Support NeoGAF

[moltonasty]

That confirmed? Oh dear...

I mean the PS4 had 8 GB GDDR5 RAM that everyone lost their shit over. In general PS4 specs were considered "high end" for a console. While we don't know much about Switch specs it has the impression already of being overpriced/underpowered...so a comparison with PS4 $300 isn't really equal

 

[SporeCrawler]

Even that is hampered by controller prices. It's an easy "switch" if you pay $70 for the pro controller (or $80 for another pair of joycons) and leave your joycons on the tablet.

Otherwise it's a bit clunky to have to detach them from the grip and attach them to the tablet to "switch" and then do the reverse to go back to gaming on the screen. Especially if just wanting to keep playing while taking a crap and then go back to the screen.

i dont see the clunkyness.

 

[onemanasylum]

- The PS4 was cheaper than its competitors. Switch is more expensive.
- The PS4 was more powerful than it's competitor, Switch is the weakest of the three.
- The PS4 had the 2 free PS4 games for online, Switch has 1 free NES/SNES game thats only playable for free for a month.
- The PS4 had a much stronger line up of games, including massive third party franchies.

Come on, don't pretend there wasn't any difference between the two.

People comparing this Ps4's price in 2013 are totally out of touch, ps4's hardware at time time was great for the price, Sony has a good, robust online network, full third party support, and on and on.

 

[Burny]

If nothing else, the Switch raises the bar for handheld gaming considerably, where production values am game features are concerned. Even if only Nintendo games should appear on it.

Or would anybody in the market for a Nintendo handheld want a less featured Mario Kart/Smash Brothers/Splatoon/Zelda on an additional slightly smaller hardware with further graphic downgrades, when they can just play the Switch versions on the go? If ever I'll buy a Switch, at least I would not go back to something like a 3DS, when the "real thing" is just as portable.


If aynthing, unifying the Nintendo ecosystem into the Switch is the only salvation I see for it currently. 300$ is a hard pill to swallow, even for Nintendo fans, but if it allows to play the full output of all Nintendo studios, that's actually cheaper than a separate handheld and home console.

 

[llehuty]

Well they hardly stepped up their online with it requiring a smartphone and app for chat, game invites etc.

We don't even know what online functionalities will the console have or the price of the online service. I feel like Sony would be given the benefit of the doubt (despite their awful online services), but since is Nintendo, it has to be bad.

People comparing this Ps4's price in 2013 are totally out of touch, ps4's hardware at time time was great for the price, Sony has a good, robust online network, full third party support, and on and on.

lol

 

[KingSnake]

I honestly am stunned that GAF celebrated the PS4 coming in at the same price and also introducing paid for online, yet the Switch is met with shock and disgust?

For me, the lacklustre launch line up and the fact they are still being vague about the devices' power and how it actually works with the dock etc has been more off putting than the price. I'm really sold on the concept I just need to try it myself and hear what power the thing has.

Stunned you are stunned about this. Nintendo can't really win.

*Step up your online*/*I don't want to pay for online*
*It needs to be cheaper*/*It's not powerful enough*
*They are doing the same again*/*Nobody asked for innovative gameplay*

etc etc, kind of predictable.

I don't have a PS4 and I wasn't enthusiast about the PS4 reveal or launch.

Under these circumstances, may I say that the event really presented Switch in a very poor light? Expensive with expensive accessories, paying for online without being clear for what exactly only to be clarified later that you pay so you use your own phone in the end? With a very poor launch line-up and post launch line-up. May I say that? How does this fit into your whataboutism?

P.S. I don't have an Xbone either. Just a Wii U and a PC.

 

[Mokujin]

On point.
Actually WiiU, in its messy proposition, was centered around an idea. The Switch has just no identity as a product.

Nah, I don't agree, WiiU concept 2-screen gaming TV|Tablet proposition was totally botched from the start, Switch gaming on TV or on the go on the other hand is great but Nintendo has failed to hit some crucial key points to fulfill it's potential.-

* Pricing: Oh man, did they screw big time on such a key area, 250$ Main unit, 25$ Joycons, 50$ Dock 50$ Pro controller would had gone a long way towards satisfying most people.

I would even say that if they think the dock is worth 90$, why not sell stand alone unit for 210$? that would have made people go crazy! (I know this idea kind of defeats the purpouse of the system, but doesnt sound that bad if your full sku and perpherals are so expensive)

* First party software: Merging portable and home software studios was great news, but today presentation didn't show like they have improved their output that much yet.

