Rumours/Fakes/Leaks Discussion Thread

[godiego]

I stopped using the "GameFreak has never done it" argument a long time ago

your post from yesterday literally uses a "GameFreak has never done it" argument in "main series games are never made for home consoles." does time really move that fast for you?

and now I use other arguments against it, including sales, compatibility, official statements from Nintendo, and anything else I can find that seems remotely anti-Stars.

so three bits:

1) sales: focusing on sales is pointless. GameFreak games sell well. could you tell me what a flop would be? what would even happen if it were a flop? mind you, Fire Emblem was revived because one of their games sold barely a million copies. the Nintendo-owned portion of the Xeno series (re: Xenoblade) sells in comparable range (Chronicles sold below 1m, slightly above 1m if you include Chronicles 3D, and X sold below 1m as well) yet it's a franchise Nintendo is pushing regardless. so do you all really think that Stars being a flop would have any significant bearing on anything? at best it would be symptomatic of something else (ie., it flopped because the Switch was a flop).

2) compatibility: as if they've never ruptured it before either inter-generationally (GB to GBA) or intra-generationally (XY to ORAS).

3) official statements: Nintendo is not obligated to tell the Truth. or even if they were to tell a true statement, it doesn't necessarily have to be a wholly true statement. "we're not developing for the Switch right now" could be true because they've already developed for the Switch or simply aren't developing right now because they're on holiday. even still, i'm sure we all remember the DS being the third pillar to the GameCube and already successful GBA and i'm sure we all remember how that turned out.

(and then of course there's confirmation bias but that's another story.)

And just so you know, the Switch is not that portable. It's a bulky tablet. With low battery life.

i mean.... tablets are portable. all in all, the Switch is no less portable than the 3DS XL or 2DS is for the majority of the population.

 

[RileyXY1]

your post from yesterday literally uses a "GameFreak has never done it" argument in "main series games are never made for home consoles." does time really move that fast for you?


so three bits:

1) sales: focusing on sales is pointless. GameFreak games sell well. could you tell me what a flop would be? what would even happen if it were a flop? mind you, Fire Emblem was revived because one of their games sold barely a million copies. the Nintendo-owned portion of the Xeno series (re: Xenoblade) sells in comparable range (Chronicles sold below 1m, slightly above 1m if you include Chronicles 3D, and X sold below 1m as well) yet it's a franchise Nintendo is pushing regardless. so do you all really think that Stars being a flop would have any significant bearing on anything? at best it would be symptomatic of something else (ie., it flopped because the Switch was a flop).

Under 2 million copies. Paid online features and a high console price will exclude more people than it brings in.

2) compatibility: as if they've never ruptured it before either inter-generationally (GB to GBA) or intra-generationally (XY to ORAS).

The Switch has no backwards compatibility whatsoever with the 3DS.

3) official statements: Nintendo is not obligated to tell the Truth. or even if they were to tell a true statement, it doesn't necessarily have to be a wholly true statement. "we're not developing for the Switch right now" could be true because they've already developed for the Switch or simply aren't developing right now because they're on holiday. even still, i'm sure we all remember the DS being the third pillar to the GameCube and already successful GBA and i'm sure we all remember how that turned out.
(and then of course there's confirmation bias but that's another story.)

I discovered that the GBA was only kept alive as a backup plan in case the DS failed. I often take statements from the developers as truth. They are the only people I trust for information.

i mean.... tablets are portable. all in all, the Switch is no less portable than the 3DS XL or 2DS is for the majority of the population.

I'm comparing it to the portability of the 3DS. The Switch does not look like you can fit it in your pocket. I don't think you want to lug a bag around everywhere just to carry it. That's one of the advantages of the 3DS has over the Switch.

 

[Soki]

I discovered that the GBA was only kept alive as a backup plan in case the DS failed. I often take statements from the developers as truth. They are the only people I trust for information.

Remember when Nintendo said the Wii U wouldn't be discontinued? Don't trust game companies (or any company really), they lie all the time

I'm comparing it to the portability of the 3DS. The Switch does not look like you can fit it in your pocket. I don't think you want to lug a bag around everywhere just to carry it. That's one of the advantages of the 3DS has over the Switch.

