> signs that Nintendo didn't know how to adapt to the Internet age haven't exactly been mitigated by what we know of the Switch so far: no web browser, no Virtual Console nor movie services like Netflix at launch.

The Wii (not Wii U but the original Wii) had all of that though. A web browser, multiple on demand services including BBC iPlayer and Netflix, an online store that allowed you to downloadable games direct to the console, etc. So it's not the case that Nintento "can't adapt for the internet age", they clearly did already. This is more a sign that Nintendo don't want the Switch to compete with living room entertainment systems nor general purpose computing tablets.

This actually makes some sense when you consider both of those markets are already saturated. eg most living rooms already have several streamable devices such as:

    * other consoles (eg Xbox 360 / P3 and newer),
    * XBMC/Kodi devices,
    * Amazon Fire Stick and similar,
    * or even just a smart TV with that stuff in built.

And who doesn't already have a smart phone and/or tablet?

So instead of chasing after saturated markets that exist on the fringe of their business, Nintendo are focusing on their core market.

Another data point: the Switch will facilitate voice chat by the use of a smartphone app: https://www.reddit.com/r/NintendoSwitch/comments/5nv1ht/conf...

Chat is a function served by many, many applications and devices, of course, but it doesn't seem strange for games and system makers to provide dedicated in-game/system chat even in the face of Discord. Granted, chat is much more integral to a game than Netflix or even a web browser. But the argument isn't that the Switch "competes" on these facets, but that it's natural to use these apps before/during/after a game session. For example, after playing a game on my PS4 or Wii U, instead of switching off my system to turn on Netflix on my Smart TV, I'll just use the app on the system, because it's usually fewer steps. Admittedly, I rarely use my console browser...but that's because I usually have access to my laptop in my living room. But the Switch is meant to be a mobile device; it's not hard to imagine the situation of checking the web to look up a tip or guide while gaming. Could you pull out your phone? Sure, but again, you could argue this for any function on any system ("just use X device, which most people carry around all the time").

Again, it's not the absence of these things that are alone disconcerting. It's just that we know of these downsides -- on top of a whole bunch of other online-related things that on launch week we have no clue: Nintendo's online account system, social network, purchase transfers, etc., things that Nintendo's history has not inspired confidence about.

This is what made me hold off on preordering.

It seems so ill-conceived, and I can't imagine how it will work. Does in-game audio get piped to your phone? If not, what are you supposed to do? Have two sets of earbuds, one from your phone and one from the device?

Also, what's with the console's lack of an ethernet port? Everything I've seen suggests that Nintendo did not prioritize online play when designing the Switch.

Have Nintendo ever prioritised online play?

I would argue this is a major selling point of nintendo. I can't count the number of times i've seen people express disappointment that its so hard to have friends over and play a game these days.

modern consoles were designed seemingly to discourage single console multiplayer gaming; everything is being pushed to online. I think nintendo is smart by catering to the split screen gamers out there, since no one else seems to.

Splatoon is an online-first title and one of the best on the Wii U.

All I remember about Splatoon was that there was no way for me to play with my friends.

The console supports 10/100, possibly gigabit, ethernet over USB. It's an <$20 adapter that can be gotten on amazon.

> The Wii (not Wii U but the original Wii) had all of that though.

For what it's worth, the Wii U also had that too (a web browser, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Instant Video, etc).

I get the impression that most Wii U owners didn't use it much, and mainly used the console for gaming. But it's still there, and works.

"I don't want to compete against all the other (faster) sprinters in the olympics, so I just cut off my legs"

Lack of a virtual console I can understand, but are you really being dissuaded from purchasing a Switch based on its lack of web browser and Netflix -- two things that run on half a dozen or more devices that the typical HN reader probably already owns?

> but are you really being dissuaded from purchasing a Switch based on its lack of web browser and Netflix -- two things that run on half a dozen or more devices that the typical HN reader probably already owns?

It's competing against those devices though. And not just for sales, but pocket/bag space. If I'm bringing a Switch somewhere, I don't really want to carry an iPad with me too if I want to watch something on Netflix.

