You can buy at least 1 dumper for switch carts and not need an actual Switch. The same device can get your certs, but yes for that you do need to have a switch.
Exclusives are cancer. Computers should be able to compute everything. Nintendo’s/console strategy is an absolute travesty for human progress, like almost all capitalist strategy.
I mean, yeah, but at the same time, a Nintendo game being a Nintendo exclusive product doesn’t seem that weird to me. If it was an external studio, sure. But it’s the same company. I agree that it’s annoying, but I don’t think it’s an unreasonable tactic if you control the vertical and you actually DO build good hardware and software that play well together, and you want to leverage the multiplicative effect there.
Sure, I’m not unreasonable. I hate against exclusives, because I’m sure it’d be better without them, but Nintendo is not entirely terrible. It’s never completely black & white.
I hate Nintendo exclusives because i hate Nintendos hardware. I do love their software, so i emulate it.
I get why they need exclusives, if they want to keep making consoles instead of turning into SEGA they need to give peeps a reason to buy their console, which since the wii (?) has had a deliberate focus on less powerful hardware. If they didn’t have those N exclusives those games would look better on their competitor’s systems.
Like i said, i love their games, can’t stress that enough. I hate, hate, HATE their hardware tho. I’ve refused to buy Nintendo stuff since i felt burned by n64s crap analog sticks (i hold a mean grudge haha) and the only way Nintendo would get my hard fought-stretched-to-hell $ is if they sold pc copies of their games.
I wish they’d consider doing that (after a few years of exclusivity even, i’m a patientgamer) but i don’t think they ever will :(
I guess my point is that I think of the Nintendo dynamic more charitably than I think of independent large game studios making platform exclusive titles just because some business deal was struck, simply because the latter creates the impression of vertical integration when there is in fact none.
Nintendo’s hardware used to have features that competitors lacked. The DS’s dual screens, the 3DS’s 3D top screen, the Wiimote, the Wii U’s controller with a second screen. Even the Virtual Boy did something different, though it didn’t do it well. Nintendo used to innovate on hardware while everyone else was just going for bigger numbers. Exclusives made sense as they made use of those features that you just couldn’t get elsewhere.
The Switch and Switch 2 have this portable/dock gimmick but that doesn’t really affect gameplay in a way that makes the software incompatible with a PC or a Playstation 4/5. And there’s the Steam Deck and a load of other portable gaming PCs out now, so even if it did there’d be no justification for a Switch exclusive other than greed and an unwillingness to prioritize the consumer.
How much e-waste is generated due to equipment that could be redundant if not for exclusives. Not just the consoles either, but all the accessories.
My understanding is that the console hardware itself isn’t even that profitable, in the same way that lower-end printers are just platforms to sell ink.
What is the point of buying a gaming console instead of a PC if not for the exclusives? Also what about all those games funded by exclusive contracts that would not have existed?
You for some reason assume that games would not have existed if not for being exclusive. But you do not actually know that. Yes, exclusive games do exist. But also quite obviously non-exclusive games exist. It is obviously possible to get games funded without being exclusive.
It is impossible to predict the future, or similarly, predict alternative versions of the past. I do not claim to know for sure that the same amount of games would exist without exclusivity. But since non-exclusive games are possible, and actually in the majority, it seems very likely to me that when a consumer demand is there, supply for it would be created.
In the end, this is an argument about cooperation vs competition. The argument for exclusives is basically an argument for competition. The argument against exclusives is one for cooperation. My base thinking is, why create many different consoles, that all just contain a CPU, some graphical processing unit, some way to load games on it, when you can just save the work of everyone developing their own thing and duplicating work, when everyone could just work together to create the same thing, just with more minds working together and without duplicating work.
Yes but can you really know that Bayonetta would not have been made without exclusives? Maybe if exclusives didn’t exist Bayonetta would’ve just secured funding some other way. You can’t know that now anymore, because that’s not what happened, but it’s not entirely unreasonable to believe that Bayonetta could have turned to other funding sources, if the situation was different at the time.
I mean ya. Bayonetta doesn’t sell well but as an exclusive it brings variety to the system. I think the creators themselves said something like 2 and 3 wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t funded by Nintendo.
That’s probably why I haven’t bought a Nintendo console since the original Wii. I keep looking for a reason to do so but coming up short.
I still love the NES and SNES, as well as some N64 and GC games. I definitely would like to try some of Nintendo’s newer games, just not at the prices they’re asking for! I am absolutely spoiled for choice on games to play.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc…
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.
Comments.
No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc…)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Why didn’t you get a Steam deck if you wanted one? I don’t see how it’s related to Switch 2. Those play different games.
Not true. The deck can emulate Switch games. 😌
IIRC you have to buy a Switch to legally emulate Switch games anyway?
Are you under the impression that we need to stick to legal discussion here?
Ha!
Nah just the games and a cartridge dumper
And the cartridge dumper would be a hacked Switch. Besides that you also need to get several system files from said Switch and import to the emulator.
You can buy at least 1 dumper for switch carts and not need an actual Switch. The same device can get your certs, but yes for that you do need to have a switch.
Exclusives are cancer. Computers should be able to compute everything. Nintendo’s/console strategy is an absolute travesty for human progress, like almost all capitalist strategy.
