News Nintendo details the Switch 2 in a Direct livestream

[Heiro78]

The gameplay did suck. They were rehashes of rehashes. The only original thing was BOTW/TOTK. How many times can you remake Mario Party, Kart, etc.. before people realize it's the same thing. It's akin to MS not getting off thie cushions and redoing Windows codebase but rather pile overtop it.
It's safe. Not what is best.

Gameplay is important but not at the expense of originality

I'd love to learn what you consider as good gameplay in non-nintendo consoles as well as what originality is.

 

[ThereAndBackAgain]

Thank goodness not all games will be game-key style. I want a list to be put out on which ones are that and which are not. So I know when it's not worth it.

Thankfully, it'll show on the box if it's a Game-Key Card.

At the end of the day this digital game licensing needs to end and ownership needs to be the normal. If I don't want to own something/test it out, I'll play it on game pass.

I understand the sentiment, but the reason digital games are licensed, not sold, is because there needs to be restrictions on what you can do with it. As in, you own a license to play the game whenever you wish, but you don't own the right to do whatever you want with the 1s and 0s of the game, like redistributing it or selling copies of it yourself. The same goes for physical games; you own the disc or the card, but you don't own its contents and are not free to do anything you want with its contents. Even physical books carry an implicit "license," since you're not allowed to make and sell copies of them after buying them.

Now, physical games of course grant the extra freedom of being able to sell or give away that specific copy, so in that sense the "ownership" is greater.

 

[atomicWAR]

Thankfully, it'll show on the box if it's a Game-Key Card.

Now when your shopping in store that is great but online I have seen retailers falsely claim physical copies for keys. So I am not sure it is straight forward as all that, though I'd love to be proven wrong in time.

I understand the sentiment, but the reason digital games are licensed, not sold, is because there needs to be restrictions on what you can do with it. As in, you own a license to play the game whenever you wish, but you don't own the right to do whatever you want with the 1s and 0s of the game, like redistributing it or selling copies of it yourself. The same goes for physical games; you own the disc or the card, but you don't own its contents and are not free to do anything you want with its contents. Even physical books carry an implicit "license," since you're not allowed to make and sell copies of them after buying them.

Now, physical games of course grant the extra freedom of being able to sell or give away that specific copy, so in that sense the "ownership" is greater.

I get all that but it doesn't mean it is an impossible task to allow for game "ownership" as some marketplaces have drm free versions now you have similar*physical like* control over. Not to mention with all the talk of adding blockchain to games it could be quite feasible to set up a system that allowed for ownership in the sense that you could sell, gift or will a game to a new owner across multiple market places with a record of each sale tied directly to the title. I am not looking for a free lunch here, just the one I am paying for. I do not condone piracy or any misuse of games/game files.

Point being I see no reason Steam or other marketplaces can't come up with a solution here. Heck I am not even against giving dev's a cut of a game resales which could also be implemented with block chain/steam accounts/etc. Let's be real the big reason devs hated the resale market was they got no cut of the sales. They have been very vocal about this. If you had a used marketplace on say Steam or MS stores...It could be set to give devs X percent of the sale price. There is no real reason besides greed preventing devs/marketplaces from doing this already.

 

[ThereAndBackAgain]

Now when your shopping in store that is great but online I have seen retailers falsely claim physical copies for keys. So I am not sure it is straight forward as all that, though I'd love to be proven wrong in time.

In theory, any online listings should have the same box art visible, and would also likely mention the key card nature in the item description. Of course, that can't account for the actions of third-party or individual sellers, but in those cases you can probably look up beforehand whether it's a key card or not. I don't think there's going to be any games with both a regular game card and a game-key card edition. But this all remains to be seen.

I get all that but it doesn't mean it is an impossible task to allow for game "ownership" as some marketplaces have drm free versions now you have similar*physical like* control over. Not to mention with all the talk of adding blockchain to games it could be quite feasible to set up a system that allowed for ownership in the sense that you could sell, gift or will a game to a new owner across multiple market places with a record of each sale tied directly to the title. I am not looking for a free lunch here, just the one I am paying for. I do not condone piracy or any misuse of games/game files.

Point being I see no reason Steam or other marketplaces can't come up with a solution here. Heck I am not even against giving dev's a cut of a game resales which could also be implemented with block chain/steam accounts/etc. Let's be real the big reason devs hated the resale market was they got no cut of the sales. They have been very vocal about this. If you had a used marketplace on say Steam or MS stores...It could be set to give devs X percent of the sale price. There is no real reason besides greed preventing devs/marketplaces from doing this already.

I'm totally with you on that. If Steam or someone else found a way to make reselling, trading, and giving away of digital copies work, that would be super awesome.

 

[Heiro78]

Thankfully, it'll show on the box if it's a Game-Key Card.


I understand the sentiment, but the reason digital games are licensed, not sold, is because there needs to be restrictions on what you can do with it. As in, you own a license to play the game whenever you wish, but you don't own the right to do whatever you want with the 1s and 0s of the game, like redistributing it or selling copies of it yourself. The same goes for physical games; you own the disc or the card, but you don't own its contents and are not free to do anything you want with its contents. Even physical books carry an implicit "license," since you're not allowed to make and sell copies of them after buying them.

Now, physical games of course grant the extra freedom of being able to sell or give away that specific copy, so in that sense the "ownership" is greater.

Thank you for this. Online retailers should show this in their box art too.

 

[SyCoREAPER]

I know I said I won't be back but am not to back comment on any any particular post.
Just to leave you all with this.
https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2...art-8-deluxe-side-by-side-graphics-comparison

Very best case this is akin to raytracing. "Worst" case this could be achieved with Reshade. Unimpressive IMO. Especially what they justify the cost they want to charge for it.
These are not next-gen even by Nintendo standards. Keep your Switch, better yet, find a gen-1, mod it, overclock it and enjoy. You have a Switch 1.5

 

[ThereAndBackAgain]

I know I said I won't be back but am not to back comment on any any particular post.
Just to leave you all with this.
https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2...art-8-deluxe-side-by-side-graphics-comparison

Very best case this is akin to raytracing. "Worst" case this could be achieved with Reshade. Unimpressive IMO. Especially what they justify the cost they want to charge for it.
These are not next-gen even by Nintendo standards. Keep your Switch, better yet, find a gen-1, mod it, overclock it and enjoy. You have a Switch 1.5

Mario Kart 8 is already a spectacularly good-looking game even now, holding up well in comparison to modern graphics. It would be hard for them to make something that blows it away in comparison. It's also a lot more difficult to have a good-looking open world than it is to have good-looking confined race tracks; there's more demand both on the hardware and on the designers.

I agree the Switch 2 is overpriced, and I'm not exactly a fan of a lot of modern Nintendo's practices. But graphics aren't everything, and moreover the Switch 2 does seem to me to be an adequate improvement in capability over its predecessor.

I'm an image quality enthusiast, so to me, Nintendo games (even at 1080p, but especially at 4K), with their great art design and crystal clear, un-anti-aliased image quality look a lot better than "next-gen" AAA games that are a blurry, smeary, artifact-filled mess thanks to mandatory TAA and AI upscaling. I recognize that that's not a popular opinion, though.