> It's competing against those devices though.

It's not, it's a game machine. If you want to play games take a switch, if you want to do other things then take them.

Not to be too uncharitable, but did you read the rest of their comment? The very next words are that they don't want to bring multiple devices.

Yes, but it starts out with the assumption that the devices have the same function, which they don't. In a similar vain, a laptop will not replace either.

It's a bit surreal.

You can now bring all this information and entertainment with you and it takes up less space and weight than any 2 textbooks I used at uni and people are concerned about an extra half kilo in-case they can't make up their mind if they want to play console games or watch TV that day on the train.

Of course their phone can do all these things as well but they need the bigger screen or something.

Reminds me of the people who think we'll be able to plug our phones into a dock and have a portable pc everywhere, there will always be trade offs.

If you can't admit there is a huge overlap between mobile touch screen devices your are just being silly.

Have you replaced you phone with your tablet/laptop or visa-versa? They're all mobile touch screens.

Of course. I used to use my laptop all the time to browse at the couch or watch netflix in bedroom. Now I just use my phone for those purposes.

I usually have a phone, and sometimes also a laptop. If a added the Switch it would be add a far superior viewing experience when I am sitting in the train and watching.

Also, when Im playing video games and want to look up something, I would like it to be 2 clicks away and not on a different device.

I think Nintendo could just sell these as tablets that are specially good for gaming. The people who already carry around tablet will not drop theirs until the Switch supports common stuff, and they will not buy a Switch because why add another device of the same size.

Exactly...two things that are ubiquitous on modern devices, but aren't on the Switch because of what seems like rushed online infrastructure. Why should we have faith that Nintendo has successfully executed social matchmaking and account services, which are much more bespoke?

Something only 60s/70s kids will remember is the bubble in digital LCD clocks in the early 80s meant the average 80s kitchen had over 15 digital clocks in it, and keeping them set or covering the screen with electricians tape was an annoyance. I'm happy to be down to 4 digital clocks to maintain in my kitchen and I could achieve a mere 1 with some effort. I'm happy I don't have to install and maintain a netflix account on my bathroom scale and my car keyless entry keyfob and my digital picture frame and my outdoor thermometer. Might be an early sign that Netflix on Everything is post bubble peak.

There were so many of those cheap little LCD clock modules with the two little buttons to set the time. They were crammed into absolutely everything. It was like we were thinking, we desperately want the future to be here, but we don't have the technology yet, so these will do.

This reminds me of a comment by Douglas Adams in which he pointed out the absurdity of regular clocks/watches going out of fashion at about the same time as pie charts became insanely popular (since a traditional watch works more or less exactly like a pie chart).

While this is just a funny thing to notice, it really shows that both technical product design and fashion often depend more on a "look what we can do now!" factor than actual practicality.

Luckily, there are more and more product designers who recognize that minimalism is often the better principle to base their work on.

Remove the word "minimalism" from your comment and I'll upvote you ;-)

I'm not sure that analogy works because an unmaintained Netflix isn't a blinking eyesore like an unset digital clock. I setup Netflix on my PC and on my tablet which casts to my TV. Other devices, like my Xbox or my TV itself, are no worse for having never been setup with Netflix.

On the other hand, I am perfectly fine with a console that just plays games, because that's what I buy it for.

There were plenty consoles that came with a plethora of features but had no good games at launch - if Nintendo does it the other way around, I don't have a problem with that.

Also, if you look at it from Nintendo's perspective: If Netflix is everywhere, it certainly won't be the feature that actually sells their product.

Nintendo seems strongest when they are focusing purely on the gaming experience. Adding web browsers and Netflix because you can is just a distraction and not where their core competencies and interests are.

Adding UI for a Netflix account that's never setup is a waste. I would much rather they focus on something people would actually want to use.

It's the same basic problem as smart TV's. I don't care if it only adds 1$ in manufacturing costs focusing on making the best TV/console/car is much better reason to buy something than adding yet another so so entertainment features.