I mean, yeah, but at the same time, a Nintendo game being a Nintendo exclusive product doesn’t seem that weird to me. If it was an external studio, sure. But it’s the same company. I agree that it’s annoying, but I don’t think it’s an unreasonable tactic if you control the vertical and you actually DO build good hardware and software that play well together, and you want to leverage the multiplicative effect there.
Sure, I’m not unreasonable. I hate against exclusives, because I’m sure it’d be better without them, but Nintendo is not entirely terrible. It’s never completely black & white.
I hate Nintendo exclusives because i hate Nintendos hardware. I do love their software, so i emulate it.
I get why they need exclusives, if they want to keep making consoles instead of turning into SEGA they need to give peeps a reason to buy their console, which since the wii (?) has had a deliberate focus on less powerful hardware. If they didn’t have those N exclusives those games would look better on their competitor’s systems.
Like i said, i love their games, can’t stress that enough. I hate, hate, HATE their hardware tho. I’ve refused to buy Nintendo stuff since i felt burned by n64s crap analog sticks (i hold a mean grudge haha) and the only way Nintendo would get my hard fought-stretched-to-hell $ is if they sold pc copies of their games.
I wish they’d consider doing that (after a few years of exclusivity even, i’m a patientgamer) but i don’t think they ever will :(
I guess my point is that I think of the Nintendo dynamic more charitably than I think of independent large game studios making platform exclusive titles just because some business deal was struck, simply because the latter creates the impression of vertical integration when there is in fact none.
Nintendo’s hardware used to have features that competitors lacked. The DS’s dual screens, the 3DS’s 3D top screen, the Wiimote, the Wii U’s controller with a second screen. Even the Virtual Boy did something different, though it didn’t do it well. Nintendo used to innovate on hardware while everyone else was just going for bigger numbers. Exclusives made sense as they made use of those features that you just couldn’t get elsewhere.
The Switch and Switch 2 have this portable/dock gimmick but that doesn’t really affect gameplay in a way that makes the software incompatible with a PC or a Playstation 4/5. And there’s the Steam Deck and a load of other portable gaming PCs out now, so even if it did there’d be no justification for a Switch exclusive other than greed and an unwillingness to prioritize the consumer.
How much e-waste is generated due to equipment that could be redundant if not for exclusives. Not just the consoles either, but all the accessories.
My understanding is that the console hardware itself isn’t even that profitable, in the same way that lower-end printers are just platforms to sell ink.
Yep. But aren’t we glad we have competition! Aren’t we glad we duplicate research/work all the time! We’d never think of improvements without this.
What is the point of buying a gaming console instead of a PC if not for the exclusives? Also what about all those games funded by exclusive contracts that would not have existed?
I buy consoles because i don’t want to setup, configure, fix, ant upgrade computers.
You for some reason assume that games would not have existed if not for being exclusive. But you do not actually know that. Yes, exclusive games do exist. But also quite obviously non-exclusive games exist. It is obviously possible to get games funded without being exclusive.
It is impossible to predict the future, or similarly, predict alternative versions of the past. I do not claim to know for sure that the same amount of games would exist without exclusivity. But since non-exclusive games are possible, and actually in the majority, it seems very likely to me that when a consumer demand is there, supply for it would be created.
In the end, this is an argument about cooperation vs competition. The argument for exclusives is basically an argument for competition. The argument against exclusives is one for cooperation. My base thinking is, why create many different consoles, that all just contain a CPU, some graphical processing unit, some way to load games on it, when you can just save the work of everyone developing their own thing and duplicating work, when everyone could just work together to create the same thing, just with more minds working together and without duplicating work.
Not all games? I mean the exclusive games like Bayonetta 3.
Yes but can you really know that Bayonetta would not have been made without exclusives? Maybe if exclusives didn’t exist Bayonetta would’ve just secured funding some other way. You can’t know that now anymore, because that’s not what happened, but it’s not entirely unreasonable to believe that Bayonetta could have turned to other funding sources, if the situation was different at the time.
I mean ya. Bayonetta doesn’t sell well but as an exclusive it brings variety to the system. I think the creators themselves said something like 2 and 3 wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t funded by Nintendo.
Reading articles is over rated. Just make a comment solely based on the title. Good move.
How many exclusives is the Switch 2 going to have besides the usual Nintendo first party stuff?
“Aside from all the exclusives, how many exclusives will it have?”
I can remember when the SNES had countless 3rd party exclusives. Now we can’t expect any?
The value prop of the Switch 2 is not compelling to me.
That was the time when SNES was practically the only player jn town and you couldn’t easily port a game from one plataform for the other.
No? The SNES was in fierce competition with the Sega Genesis / Mega Drive. They didn’t call it the console wars for nothing.
We can expect exclusives. I’m not sure why you’re acting like all the exclusives that exist don’t count.
Because your previous comment conflated exclusives with first party exclusives.
I’m just questioning why you’re trying to write those off.
Because I don’t think it’s worth it to pay $650 Canadian for a console based only on a few Mario/Zelda/Metroid games?
There are more than few…
Not sure why are you considering a Nintendo console if you’re not interested in the Nintendo stuff
Because everything else can be played on a Steam deck!
I get your point, but people buy Nintendo consoles to play Nintendo games.
That’s probably why I haven’t bought a Nintendo console since the original Wii. I keep looking for a reason to do so but coming up short.
I still love the NES and SNES, as well as some N64 and GC games. I definitely would like to try some of Nintendo’s newer games, just not at the prices they’re asking for! I am absolutely spoiled for choice on games to play.