You have pockets that can fit a 3DS? Cause I sure as hell don't, I always need a bag to carry that thing anyway. And if the game looks better + has no lag + no loading screens, I think people could care less about being able to fit something in their pocket.

 

[godiego]

Under 2 million copies. Paid online features and a high console price will exclude more people than it brings in.

your number means nothing and it shows that you clearly missed the point i was trying to make. so i'll reiterate it: Fire Emblem was saved from cancellation through Awakening, which barely sold over a million copies. Nintendo invests fairly heavily in Xenoblade, a series that has yet to sell over a million copies. arguments about sales are pointless because we are not Nintendo executives and Pokemon reliably sells well anyways (especially GameFreak-made games). the franchise is not struggling at all so Pokemon, as a multi-billion dollar IP, truly can afford to have a game, especially one that is likely a very small investment compared to other games, that doesn't sell up to series standards.

The Switch has no backwards compatibility whatsoever with the 3DS.

with respects to communication, neither did the GameBoy and GameBoy Advanced. the DS era ended without any backwards compatibility. not even factoring in that games can also be played digitally now anyways.

I discovered that the GBA was only kept alive as a backup plan in case the DS failed. I often take statements from the developers as truth. They are the only people I trust for information.

then you're extremely naïve. let's also not forget that it was stated that customization would be Kalos-only. what a truth that turned out to be. no, not everything they say is a lie, however everything they say should be taken with a grain (or two) of salt.

I'm comparing it to the portability of the 3DS. The Switch does not look like you can fit it in your pocket. I don't think you want to lug a bag around everywhere just to carry it. That's one of the advantages of the 3DS has over the Switch.

and that's a faulty comparison. the 3DS is designed to be completely "pocket-sized portable gaming." it is meant to be small (or smaller). the Switch is clearly not designed for that. it is clearly designed in the same conceptual vein as tablets.

 

[RileyXY1]

It's called conveinance. People want things easily accessible to them. That's why I care about portability. And yes, I do have pockets that can fit a 3DS. But, they can't fit a Switch.

 

[Stratelier]

You have pockets that can fit a 3DS? Cause I sure as hell don't, I always need a bag to carry that thing anyway.

I can fit a regular 3DS in a jeans front pocket (I use Dockers slacks, the pockets are fairly roomy, and I've never used back pockets. EVER.) . The 3DS XL can fit in the same pocket only by itself, so instead I carry it in a coat pocket.

 

[TechSkylander1518]

It's called conveinance. People want things easily accessible to them. That's why I care about portability. And yes, I do have pockets that can fit a 3DS. But, they can't fit a Switch.

Easily accessible doesn't have to mean "so small it fits in your pocket". People carry bags, purses, and jackets with them all the time-it's not like it's a massive inconvenience to put a console somewhere else.

 

[NoirCore]

they view the Switch is a home console, and main series games are never made for those.

I stopped using the "GameFreak has never done it" argument a long time ago

Over 12 hours is a long time ago?

And just so you know, the Switch is not that portable. It's a bulky tablet. With low battery life.

Nope. It's very close to as tall as a 3DS XL closed. It can at least fit in your bag or such; I mean, I never put my original 3DS (which has Nerf padding, making it thicker than a Switch) in my pockets, just either carry it in my hands or my bag. I imagine you can easily do that with a Switch. Plus, there's a beautiful thing called a charger that the tablet has.

 

[TouyaShiro]

Know the best thing about the charging for the Nintendo Switch? You could literally bring a power pack with you to charge it on the go, since it uses USB Type-C. With the growing age of people not wanting to lose their battery on the go, a lot of people are gonna have one. (Not that most people would get you could use it in that way, of course, but still.)

 

[SUP3RN0VA]

I stopped using the "GameFreak has never done it" argument a long time ago and now I use other arguments against it, including sales, compatibility, official statements from Nintendo, and anything else I can find that seems remotely anti-Stars. In fact, I never want the main series games on the Switch because I don't want to have to pay to use the online modes, which are an essential part of Pokemon! *breathes* Okay, so, Nintendo has said that the Switch is, at its heart, a home console with portable capabilities. It's essentially the Wii U, except the GamePad equivalent can be taken farther away from the console. And just so you know, the Switch is not that portable. It's a bulky tablet. With low battery life.

