Platinum Studio Head Doesn't Think Next-Gen Hardware Will Be As "Ground-Breaking" As The Switch

PlatinumGames' studio head, Atsushi Inaba, struggles to get excited for Sony and Microsoft's next-generation hardware, saying the two lack "inventive quality."

[blackblades]

Guesing most JP devs thinks the same, then again it should help with some JP games like dynasty warriors. Matter fact they all could do much more if and this guy is wrong only thing that make switch different is the on the go design.

[Shiken]

Not so much having games on the go, but the ability to seamlessly "switch" between console and handheld functions. It allows us to play console games natively on the go or on a TV without the need for multiple saves, transfers, or a wifi connection. It litterally has every Nintendo gimmick packed in as well, from touch screen to motion controls. It is all there, so no matter how you slice it, the Switch is a very innovative and great device to have.

Having said that, there are multiple ways to innovate, and Sony/MS are going a different route. No need for platinum to downplay them, as options for us gamers is only a good thing. Having everyone do the same thing would be boring afterall.

[mandingo]

Games on the go is so lame imo. Your playing on a tiny screen and at like 720p. Who wants that? Maybe when I was 12 playing Pokémon was cool on the go but now with all the great games out why would I spoil that on a tiny screen.

[MajorLazer]

I'm more than happy to sacrifice portability in favour of a vastly superior and definitive experience, something the switch could never be able to provide.

[Shiken]

@mandingo @MajorLazer

Thats nice, thats why there are options. I have downtime at work and my PS4 Pro cannot not provide me the ability to play during that time. Also as a father with small children, I cannot very well retire to my den while my 2 year old runs rampant throughout the house. But with Switch, I can monitor them and get in some extra time on the game as well. Because of this, I buy all multiplats that come to Switch, on the Switch. On weekends and very early mornings when I feel like getting up at 3 am, I play docked. The versatility is king for me, and PS4 cannot touch that.

For the few games that I feel I must play that don't come to Switch, that is where my PS4 Pro comes in. I beat REmake 3 over the course of a weekend and am about to finish FFVIIR (which is taking longer due to limited time tied to a TV).

But because of Switch, I was also able to enjoy Metro Redux, Trials of Mana, Animal Crossing and soon Outer Worlds as well thanks to the hybrid nature of the device. Not sure if you guys are that narrow minded to fail at realizing that the Switch is selling for a reason (which is that your needs =/= the needs of others), or if you are bitter about the success of the Switch in general.

And no, it is not Nintendo fans alone supporting the Switch. This is why it has destroyed the WiiU and already passed X1 in less than half the time X1 was on the market. The Switch has a wide appeal, and for good reason.

[shauzy]

when the switch goes from handheld to docked mode, the speed of the screens switching is faster than alt tabbing a game on pc for me

[ABizzel1]

Not once did I see him say anything about the Switch in those quotes. The reality is its not the hardware that completely drives innovation, the creativity of the talent working on the hardware that produces ground-breaking experiences.

There hasn't been any ground-breaking tech that I can think of in gaming in a while, as consoles and even handhelds are basically mobile hardware (in the sense of consoles laptop equivalent, and handheld cellphone / tablet equivalent) across the board. The only real innovation has been in game development and design, and game peripherals like PSVR, Kinect 360, Wii-Mote, PS Eye PS2, etc...

If Platinum wants innovation, then use the newfound powers in the new consoles to create it.

[TorpeAlex]

Did... did you read the article? He mentions the Switch explicitly and explains:

"As an industry, it’s all very promising and I don’t want to be perceived as too negative. But to give another example of my point, the Nintendo Switch was very ground-breaking in how it was able to just to take a home console and make it portable. It’s something that you hadn’t seen a lot of people doing before: it took this wall, that perhaps a lot of people didn’t know even existed, and broke it down. --- Switch opened up all these new possibilities. I think the Game Boy and the DS also did that: there were so many surprises in those. If you compare that to when you’re simply seeing graphical improvements or just ‘faster, bigger’… obviously it’s nice, but it doesn’t have that same inventive quality that really surprised me with past consoles."

[rainslacker]

@Torpe

That doesn't make a console ground breaking though. I mean, it's a great feature I guess, but it does absolutely nothing to innovate the overall hardware, or the games on the system itself.

If the idea that ground breaking is in how the user uses the system, then that's backwards. The ground breaking stuff should be in how that system changes gaming, because Switch doesn't do anything that does that. The example given just gives people an option to play the same game on the go, as opposed to having it hooked up to a TV.

[Concertoine]

Yes, it is important to consider this comment in the context of the Japanese market. The switch basically reversed a multi-generational trend of waning console sales in Japan by being a portable home console.

Compared to its predecessor, the only market that the ps4 is still trying to catch up to is the Japanese market.