* Why didn't they show Pokemon, Monhun or Yokai? Maybe they wanted to focus on messaging Home games on the go, but showing the big portable guns on TV would have gone a long way to raise the percieved value of the product.

* Retro and Smash were also missing, don't think it woud have been that bad to show a simple teaser.

* Third party wise it was always going to be a lost cause, they won't do much till Switch sales go well.

There was quite some room to do a superb presentation, but it seems like Nintendo wanted to tell investors that they want to make a killing selling high profit skus, overpriced peripherals and paid online instead of offering a honest attractive proposition to gamers.

Nintendo can sort a lot of those things down the line this year, but it seems like a missed oportunity when we are so close to launch.

 

[Kor of Memory]

Is there an album of screenshots or whatever of that giant game highlight real where they showed a bunch of 2 second clips of games crammed into 30 seconds or something?

I swear I saw an F-zero in there.

 

[OnionPowder]

Anybody have video of that Suda51 translator?

 

[Xater]

Is there an album of screenshots or whatever of that giant game highlight real where they showed a bunch of 2 second clips of games crammed into 30 seconds or something?

I swear I saw an F-zero in there.

There was no F-Zero, just Fast Recing Neo Remix.

 

[Burny]

Here's the issue with what you're saying: Most of what we saw were WiiU ports. Mario Kart 8, Splatoon, and Zelda are all WiiU ports. Intergenerational ports don't usually look all that different from each other. The only major game we say that was really a Switch game was Mario Odyssey. Of course, Mario's cartoonish art style has been plateauing since the Wii, so it's really hard to say much about it.

Even though it's a Wii U port, Zelda apparently doesn't run even in Full HD on the Switch. The direct feed screens we saw definitely weren't at least and there's the 900p comment.

That should indicate what we can expect in terms of hardware capabilities: A tablet that does not go too far beyond the Wii U's capabilities.

 

[ElfArmy177]

God I hate to love Nintendo. You're not gonna get me this time! Take your shitty hardware and shove it up your splatoon. I'll be playing Zelda on my Wii u, then selling that POS and playing on cemu, who along with dolphin apparently cares more about Nintendo games and gamers than Nintendo does.

I was so excited... Man.. fuck you nintendo

 

[PhazonBlazer]

Wait did Amazon preorders ever go up?

 

[Wallach]

Wait did Amazon preorders ever go up?

Yeah. I think they are already gone though.

 

[Spy]

Asking again, does the Joy-Con Grip that comes with the console charge your Joy-Con's or is it only the $30 optional Grip that does?

 

[Wallach]

Asking again, does the Joy-Con Grip that comes with the console charge your Joy-Con's or is it only the $30 optional Grip that does?

Based on the naming, I don't think the included grip is the one that charges.

 

[Xater]

Asking again, does the Joy-Con Grip that comes with the console charge your Joy-Con's or is it only the $30 optional Grip that does?

I think it's only the optional one you can buy. The one that comes with the system looks like it's just a shell.

 

[Volotaire]

I think it's only the optional one you can buy. The one that comes with the system looks like it's just a shell.

Wait, really?

 

[hohoXD123]

I honestly am stunned that GAF celebrated the PS4 coming in at the same price and also introducing paid for online, yet the Switch is met with shock and disgust?

For me, the lacklustre launch line up and the fact they are still being vague about the devices' power and how it actually works with the dock etc has been more off putting than the price. I'm really sold on the concept I just need to try it myself and hear what power the thing has.

GAF celebrated paid for online on the PS4? When?

 

[TLZ]

I honestly am stunned that GAF celebrated the PS4 coming in at the same price and also introducing paid for online, yet the Switch is met with shock and disgust?

People making up stuff to justify this is even more stunning.

 

[azyless]

Wait, really?

Yes, really : (from another thread)

From the Japanese site: https://www.nintendo.co.jp/hardware/...ies/index.html
"You can use "Joy-Con (L)" and "Joy-Con (R)" as a grip type controller.
Unlike the "Joy - Con grip" that comes with the main unit set, you can also charge "Joy - Con" while using the included USB charging cable, so you do not have to worry about running out of the battery."

If you go on the store page you'll notice in What's Included that it just says Joy Con Grip instead of Joy Con Charging Grip.

 

[Relaxed Muscle]

I honestly am stunned that GAF celebrated the PS4 coming in at the same price and also introducing paid for online, yet the Switch is met with shock and disgust?

Many lamented the pay for online on PS4, but that announcement, was smartly hidden between the 2nd hand video, when xbone was promising eliminating the physical sharing.

An entirely different context.

 

[orioto]

Nah, I don't agree, WiiU concept 2-screen gaming TV|Tablet proposition was totally botched from the start, Switch gaming on TV or on the go on the other hand is great but Nintendo has failed to hit some crucial key points to fulfill it's potential.-

* Pricing: Oh man, did they screw big time on such a key area, 250$ Main unit, 25$ Joycons, 50$ Dock 50$ Pro controller would had gone a long way towards satisfying most people.

I would even say that if they think the dock is worth 90$, why not sell stand alone unit for 210$? that would have made people go crazy! (I know this idea kind of defeats the purpouse of the system, but doesnt sound that bad if your full sku and perpherals are so expensive)

* First party software: Merging portable and home software studios was great news, but today presentation didn't show like they have improved their output that much yet.

* Why didn't they show Pokemon, Monhun or Yokai? Maybe they wanted to focus on messaging Home games on the go, but showing the big portable guns on TV would have gone a long way to raise the percieved value of the product.

* Retro and Smash were also missing, don't think it woud have been that bad to show a simple teaser.

* Third party wise it was always going to be a lost cause, they won't do much till Switch sales go well.

There was quite some room to do a superb presentation, but it seems like Nintendo wanted to tell investors that they want to make a killing selling high profit skus, overpriced peripherals and paid online instead of offering a honest attractive proposition to gamers.

Nintendo can sort a lot of those things down the line this year, but it seems like a missed oportunity when we are so close to launch.

What people seem to not see.
WiiU concept had some kind of influence on the type of game you could do. They had games to showcase that. But the concept was not enthusiastic or new enough.

Now the Switch. That Gaming at home/on the go is vapor. Firstly, it doesn't change anything to the games in themselves. It's not related to them, they won't benefit from it. They didn't show anything that would do that. Secondly, we have no clue how relevant is it to people actually. You could really well think people won't care. You have people liking to play at home and never playing on the go. You have people playing only on the go. I don't know how many people needs to have both, honestly. I think people being happy about the portability (the semi portability) are people liking and playing on portable to begin with. But in that direction, how relevant is it that they can also play on a tv. They'll probably play in portable mode at home to. That whole, "amazing" argument of being able to switch. I'm actually not sure there is an existing practical audience for it.

And again, it's messy as fuck.
Just take ARMS. Which seems fun to me. But...
It's as the same time a showcase of one big Switch feature, ANNND contradicting its main concept. As it's NOT a portable game.
This is the kind of amazing contradiction that you had on WiiU already.
You got that game that has to ignore the console's main philosophy to showcase one of its biggest feature. Do you see the problem here ?

 

[Volotaire]

Yes, really : (from another thread)

If you go on the store page you'll notice in What's Included that it just says Joy Con Grip instead of Joy Con Charging Grip.

Ah that's a real shame. Thanks for the info.

 

[PSFan]

Trust me, I don't like the city part either. But:

- not the Mushroom Kingdom anymore, that's new
- it's just one of many worlds, it's called Odyssey after all
- new mechanics

I'm repeating myself here but I really believe this is a setup for Mario's own TV show that could be announced this year. It's just perfect for that and Nintendo has been very confident in showing Mario with real humans, like in the Super Mario Run trailer.

Trust me, if this was Mario Galaxy 3 I'd be crying tears of joy. But I'm still curious about this.

Super Mario Sunshine says Hi!!!

 

[Deleted member 752119]

i dont see the clunkyness.

Maybe clunky isn't the best word. It's just a hassle vs. having joycons to leave on the tablet at all time so you can just grab and go.

What is shitty is the included grip not being a charging one. So if you only have what comes in the sku, it seems you're shit out of luck for gaming on the tv when the a joy con battery dies since the grip can't charge them.

Hell, we don't even know if the tablet can charge them in portable mode, so if its dead you may not even be able to attach and remove from dock and play in portable mode.

So it seems like at a mimimum the $30 charging grip is needed if you're mostly going to be gaming on the tv, and the $70 pro controller is more ideal.

Just a lot to ask for any but diehard Nintendo fans IMO. I'm really struggling with my love of their games and dislike of most everything about this hardware and pricing scheme.

 

[mrklaw]

They need more than that, they need an other form factor. I still think it's planned. The device is just SOOO no targeted at people who play only on 3ds. When you think about it, it's soo not for them.

Switch is designed for those who play at home in the couch, without a tv, maybe.
But the portable users, who play in the subway, in the bus.. The kids who plays in the playground ? This is not designed for them at all.

Wich makes the Switch even more dead. Cause it's only chance at selling more than 10 millions is to win a part of the 3ds crowd. But Nintendo doesn't want to.

An Apple TV style box I could imagine, but it wouldn't reduce cost much - still need the joycons.

And a smaller handheld only version probably isn't possible without a chip shrink due to power consumption. Also if they made a cheaper handheld only with no removable joycons, then no developers will bother supporting them (probably won't anyway..)

 

[I Wanna Be The Guy]

One of the biggest disappointments and honestly surprises when it comes to the software, is the complete absence of indies and smaller download only titles. Seriously, what the fuck? Look, I didn't expect massive major western third party support. But I did expect plenty of nice smaller download only titles to release with the system to complement Zelda and Nintendo's own titles.

Look at the Vita launch. You had the big guns in Uncharted and Wipeout and the like. But you also had games like Super Stardust Delta, Motorstorm RC, Mutant Blobs Attack and others to pick up as well. Switch has nothing like this. It's ridiculous.

 

[Derphoof]

How about controllers that don't cost 70-80 fucking dollars?

Or do you seriously think that's justified?

Is $50 for a PS4 controller justifiable? Considering the form-factor and what all the controllers do, it's not completely outrageous.

 

[mrklaw]

Yes, really : (from another thread)

If you go on the store page you'll notice in What's Included that it just says Joy Con Grip instead of Joy Con Charging Grip.

But here is only one usb charging cable provided? Won't that be occupied constantly by the dock? People will definitely need two USB chargers - one for the dock and one for the switch when it runs out of battery while handheld

 

[Kssio_Aug]

I honestly am stunned that GAF celebrated the PS4 coming in at the same price and also introducing paid for online, yet the Switch is met with shock and disgust?

For me, the lacklustre launch line up and the fact they are still being vague about the devices' power and how it actually works with the dock etc has been more off putting than the price. I'm really sold on the concept I just need to try it myself and hear what power the thing has.

I didn't like PS4 charging for subscriptions either. But Sony's PS4 presentation was just much better overall, so they got people's attention positively anyway.

PS4 was announced as a powerful device (and besides being nowhere as powerful as PC it actually is the most powerful console from the big 3), with 500gb internal memory, and sold itself against Microsoft ludicrous plans. Also people were aware of PS Plus (when it wasn't obligatory) and trusted Sony's capabilities to handle the service.

Nintendo has not a good history with their online service. It's just plain bad and lacks most basic stuff. The fact that they recquire you to download an app in your smartphone just to voice chat is already an idication they're gonna keep doing bad decisions in that regard.

Also, PS4 and XB1 today can be found cheaper. Nintendo should have came with a cheaper device to gather more interest, specially cause it's too damn weak as a table console. It also doesn't shine as much as it should as a hendheld, cause the battery life seems to be lauhable bad.

To be very honest, I do think that PS4 announcement was overhyped back then. But even though, they had much more reasons to receive positive attention than Nintendo has with Switch right now. There's also that thing that Sony / MS procuts drops price much easily than Nintendo products, so we can expect them to stick with the overpriced stuff for quite a while.

 

[onemanasylum]

We don't even know what online functionalities will the console have or the price of the online service. I feel like Sony would be given the benefit of the doubt (despite their awful online services), but since is Nintendo, it has to be bad.


lol

Care to elaborate instead of a shit post? PSN is quite good overall these days, especially compared to Nintendo. Come on, explain how PSn is "Awful:

 

[Doc Holliday]

I honestly am stunned that GAF celebrated the PS4 coming in at the same price and also introducing paid for online, yet the Switch is met with shock and disgust?

For me, the lacklustre launch line up and the fact they are still being vague about the devices' power and how it actually works with the dock etc has been more off putting than the price. I'm really sold on the concept I just need to try it myself and hear what power the thing has.

The PS4, was 100 dollars cheaper than the xbox 1 yet more powerful, and had tons of 3rd party support.