> Something only 60s/70s kids will remember is the bubble in digital LCD clocks

Even Nintendo was in on the action back then: https://i.ytimg.com/vi/kj1iVgrpX4Y/maxresdefault.jpg

Also, every time Netflix releases an app on a new platform, their UI gets collectively slightly worse on all platforms. It's probably the sheer burden of building and supporting and synchronizing so many client apps.

Maybe I'm a glass half full kind of guy but I'd like to believe they spent less effort on duplicating features that fulfill needs most buyers can already meet with other devices and more effort on features germane to the console itself, like the matchmaking and account services you mention. I could very well be wrong.

For something portable like this, it would be appealing to have Netflix on the go on it. It could be the best screen you have with you, and multifunction means that you can potentially leave some other device at home.

With just wifi? Why not use a tablet, which is going to give better video playback with a regularly updated app anyway?

Because it's another expensive device you need to buy, carry with you (+0.5kg!) and keep charged (+weight for all the chargers, because of course iPad won't use USB-C ;) )

Fair point. But is that necessary at launch, or can it be a few weeks or months down the road? I'm guessing it will be.

I think the larger point is, anyone else would have had it at launch, because it would have been both a no-brainer and no big deal. Netflix is generally pretty good about supporting ports of their client to anything that can run it. There's also no Virtual Console, the eShop isn't available for review yet... and Nintendo has a terrible track record on online services. The Wii U was even further behind on such matters than it was on graphics, compared to the Xbox One and PS4. You can argue that Nintendo shouldn't compete on graphics. But simple stuff like "downloadable games I buy should be linked to my account, not my console" are things they should be doing and have a really bad track record with. So I think Nintendo doesn't deserve a lot of the benefit of the doubt that they will get things like Netflix up-and-running on the Switch.

If Nintendo hadn't shipped a shitty Netflix app and instead got the console to work better it would have been worth buying.

I mean, they did neither. And Netflix would have done a lot of "free" work to put their app on the Switch.

The Switch is basically a high-powered tablet with proper gaming controls. I'd love it if it could actually replace "real" tablets. As it is, we're going to have two separate classes of tablets: those that are actually good at gaming (Switch), and those that are good at everything else (iPad, etc.).

That said, it's easy to see why Nintendo's focusing on gaming: it's their core competency, nobody else in the tablet space does serious non-casual gaming well, and it would be a tremendous undertaking to make the Switch into a real iPad competitor.

I already have a tablet. I certainly don't want to browse anything with shitty Nintendo software. They should focus on games.

Hell, this is the best sign yet that the switch will have SOME value beyond "you can play the latest Mario here"

Can I just say that the Wii U browser wasn't a "power user" browser or anything, but was totally charming and fun. I loved it.

Do you really want to carry both an iPad and a switch in your bag, though?

I would much rather carry a Switch and an iPad rather than something that amounts to an iPad with awful tacked on gaming controls, with the kind of games the iPad is known for.

Multipurpose portable utility computing platforms are all well and good, but in a general sense are a jack of all trades and master of none.

I prefer to read on a kindle. I prefer to type on a laptop. I prefer to watch movies on an iPad. I carry my DS in case I want to game. I also carry a DSLR in case I feel like taking photos.

I can guarantee I get more work done on my laptop on the train than the guy with his iPad, and I take better photos than the guy with his phone out. I like to think I enjoy the gaming I do on the train more than the people playing bejewelled to pass time.

Hmmm, do you have to walk or bike to the train? If you carry that much stuff around, I guess a car would be better. I've been simplifying what I carry around, I can read better on an iPad anyways.

Late response, but I walk. It's roughly a 10 minute walk from my house to the train station.

I've not weighed my bag, but it usually contains:

* 6D DSLR body, 20mm f/1.4, 35mm f/1.4 85mm f/1.4. (About 4KG total of lens & camera.)

* Xiaomi Notebook Air 13" (About 1.2 KG.)

* iPad Pro 9.7.

* Kobo H2O.

* Nintendo DS.

And other sundries: A couple moleskines and pens, a leatherman, headphones, a 20k mAh USB battery pack and lightning cable.