[kneon]

Is the portable aspect really used much in Japan? I was there about a 6 months after launch and the only time I saw one in use was on the plane ride there. Never saw one in the subways, or anywhere else. I went back a year later and never saw one at all.

[PhoenixUp]

What part of minimal to nonexistent load times doesn’t sound groundbreaking

[DJStotty]

Snes/mega drive games (Cartridges) have minimal to non-existent load times

[bouzebbal]

Even Nintendo handhelds, kept that going

[NeoGamer232]

LOL. PS actually brought the console world load times...

Before PS there was no such thing. It was their decision to switch to an optical drive to spur CD/DVD growth that brought load times to consoles. In fact, it got so bad with PS3 and blu-ray that they had to start installing parts of games to the PS3 hard drive to get load times down from optical discs. And they called it a feature. LOL.

[bouzebbal]

Neogamer: you know other consoles with cd were out before ps1 do you!?

[Mr_Writer85]

@Djstotty

Whilst that is true, the tech, design and size of games of those games made it easier.

The Switch games are on carts, and they still have load times.

[iofhua2]

The Switch doesn't have bad load times either.

Pokemon Sword has maybe the worst I've seen so far and it loads a whole new wilderness area map with trees, rivers, pokemon, NPC's, etc. in like 4 or 5 seconds.

Loading anything else is even quicker. Other Switch games either have virtually instant load times or are like 1 or 2 seconds.

The Switch gets a lot of hate but it uses all solid state storage with it's cartridges and SD card. It's not close to SSD speed but it's better than disk-based or mechanical HDD.

[Concertoine]

Metroid Prime and Jak and Daxter had no loading times in the 6th gen

[meganick]

Prime actually did have load times. It just did a good job of masking them. Anytime you ride the elevator from one locale to another, the game is loading the next location, and you can’t skip it.

[PhoenixUp]

@ DJ

And they don’t have nearly as large games as today so what’s your point?

@ Con

Those were specific titles. This is about a system wide feature

[Imalwaysright]

The point is that it is not groundbreaking.

[PhoenixUp]

It is when you consider the large amount of expansive titles that will have more seamless gameplay. That’s far more impactful on the industry moving forward than what Switch has brought to the table

[VariantAEC]

I guess I'm the brave one who liked this comment?
Too bad the truth is you're right games had to be designed to leverage the system's weaknesses to load in content but it is also true that basically every game console and computer saw extended loading times since the PS1 era.
Computers have only started to keep loading times down thanks to faster I/O (some of which is actually also available on PS4 with NVMe being the only hold out not available on consoles until next generation). Games used to be very small. The entire GameBoy through Gameboy Color library could fit on a 8 BD-ROM discs or less! Because figuring the total space requirements actually requires ownership of every game cartridges file I decided to look at the largest cartridge sizes the system supports and the total number of games released. There were 1,056 GB games and GB carts maxed out at 4mb. GBC had 660 games and carts as large as 8mb with GBA having 1,510 titles on carts as large as 256mb so 8 BD-ROMs is the total size of all of the GameBoy's software if every cartridge were completely full.
Assuming we threw all of the 296 N64 titles in there too you'd still only need to add a DVD to the 8 Blu-ray discs you already have, but the reality is you'd probably need less than 8 Blu-rays worth of space for every game on all Nintendo's GameBoy systems plus the NES through the Nintendo 64 all on 9 BD discs *OR LESS!*
Imagine all your PS4 games fitting on a single BD ROM... There are already games on PS4 that don't fit on one BD anymore Gran Turismo Spec II is one such example already... And you still need to download some content from the servers!!! It's really that huge. When 2 BD aren't enough for one game...

Anyway yeah GT Sport takes a while to load races but that time hasn't increased with all the new content. It's a limitation of the I/O itself that prevents fast loading. Imagine GT Sport loading a race in 2-4 seconds instead of the 55-70 that it takes now.
That's what next gen brings. Near seamless loading across many if not all games.

I'm not saying load times will be gone entirely they'll just be far less intrusive most of the time. There was loading times in SNES games too from my time playing on the SNES mini and if I recall correctly Diddy Kong racing had brief loading screens too (they were totally black loading screens that at longest hung around for 2-3 seconds).

[VariantAEC]

Diddy Kong Racing is an N64 game, but the there were still brief, but obvious loading pauses when entering and leaving levels.

[DJStotty]

In the cartridge era, them games would have been classed as large, and hard to produce with the tech available.

Games these days may be larger, but the tech has also evolved so that the process of creating games is more simplified. That is why you have 1 man teams, producing games looking largely on par with AA games of major publishers today.

[porkChop]

It isn't groundbreaking. Games didn't have any load times until the move to discs. Groundbreaking literally means breaking new ground, something that hasn't been done/seen before.

[VariantAEC]

GameBoy games were just a few megabytes in size. Games on disk (cartridges) were tiny and RAM while far slower and infinitesimal by today's standards was fast enough to load in 2D sprites and or very simple geometric shapes.
GameBoy to N64 were simple machines. PS1 was indeed even slower due to CD I/O.

There is just one tiny problem...
If CDs were the issue and carts are the solution why is Switch so slow?

[porkChop]

The Switch uses flash memory cards rather than traditional cartridges. They're essentially just SD cards. The old cartridges on the N64 for example basically acted like RAM, they gave the system direct access to the game files. It was a much faster way of handling data.

The reason discs won out is because they're far cheaper, not that they're better. The N64 cartridges in the 90's could read at 50MB/s. The PS4's much newer hard drive reads at 75MB/s. That shows you just how advanced cartridges were, even back then.

[VariantAEC]

CDs weren't better?
I'd say that extra 636 megabytes of storage was a definitive bump and allowed huge worlds to exist on PlayStation and other consoles and PC. Then and even now space is more important to gamers and developers than speed. Would developers or gamers be excited for PS5 if the hardware could only support 200GB of storage? I sincerely doubt it!

[Mr_Writer85]

@porkchop

"Games didn't have any load times until the move to discs."

Resorting to lies 😂

[PhoenixUp]

@ pork

Are and the various other disagrees that dense?Of course games on cartridges in the 2nd-4th gens didn’t have much loading times because the data wasn’t massive. Games barely came out to a gigabyte back then.

You can’t be sane and compare that to the next gen moving massive amounts of data in a very fast manner to what was done in the 80s and 90s.

You especially can’t overlook that along with the other technological advancements these new consoles bring and yet act like the Switch is the most groundbreaking thing ever imagined. That’d be the same whack thinking where some people proposed that Wii did more to advance gaming than either PS3 or 360

[porkChop]

I never said the Switch was the most groundbreaking thing ever. It's just a fact that we didn't have load times. The reason for that doesn't even really matter. Split second loading is not new, so it isn't groundbreaking.

[PhoenixUp]

That’s really an asinine line of thinking

Might as well say caveman drawings makes the Mona Lisa not a groundbreaking impactful piece of artwork

[Mr_Writer85]

"It's just a fact that we didn't have load times"

Again with the lies....

https://youtu.be/MtBoRp_cSx...

https://youtu.be/2EkVHxE0Y8...

"Games didn't have any load times until the move to discs."

And before you try the "I was talking just about cartridges/consoles" defence, that's a reminder of what you said.

[gamerben]

Ironically enough, minimal loading times is one of my favorite things about the switch. I'm glad consoles will start using SSDs this gen.

[PhoenixUp]

@ gamer

Minimal load times? Please. I have all three consoles and there’s various Switch games that have just as long load times as the other platforms

[AuraAbjure]

Puck inventive quality. They're video games. They ooze creativity. I'm actually wondering are there any recent games where NPCs react to voice commands?

[L7CHAPEL]

I'd like to see a lot more done in the area of AI, instead of multiple huge health bars & pumped up hit points.

[ColdSin]

For that to happen in games, I believe that we have to usher into the age of 3D XPoint technology.

[Mr_Luke]

Since PS2:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

There was a war game you could send commands with voice, there was a bundle with the headset. SOCOM maybe? I don't remember so well.

[L7CHAPEL]

original socom did have that capability.
also "hawx" Tom Clancy game, and there was one or two rainbow six games for console that did the same thing.

[AuraAbjure]

I think talking and communicating with NPCs in game would count as "inventive creativity". Microsoft could import Cortana's voice command tech and it would be a totally different experience compared to 8 year old games using voice tech.

Think full blown conversations with NPCs. I think a lot of players would enjoy the sensation of strategically planning for a battle by verbally communicating with their NPC team beforehand. They already have full blown human-computer verbal conversation tech up and running in Japan with their digital girlfriend apps.

[kthxcrayon]

Love this. Imagine an RPG where instead of a skill check against a persuasion stat you instead have NLP run sentiment /emotion analysis on your spoken dialogue.

[AuraAbjure]

@kthxcrayon That's an excellent idea. It's plain to see with the success of Amazon Alexa and Google Home Speaker the public enjoys engaging A.I. in verbal conversation. With my Google Home Speaker it always says "Sorry, I didn't quite get that." and therefore leaves a lot to be desired...

[ZeroX9876]

I would buy a home console switch anytime for a reduced price. When you consider that the display is a big part of the price, a home-only switch could probably sell for $200, maybe even lower considering it costed Nintendo the equivalent of $257 to manufacture it back in 2017.
Nothing better for Couch coop play on a big screen with lots of guest over :)

[justsomeoffdude]

This guy should shut the hell up.. where are the games they promised to announce after the viewtiful joe kickstarter?

[BenRC01]

You mean you have no original ideas and rely on hardware gimmicks.

