A few more thoughts on the Nintendo Switch now that I've had a couple of days to think about it

If you read my most recent post, you know I was pretty excited by the unveiling of Nintendo's next games console, Switch. I wouldn't say the reveal blew me away, but it definitely interested and intrigued me.

Although I'm still interested and intrigued a few days later, I'm also a bit ... confused? I'm not sure that's the right word, but whatever. Basically, a number of questions have been bouncing around in my brain since Nintendo introduced Switch. Here they are, in case you're curious.

Is Switch really supposed to replace both the Wii U and the 3DS?--That Switch is supposed to replace the DOA Wii U is a given. Hell, Nintendo even chose to promote Switch using bulked-up ports of some of its best Wii U games, like Mario Kart 8 and Splatoon. I'm not entirely sure Switch is supposed to replace the 3DS, though. I assumed that would be the case before the system's reveal on Wednesday morning, but now I've got my doubts. That's mainly because Switch doesn't look like a $200 or even a $250 system at the moment--and, in my opinion, that's the price point Switch is going to need if it's going to take over where the 3DS and even the company's DS and GameBoy lines left off.



Maybe the Switch Nintendo unveiled this week is just the first in a planned line of systems?--What I mean here is, what if what Nintendo showed off in Wednesday's three-minute promo video is the "pro" version of Switch? And what if Nintendo later (six months down the road, maybe a year) releases a "standard" or "lite" version of the system that dumps the dock? In other words, what if Nintendo offers up a package that consists of just the tablet and two Joy-Cons? I'm guessing that would allow the company to sell Switch for a lot less than it's going to sell the docked version it introduced us to a couple of days ago. It also would allow the company to attract more of the mainstream (or maybe I should say family-friendly) audience that has supported its other portable systems over the years. And who knows? Nintendo may also produce a "plus" version down the line that beefs up the abilities of the standard Switch and costs $50 or $100 more.



If Switch isn't supposed to replace the 3DS, why is Nintendo replacing the Wii U first?--There's no question the Wii U bombed--right out of the gate, in fact. If Nintendo intends to stay in the home console space, it needs to be replaced. Most people (including me) would argue, though, that replacing the rapidly aging (and dying) 3DS line is far more important at this time. Nintendo and a few third-party game developers and publishers may continue to support the 3DS with software into 2018, but that isn't going to keep the handheld's sales from falling off a cliff at the end of this year or sometime early in 2017. Given that, why would Nintendo decide to replace the Wii U first? This makes me think either Switch will be cheaper than I'm imagining ($250 or less), or Nintendo is prepping a stripped-down Switch--à la the comment above--that the company hopes will be more appealing to the 3DS audience.



Will Nintendo finally offer up a real account system with Switch?--It's going to be really interesting to see what happens if Switch hits store shelves and doesn't include a modern account system that ties digital game purchases to the buyer rather than a specific piece of hardware. In such a situation, I'd actually expect a sizable portion of the Nintendo faithful to pass on the system. A lot of people are tired of being asked to buy the same games many times over--whether we're talking about retro Virtual Console titles or digital versions of current-gen or last-gen releases. I'm one of them, unsurprisingly. Does that mean I'll pass on Switch if it treats eShop purchases like the 3DS, Wii and Wii U did? I'm not sure. What I can tell you right now, though, is that if such a scenario were to come true, there's no way in hell I'd re-buy any game I already bought via my Wii or 3DS. I'd also continue to do what I've done for some time now, which is buy physical or retail games (rather than digital ones) whenever possible.



How is Nintendo going to handle backward compatibility this time around (if at all)?--Of all the console-makers, Nintendo is at the top of the heap when it comes to consistently producing backward-compatible systems. One of the few times the company didn't produce such a system was when it transitioned from the cartridge-based Nintendo 64 to the disc-based GameCube. With Switch, Nintendo's going the other direction--from a disc-based console (Wii U) to a cart-based one. Given that, it'll be hard to fault the company if Switch doesn't magically allow owners of physical Wii or Wii U discs to play those games on their shiny new systems. But what if it doesn't allow them to play previously purchased digital Wii or Wii U games? That could be as problematic as the possible lack of a real account system, if you ask me. Here's hoping Nintendo comes up with a solution that makes everyone happy.

Do you have any thoughts on the questions above? Share them in the comments section below.

My one-word reaction to the PS4 reveal: 'eh'

The first thing that came to mind after watching a stream of Sony's PlayStation 4 presser yesterday afternoon: well, that's two-plus hours that could've been better spent. I kind of hate to say such a thing, but for me, at least, it's the truth.

It has to be said that a good part of that reaction is due to the horrid quality of the stream I attempted to watch, but it's also due to the fact that the event in question consisted of one long-winded, hyperbole-filled speech after another.

Honestly, most of what was said by both Sony's staffers and those working for various third-party studios could have been said--and probably was said--when the Japanese giant unveiled the first PlayStation console all the way back in 1994.

That in and of itself didn't completely turn me off, by the way, as pretty much everyone in the gaming industry is guilty of it these days. No, what turned me off was that it lasted for two-plus hours.



