Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1

    Objectivity of Nintendo Switch Reviews

    the people who are reviewing the Nintendo Switch are also playing The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. Could the experience with the software cloud the review of the hardware? Is it possible that reviewers unintentionally give the Switch a higher score because Breath of the Wild is so amazing? I know software sells hardware but software can blind us to the hardware problems. I am not saying the Switch will be bad or Zelda will be awesome. I am wondering if the reviewer were reviewing a different game, would they give the Switch the same score.

  2. #2
    Well given that the Switch doesn’t really have many other functions besides playing games, it is difficult to review the hardware outside ease of use on the functions it was designed to do. Its main competition is better as a home console, but lacks portable functions so it kind of stands on its own.
    The quality of the games used for review will certainly affect the hardware review as it should. Reviews on it are going to be a snapshot and what it plays at time of review will matter a lot. No one wants to buy a game console that lacks quality games to play.

  3. #3
    Then your question has been answered.
    You can look back at previous console launch reviews and read up on the follow up or yearly state of the system opinions.
    They have always been done by many publications.
    A console isn’t like say a Windows PC where they all share the same software so you are primarily reviewing the hardware. Game consoles have their own share of distinct games that may also happen to be on other systems, but they cannot be evaluated like a Windows PC. It isn’t "universal" for lack of a better word.

  4. #4
    Everyone who has used the Switch has said that actually using it is great.
    The actual device is solid and well put together. The screen is bright and clear.
    I can only imagine that maybe your referring to performance. If so, most agree that it performs very well.
    It’s not a graphical powerhouse like the One or PS4. But that was never Nintendos intention. And I’d argue that that’s actually a good thing.
    We’re quickly reaching the point where you can hardly discern the difference in power.

  5. #5
    Well if we live in reality, both consoles shared a lot of launch games and we saw the early launch differences in games like Battlefield 4. Sony launched with several games as well as Microsoft and the quality of those games were variable. If the launch software is bad, then it should be stated to not buy the system until better games come out. If the price is a sticking point and the games don’t stand up to scrutiny, it should be said. The PS3 had a pretty bad launch coupled with a high price. Why should the games at launch not affect the opinion of whether the system is a good buy? Who has a time machine to see the system improve and when or the price to be more favourable?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts