensed print for a pound,which one would or should the old lady buy .
    Your comparison makes no sense. You are comparing an unlicensed product with an unlicensed product. Of course you'd get the cheaper one. This has absolutely zero relevance when looking at an officially licensed Nintendo release vs. a pirated ROM dump. People do value a genuine product. The fact that you see way more people running around with original clothing, bags, watches, phones etc. than fake ones should be more than enough indication.
    Reply +1
  • Der_tolle_Emil 20/01/2017

    @NewYork
    I find it odd that Nintendo would even need to "dump" their own game off a cartridge. I imagined they'd have the original software code stored on a computer somewhere. Like in some Nintendo Smithsonian vault of game assets/codes.
    I'm sure they have but if they still have the tools to compile the source code properly ready to use somewhere is a different question. However, I'm pretty sure they don't just have the source code but the final data that was written to the ROM as well (which would be identical to a dump).
    Reply +1
  • Der_tolle_Emil 19/01/2017

    @I_Am_CatButler
    While the information is necessary, the exact format (order and meaning of bits) could differ between implementations. So if Nintendo were making their own proprietary emulator to run their own dumps, the format they'd create would likely be different.

    The fact that it uses the iNES header format means they took existing ROMs, dumping tools or emulator code as a starting point, rather than working from nothing.

    It's certainly interesting to see, and probably points to a third party company who maybe didn't get given an official ROM image at the start of development or borrowed the format directly.
    Completely agree. If they had used their own format it won't match but since it is the same the content obviously has to match, too.

    The most important part is this one though, which is why I started to reply to this article in the first place:

    ...means they took existing ROMs, dumping tools or emulator code as a starting point...
    While I find this article really interesting and also think EG should definitely continue writing these articles I didn't really like the headline or the main point of it. I understand that "Nintendo selling pirated, downloaded ROM" makes a great (tabloid) headline and will generate tons of clicks but basing this on the inclusion of the iNES header is a bit wonky. As you correctly said there are several other reasons for it to exist, all of them (more) likely, but unfortunately, far less interesting from a journalist's point of view.

    Emulation is a fascinating topic (the linked GDC talk is definitely interesting to watch) but to simply focus on one vague suspicion while missing the much bigger picture is a bit unfortunate. EG could have at least given a bit more background information instead of just pointing fingers at Nintendo, this way the article is just too one-sided.

    Also unfortunate is that this sounds like a rant, I really didn't mean to. The article is a step in the right direction and I want to see more. I did get me to spend a good two hours reading up on file formats again etc., so it obviously struck a nerve :) However, I really need to go to bed and don't have the time to read it over again and choose my words more carefully to not sound like a completely disgruntled fanboy :)
    Reply +4
  • Der_tolle_Emil 19/01/2017

    @I_Am_CatButler
    They don't mean that every ROM dumped will create a different image.

    What they mean is that Nintendo (and other companies) routinely patched games between batches being released.
    Ah, that's what they meant. That does make sense; However, if the publically available ROM is the latest version that was released on real carts then surely Nintendo's version would match? That's imho more than just likely considering how old the game is and how many years went by until emulators started to surface and people starting to dump carts. There are also cases where developers intentionally used older builds because later ones featured weird copy protection mechanics that were harder to get to work so they just used the ones without it. Unfortunately I forgot which game it was, maybe it wasn't even emulation related but related to some re-release on platforms like GOG.

    It's a good point though; I did go through the list of released VC NES games to see if there is a title on that list where we know that the ROM within the VC emulator will be unique to check if it also contains the header. Or even better a game that was released on VC only with no pre-existing dump in the first place. However, I don't think that a NES game was released on VC only.

    The presence of a properly formatted iNES header does point to Nintendo using existing tools or a downloaded ROM. In the latter case they'd technically be acting illegally as the header is the work of the dumper (who was also breaking the law), but you could never prove who that was.