[Kavorklestein]

I agree. To deny next gen improvements while praising last gen simplicity makes it sound like This guy wants to stay in his Comfort zone and would prefer to stay with last gen GFX. His teams aren't even talented enough make a game like Scalebound up to Microsoft's hit or miss standards. I think this dude wants to develop on the cheap and collect the maximum revenue he can with minimal effort.
Switch lets him do that.

[stupidusername]

Sony and Microsoft have proven again and again that people just want consoles with better graphics and nothing more, and that’s imo not really a bad thing. But I’m also happy that we’ve got Nintendo that tries to innovate on how games are played in more aspects than just looks. The new ps5 controller is interesting though, and I hope Sony will give VR more focus with the ps5.
I’m excited to see what Nintendo will do after the Switch though. I wouldn’t be surprised if we saw a Switch 2 that mainly just focused on better graphics.

[Melankolis]

Agree. Let's not listen to that Inaba guy. I can't imagine if Sony and MS make "unconventional consoles" that emphasize on anything but graphic and raw power.

Does he want 3 "weird" consoles at the same time?. The gaming industry is perfect as it is now, with 2 conventional consoles and 1 unconventional console.

[rainslacker]

I want experiences. Sony offers those in spades. Nintendo has good games that are finely crafted, but I feel their actual experiences are not as frequent. Most of their games aren't really story driven to offer the kinds of experiences I'm looking for, and don't mention BOTW, because while it was an experience, it was kind of a dull one.

I respect if you want a different kind of experience from games, but you want to make it out to be like Sony and MS fans only care about the graphics and nothing else matters. While I'm sure we could point to some who do prove that assertion true, it doesn't mean that its an absolute. I mean, if you want to talk about new and innovative ways to play that don't rely on just looks, why not give the crown to Sony for PSVR? Graphics aren't that great. It's an entirely new experience rather than just an underpowered console that happens to also be a portable but essentially just plays games that could easily be played on other consoles. PSVR is everything you say that Nintendo has to offer, and PS fans seems to be pretty positive about that.

Nothing about Switch's hardware couldn't be done on other consoles except for the portability. It isn't the switch hardware which makes their games good, nor "ground breaking"....although that's a stretch of a term to use. It's that they make good games, and its pretty narrow minded to posit that they are the only ones that do so regularly.

[stupidusername]

I think you’ve misunderstood me. I was solely talking about the hardware and I also gave credit to both VR and Dualsense on Sony’s part. And even though I said that many only want better graphics with their next console doesn’t mean that I also think they only want better looks in their games. Of course they want inovative games with great stories too. My point is that a lot of people who likes playstation and microsoft doesn’t want the next gen console to be a machine centered around for example motion controls, a tablet controller or even kinect as microsoft found out with the Xbox One. I’m even one of those people and I’m happy ps5 won’t be anything other than a console with better graphics. But I’m also happy Nintendo is doing something different.

I agree that Nintendo doesn’t offer great stories. But I do believe they offer the most inventive gameplay. Sony on the other hand deliveres incredible stories but the gameplay, although good is a lot of the time way more repetetive and similar to other recent games.

[rlow1]

I'm pretty sure he's just wishing for a more revolutionary console. These machines are a big jump. But are basically powered up PC's. Not like a PS3 that tried something totally new and different.

[cooperdnizzle]

Sony is trying a new custom design with the ps5. M$ on the other hand has made a console Pc. Just my thoughts

[DJStotty]

Have you seen the PS5 custom design?

Please share

[rlow1]

Nothing compared to the complexity of the cell processors, a faster hardrive with a compression engine is not the same. A brand new processor architecture that hadn't been done before, now that's revolutionary.

[Vegamyster]

rlow1

I'm sure if Sony could redo the PS3 they would have done something different, the Cell processor while powerful was overall hard to develop games for which led most 360 3rd party games looking and running better. It was also expensive, something like a $200-$300 loss per unit which led Sony to not making a profit on the system until 2010.

[MajorLazer]

There's a lot more software and maybe mechanical trickery though, so not just a powered up PC. I can't imagine the quality of games around mid gen. Hell, even 2nd year games will look spectacular, I'm sure. Devs always push the consoles further than what the specs say.

[L7CHAPEL]

I wouldn't use the term groundbreaking
I would definitely say innovative without a doubt, but not groundbreaking.
tablets been around awhile...

[tehpees3]

It will come down to the price at release. PS4 was built for two reasons

1. To generate profits
2. Get rid of proprietary architecture and be more accessible to developers.

PS5 is definitely not going to be the same price as PS4 because it is far more ambitious than PS4 was for the time.

[Bluemaster77]

lmao groundbreaking ?!?!

[Fishy Fingers]

90% of the PS5/XB spec's we're ballparked months before they were officially unveiled just by looking at what's available on the PC market/horizon.

