So, yeah. My local Target is showing as having them in stock (and I've been told they had about 8 of them this morning by a friend who picked one up). I'm seriously considering going and getting one. Thoughts?

Zelda looks absolutely incredible, but there's really nothing else I would want the system for until Mario later this year, so I feel like the smart thing to do would just be to wait. That said, the fact that they're basically sold out everywhere and I have the chance to maybe snag one really makes me want to pull the trigger.

So, yeah. My local Target is showing as having them in stock (and I've been told they had about 8 of them this morning by a friend who picked one up). I'm seriously considering going and getting one. Thoughts?

Zelda looks absolutely incredible, but there's really nothing else I would want the system for until Mario later this year, so I feel like the smart thing to do would just be to wait. That said, the fact that they're basically sold out everywhere and I have the chance to maybe snag one really makes me want to pull the trigger.

I'm loving mine, they pulled off the concept really well, it seamlessly goes from a home console to a mobile console really well, and despite it not being amazing battery life being able to play a modern Zelda for 3 hours without a TV is pretty awesome. BUT, at this point if you aren't really into Zelda and Nintendo it's probably not worth $300+. If you're not I'd wait until more games come out for it.

The details on it are pretty cool though. Switching between playmodes is ridiculously easy, and they have nailed controller syncing and assigning controllers to players. First of all, all new controllers are synced by attaching them to the console, so pro controller with a USB cable, Joy-cons by attaching them to the console, and then they are sycned forever until you sync them to a different console. When you add any controller into the current mix, or switch playmodes it has you identify which controller your user is using by just hitting L+R together. It's super quick and instantly switches to the new controller and after controller identification for everyone ends it turns off all the controllers not being used. No turning on or off controllers manually.

That's the thing. I love Zelda. One of my favorite game series ever. And BotW looks and sounds incredible. I'm just not sure it's worth 400 bucks to play. I loved my 3DS, and if I could be absolutely sure that Nintendo is going to make the Switch the go to console and ditch the 3DS, I'd buy one immediately.

I really want one. I'm totally sold on the concept of the console--I'm just worried about there actually being games for it. It's times like these where I hate being an adult. I just need someone to tell me what to do!

*The poster retains no responsibility for any future regrets you may experience

Think about all the toilet gaming you can do. You would never have to leave the bathroom. Install a fridge and a reclining toilet bowl, and just do it all right there.

I take full responsibility for all your regrets.

Missed it by about twenty minutes, the guy said. I'm kinda relieved to be honest. I'm pretty sure I'll end up with one towards the end of the year if only just for Zelda and Mario, but I'll feel better about it after it's been out that long. I'll content myself with Horizon for now. (:

- No text -

I know, that always seems to fuck me.

I bought Zelda for the Switch, but I'm holding off on the console itself for a few months. Putting the money elsewhere in the short term. But this Zelda purchase guarantees I'll get one. Self-compromise! :D

- No text -

- No text -

My thought for myself is that I love the idea of the hardware, and I'm just waiting for a game to justify buying it. Zelda is probably a good enough game, but I've never *really* played a Zelda game, so it doesn't hold the same draw for me that it does for many others. And I'm not buying a new console just to try my first one. So, personally, I wait and see. If only I hadn't already played Skyrim plenty... :(

I guess my opinion for you hinges on how big of a deal Zelda is to you. If you're really into it, the Switch might be worthwhile. Unless you have a Wii U - if you do, buying a new console for a game that'll run on what you already have is obviously pretty silly.

- No text -

That is the single strangest thing I have ever heard of, and I make it my business to watch every nature documentary that pops up on Netflix.

I guess my opinion for you hinges on how big of a deal Zelda is to you. If you're really into it, the Switch might be worthwhile. Unless you have a Wii U - if you do, buying a new console for a game that'll run on what you already have is obviously pretty silly.

I never did get a WiiU, and I have mixed feelings about that. I'm sort of in the same situation, again. I told myself I'd get a WiiU eventually, but the more time passed, the easier it was to not buy one. There were undoubtedly some great games there, but nothing big enough to make me actually go buy a WiiU. I want to avoid doing that again (even if it is probably the smart play). Zelda and a new Mario64-style 3D Mario game are huge selling points--those two games alone will probably justify the cost of the console. If Nintendo actually abandons the 3DS and uses the Switch as a console and handheld platform and just has one library of games, I feel like it'll be a no-brainer. But I'm not actually convinced that'll happen, yet.