    This does suggest that the ROM was dumped using an existing tool instead of Nintendo's own, otherwise their header format would be expected to differ in some way.
    The problem with the header is that it has to contain the correct information about the ROM, otherwise the emulator won't run the game properly. There is no info in there that could be different. That means that even if Nintendo created it themselves manually it would look exactly the same. For me the identical header (or rather the existence of one in the first place) points towards them basing their emulator on already existing work, not necessarily code but at least the general architecture of existing emulators. I could also imagine a completely different reason for their emulator supporting the header: Much easier to test the emulator in general because they could use pretty much any ROM that you can find on the internet to test their emulator without having to get their hands on an official dump; I could imagine this being already difficult for Nintendo's own games and even harder for 3rd party games. Of course it's ironic that they would use pirated ROMs to test their emulator but not necessarily an indication that they shipped pirated dumps with the official release; Although at this point the question remains if it would really make that much of a difference if you are already using the pirated ROMs :)

    What would be really interesting is to see how Nintendo's file containing SRAM data for battery backed games and especially save states look like. There's no standard there and looking at the header information of those files (if they have any) would be a much more valuable indication if they used existing code and if so which one. The format of save states will most likely differ a lot more between emulators which gives them a much more unique fingerprint.

    I did, however, look up the formats used for WiiU and 3DS virtual console titles; They look custom and the ROMs don't have an iNES header anymore (I can't confirm though, I haven't looked at the files myself).

    I'm still leaning towards Nintendo re-using code for their Wii VC emulator before coming up with their completely own implementation, which makes sense considering the Wii VC is the oldest one and they probably didn't really know if the effort of VC was worth it. As far as the ROM is concerned we'll probably never know, the chances of it looking the same as publically available ones is just too high I think.
    Reply +3
  • Der_tolle_Emil 19/01/2017

    @Mantis41
    Makes me wonder why they don't employ a lot of these talented kids.
    Because that costs money. If it wasn't about that you can bet that companies like Nintendo are more than capable of writing their own perfectly cycle accurate emulator.

    Not to discredit any emulator authors, they have done absolutely phenominal work, but whether the same amount of work would pay off financially for a company emplying them is, sadly, a completely different question.
    Reply +3
  • Der_tolle_Emil 19/01/2017

    @ambershee
    This would of course, depend strongly on the licensing terms for said open source code.

    As it happens, iNES is not open source, but can be licensed.
    Absolutely, if they did in fact use source code from someone else I'm sure they checked the license. If not that would be a much bigger headline. The iNES header is just so incredibly common that pretty much every emulator adopted it and it is de facto a standard, which is why I'm not surprised to find it in Nintendo's own code either.
    Reply +3
  • Der_tolle_Emil 19/01/2017

    @Bauul @Bauul
    According to the article, Nintendo would not have got exactly the same result if they'd dumped their own cartridge, as apparently every cartridge produces a minutely different ROM.

    I'd be very interested to know why each cartridge produces a different ROM though. Digital data is supposed to be identical across copies, so what exactly is it that causes a slightly different code to be recorded?

    Aside from the crux of the story, this little fact fascinates me!
    Me too. Old hardware does fascinate me and I actually do have enough knowledge to program my own emulator. I even started at some point out of curiosity; Never finished it but it was good enough for a proof-of-concept (without any audio though). The thing is: The ROM really doesn't contain anything besides CPU instructions and character data. If even just a single bit was different it would have tremendous implications if it happened on the code side and if it "just" affects the character data you would see (slightly) garbled sprites.

    But aside from that: How in the world would anyone be able to confirm that a ROM was properly dumped if the result is always different? Verification usually includes some general sanity checking (if your ROM is 512kb when the ROM chip is only 256kb it's pretty obvious), check the tile set to spot some obvious mistakes, you might even check for long parts of repeated bytes in the ROM which is also an indication that something went wrong. Eventually you will end up comparing your dump with the dump of another trusted person to see if they come up with the same result.