The switch is weaker than the ps4 that comes with a 500gb HD at the same price and too big to be a real portable. Not to mention that the lineup is weak as fuck.

Why are you stunned.

 

[wapplew]

If nothing else, the Switch raises the bar for handheld gaming considerably, where production values am game features are concerned. Even if only Nintendo games should appear on it.

They raise a bar to a contest that no one else going to enter ever again, not sure even Nintendo going to try after Switch.

 

[Mokujin]

What people seem to not see.
WiiU concept had some kind of influence on the type of game you could do. They had games to showcase that. But the concept was not enthusiastic or new enough.

Now the Switch. That Gaming at home/on the go is vapor. Firstly, it doesn't change anything to the games in themselves. It's not related to them, they won't benefit from it. They didn't show anything that would do that. Secondly, we have no clue how relevant is it to people actually. You could really well think people won't care. You have people liking to play at home and never playing on the go. You have people playing only on the go. I don't know how many people needs to have both, honestly. I think people being happy about the portability (the semi portability) are people liking and playing on portable to begin with. But in that direction, how relevant is it that they can also play on a tv. They'll probably play in portable mode at home to. That whole, "amazing" argument of being able to switch. I'm actually not sure there is an existing practical audience for it.

And again, it's messy as fuck.
Just take ARMS. Which seems fun to me. But...
It's as the same time a showcase of one big Switch feature, ANNND contradicting its main concept. As it's NOT a portable game.
This is the kind of amazing contradiction that you had on WiiU already.
You got that game that has to ignore the console's main philosophy to showcase one of its biggest feature. Do you see the problem here ?

Time and sales will tell if the concept has real weight behind, is there an audience for it? I can't tell you for sure but at least for me it's something I have always wanted, so from my perspective there's no doubt about it.

I replied in the Arms thread that if the game only has motion controls that would be meh for me, but on the other hand if it also has standard controls that might make it great, the game has very nice character designs and seems like good fun, but if it's only motion controls I agree with you it's a bad proposition for a Switch game.

And it's not like I hate motion controls but I prefer standard controls (and the reason why I would be pumped for Prime or Skyward Sword remasters on Switch since they would have to support them)

PD.- About the semi portability I guess you are refering to the 3 hours, but if Switch supports fast charging it doesn't seem like a big deal to me, I already have a nice portable battery charger for my phone.

 

[family_guy]

Here's the issue with what you're saying: Most of what we saw were WiiU ports. Mario Kart 8, Splatoon, and Zelda are all WiiU ports. Intergenerational ports don't usually look all that different from each other. The only major game we say that was really a Switch game was Mario Odyssey. Of course, Mario's cartoonish art style has been plateauing since the Wii, so it's really hard to say much about it.

Might as well wait until the fall to launch. I mean it's clearly not ready for prime time. I also wonder if waiting until November would have allowed them to get the more efficient Pascal architecture to help with battery life. I'm still baffled at why they seem so unprepared with their software lineup. What have they been doing the past few years? It feels like they haven't learned from their mistakes.

 

[orioto]

Time and sales will tell if the concept has real weight behind, is there an audience for it? I can't tell you for sure but at least for me it's something I have always wanted, so from my perspective there's no doubt about it.

I replied in the Arms thread that if the game only has motion controls that would be meh for me, but on the other hand if it also has standard controls that might make it great, the game has very nice character designs and seems like good fun, but if it's only motion controls I agree with you it's a bad proposition for a Switch game.

And it's not like I hate motion controls but I prefer standard controls (and the reason why I would be pumped for Prime remasters or Skyward Sword on Switch since they would have to support them)

That's one of the aspect that has been terrible about Nintendo designs lately. having to design your game for such different control methods means automatically that those controls won't use them smartly. I mean ARMS is basically designed around motion control.. So if they tell me i can play without them, what's the point then..

Nintendo always want to do everything and its contrary at the same time... When will they learn..
That whole idea of having "every control method in the same console" illustrates that so well.

 

[Mattenth]

If nothing else, the Switch raises the bar for handheld gaming considerably, where production values am game features are concerned. Even if only Nintendo games should appear on it.

Handheld gaming currently has...
- A robust and vibrant gaming store with both cheap and fully priced games.
- Voice chat.
- Motion controls.
- Easy-to-use development environments.
- Internet anywhere.
- 1080p - 4k video.

It's called a smartphone.

What exactly is the Switch bringing to the market? Seems like just a (very expensive) content channel.