You literally used that exact argument in the post before this one, when you said "Pokémon have never been on consoles before."

Nintendo said that at it's heart, it is a console YOU TAKE ON THE GO. That is literally what a hybrid console is. That literally means it is a console as well as a handheld device.

And just so you know, the Switch is VERY portable. The low battery life depends solely on the game being played, and can reach up to the same battery life as 3DS systems. Saying Switch isn't that portable is just plain denial right there. You need to face the facts and stop letting personal wishes get in the way of logical thinking.

Nintendo switch IS a HYBRID system. There is NO point in Nintendo creating a hybrid system if they are planning on creating completely seperate handheld consoles along with it, that cannot play Switch games, and instead play their own personal games.

The only way people will not have to purchase a Switch in order to play Pokémon is if Nintendo releases a 'cheaper handheld only' version of the Switch, so that people have the option to not purchase a full console if they so wish.

 

[TouyaShiro]

Nintendo switch IS a HYBRID system. There is NO point in Nintendo creating a hybrid system if they are planning on creating completely seperate handheld consoles along with it, that cannot play Switch games, and instead play their own personal games.

With that being said, I've been talking about it a lot in the Nintendo Switch thread over at the Video Games section of the forum, and one point they keep putting forward is that it's a home console first, so it's likely that the type of game that would be going on the system would be suited more that sort of gameplay. Sure, it's a hybrid system, but the ways they want you to use that portability vary somewhat from our typical handheld console - you take it to parties (1, 2, Switch!), you take it on long trips, you take it to other places to play with other Switch owners, and heck, you take it to play with competition. All that sounds well and good, but given the battery life and its slightly less portable size, it's not like you're gonna be standing up in the mall to play the Nintendo Switch. Maybe you will, and more power to you, but typically it seems to me like they want you to set it down somewhere so that you can play while you're taking a break from some outside activity, or bring it over for a really cool multiplayer experience...

Perhaps all that above is not entirely relevant to the fact that it still is a hybrid at the end of the day, but in my mind, the way Nintendo says they market it as a home console first probably means the kinds of games you'll be playing on it will typically be the sort of experience you would get from just that. Pokémon games typically have a mold which makes it easy to pick up and put down whenever and wherever, and I'm not sure if that's the kind of game that we'll see on the Nintendo Switch... Feel free to gloat if I'm proven wrong, of course.

 

[SUP3RN0VA]

It's called conveinance. People want things easily accessible to them. That's why I care about portability. And yes, I do have pockets that can fit a 3DS. But, they can't fit a Switch.

With that being said, I've been talking about it a lot in the Nintendo Switch thread over at the Video Games section of the forum, and one point they keep putting forward is that it's a home console first, so it's likely that the type of game that would be going on the system would be suited more that sort of gameplay. Sure, it's a hybrid system, but the ways they want you to use that portability vary somewhat from our typical handheld console - you take it to parties (1, 2, Switch!), you take it on long trips, you take it to other places to play with other Switch owners, and heck, you take it to play with competition. All that sounds well and good, but given the battery life and its slightly less portable size, it's not like you're gonna be standing up in the mall to play the Nintendo Switch. Maybe you will, and more power to you, but typically it seems to me like they want you to set it down somewhere so that you can play while you're taking a break from some outside activity, or bring it over for a really cool multiplayer experience...

Perhaps all that above is not entirely relevant to the fact that it still is a hybrid at the end of the day, but in my mind, the way Nintendo says they market it as a home console first probably means the kinds of games you'll be playing on it will typically be the sort of experience you would get from just that. Pokémon games typically have a mold which makes it easy to pick up and put down whenever and wherever, and I'm not sure if that's the kind of game that we'll see on the Nintendo Switch... Feel free to gloat if I'm proven wrong, of course.

Everything you listed that the Handheld part of Nintendo Switch can be used for is exactly what Nintendo 3DS is often used for as well. Your comparison only shows even more how much of a hybrid the Nintendo Switch is.