It's the special edition version. I was lucky enough to get one at retail price. Those things sold out fast.

If I'm gonna get a Nintendo Switch, it won't be just to play the dead horses; the same old Mario and Zelda we've been getting for thirty years. If I buy one, it'll be for playing Sonic the Hedgehog!

If you want the new Zelda, it's available on the Wii U, and the performance is the same (never reliably hitting 30fps). The Switch is stupudly overpriced, and has a ton of issues out the gate.
It is an objectively bad console.

Wait for them to come out with a version that fixes the technical issues, and is hopefully cheaper as well.

- No text -

- No text -

stupudly

Lol

Wait for them to come out with a version that fixes the technical issues, and is hopefully cheaper as well.

Agreed.

stupudly

Lol

Funny thing is that as I was typing that reply, Sammy asked me if I was liking the Samsung that I was typing on (been an iPhone user for the past decade, but I've been using the work phone). I went on a rant about the terrible keyboard spacing and pushy autocorrect (that I was forced to disable to make the dang thing useable). Guess the phone didn't appreciate me talking trash about it...

iPhone > Windows > Android.

iPhone > Windows > Android.

More like Anything > Samsung

- No text -

- No text -

- No text -

- No text -

- No text -

- No text -

I will never forgive HP for not committing to pushing WebOS after they acquired Palm. In its day, it was a quantum leap in design. They could have had a winner if they'd just let it happen.

I had a Palm Pre. There were 2 killer apps, the multitasking and Synergy.

The multitasking was true multitasking, so Facebook and AIM and crap were constantly running and the battery life was therefore abysmal. It was navigated by a card system which was adopted by every major mobile phone OS, but with more efficient implementation so as to not kill battery life.

Synergy also did something perfect for the time, but now is largely irrelevant. This was a phone that combined many different social networks into one feed, as it was a time of different services battling it out. Now, there's basically one microblogging site, one life sharing site, one blogging site, and one video site. Hence, integrating these things to keep in contact with all your friends is nigh useless. Each network is used for different stuff.

I think the first people to catch up with them on the multitasking was HTC with Sense 2.0 later that year, and the social networks soon sorted themselves out.

The phone was also behind the times. When the Pre launched, it had a fixed focus camera and a low resolution screen. Consider that the year before, HTC had launched the TouchHD, a phone with a 3.8" 800x480 screen, a 5 megapixel AF camera, and even a front facing camera. Pre's specs were not intriguing to power users. This was also a year after the iPhone 3G, and the Pre didn't have the curb appeal of that phone or the new 3Gs. It was innovative, but didn't back it up with hardware, and was cool, but not iPhone cool, so it was never going to work out.

I had a Palm Pre. There were 2 killer apps, the multitasking and Synergy.

I agree with that statement. Those things seem obvious today, but they were major advances at the time.

I had a TouchPad (actually, I still have it somewhere), which is part of why I'm so bitter about WebOS. I think it was about a month after that tablet came out that HP announced they were axing the project.

The multitasking was true multitasking, so Facebook and AIM and crap were constantly running and the battery life was therefore abysmal. It was navigated by a card system which was adopted by every major mobile phone OS, but with more efficient implementation so as to not kill battery life.

I thought the battery life on my TouchPad was pretty good at the time. Of course, that was a tablet (and not a thin one) so the battery was enormous compared to the phones I was used to, even accounting for the increased screen size. It was also WebOS 2.0, so maybe they had made some battery-saving tweaks by that time? I don't recall that detail.

In any case, I'm sure if they'd been allowed to continue development that problem would have been solved. Android dynamically puts things to sleep depending on what you're using. iOS limits true multitasking to only certain things. Palm would have done something.

A historical note for anyone reading (I get the feeling Funk already knows), a guy named Matias Duarte was largely responsible for the design and UX in WebOS. Shortly after HP killed it, he moved to Android. Not long after that, Android implemented card-based multitasking, and that was the beginning of a very rapid improvement in design and everyday usability in Android. He apparently also had a major role in designing the beloved T-Mobile Sidekick, although I don't know much about that period.