 

[Burny]

...

Where production values are concerned.

 

[talkingood]

Does anyone know how long it takes to charge the Switch itself?

 

[Doc Holliday]

Hopefully Japanese devs and audience take a liking to the Switch. I wouldn't mind if the Switch became a japanese RPG+arcade +Indie game box to complement my ps4/PC

My ideal system from Nintendo

199.99 decent hardware, even the current switch specs would have been enough.
Tons of HD space
Monthly subscription fee, with entire Nintendo library online ala Netflix.

Regular Controllers

Tell me that wouldn't sell like pancakes, after the NES classic,

 

[gofreak]

I honestly am stunned that GAF celebrated the PS4 coming in at the same price and also introducing paid for online, yet the Switch is met with shock and disgust?

It's very simple. Playstation - and PS4 - has a lot of credibility as a primary gaming platform. I'm guessing people are willing to pay more for their primary. PS4 felt like good value at the time compared to similar boxes and still does. It was an investment people felt happy to make because of trust in the brand to deliver 'all the games' for the extent of the generation.

Nintendo simply doesn't have that credibility to most as a primary platform, but they're behaving like they do. If Nintendo has this mentality, it's where they're going wrong. Switch should have either been an attempt to be a more central, 'primary' gaming platform for more people (e.g. something with broad multiplat access etc), or should have adjusted the value proposition accordingly.

 

[Resident_UA]

I honestly am stunned that GAF celebrated the PS4 coming in at the same price and also introducing paid for online, yet the Switch is met with shock and disgust?

Nothing happens in a vacuum. Sony had to fight for quite some time to be able to introduce paid online and even then it was met with skepticism. Nintendo has nothing to show for it. Plus Sony has solid third party support, so buying PS4 was never a risk. You would always get a decent version of GTA and Call of Duty on PS4 in addition to Sony's titles. Sure, 3 years from now when Switch fully replaces 3ds it can be amazing, but it's a guess and best case scenario.

 

[Mokujin]

That's one of the aspect that has been terrible about Nintendo designs lately. having to design your game for such different control methods means automatically that those controls won't use them smartly. I mean ARMS is basically designed around motion control.. So if they tell me i can play without them, what's the point then..

Nintendo always want to do everything and its contrary at the same time... When will they learn..
That whole idea of having "every control method in the same console" illustrates that so well.

Why are options bad? I'm much more annoyed by mandatory controls, even if I didn't mind them too much I would have rather had the option to use a controler in Wii Zelda games, or Donkey Jungle Beat.

 

[SomedayTheFire]

Hopefully Japanese devs and audience take a liking to the Switch. I wouldn't mind if the Switch became a japanese RPG+arcade +Indie game box to complement my ps4/PC

My ideal system from Nintendo

199.99 decent hardware, even the current switch specs would have been enough.
Tons of HD space
Monthly subscription fee, with entire Nintendo library online ala Netflix.

Regular Controllers

Tell me that wouldn't sell like pancakes, after the NES classic,

and it would lose a lot of money for nintendo.

 

[Doc Holliday]

and it would lose a lot of money for nintendo.

Yes unlike the Wii U...

Also why do you think it would lose money?

New games would not be included in the subscription.

 

[ss_lemonade]

What type of screen did the wii u gamepad have? I wonder if we'll be seeing another 3ds situation where some switch units would have a TN panel and others would have an IPS panel

 

[klabautermann]

I came out of this way more excited than I thought I would be.

Zelda, Mario, and Splatoon 2 are great first party titles. But really, I was bought in INSTANTLY at the sights of Xenoblade 2, new SMT, and new NMH. Hype af now.

Also Ultra Street Fighter II and new Bomberman are pretty cool as well.

 

[Resident_UA]

I think they have to make the system available without the dock for $189... If they went after 3ds market and made TV thing an optional feature Switch would be a much better proposition. Also if they somehow managed to make it backwards compatible with 3ds...

 

[orioto]

Why are options bad? I'm much more annoyed by mandatory controls, even if I didn't mind them too much I would have rather had the option to use a controler in Wii Zelda games, or Donkey Jungle Beat.

Cause if you design a game with a control method in mind, but you can actually play it without it, that's the simple proof that control method doesn't add anything to it.. As it's not necessary.

And that can be said for every Nintendo decision. Nothing is legit, or necessary, or relevant as anything can be anything else.