Also, when did Nintendo even say it is a home console first? I don't recall that. What I do recall them saying is that at it's heart, it is a console that you can play on the go. That is exactly what previous handheld consoles are. It's the same thing. There is also the fact that the handheld part of the Switch, literally does everything that Nintendo's other handheld consoles do, plus more. Nintendo switch is a true Hybrid console. It isn't more one over the other. It is just as much handheld as it is console, and that is the entire point of Nintendo Switch. They intended to combine the two into one. 'Slightly less portable', barely makes any difference. The handheld part of the Switch isn't that much bigger then what the 3DS XL is, and unless you have very, large pockets, you can't fit the 3DS XL into a pocket. And if you DO have large enough pockets for a 3DS XL, you could probably still fit the Switch into anyway. Nintendo Switch is perfectly portable, and will not take up much more room in anything than an XL would.

Now, I have a questions for you. Firstly, if you don't think Pokémon is going onto the Switch, then where do you think it IS going to go? Another new handheld? Secondly, if you DO believe that, then answer why you think Nintendo bothered to create a complete hybrid system, only for Nintendo to release another new handheld system that is completely seperate from the Switch and plays it's own games, instead of Switch games? Seriously, what's the point? There is no point in Nintendo Switch being handheld if they are just going to release an entirely new and different handheld as well.

 

[TouyaShiro]

What I do recall them saying is that at it's heart, it is a console that you can play on the go. That is exactly what previous handheld consoles are. It's the same thing.

The quote in this article (Nintendo’s Boss Promises the Switch Won’t Have the NES Classic’s Supply Issues) is this:

I think there’s a sense that Nintendo Switch is a portable device. It is portable. But at its heart, it’s a home console that you can take with you on the go.

Which says to me that they put it as a home console first. The same interview also says that, for now at least, "the 3DS has a long life ahead of it". Which either means that the 3DS itself will remain side by side with the Nintendo Switch, or a proper successor to it will come at a later point with the same moniker of 3DS. The point they're saying right now is that the 3DS is not being ousted by the Nintendo Switch at all, which I think is pretty significant.

It is just as much handheld as it is console, and that is the entire point of Nintendo Switch.

My question is, will the game selection reflect this? My assumption at the moment is "no", due to what I said above earlier - if they plan to do it this way for the foreseeable future, then I don't see a game that would be better suited handheld being placed on the Nintendo Switch unless it was built to be taken at parties and whatever. It's not like this console can be easily pulled out of your pocket...

Now, I have a questions for you. Firstly, if you don't think Pokémon is going onto the Switch, then where do you think it IS going to go? Another new handheld? Secondly, if you DO believe that, then answer why you think Nintendo bothered to create a complete hybrid system, only for Nintendo to release another new handheld system that is completely seperate from the Switch and plays it's own games, instead of Switch games? Seriously, what's the point? There is no point in Nintendo Switch being handheld if they are just going to release an entirely new and different handheld as well.

There's no guarantee that it will be the case, but the point I was trying to make is that the way we use the Nintendo Switch's portability will be much different compared to the usual. I'd actually want to back up Riley here on this one - you don't tell me to pull out a freaking set of Joy-Cons or a Pro Controller out of my pocket, and you certainly don't put the screen in there! To me this is more like the sort of thing that you would bring over to another person's house, with much easier setup than it takes for a different console by comparison. Just the one or two wires (HDMI and the AC output to charge), set it down, boom you're gaming. Creating this sort of hybrid system comes with its own problems if you treat it as you would a handheld console, however - it's not like it has an easy Sleep function like the Nintendo handheld we're currently used to, and even so, the games currently being developed for the Nintendo Switch do not lend themselves to the same sort of experience that we'd expect from a handheld title. Should we expect that sort of thing? Maybe, maybe not!

Even if we remove all premonition and assume that it's the only console they will have remaining, it's $470AUD over here and I'm still unhappy about it. Compared to the 3DS that's a pretty fucking steep price for a handheld.

I apologise for bringing on a logical fallacy like this, but I must address this - if they do intend to combine the two into one, then where do they say that part? I know that we both may be making assumptions here, but the only truth here that is apparent to us is what has been currently said by Nintendo, and for now, we only have that to go by. It's not like we've heard that the 3DS is ceasing production - they would have said so if that were the case.