IMO, to this day no one has nailed card-based multitasking quite as well as WebOS, though. It had the ability to stack related cards together in groups. A simple example of this is that if you clicked a link to open something in a browser, the browser card would group with the place you opened it from. But the really unique thing was that you could, say, have your email inbox open in one card, and be composing a message (via the same app) in a different card. I still haven't seen another mobile OS with that capability, although it's standard procedure for any desktop OS.

Synergy also did something perfect for the time, but now is largely irrelevant. This was a phone that combined many different social networks into one feed, as it was a time of different services battling it out. Now, there's basically one microblogging site, one life sharing site, one blogging site, and one video site. Hence, integrating these things to keep in contact with all your friends is nigh useless. Each network is used for different stuff.

It wasn't just social networks, though. It was email, calendars, contacts. Nowadays we take for granted that you can gracefully pull those things from multiple sources into one app, but back then it was new. Or at least, doing it smoothly was new.

I think the first people to catch up with them on the multitasking was HTC with Sense 2.0 later that year, and the social networks soon sorted themselves out.

Man, HTC Sense. Those were the days, huh? It's amazing that HTC became such a minor player in Android, when there was a time that they were the 800-pound gorilla.

The phone was also behind the times. When the Pre launched, it had a fixed focus camera and a low resolution screen. Consider that the year before, HTC had launched the TouchHD, a phone with a 3.8" 800x480 screen, a 5 megapixel AF camera, and even a front facing camera. Pre's specs were not intriguing to power users. This was also a year after the iPhone 3G, and the Pre didn't have the curb appeal of that phone or the new 3Gs. It was innovative, but didn't back it up with hardware, and was cool, but not iPhone cool, so it was never going to work out.

Yeah, that was all hardware, though. I still love WebOS for what it accomplished, and I still hate HP for giving up on it.

Part of me wants to buy an LG Smart TV, despite the fact that I HATE smart TVs, just because they're using WebOS. I'm sure it's not anything like it used to be, though.

I tried to buy one when they started going on sale everywhere, but never could get one. My buddy had one and I would play with it.

Too heavy for me, I had a Galaxy Tab at the time, which was thinner and lighter than an iPad 2, but I wish I could have gotten it. It blows that it wasn't super thin, which was what everyone was going for at the time, so it also didn't sell well. Oh, and it was $500.

The stacks feature came about in WebOS 2.0 I believe, which, outside of the tablet, was only on the Pre3, which was functionally identical to the Pre.

Overall, I think it was let down mostly by the hardware and Palm not being able to stick with it. HP had almost no confidence in the product, and dumped it immediately. I bet that if it had the kind of support other companies put behind their phones, it would still be in the conversation.

I've never tried an LG smart TV. :(.

But yeah, once Duarte showed up at Google, the phone manufacturers didn't have to skin the shit out of it anymore.

Also, the HTC 10 is a great smartphone. Try it.

I tried to buy one when they started going on sale everywhere, but never could get one. My buddy had one and I would play with it.

Too heavy for me, I had a Galaxy Tab at the time, which was thinner and lighter than an iPad 2, but I wish I could have gotten it. It blows that it wasn't super thin, which was what everyone was going for at the time, so it also didn't sell well. Oh, and it was $500.

Heh, the only good thing about HP calling it quits was that they issued a huge retroactive discount. That $500 tablet cost me $100. Of course, I didn't know that was going to happen when I bought it.

The stacks feature came about in WebOS 2.0 I believe, which, outside of the tablet, was only on the Pre3, which was functionally identical to the Pre.

Ah, OK

Overall, I think it was let down mostly by the hardware and Palm not being able to stick with it. HP had almost no confidence in the product, and dumped it immediately. I bet that if it had the kind of support other companies put behind their phones, it would still be in the conversation.

That's pretty much what I think. It was ahead of the game in several key areas, it's hard to believe it couldn't have done well given the right circumstances (and better hardware). It really did seem like someone at HP wanted to dump it before it even got going. I'd guess there was some internal conflict about whether to even acquire Palm in the first place.

I've never tried an LG smart TV. :(.

Me either. I'm sure it's pretty different in TV form.