As for the rest of what was covered during this event: it was OK, I guess. A good number of games were shown in some form or another, for instance, and all of them looked quite nice. I can't say they got my heart racing, though. Of course, I've never gotten all that excited about "realistic" graphics in games--which is what pretty much every next-gen game developer and publisher is peddling these days. Nope, I'll take a healthy dose of whimsy and an interesting art style over realism any day.

That said, I was intrigued by Jonathan Blow's The Witness. The trailer didn't give me a very good idea of what to expect from this title's gameplay, but its style made up for it--at least to an extent.

I also liked the looks of Capcom's Deep Down, although I'd be lying if I said this game's "Monster Hunter meets Demon's Souls" aesthetic didn't seem a bit ... derivative.

Oh, and the controller! How could I forget about that? Actually, it wasn't hard at all, as the controller looked pretty much like every other controller Sony's produced since the first DualShock--except, of course, this time it features a tiny touch pad on its face.



Strangely, no one from Sony or any of the third-party studios on hand put the touch pad through its paces, so it's hard to say at this point whether it'll be useful in the end or not. At the moment, though, I'm personally leaning toward the latter.

The PS4 controller was the only piece of hardware unveiled during yesterday afternoon's broadcast, by the way; the actual console was, unsurprisingly, nowhere to be found. I'm guessing Sony's waiting until E3 to reveal it--hopefully along with the system's price and launch date.

Given all of the above, I can't say I'm all that stoked about the PS4 at the moment. Of course, I've yet to be persuaded to buy a PS3, so my relative disinterest probably shouldn't surprise anyone.

Still, I know a lot of you guys and gals own PS3s. What do you think of the PS4 now that a bit of information about it has been released? Are you frothing-at-the-mouth excited about it? Are you already planning to avoid it like the plague? Or maybe your feelings lie somewhere in the middle of those two extremes?

Raise your hand if you're looking forward to the PS4 reveal on Feb. 20

You may be surprised to hear that my hand is raised, too.

Sure, I don't yet own a PS3, but that's not because I have no interest in Sony's current-gen console. The fact is, I only have so much money to spend on games these days, and that pile of dough has to support a lot of systems, including the 3DS, DS, Famicom, PC Engine, PlayStation, PlayStation 2, PSP, Wii and Xbox 360 (among others).

Anyway, I'm interested in the PS3, just as I'm interested in the PS4--or whatever Sony winds up calling its next-gen console.

Speaking of which, Sony's supposedly going to reveal its much-anticipated PS3 successor on Feb. 20 at 3 pm PST/6 pm EST.

Will you be watching the event live (at us.playstation.com/meeting2013, I believe), or at least reading about it afterward?

I will, although I have to admit I'm not at all sure what to expect. Will we see a mock-up of the console itself? Will we get a glimpse of its controller, which is rumored to include a small touchpad (a la the back of the Vita)? Will we be shown snippets of in-the-works games, or simply the video equivalent of bullshots?

I'm guessing at least a few of the above-mentioned things will be covered during Sony's presentation, but I'm not so sure all of them will.

Regardless, I'll be sure to post my impressions shortly after it ends. In the meantime, what are all of you hoping to see and hear as part of this event?

So, who's on board the 3DS XL/LL train?

During its trio of "Nintendo Direct" broadcasts last night (one of which was aimed at Europeans, one of which was aimed at the Japanese and one of which was aimed at North Americans), the "house that Mario built"--aka Kyoto-based Nintendo Co., Ltd.--announced that it will be releasing a new, larger 3DS system alongside the much-anticipated (by me, at least) New Super Mario Bros. 2.

More specifically, that means Japanese and European gamers can expect to see a shiny new--and surprisingly large (more on that in a second)--3DS sitting on the shelves of their favorite electronics or convenience stores starting on July 28, while their North American counterparts can expect to see the same sight starting on Aug. 19.

The "3DS LL," as the system will be known in Japan (it'll be called the "3DS XL" elsewhere), features a 4.88-inch top screen and a 4.18-inch bottom screen--that's a 90-percent increase, for all of you size queens--and improved battery life (the battery reported will last for 3.5 to 6.5 hours while playing 3DS games and 6 to 10 hours while playing DS titles). Also, it will come with a 4 GB SD card and will sport a price tag of $199 in North America and ¥18,000 (approximately $223) in Japan.



As for my thoughts on this particular revelation: Actually, I think it's pretty cool. I definitely like the idea of being able to play current and future 3DS games on a larger pair of screens, for instance, and I also like that Nintendo has decided (finally!) to stop surrounding the system's upper screen with a sea of black.

Along that same, aesthetic line: I quite like the looks of the all-white model (above) that will be sold in Japan. However, I abhor the ugly, two-tone models that will be sold in my neck of the woods. I also hate Nintendo of America's obsession with the colors red and blue. (Please don't tell me it has anything to do with the American flag.)

Will I be buying a 3DS XL (or LL) anytime soon? Probably not. Although I'm not the biggest fan of the current 3DS design, I don't dislike it so much that I want to throw away $199 or more on this upgraded model. Now, should the powers that be at Nintendo of Japan decide to release an all-pink version at some point in the next year or so, I'll seriously reconsider that position (as I'm sick of not being able to buy and play Japanese digital and retail games on my North American 3DS).