 

[PkmnTrainerV]

@RileyXY1 This is a size comparison of 3DS XL, Wii U and the Switch

Spoiler

If you have pockets that can fit a 3DS, you can fit a Switch without the Joy Cons. And the JoyCons can go in the second pocket.

 

[TouyaShiro]

If you have pockets that can fit a 3DS, you can fit a Switch without the Joy Cons. And the JoyCons can go in the second pocket.

my wallet and phone tho

 

[PkmnTrainerV]

Under 2 million copies. Paid online features and a high console price will exclude more people than it brings in.

It is not necessary that Pokemon takes up the paid features site. It is not confirmed if we need to pay.

my wallet and phone tho

I guess, if someone has a pocket big enough to fit in a 3DS (XL), then I think that they can fit in a Switch.
I really don't experience the portability issues on any tablet. I carry around my iPad mini with me (that's what I'm using to access the forums at the minute), and the Switch is smaller than my iPad, so I think it'll fit into my hoodie's pocket, with the joycons somewhere else.

 

[SUP3RN0VA]

The quote in this article (Nintendo’s Boss Promises the Switch Won’t Have the NES Classic’s Supply Issues) is this:

Which says to me that they put it as a home console first. The same interview also says that, for now at least, "the 3DS has a long life ahead of it". Which either means that the 3DS itself will remain side by side with the Nintendo Switch, or a proper successor to it will come at a later point with the same moniker of 3DS. The point they're saying right now is that the 3DS is not being ousted by the Nintendo Switch at all, which I think is pretty significant.

My question is, will the game selection reflect this? My assumption at the moment is "no", due to what I said above earlier - if they plan to do it this way for the foreseeable future, then I don't see a game that would be better suited handheld being placed on the Nintendo Switch unless it was built to be taken at parties and whatever. It's not like this console can be easily pulled out of your pocket...

There's no guarantee that it will be the case, but the point I was trying to make is that the way we use the Nintendo Switch's portability will be much different compared to the usual. I'd actually want to back up Riley here on this one - you don't tell me to pull out a freaking set of Joy-Cons or a Pro Controller out of my pocket, and you certainly don't put the screen in there! To me this is more like the sort of thing that you would bring over to another person's house, with much easier setup than it takes for a different console by comparison. Just the one or two wires (HDMI and the AC output to charge), set it down, boom you're gaming. Creating this sort of hybrid system comes with its own problems if you treat it as you would a handheld console, however - it's not like it has an easy Sleep function like the Nintendo handheld we're currently used to, and even so, the games currently being developed for the Nintendo Switch do not lend themselves to the same sort of experience that we'd expect from a handheld title. Should we expect that sort of thing? Maybe, maybe not!

Even if we remove all premonition and assume that it's the only console they will have remaining, it's $470AUD over here and I'm still unhappy about it. Compared to the 3DS that's a pretty fucking steep price for a handheld.

I apologise for bringing on a logical fallacy like this, but I must address this - if they do intend to combine the two into one, then where do they say that part? I know that we both may be making assumptions here, but the only truth here that is apparent to us is what has been currently said by Nintendo, and for now, we only have that to go by. It's not like we've heard that the 3DS is ceasing production - they would have said so if that were the case.

Again, as you and others are not truly understanding the quote "at it's heart it is a console YOU CAN TAKE ON THE GO", notice how that exact quote, can apply both to the Nintendo Switch, and any handheld console. What do you think a handheld console is? It is a console you can take on the go. Nintendo Switch takes this further by being a console you can play on the television as well as on the go, therefore, regardless of what anyone thinks, it is a true hybrid console. The handheld aspect of the Switch, literally does everything that a handheld console does. To further this argument, the actual console part of the switch is the handheld part, the part that connects to the television is simply a dock to boost the capabilities of the Switch. The home console part is just a shell. If you removed the shell, then would the Switch be? It would be a handheld console.

Yes, the 3DS still has a life and will coexist with the Switch for a while, however, remember that plenty of previous consoles were still having games created for them even after a new console was released. Wii games were still being developed for Nintendo Wii after the Wii U was released, and I'm quite certain that GBA and NDS games were still being created after NDS and N3DS were released.

I'm not sure what point about games reflecting anything is. Every game on the Switch will be playable in handheld mode, so EVERY game is going to reflect a handheld title as well as a console. Times change, and technology changes. Nintendo's consoles will now change so that games can effectively reflect both handheld games and console games. That is the growth of gaming.

The only reason people brought their 3DS with them everywhere is because it has a built in pedometer to collect coins, as well as street pass. If Nintendo Switch has similar features, then you can bet that plenty of people (including myself) will be taking their Switch with them. Nintendo 2DS also has a sleep mode function despite the fact it doesn't flip open and close, and as such, Nintendo Switch and easily use this function as well, if it needs it for streetpass-like features. You also have the ability to charge your Switch while you're out, so no matter what argument you try and make, Nintendo Switch is completely portable.

Nintendo Switch is only approximately $50 more than Nintendo Wii U deluxe, and considering the amount of technology that has been put into it, I believe the price is reasonable. Now, people have argued that it should be bundled with other games and such, however, that is irrelevant to what our current discussion is in regards to. It isn't a steep price for a handheld, because it is a price of a handheld AND a console. Again, they could create a cheaper version of a handheld only Switch, however, I still believe there is no point in making the Switch a hybrid if they plan on creating a seperate handheld gaming system anyway. They could have made Switch console only in that case. I doubt many people will want to carry a handheld Switch and another handheld with them as well.

What do you mean, "where do they say that part?" Just take a look at the Switch. They didn't just intend to combine the two into one, they succeeded in combining two into one. The quote you so kindly offered before "at it's heart, it is a console you take on the go" says everything. What else do you need Nintendo to say in regards to it?

 

[TouyaShiro]

@PkmnTrainerV For me I think that's a bit too much inconvenience for a handheld. I'd definitely want to use it for that at some place, of course, but it'd probably take a backseat to my 3DS gaming while I'm out and about and not in a house of some sort.

Damn, though, you've got large pockets, lol. Personally I don't risk putting anything in my bigger and more loose pockets because I sit down a lot and those tend to fall out when I do. So I'd probably actually purchase some sort of carry case for the Switch since I think I'd use mine more akin to bringing it to a place.

Edit:

What do you think a handheld console is?

Something small that's convenient to pull out of my pocket and just start gaming as soon as I turn it on (or it exits some sort of power saver mode). At least one of these things the Nintendo Switch lacks out on. Of course, while it's not pertinent to how you perceive it, I'm gonna treat mine like a home console more than a handheld.

I'm not sure what point about games reflecting anything is. Every game on the Switch will be playable in handheld mode, so EVERY game is going to reflect a handheld title as well as a console. Times change, and technology changes. Nintendo's consoles will now change so that games can effectively reflect both handheld games and console games. That is the growth of gaming.

Understandable to think that way. The question I ask then is this: Do we want to force that too quickly? I've already explained in other threads why I think moving Pokémon to the Nintendo Switch (and phasing out the 3DS entirely) is a baaaaaad idea.

I'm not sure what point about games reflecting anything is. Every game on the Switch will be playable in handheld mode, so EVERY game is going to reflect a handheld title as well as a console. Times change, and technology changes. Nintendo's consoles will now change so that games can effectively reflect both handheld games and console games. That is the growth of gaming.

Australia does not receive reasonable prices for gaming, though. That's one reason why I can't support it at launch - it's too much for a system that won't have what I want during that launch day.

It isn't a steep price for a handheld, because it is a price of a handheld AND a console.

Yeah, but for Pokémon specifically (and other titles which typically have the 3DS and/or portability in mind)? No fucking way, man.

What do you mean, "where do they say that part?" Just take a look at the Switch. They didn't just intend to combine the two into one, they succeeded in combining two into one.

I thought you meant it in the context of phasing out the 3DS intentionally so that it's the only console remaining for Nintendo, rather than just the prospect of the Switch itself.

What else do you need Nintendo to say in regards to it?

For them to confirm that the 3DS is indeed dead at the bottom of a river. Like the Wii U is. Until they say that for real, I have no reason to believe the 3DS will be phased out entirely as of yet.

 

[SUP3RN0VA]

@PkmnTrainerV

Something small that's convenient to pull out of my pocket and just start gaming as soon as I turn it on (or it exits some sort of power saver mode). At least one of these things the Nintendo Switch lacks out on. Of course, while it's not pertinent to how you perceive it, I'm gonna treat mine like a home console more than a handheld.

Understandable to think that way. The question I ask then is this: Do we want to force that too quickly? I've already explained in other threads why I think moving Pokémon to the Nintendo Switch (and phasing out the 3DS entirely) is a baaaaaad idea.

Australia does not receive reasonable prices for gaming, though. That's one reason why I can't support it at launch - it's too much for a system that won't have what I want during that launch day.

3DS XL can't fit into a generic pocket, would that mean you wouldn't consider it a handheld because you can't pull out of your pocket? even my original 3DS, while technically being able to fit in my pocket, had the L and R buttons eventually become unusable for being in my pocket too many times. Also, I can easily see myself pulling out my Switch while out to game on the go, and so will plenty of others, therefore, it seems as if you're letting your own personal feelings for the Switch dictate what you believe the Switch to be. I'll likely spend majority of Switch gaming on the Television rather than handheld as well, however, that doesn't make the Switch any less handheld.

And Pokémon staying on 3DS is an even worse idea. As I said, it is obvious at this point that Pokémon SM reached the capabilities of 3DS, and no future Pokémon game can possibly offer any kind of improvement. If a third version of SM was released on 3DS, what do you expect will happen? Imagine all the other features that will be cut in order to add new features to the third version. Plus, they will not be able to solve their lagging issue. Whether you want to believe it or not, future Pokémon titles on 3DS WILL stop the Pokémon franchise's growth. There is no more room for Pokémon to grow on Nintendo Switch.

 

[TouyaShiro]

3DS XL can't fit into a generic pocket, would that mean you wouldn't consider it a handheld because you can't pull out of your pocket? even my original 3DS, while technically being able to fit in my pocket, had the L and R buttons eventually become unusable for being in my pocket too many times. Also, I can easily see myself pulling out my Switch while out to game on the go, and so will plenty of others, therefore, it seems as if you're letting your own personal feelings for the Switch dictate what you believe the Switch to be.

I've got rather large pockets on most of my clothes. Granted, if I ended up with clothes that are too tight for even this New 3DS I have, I'll put it back into my bag if needed. No way am I gonna fit a Nintendo Switch screen by itself in there, though - I'd rather it gather dust from my bag rather than my pocket.

As for my "personal feelings" on the Switch being a handheld... Well, the kinds of games I've seen that work well for a handheld setting just don't seem to be there, aside from maybe Breath of the Wild - and even then, I think the sort of singleplayer experiences that are being brought to the table require quite a bit of commitment - more than I'd want to do from a typical handheld game. The view is influenced by the way I typically play games - for a handheld title it's much easier to just snap open my 3DS, play it for a bit (mostly Pokémon) or play a level or segment of whatever game I'm focusing on at that moment for short bursts of time rather than committing wholeheartedly to an entire hour or more of playing a more console-based experience.

Now, this might be moving a bit too far into the social aspect of it, but you can't tell me that it's not gonna be awkward at first finding people who want to play the Nintendo Switch in public places. Will people actually come out of their shell and embrace that portion?

Imagine all the other features that will be cut in order to add new features to the third version.

Game Freak may be idiots but they're not that stupid. This is also based on conjecture, that there would be a third version to begin with - which I'm personally opposed to because I believe Game Freak have moved past a requirement to have those within a Generation.

Whether you want to believe it or not, future Pokémon titles on 3DS WILL stop the Pokémon franchise's growth.

It's all about timing. You need a good reason to get them to believe that investing in a Switch is a good idea - and for Pokémon specifically, I'm not sold. I don't see the benefits just yet, aside from the much greater power of the system, so whatever growth they can do on that system had better be good enough to lead me to believe that Pokémon can work on the console.

There is no more room for Pokémon to grow on Nintendo Switch.

And there's a typo.