    Unfortunately the article skipped that part which in my opinion is the most critical of them all, because the whole iNES header argument is really weak as that can be explained, as I mentioned earlier, by Nintendo simply taking existing open source code and starting from there (which is something that makes a lot of sense, even if they didn't use the source code it would make sense to at least take a look at other implementations).
    Reply +6
  • Der_tolle_Emil 19/01/2017

    Well, the existence of an iNES header is curious but not that surprising given it's the de-facto standard for NES roms. It does have its purposes and makes it easier for the emulator to know how to deal with the ROM at hand - and there is no reason not to use an already existing and well documented format, even though it sounds a bit strange that a company emulating their own games from their own system on their own platform wouldn't have a better (or rather already existing) way; But then again NES emulators have existed long before Nintendo was even thinking about Virtual Console. Besides, noone ever claimed that Nintendo started their emulator from scratch. Chances are very likely that they took some working source code written by someone else and started from there, and why not?

    In regards to the "minute differences" between various ROM dumps. That would go against pretty much every ROM audit/checksum database in general. I checked the documentation of the header again, unless I missed it there are no fields for timestamps or anything else that would be different even if the same game was dumped using the exact same hardware on the exact same computer.

    I'd really love to hear about those differences as obviously it can't be anything within the dump itself as that would mean that the game would have some glitches or would just plain crash. There might be additional data at the end of the ROM (which never get read by the game and so they wouldn't have any impact of the game), however, given how old this game is chances are that existing dumps are pretty much perfect, ie. not overdumped or anything. I don't see any reason why Nintendo wouldn't come up with the exact same ROM file if they dumped it themselves. Especially if they used the same hardware as people who dumped the game centuries ago.
    Reply +11
  • Free XCOM 2 overhaul mod Long War 2 released

  • Der_tolle_Emil 20/01/2017

    @Starbow
    Coming into this from scratch, is it best to run through first without this, or is the entire game just "better" with it?
    Depends on how easily you get frustrated. I played XCOM1, its expansion and XCOM2 (plus the originals back in the DOS days) and I started Long War 2 yesterday. Survived the first mission, got utterly destroyed in the second mission. It said "VERY LIGHT ADVENT RESISTANCE". And I did choose the lowest difficulty.

    You should have at least played one of the original campaigns. Otherwise I think this is absolutely impossible to get into (it strips out everything that could be considered a tutorial or educational)
    Reply +3
  • Zelda will be Nintendo's last game for the Wii U

  • Der_tolle_Emil 20/01/2017

    Not too fussed about no more WiiU games, my backlog will last for a year anyway. I've always been a huge Nintendo fan but didn't think too much of the WiiU when it was announced. Nevertheless, playing VC games in Bed or even continuing bigger games for "one more go" had a huge appeal and I ended up spending a lot more time with the WiiU than my other consoles or PC. And that's without even being more than one hour in Xenoblade! Reply +2
  • Cave Story and 1001 Spikes are coming to Switch

  • Der_tolle_Emil 19/01/2017

    I haven't played Cave Story in ages (and only the Steam version) so I might just get it. I used my 20+ years old SNES controller, which was kind of awesome for a bit more of a retro feeling, however, pressing left on the DPAD is becoming harder these days. I guess it's finally dying. Not bad considering its age though.

    Either way, anyone know what the cut off logo on the very right is? Looks almost like a placeholder, at least I can't figure out what it is.
    Reply 0
  • Super Bomberman R for Nintendo Switch costs £50, Konami says

  • Der_tolle_Emil 19/01/2017

    @59fps
    You're right. I think people are failing to see that

    1/ The prices will come down from RRP
    2/ The controllers have a fair bit of tech in, and split into two near-fully functional ones for many games.
    Unfortunately people don't really see your second point. I've been arguing this since the whole price debate started. I totally understand that people might not care about those features and also don't want to pay for them when they don't need them but that doesn't mean that Nintendo can just make them cheaper. I don't care about a lot of features about luxury cars either yet I don't complain that they are too expensive just because I don't need half of them.

    And regarding the prices: Is the RRP of Switch games and Xbox/PS4 games really that different? I don't live in the UK and I don't quite know how RRP works but if a shop sticks to the RRP isn't that the shop's decision alone? I mean if Nintendo set the RRP to 50 pounds and the shop sells the game for 49 whereas it sells a game by Microsoft for 35 (that has a RRP of 50) is that even something that Nintendo can control?