I'd take a PS/XB over the Switch all day long. But when Nintendo is working on a new system you never know what you're going to get, cant say the same for the others.

[Spicyram]

Lol

[CrimsonWing69]

So... cloud based gaming where you can play on different devices and transfer that save data to your console isn’t as groundbreaking as a portable console that you can dock to play on your tv?

[rainslacker]

I think he's talking from the viewpoint that it's a home console that someone can take away as a portable. I guess he's positing that that is the common way people are using it, instead of looking at it as the replacement to the extremely popular 3DS, which sold bucketloads because it was portable.

It's not that groundbreaking to be able to hook a portable up to a TV. It's been available off and on through different means with portable consoles since the game boy, and was adopted by Nintendo, Sony, and even NEC(sort of) for decades.

[Xaevi]

The Switch is far from ground breaking.

[Xaevi]

If y'all are gonna disagree I'ma need reasons why the Switch is ground breaking. And just to be clear, I don't think next gen is all that ground breaking either. The fast loads are going to be pretty sweet, but I strongly believe that developers are the ones who need to do the ground breaking. So far there's no game that has broken any ground on Switch, not from Nintendo or any Dev that has made a switch game

[tehpees3]

Not added any disagrees but I will give you the reason it sold well.

'Groundbreaking' is not limited to games alone. The vast majority of Switch's own games are Indies and niche Japanese games. It is the ports that make it groundbreaking.

Sony claimed Vita had the same graphical power as PS3 and the claim simply did not stick. Switch is the system to have built the bridge between home console and handheld and that is what makes it 'groundbreaking'. It is doing something any handheld prior to it was not capable of.

Games on Switch look just as good as they do on last gen systems (sometimes even better) and that has been perceived by the public as a groundbreaking technical accomplishment.

Also Blu-Ray now feels very outdated and backwards compared to the storage methods that Switch delivers which makes it hard to go back to my PS3.

[Xaevi]

Selling well doesn't make the hardware groundbreaking. It's third party ports also don't make it groundbreaking. The hardware in the Switch is mobile and we've known that the tech inside phones have been capable of handling console games for years. The only reason why devs don't port games to phones is because the market is completely different, and phones aren't all just for gaming. The Vita at that time was proving to be a portable PS3 with games like Uncharted, And Killzone. The unfortunate truth is SONY left it to die. It's not bridging anything, it's still very much a handheld even if you can hook it up to a tv, or if you can play some current gen games which again we've known for years that mobile tech can handle em. As for games looking better on Switch than they did last gen I can't take that seriously. There's nothing from Nintendo that looks as graphically amazing as Uncharted 2,3, or GOW3, and third party ports look like a blurry mess, ontop of having to downgrade a lot of other parts of a game to be able to run it in the first place. As for Blu-ray, I can give you that one since cartridges have surpassed em but they remain inexpensive compared to what Ninty is using

[rainslacker]

Vita was as graphically capable as the PS3. More so even. It wasn't as powerful in the CPU department.

How are software sales ground breaking? Their policies aren't particularly ground breaking, as they're just adopting what Sony has been using since the early PS3 days, and those were based on policies that Sony had for indie games back in the PS1 days. Indie game support was excellent on the Vita as well...up to the point Sony was even allowing homebrew to work officially on the system...which was eventually scrapped, probably because Sony was on the path to scrap the Vita.

Getting niche Japanese games on the Switch isn't particularly ground breaking. It's par for the course. Just like the Vita and the 3DS had them in spades, because that's where a lot of the Japanese user base plays.

"Games on Switch look just as good as they do on last gen systems (sometimes even better) "

That's great. But this is supposed to be their home console as well, and that was a primary thing the developer said made the Switch ground breaking. A portable system that can handle 14 year old graphics isn't exactly ground breaking. Cell phones before the Switch even released were able to do that. It's neither a technical accomplishment nor groundbreaking, just what's available with today's tech, and I haven't seen this overflow of the public considering that a groundbreaking technical achievement. In fact, this is the first time I've heard anyone state that it could match last gen graphics, although I think it can actually surpass them a bit.

"Also Blu-Ray now feels very outdated and backwards compared to the storage methods that Switch delivers which makes it hard to go back to my PS3."

So, a cart technology that was out years before Blu-ray was even conceived is more ground breaking? Again, it's just what's available today, and it's the practical way to deliver games on a portable. I guess those high speed Vita carts using essentially the same technology was way ahead of its time?

Blu-Ray is just a installation and DRM mechanism. Games do not play off them. It'd be more apt to say that the hard drive feels outdated, and I might actually agree with you to some degree, but it's a more practical solution for a non-portable system.

[tehpees3]

Vita was compatible with (at the time) high end mobile engines. That does not make it 'PS3 graphics'. PSP also had a Killzone game so getting Killzone does not make it match PS3. Which Vita game was it that looked as good as the Last of Us because I never saw it.

Sony seriously exagerrated what Vita was capable of and that is partially why it failed. See Xaevi you are doing a disservice to the PS3 because you do not seem to realise HOW AHEAD OF IT'S TIME PS3 was. Yeah, the Cell was not capable of the promises Sony made of it at E3 2005 but it was 'future proof' and the decisions Sony made with it not only benefitted it above 360 in the long run but also placed it on a pearch above 2011 high end portable systems. Switch is the first dedicated game portable that can match PS3 graphically. Not Vita. Unless you can show me that game that looks like the Last of Us.

Having said that I stand by my view that disc based media is no longer needed.

[rainslacker]

And what Switch game looks like a current gen game that bridges the gap between the home and portable console?

Graphically, the PSV was just as capable as the Vita. It was never really shown off though. Some games did have moments where it was evident, but there were none that showed it across the board. But, there are plenty of PSV games which are easily on par with other games of last gen, so saying they seriously exaggerated is quite the stretch.

[tehpees3]

Not stretching at all. For starters, Vita was not truthfully HD, it was only sub HD so that was one lie Sony told. Jack Tretton boasted a 'AAA first person shooter with seamless online connectivity' when talking about Black Ops Declassified. Every single multiplat apart from the original Sigma, looked appauling compared to it's PS3 counterpart, Borderlands 2 most notably. The only reason Sigma looked as good as it did was likely because it was a time when developers were still getting used to developing for PS3.

Switch however never claimed it would be as powerful as PS4 and never boasted it would have a game that would look as good. You need to realise that by the time Vita launched people's perception of PS3 games had changed massively compared to 2007. If you claim it is PS3 power, Borderlands 2, Marvel vs Capcom 3, Mortal Kombat, Street Fighter X Tekken, Ninja Gaiden etc all need to match their PS3 visuals or people perceive it as a lie.

Switch succeeded because it has the portable Assassin's Creed, Bioshock and Borderlands we expected and were promised with Vita. Vita was not capable of it. I agree Vita was extremely ambitious but it ran before it could walk and was too early for what it wanted to accomplish.

[Germaximus]

There is literally not a single thing ground-breaking about the Switch.

[stupidusername]

So when did you last play home console games on the go without a TV?

[FanboyPolice]

The Switch is the only ground-breaking console of this gen.

[Traecy]

LOL!

[Jon_Targaryen]

Ofcourse Platinum is going to say that.. They're basically a second party studio for Nintendo at this point.

[DreadGara]

Switch is groundbreaking for being not having games? Or for being just a Nintendo handheld device?

[Darkborn]

That's because they only got an Xbox dev kit lol. I'm kidding but no loading times completely does change everything and many devs said that that alone will completely change how they develop all games because they had to work around loading times and a lot of cinematic and even the speed of your character was all designed around how fast the disc could read and transfer data to load the environment or the next zone if you fast traveled or loaded a new level.

[TheHunter81]

The Switch is groundbreaking?

[FlavorLav01]

Only thing groundbreaking about the switch IS it’s portability. Switch has its iconic cartoony Nintendo roster as always sure, everything else is either not on the switch or it’s likely the lowest quality port of the games I actually want to play. I Don’t see Cyberpunk, Mafia1 Remake, RDR2, or any open-world Ubisoft or FromSoft games going to Switch. It does light hearted cartoon graphics well, so MarioParty is great for company, but unfortunately that doesn’t leave a lot to desire for someone into mature themes and a broad library to play. I would still enjoy a Switch Pro with more 3rd party support though...

[Xx_Pistol_xX]

If your not using next gen level tech I see exactly why you would think that.

[KyoSiegfried86]

Pretty sad thing to say, since they’re best selling game was on ps4. Also their Games don’t really use switch unique features that much. So what’s the point of saying that a console is ground breaking and the others are not when you make Games that could be ported easily on every console?

[ForwardDude]

If he knew something about PS5 or Xbox Series X that were "Groud-Breaking" he would be under NDA and couldn't talk about it. I hope we don't know everything about the Xbox Ser.X and we still don't know a lot about the PS5. Let's wait for official reveal.

Also, the PSP had a TV out function by plugging a cable in a TV and the Vita also had a TV out function in early devs kits ( not in the commercial release ). Technically, Sony could have made the Vita a proto-Switch. But I must confess that I am very proud that it's Nintendo that done it first, because they have done it completly ( the Switch is a home console unlike the psp or the vita ).

The detachable control of the Switch is unique and is a real innovation. But I don't feel it really used at it's full potential. Games on the Switch are still better played with the Pro controller. No Wii Sport and 1-2 Switch is still the game that use the controller the best.

[Melankolis]

What does he mean by ground-breaking?

If he talks about how we play video game? Yes, Switch might be ground-breaking, because it's a home console and a portable at the same time.