I mean, do you really want to wear pants AND a shirt?

Yes, I need both of those. When I'm commuting, I don't want to carry both a tablet and a game console. I'll choose one that can do what I need (so in this case, an iPad).

The thing is I don't want to carry multiple devices or have tonnes of things plugged into my tv. I want to turn on a device and watch Netflix or YouTube.

I also got the WiiU late on a whim and it wasn't a good purchase. The switch looks like what the WiiU should have been but still seems underpowered compared to other things I can plug into my TV.

I already have a PS4. I cannot see the switch replacing it without the basics of a decent online system and access to streaming services.

I'm not really clear why it's a problem to have more than one device plugged into a TV, especially when they're going to have such a different selection of games.

There are plenty of indications that Nintendo considers this release a just as an early on release addressing the enthusiasts who need to have a new console on the first day. They clearly plan to ramp up everything over the course of the year. One could claim that the release is only finished when Mario Odyssey gets released. Nintendo clearly hinted at the virtual console coming to the Switch, its just not there yet. It is probably connected to some of the upcoming online feature (as they talked about offering a different older game with it every month). Nintendo probably equally wants to stress that the Switch isn't a tablet but a serious gaming system. Therefore (and probably just because they are not finished), no web browser or Netflix client now. But there is no reason to assume they are going to be left out forever.

I honestly don't really care about a browser or NetFlix, because I've never used NetFlix with our Wii U. The two things that have disappointed me about the Wii U have been: * Lack of games * Reliability

Reliability especially...the drive has pretty much stopped reading any discs, even when there aren't any scratches. The console randomly stops with a fatal error. I don't really want to pay to get it fixed, since new consoles are coming out and there isn't a huge catalog for the Wii U.

I can't tell whether it's scratched disks or broken drive. So happy Nintendo went with cards for the Switch.

Me too, but mostly for the lack of load times. I remember the move TO optical and I've hated load times ever since.

Sounds like a dirty optical drive?

The lack of a web browser is I suspect a reaction to WebKit vulnerabilities having been one of the primary entry points for people hacking the (New) 3DS. Omitting this functionality reduces the OS's attack surface.

Quite a few hacks come right from exploited game saves and I have a feeling the same will happen this time around too.

..and maybe to stop users playing HTML games (Nintendo ripoffs for example). This is a shame as I felt the Wii U was crippled in this respect (i.e. video tag supported but not audio!)

Why would I buy a switch to play HTML games? Honestly this argument seems a stretch to me.

There's a popular website used on the Xbox One that emulates older Nintendo consoles from within the included Edge browser with controller support, and it can use OneDrive to store your ROMs and saves.

Something similar to that on the Switch could eat into Virtual Console revenues.

> Why would I buy a switch to play HTML games?

A portable, dockable tablet with a built-in reliable controller? If it had a browser, I'd be surprised if people didn't specifically write some games to target it.

I'm hoping that they do bring it back, because Nintendo did see the potential and have dev tools for the WiiU to target html based content - https://developer.nintendo.com/tools

3DS has a browser and a built-in reliable controller. I haven't heard about any HTML game for 3DS.

The 3DS used a relatively deficient browser engine, with much less support for web standards; it didn't support anything a non-trivial game might need.

A browser based on current WebKit or Blink, with full hardware-accelerated support for WebGL, a fast JavaScript JIT, WebAssembly, fullscreen, joysticks, and other such standards would make a compelling platform.

Well, the point stands: browser and integrated pad is not enough for third party browser games to emerge. Nintendo would also have to provide relevant APIs, some of which aren't commonly used by regular websites (e.g. WebGL).

I don't think that's the reason, considering Nintendo created special JavaScript APIs for accessing the Wii U's gamepad hardware features and made them available to all sites via their browser.

My bet is that they felt they needed more time to figure out how to properly sandbox it to prevent homebrew/piracy-related exploits, and that it will be released as a free installable item (or packaged with an OS update) in the next few months.