    I only checked the prices in Switzerland since that's where I have everything preordered and the prices between Switch hardware/software/accessories compared to Xbox One is absolutely negligible (prices are equal or ~5 to 7 pounds higher, but that's it).
    Reply +2
  • Der_tolle_Emil 19/01/2017

    @UncleLou
    Fair enough. :)

    At least you "only" need to buy a second pair of joycons this time around.
    True. I know I'm in the minority buying controllers for friends but I enjoy couch multiplayer way too much. The point being: I buy the controllers, they bring the food and the drinks. It all evens out eventually :)
    Reply +2
  • Der_tolle_Emil 19/01/2017

    @UncleLou
    And anyway, who buys *3* extra controllers for their other consoles in case friends come over?
    I do :/ My friends like to play every now and then but they are too cheap to buy their own consoles.

    Fortunately with the Wii U it was slightly cheaper this time around as I did get a pro controller for myself which means I already had two and the rest just got WiiMotes with the addons I had from the Wii. With the Switch I'm already at three controllers for games that don't need too many buttons (two included joycons plus the pro controller).
    Reply 0
  • Der_tolle_Emil 19/01/2017

    @jabberwocky
    Nintendo just seem to keep kicking themselves.
    Absolutely. I mean Nintendo is neither the developer nor the publisher, but I'm sure they somehow must be at fault here.
    Reply +3
  • Der_tolle_Emil 19/01/2017

    I haven't played a Bomberman game in ages, I think the last one was the XBLA one. I still had Live Gold back then and online was much better than I expected. Bomberman is a series that really shines if everyone sits together in the same room. Still, online was still a lot of fun and I might just get this one, too. I always enjoyed the series. Reply +1
  • £60 Zelda: Breath of the Wild for Nintendo Switch now £50 on Amazon UK

  • Der_tolle_Emil 18/01/2017

    I do wonder what does go on behind the scenes. I just compared the prices of my pre-orders with upcoming Xbox One games and or peripherals and the price difference is marginal at best. A Xbox One controller is 65 pounds, a Switch Pro Controller is 57. Zelda is the same (65 pounds), Dead Rising 4 is 57, the Master Edition of Zelda is the same price as Watch Dogs 2 (limited edition).

    The Xbox One games at launch had the same price, 65 pounds.
    Reply +1
  • Custom Resident Evil PS4 controller is as disgusting as it is amazing

  • Der_tolle_Emil 18/01/2017

    I don't know what it is about teeth, I don't care about fingers, blood, cuts, eyeballs, bones... but the teeth creep me out :) Reply +4
  • Zelda fans uncover Breath of the Wild backstory from Special Edition map

  • Der_tolle_Emil 18/01/2017

    Has Nintendo posted pictures of the map included with the special edition or how did they get their hands on one in the first place?

    Edit: It's probably in the video but I'm at work.
    Reply -2
  • Zelda: Breath of the Wild's Switch and Wii U differences outlined

  • Der_tolle_Emil 18/01/2017

    I never expected this to be 60fps but I did hope for 1080p. However, I can't really tell the difference between 900p and 1080p on my Xbox one either when sitting on the couch and considering that this is one of the first games on the console (that started development on another one, too) I can't really complain. I'm glad this is a launch title. Reply +5
  • Zelda: Breath of the Wild download fills almost half Nintendo Switch internal storage

  • Der_tolle_Emil 16/01/2017

    @Lamb There are far more advantages of physical media, be it borrowing games from a friend or being able to actually buy them years after they have been released (and if you're lucky they are cheaper, too).

    There are benefits to both, ultimately it's about giving the consumer the choice and this is exactly what the Switch does. Limiting the options what a consumer can do just to do something that is state-of-the-art is a horrible decision if you ask me, that's all I'm saying.
    Reply 0
  • Der_tolle_Emil 16/01/2017

    @redcrayon
    Im sure there are plenty of things less important than file size considering that this is a thread about memory cards.
    Sorry, I completely misunderstood what you were saying :) With all the negativity around here I thought you were implying the filesize is too small for what a game should be these days. Sorry about that :)
    Reply 0
  • Der_tolle_Emil 16/01/2017

    @Lamb
    Its a console, not an ipad, and in these days of digital media going back to cartridges is a Fisher Price move.
    Yet when Microsoft said the Xbox One would go digital only we had the biggest uproar in gaming history in a VERY long time.