But is Switch ground-breaking in terms of gameplay? No!. Even Platinum Games made hack and slash that just like his routine job for years that is not a ground-breaking at all, even on Switch.

And now he's looking at PS5 and XSX mumbling "oh yeah it's good but it's same old console, just with enhanced graphics...".

This Inaba guy is pretty inconsistent.

[rainslacker]

What exactly is all that ground breaking about the switch? It's a portable console with removable controllers, but offers up nothing that is innovative in terms of hardware, nor are games on the system breaking ground or innovating in ways that couldn't be done on other platforms. I actually saw more innovation on the Wii when it comes to asynchronous play, whereas Switches biggest feature is that you can have multiplayer from a single portable console.

[Zodiac]

You just listed hardware innovations. Hardware innovations aren’t exclusive to the guts of a machine.

On break at work I would be able to set the switch on the table and play mario kart with a friend and he didn’t need his own controller. At school I would bring it to the library and play some smash bros in tabletop mode during breaks.

To me, that’s really fun and it’s an experience I won’t get with other consoles, therefore, I don’t compare them. It’s two different experiences.

Also playing in handheld while I have some shows on the tv as background noise is fun lol. There’s no lag and no huge dip in visual quality. It’s seamless. And the screen is bigger than say, the Vita’s, so it really is a high quality experience on the go.

For me, it’s those little things. Other consoles will offer their thing and I’ll be able to enjoy all of them

[rainslacker]

OK, but is tabletop mode really reason to call it groundbreaking beyond new gen hardware which has completely new paradigms for best practices for game design, which can truly allow for innovation in game design beyond just slapping together some other ideas, putting the zelda label on it, and getting called the most innovative company ever? There was an add on to the PS1 that added a screen that price combined with a new PS1 and that add on, was actually the same price as the Switch it now. Was that innovative? I guess not, because it wasn't an official add on. But it allowed for the same thing outside of needing a power outlet nearby.

Comparing it to the VIta, when it released 4 years later and saying that makes it ground breaking, instead of just a typical advance in technology is kind of disingenuous. When talking about innovation, you talk about who did things first. Not that Vita was hugely groundbreaking, but that the Switch wasn't particularly first.

This isn't about what is a cool feature, but rather, is that cool feature actually ground breaking.

[Zodiac]

What have been the recent innovations in game design that really shook the mold?

360/PS3 introduced a lot of beloved franchises and its contributions to the entire gaming medium are obvious, most notably online more so than even the games themselves. Wii and WiiU did offer new play experiences, but as is the case with the WiiU, innovation isn’t always a marker for success.

Kinnect and Move never really took off, and VR is still in its infancy, but that’s what I would call an actual new gaming experience.

But PS4/360, while offering great games, were really really safe consoles.

PS5/series x will be amazing consoles that will both sit under my TV, but I can’t say they will offer experiences yet. The PS4/one didn't, so I’m going to wait and see before I say that. Maybe the PS4/one just weren’t the power jump needed to give devs that extra breathing room that the 360/PS3 did and the ps5/series x will give that breathing room, but I gotta see more.

[rainslacker]

"What have been the recent innovations in game design that really shook the mold"

There haven't been any. And that's the point. You're trying to prove your point that next gen hardware isn't breaking ground, before that hardware is even released. You expect games to come out before the system that show how it's going to be used to shift game design?

I don't expect a sudden jump from this gen to next, but I expect more than just being able to put the system on top of a table, and use it as a display. Those changes may take time to happen, but you aren't making your point by citing that we haven't seen this yet. The whole point of the new hardware set ups is to allow a change from what we have now....hence, ground breaking.

"Kinnect and Move never really took off"

That doesn't make them any less ground breaking. But it's a good example of how sometimes it takes time to show full potential. Move or similar motion type controls, are now used as a common way for VR input. Ground breaking doesn't have to become mainstream to be considered as such. In reference to next gen, the systems are designed to push past current game design paradigms. Actual games may not represent it as directly as you need to show this, but it's still there, and certainly much more ground breaking than Nintendo using older hardware, which happens to have a dock to put their portable system in, and a stand so you can keep it upright on a table....something I did with some random piece of plastic I found around the house so I could watch videos on it years before the Switch was even conceived.

"But PS4/360, while offering great games, were really really safe consoles."

I agree, and it's why I'm more excited for next gen, than I was for this gen before it started. Go back in my history, and you'll see plenty of comments where I state that next gen was that gen with a prettier coat of paint, and it's my biggest impetus for being critical of MS plans to do cross gen for the first year or two.

[ShadowWolf712]

...it's a tablet with an HDMI adapter. Most everything groundbreaking about it has been on the software side finding ways to make games work despite the limitations, being blunt.

[Silly gameAr]

Someone from Platinum said that about the Switch? No way!