Except they will support connecting to public Wi-Fi hotspots, which almost always require logging in or accepting terms of services on an HTML page nowadays. So they definitely didn't get rid of WebKit.

It was also the entry point for the Wii U.

I agree with your points and wanted to add some more as to why I am wary in looking in a new Nintendo console.

1. Wii and the Wii U especially never truly lived up to their potentials. They release small minigames (Nintendo Wolrd is a good example) that were amazingly fun and utilized the dual screens, but then developers almost completely forgot about what differentiated the consoles and it became merely inconvenient to have motion controls or the dual screens.

2. They absolutely do not listen to their fans, at least Americans. I can't tell you how badly a lot of people wanted a true console Animal Crossing, and they throw a shitty board game at us. Mario Party 10 could have easily been an amazing multiplayer game with dual screens and motion controls but they watered it down to a very mediocre experience. Pokemon 3d? Heres a tekken style game. Hell, the Wii U is finally getting a Zelda game.. at the release of their new console.

3. Amiibos. Sorry I don't want DLC in the form of hard to obtain collectibles.

Don't get me wrong, some of my favorite games were brought to me by Nintendo but it is hard clutching on to these memories when they are just pumping out years worth of "almost there" titles and experiences. I would love to be proved wrong but Nintendo is certainly more focused on bottom line profits than providing a fun gaming experience.

This is exactly how I feel about my Wii U purchase. I bought it initially to play the new Fatal Frame and Zelda games. Then I had to buy an external hard drive because FF couldn't fit on the device. Then Zelda was pushed back... all the way until their new console was released. The system itself just feels lackluster and I won't be buying into another generation of Nintendo console with barely any worthwhile titles.

Nintendo has a history of only supporting games on their consoles. They still don't view themselves as your home theatre center-for-everything like xbone does, and that's a relief for me. They only thing they need to be "complete" in this day and age is to have good online multiplayer.

That being said I'm looking at the switch as a vita replacement, not a home console.

> no web browser, no Virtual Console nor movie services like Netflix at launch.

I'm not a console gamer, but why would you want those things in a game console? My TV does all that already. What my TV can't do is play new Nintendo games.

If anything, I find it annoying when I buy a new device and the developers have clearly spent more than half their budget trying to (poorly) replicate functionality that's already built into every other device on my TV cabinet.

Do one thing. Do it well.

> Virtual Console

> why would you want those things in a game console?

The virtual console was huge on the Wii and Wii U

> Do one thing. Do it well.

This is a game console, not some Unix tool. The rest of the competition has demonstrated that not only can they play games, they can handle other features just as well. Unix philosophy doesn't apply to everything in life.

i see the lack of a web browser and no movie services as a move to emphasize that this is a gaming machine and not a tablet. it focuses the use of the machine as a gaming device and not as a do it all device. i like this commitment. it's similar to what amazon does with the kindles (that ignores the limitations of the e-ink screen though).

although, i have certainly been disappointed with nintendo's embracement of online services even within games. e.g., matchmaking and co-op features.

As a longtime Nintendo fan I'd say it's not so much a commitment as a total lack of resources put into basic online functionality. It just seems brave of them because it's such a glaring error.

Lack of a web browser is a feature if you are a parent. The easier it is to control access to content, the better.

That's what parental controls should be there for, an actual feature. Nothing would have stopped Nintendo from just adding a "disable web browser" to the parental control feature the Switch already possess. As such the lack of a web browser is not a "feature", it's merely omitting functionality.

True, that is what parental controls are for. Still, kids are clever, and I'm lazy. That makes it a feature in my book.

The problem is that it appears to be handheld-power in console, not the other way around. That being the case, the trend seen with third-party titles and the WiiU is going to be more pronounced right out of the gate with the Switch.

No browser?? No netflix? If you want these there are umpteen devices in your life giving you instant access already. This is about pureplay gaming. Nobody buys a console to browse anymore. I can literally do browsing and netflix with 3 devices right now within my immediate reach in the living room, and I'd be really unlikely to want to replace my smartphone with the switch when I am travelling even if it had a browser.