    Technically speaking you are right, cartridges (or physical media in general) isn't really state of the art but it has sooo many other benefits that I don't even know where to start.

    The Switch really gives players all the options by a) having retail games available physically and b) giving you a cheap and convenient way to go digital only if you want to.

    I really don't get how that can be considered a bad move, especially when other companies charge you quite a hefty sum for 96GB of additional storage whilst giving the user no other option of increasing storage any other way.

    The whole discussion here is borderline ridiculous. Never, ever, I have seen so many people complain about internal storage and the price of MicroSD cards even for devices that cost two almost two times as much.
    Reply -2
  • Der_tolle_Emil 16/01/2017

    @Kysen
    You can forget about 3rd party patches then.
    Microsoft had a size limit of 4MB (!) for patches on the 360. This rarely stopped devs from supporting their games after release.

    It's just so much easier to just repackage everything completely instead of implementing a proper delta patching which is why we see patches that are just ridiculous in size right now.

    Of course it's nice to allow for studios not to worry about patch sizes but it's far from impossible to shrink them down significantly, even without spending days thinking about how exactly.
    Reply +2
  • Der_tolle_Emil 16/01/2017

    @redcrayon
    There's a shedload of other stuff worth querying, Zelda seems pretty restrained in terms of file size for a modern AAA game to me.
    When it comes to software the size of an application or game is pretty much the least meaningful metric you can look at. You can derive absolutely nothing from it.

    Reply +2
  • Der_tolle_Emil 16/01/2017

    @The_shlaaaag_returns
    No, microSD cards have slower read speeds than a 5,400rpm HDD (which is what's in the PS4). They also degrade relatively quickly with continuous use, so quite why Nintendo thought that this was a good idea is baffling.
    If MicroSD cards are good enough for 99% of all peripherals sold in the last 5 years then it should be good enough for the Switch.

    Besides, speed has very little to do with this. First of all there are only a few use cases where a traditional 5.4k rpm HDD is faster and the reliability issues with HDDs in a device that gets moved on a regular basis are FAR higher than MicroSD cards.

    Also, MicroSD cards get improved over time. They get faster, bigger and cheaper because they are used in a ton of different products.

    Really, there are many things that people might consider wrong with the Switch but the chosen storage medium definitely is not one of them.
    Reply +3
  • Der_tolle_Emil 16/01/2017

    @Sicho
    since the games come on carts there is a fair chance that patches will be installed directly onto the game carts.
    There is literally zero chance of that happening.
    Reply +9
  • Der_tolle_Emil 16/01/2017

    Well, at least I won't have to delete older games when I want to play something new like with the Xbox One. 32GB looks really bad on paper but since physical games won't occupy that much of it I think it's fine. I mean, I downloaded maybe two games on the Xbox One and my storage is full even though I bought everything else physically. Looks like I'll get the same mileage out of the Switch then. Reply -2
  • Nintendo: Switch launch day "not be-all and end-all"

  • Der_tolle_Emil 16/01/2017

    @Keldorek
    To be fair, you wouldn't be buying Splatoon again, but its sequel.
    That's true. But is it really all new content? I thought a lot of the things carried over or is it just that some multiplayer maps were kept? To be fair I haven't read too much about Splatoon but I thought it was more like Splatoon: Deluxe or something. Maybe because I was hoping for that so I could catch up with what I have been missing so far :)
    Reply +1
  • Der_tolle_Emil 16/01/2017

    For those to are already sick of Mario Kart 8 and/or Splatoon (or don't want to buy them again, which is more than fair) it really doesn't look like there is too much else available. Personally it'll suit me just fine, Zelda will take me a few weeks to complete (and I don't like switching between games anyway) until Mario Kart 8 comes out and then there's Splatoon, which I haven't bought for the Wii U.