[derek]

And there's nothing groundbreaking about the switch either. Nintendo essentially combined their handheld with their underpowered console and presto the switch. You've gotta hand to Nintendo tho they've gotten away with repackaging and selling the same games since the Wii.

[WheatBread]

The Switch wasn't groundbreaking. The iphone/ipad had the same feature back in 2014 using a lighting port to hdmi cable.

[jBlakeeper]

Inventiveness is Nintendo’s area of expertise. Sony and Microsoft are all about raw power for the core/hardcore gamer.

[gamerben]

I'd be hard pressed to say the appeal is still hardcore gamers anymore honestly. A lot of games on the xbox and ps4 this gen were borderline interactive movies (especially PS4). Most of the time old-school gamers are playing on PC or switch.

[Shinox]

This mother**** , they are using our money from Kickstarter to further fund things for Nintendo only

[Exvalos]

Not to suprising as the Japanese market is all about gaming on the go. So I can see why being able to play triple a games while on the subway seems groundbreaking to them. However for the rest of the world above the age of 12 these new consoles will be revolutionary.

[Wulfer]

Wow bad enough they insulted the Xbox team but, now they've really lost it. Were they drunk when this interview took place?

[Chocoburger]

If the Switch is "groundbreaking" what does that mean for the PSP with component video-out, and Sega Nomad?

I like the Switch, but come on. Its just a portable console with HDMI-out, really not all that special. Sheesh.

[gamerben]

The design is what differentiates it from past handhelds and makes it special, but with the nomad you had to hook it the AVs and power adapter every time you wanted to play on the tv, and with the psp you didn't have the option to use a regular controller (at least as far as I am aware), you had to sit close using the same dinky controls.

With switch, you just dock it, take the joycons out and that's it. It's a MUCH more instantaneous experience.

[Chocoburger]

Yeah, its an evolution, not a revolution. A couple of tweaks and changes, still not considered groundbreaking since both SEGA and SONY did it before Nintendo.
I do like how the Switch allows you to remove the controllers, but the JoyCons are still sub-optimal. However, the Pro Controller is really nice.

I treat my Vita as a Switch, take out the memory card, slap it into my PS TV and its the same damn thing. Once again, years before the Switch. The 'instantaneous' aspect about Switch is nice, but let's not blow it out of proportion here.

[VariantAEC]

PSP Go did allow users to dock the device and play games on the TV using a DS3 controller. The real downside to that whole setup is that believe it or not you needed a PS3 to pair a DS3 to the PSP Go. So it wasn't perfect, but it was certainly a Switch-like idea that pre-dated Switch's launch by nearly 7 years!

Additionally there was the Xperia Play and of course PS Vita which not only played select PS3 games like PSP did but also basically all PS4 games via video streaming. Some Vita games were made by the same teams at the same time for both the PS3 and Vita. This was the first time that the same teams worked on the same games for two radically different devices with the final results being sometimes nearly identical to the home console versions. I did a Killzone 2 vs Killzone Mercenaries comparison a few years ago. It's a comparison I'm pretty proud of, along with my PS3 vs PS Vita WipEout game comparisons.

Switch is more powerful that Vita by a very wide margin, but it's still appreciably weaker than PS3 hardware. Phones GPUs push past the limitations of the RSX so much so that they can now safely usurp last generation graphics fidelity in very select situations. GRID Autosport is one of those possible examples! Tegra X1 hardware cannot even display some of that title's most taxing visual features like "Advanced Fog" which at least works on phones (at a massive and basically unacceptable cost to performance but at least it works).

[gamerben]

Ok so maybe it's hard to call it a "revolution" but this is the first time this concept has really worked in the mass market because it's become MUCH more convenient than it ever was before.

[bamillington]

Great graphic dint make a great game

[gamerben]

I think a lot of people still don't understand what the real appeal of the switch really is. It's innovation comes from the fact that it's incredibly convenient compared to ps4 and xbox. It's not just that you can play it in portable mode either, it's the most headache-free console available since the load times are very minimal, the UI is snappy and quick, you don't have to worry about downloading and installing gigantic 60 GB games. It's really refreshing to have a console where getting into a game is so instantaneous just like it was in the old days, I think a lot of people overlook that.

[rainslacker]

I think the appeal is more that it's Nintendo's new portable console.

All those things you state are indeed positive benefits to the Switch, but people just need to stop acting like Nintendo has made some revolutionary new product that is drawing in the masses from all areas of the gamer buying market because of it. Nintendo has almost always had success with every portable they've made. The switch is without a doubt, their new portable console.

What is revolutionary about it isn't this hugely innovative merging of two different markets, it's that they found a way to satisfy their existing home console market, using the product that would have been solely for their portable market otherwise, and likely it would have sold just as well, or close to it, if it hadn't had the ability to connect to a TV.

I like the Switch. