"You're all buying it regardless."

> hardware improvements of the Switch 2 could affect development costs I've never understood this. Yeah, better hardware means you can spend more time making a more complex product, but that doesn't mean you have to. You can make an OG Switch capable game for the Switch 2 and charge less for it than larger games. If the game is fun, it'll sell well. Look at Pico Park, I can count the polygons on one hand and it's one of my kids' favorite games. I wouldn't be surprised if you could port it to a gameboy without losing anything important. I want more games like that, because they get great battery life and are tons of fun at parties. You don't need to spend years building a game that struggles to hit 30 FPS, spend under a year and make a fun game with no framerate concerns.

I guess the point was that if you have a very low performance ceiling it acts as an equalizer of sorts. An indie developer doesn’t need to be as much concerned with competing with big AAA publisher if the end product will not differ that much in graphics and graphics, for better or worse, sell games.

Hmm, I guess I'm weird then, because graphics don't excite me very much. If a game is good, I don't really care how detailed the graphics are, as long as the art style is good.

Will be interesting to see the real sale numbers after the hype has died down. Everyone keeps saying people will buy it anyway but of the few dozen gamers I know nobody wants one.

> "This is one of the new software distribution methods we have introduced to accommodate the larger game data sizes on Switch 2 compared to Switch," he explained. >"Software can be released in various formats, and we will continue to work closely with software publishers on many fronts to ensure that they actively support our platform." Planned to deal with 'larger' games, yeah, that's why Bravely Default used it. It's so big. Make smaller, cheaper Carts available to publishers.

> hardware improvements of the Switch 2 could affect development costs I've never understood this. Yeah, better hardware means you can spend more time making a more complex product, but that doesn't mean you have to. You can make an OG Switch capable game for the Switch 2 and charge less for it than larger games. If the game is fun, it'll sell well. Look at Pico Park, I can count the polygons on one hand and it's one of my kids' favorite games. I wouldn't be surprised if you could port it to a gameboy without losing anything important. I want more games like that, because they get great battery life and are tons of fun at parties. You don't need to spend years building a game that struggles to hit 30 FPS, spend under a year and make a fun game with no framerate concerns.

You have to include the risk of not succeeding. Without high graphical fidelity to differentiate yourself, you’re forced to compete on gameplay alone. Large companies like Nintendo do not know how to make hits reliably. That’s why Nintendo keeps recycling old franchises. Look at all of the games that no one plays. There are thousands and thousands of developers out there making games. The vast majority of them never succeed. It’s just like trying to become a New York Times best selling author. Notice how Disney hasn’t cracked the novel as a medium. That’s why they spend all their money on big budget Star Wars and Marvel movies and TV shows.

"You're all buying it regardless."

> indie games that no one plays Well yeah, most indie games suck. If I pick a random game from Steam, the chance of it sucking is pretty high. Indie games fight an uphill battle of marketing and standing out from the crowd. Some indie games rock, the problem is finding them. AAA solves this with massive marketing budgets. > Notice how Disney hasn’t cracked the novel as a medium. [They have](https://books.disney.com/).

It’s the Texas sharpshooter fallacy writ large. You can always pick the winners after the games are written. The hard part is picking a winner of a game beforehand. Those are books published by Disney written by established individual authors. They’re not gang-writing books the way they make movies.

Sure, Disney acts as a publisher, but I think it would be naive to think that they don't direct the content of those books. Likewise, I imagine they use a lot of Disney outsiders for their movies as well as part of the production process. At the end of the day, it doesn't exactly matter whether it's Disney staffers doing the writing or someone on the outside, it's being published under the Disney brand.

The question is: did Disney commission the Percy Jackson series or did Rick Riordan shop around for publishers like a traditional book author and happen to get picked up by Disney?

My coworker preordered one and before he got it he was excited. The day after he said he regrets it. I honestly don’t understand the Nintendo glaze. Nintendo refuses to grow up with their customers. That’s why their games fall flat with casual gamers. Saying “It’s for kids” is so lazy. Kids don’t buy games. They did when games were $20-$40 dollars but that isn’t the case anymore.

When I can go and get a 1TB MicroSD card for under 100 bucks; I can't fathom a Switch 2 cartridge is in any way nearing it's max on game size.