    Not that the other games announced are bad but after April it looks like we have to hope for a new release each month as nothing seems confirmed after that.
    Reply +7
  • Nintendo Switch's bundled Joy-Con grip doesn't charge controllers

  • Der_tolle_Emil 16/01/2017

    It's unfortunate that the charging grip isn't included but I'm not really surprised. This really is an extra that's convenient but not really necessary. Personally I'm glad the base price of the console pack is lower due to this being not included as I'm planning on getting a pro controller anyway and i'd rather put my money towards that than the charging grip for controllers I won't use that much.

    The price should be lower though because ultimately it's just a fancy shaped adapter for the USB-C plug. There's nothing else in there, the charging "logic" all happens between the power outlet where the USB cable is connected to and the joy-cons.

    Unless this has a battery so the joy-cons can be charged without the grip being connected to a cable, so basically a portable charging station. Does anyone know if the grip is capable of doing that?
    Reply +3
  • Nintendo Switch won't use StreetPass or Miiverse

  • Der_tolle_Emil 14/01/2017

    @TimmishMcgraw
    You're defending something that has £75 controllers. Enough said.

    This thing is going to BOMB.
    People spend that much on controllers for a handful games that go on to sell over millions of copies. "BOMB" is probably pushing it a bit. 
    Reply +16
  • A pair of Nintendo Switch Joy-con controllers costs £75

  • Der_tolle_Emil 14/01/2017

    @zepekit
    Ps4 and xbox one can't be taken with you? What? ofc. they can... what have you been smoking?
    Oh come on, don't play stupid. You know exactly what I meant. I'm not trying to start a console war or willy waving contest; Just arguing that the prices of the Switch and the other current gen consoles are difficult to compare because they do things differently.

    I never said that the prices aren't high or that Nintendo shouldn't lower them - but even though all of the products are consoles it's definitely a bit like comparing apples and oranges. I know we don't really have anything else to compare the Switch to because it's the first hybrid console of its kind from one of the big three. I didn't mean to defend Nintendo's prices by throwing around fancy buzzwords about the features but rather to highlight that it's difficult to compare the console with the others.
    Reply 0
  • Der_tolle_Emil 14/01/2017

    @mega-gazz
    Their current market position is their own doing, but what they should have done is competed on price. Take a loss on hardware and get it under £200 and I think it would have flown off shelves faster than they could make it for a long time to come. They would more than make the loss back through software and online fees and they have the money behind them to do this with very little risk.
    It's their business decision not to go that route, but one that may end up giving the console the same fate as the WiiU.
    I agree; I don't know if they are still making a profit with the hardware this time around but I think they said they will continue with this "tradition" so my guess is they do. They really shouldn't. Even though the Wii was a huge success the WiiU clearly showed that it doesn't work out all the time. I like the Switch and I hope that it will be another successful Nintendo console but they really need to take a good look at where they are standing and how to get back to solid ground.

    Not making a loss on hardware is fantastic especially if the demand is there but they aren't in that position anymore. High prices are just a short term solution that leave no room for long term potential; It will save their current fiscal year but a year from now their revenue will come from games, not just their own but also 3rd party ones - but the latter will be rather scarce if they fail to build a big enough install base yet again. And I think they have an even tougher challenge than when they launched the WiiU.
    Reply 0
  • Der_tolle_Emil 13/01/2017

    @Hxy3000
    When playing local multiplayer one controller is going to be more ergonomic than the other since the buttons & sticks are in different places. Built-in shittier one for your friend/little brother to use, how nice.
    Not only that but if you have to use the right one I have no idea how you are ever going to reach the L shoulder button. No items for that player in Mario Kart I guess :)
    Reply 0
  • Der_tolle_Emil 13/01/2017

    @zepekit
    Yeah they can't do mobile, but are you really going to say that switch has more features than a ps4 or xbox one? really?
    Neither the Xbox One nor the PS4 is in any way capable of being taken with you, the controllers don't have a built-in motion camera (and in case of the XBO no motion sensing capabilities either), their controllers aren't designed to be taken apart (needs two PCBs and batteries rather than one) for quick multiplayer, neither the XBO nor the PS4 have a touch screen.

    I'm not saying people need these features, I merely accept that they cost money. You simply get what you pay for.

    People seem to accept this with various other devices. An iPad costs a lot more than a PS4 and technically (in your eyes) it can't do more than a PS4 but people think that's fine.

    If you want to buy a new car but don't need seat warmers I doubt you'd yell at the more expensive car that it's ridiculous that it is costing more because "it doesn't have more features". When it comes to what it is supposed to do, ie. driving, then no, it doesn't. Seat warmers aren't even necessary, that's true as well. But they do cost money, simple as that.

    Again, I'm not saying that the price of the Switch is cheap, not by any means. I'd also argue that Nintendo should just bite the bullet for once and not sell everything at a profit from day 1 to get closer to a competitive price.

    Yes, these things are expensive and yes, I'm sure not everyone cares about every little thing the console can do and Nintendo should respect that, but I wouldn't necessarily call the prices a complete rip-off.
    Reply -1
  • Der_tolle_Emil 13/01/2017

    @mega-gazz
    hat you wrote there is the argument that a big nintendo fan will tell themselves to convince them they are not being ripped off.
    It's more my general interest in technology that lead me to this. Of course it's hard to deny that I am a huge Nintendo fan but it's the tech that gets me in the end.

    The average customer however is going to look at 3 things... price, games and popularity - the ps4 is so far ahead on all of those that it seems to me nintendo are still not looking to place this as an alternative for somebody out looking for a device to play games on and who is willing to consider all the options.
    The PS4 is definitely ahead in these three areas. But how exactly should Nintendo position themselves? By your definition they shouldn't even release a console to begin with. They will never have more games than the PS4 due to launching later. They can't match the price either because the hardware is new while the PS4 has already gone down (or has nice bundles that make up for that) in price due to its "age".

    All Nintendo can do is position the switch as an alternative device and not just "yet another console". It's one of the banes of having a different release cycle. Nintendo could have easily produced a console that is twice as powerful as the PS4 but then people will complain that they just bought the PS4 and don't want to give up their games library already. Nintendo might try to compete with the other consoles by aggressive pricing but that will have an impact on its performance and features and the console ending up like a really weak PS4. Maybe just as strong as the PS4 - but that leads us to the same argument as before.

    I mean, it would be interesting to know how many people who have a PS4 also have a Xbox One (or vice versa). I'm guessing not too many - and those are your potential customers for a Nintendo console that doesn't differentiate itself thoroughly. Either way, I'm sure that Nintendo's "we're different" approach makes more sense; Even if that means that the hardware is more expensive than its specs make it look because the different capabilities aren't that obvious.
    Reply -1
  • Der_tolle_Emil 13/01/2017

    @JoelStinty
    It depends on how you look at it to be honest. If you directly compare it to a ps4, then yeah it is under specced.

    But for mobile tech it is high end stuff.
    That's a good point. Also, as far as the joy-cons are concerned: They are basically a much more advanced Wiimote with even more features - plus a battery. A single Wiimote was 39€ at launch. Two of them would have cost you 80€ which is more or less what a pair of joy-cons cost. And that's disregarding the fact that you get two different (from a manufacturing point of view) devices this time, which slightly increases manufacturing costs as well.

    I am very well aware that this argument will likely not convince (or should convince) anyone who thinks they are too expensive that the prices are justified. All I'm saying is that I'm not surprised at all to see them sell for so much money.

    As usual Nintendo will have quite a challenge arguing their pricing strategy because most people disregard* all the intricacies of the system since all they see is "but the ps4 has more pixels".

    *Just to be clear: This is fine. If people want a console where money goes towards horsepower rather than features then I really can't fault them; and why would I? It's just a bit disheartening to see all the "but it's just a controller" arguments when there is so much more to them, even if you don't care about any of the features.
    Reply -2
  • Let's compare and contrast the US and European Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild box art

  • Der_tolle_Emil 13/01/2017

    Both are good but I definitely prefer the US one. Might be the image and the monitor but the EU one is far too saturated for my taste. Bonus points for the US version because it's a throwback to art from the very early days of Zelda (can't find the image right now but I'm sure pretty much everyone has already seen it by now). Reply +4
  • Nintendo Switch port of F-Zero-esque racer Redout confirmed

  • Der_tolle_Emil 13/01/2017

    @Sicho Extreme-G was my #2 choice after F-Zero. The first was one was fantastic, the 2nd one was a bit meh for some reason but the third one, while feeling different, was also pretty cool. Definitely preferred this series over WipeOut. Reply +1
  • Here's what's coming to Switch you may have missed

  • Der_tolle_Emil 13/01/2017

    It's a bit odd that Nintendo didn't at least tease some of those titles with one or two slides, even if just showing the game's logo. Personally the absolute low point for me in the whole presentation was SEGA. "Hi. It's me, Sega. Yes, we're working on Switch games. Bye!". The same goes for the guy from EA. What a waste of time. Nothing against FIFA or the guy on stage, I just found it odd that this title was selected to get someone on stage to talk about it. Admittedly though it was impressive to see how frigging tall he was. Bill Trinen almost looked like a kid next to him.

    Either way, what I'm getting at: The Switch lineup is looking way better than the presentation made it look. I was hoping they would at least mention titles like Yooka-Laylee, the new Shovel Knight editions and things like that. I'm very well aware that they aren't exclusive but they get so little exposure on other platforms that I guess they chould have showed at least the title logo to show that there is more to the lineup than just big titles coming later down the year.
    Reply +8
  • The Nintendo Switch paid online service doesn't sound great

  • Der_tolle_Emil 13/01/2017

    @Malek86
    Also, I'm 99% sure they'll use the extra online play as a way to not let people "import" their old Wii U purchases.
    You are probably right, personally I never expected VC games to get a free update anyway so at least for me it doesn't make a difference.

    However, a paid service hopefully means that Nintendo will finally decouple your online account from the console completely. I admit this isn't the most convincing argument but we all know Nintendo works quite differently when it comes to online interactions. People are going to be expecting at least some kind of parity with other platforms if they start to charge for it and I really hope Nintendo are aware of that. If the only thing that money buys you is the addition of voice chat compared to previous consoles they are going to get in trouble.
    Reply 0
  • Der_tolle_Emil 13/01/2017

    Removing games doesn't sound too good but SNES games getting online play is actually a pretty big deal. It really all depends on the pricing.

    The idea of using your smartphone sounds rather odd at first but if done right could work out really well; Especially if you consider that this console is also partly a portable console. Quite frankly I'd rather use my phone or tablet to take care of chat because I already have the peripherals (be it headphones or bluetooth headset or whatever) and typing is much faster as well than using a controller should it be necessary; Also it doesn't necessarily interrupt the game as much. It's true that Skype or other apps already do all of that but the general idea of having a separate device to take care of communication (especially one that everyone already has) is not bad at all. I mean, there's a reason why sooo many people don't use the in-game communication channels already, looking at it that way Nintendo probably gets online even more than other companies. Nevertheless, pricing will be key.
    Reply -13
  • Mario Kart 8 Deluxe adds Splatoon characters and Battle Mode courses

  • Der_tolle_Emil 13/01/2017

    @rep-
    How generous of Nintendo. Up to 1080p in 2017.
    No worries, at least your eyes won't have to adjust after playing Xbox One games. Although it might be odd to see something running at 60fps...
    Reply +5
  • Der_tolle_Emil 13/01/2017

    @Sicho
    probably THE game where portable local wireless multiplayer will be awesome :)
    Absolutely. It's the perfect game to show off a lot of the unique features of the Switch. What I find slightly worrying though is that the charging port of the device is at the bottom (probably necessary due to the dock) so using it in tabletop mode and charging it at the same time is going to be rather complicated.
    Reply +3
  • Xenoblade Chronicles 2 announced for Nintendo Switch

  • Der_tolle_Emil 13/01/2017

    This is one of the very few titles where I'm glad it isn't going to release anytime soon; I didn't spend a lot of time with Chronicles X yet and since my HDD decided to die my savegame was lost anyway. I still have a lot of catching up to do :) Reply +2
  • Zelda: Breath of the Wild will launch with Nintendo Switch

  • Der_tolle_Emil 13/01/2017

    I thought it was a really nice touch how they announced the release date, switching from one person to another and using the countless rumors floating around to build up just a tiny bit more tension at the end. Reply +1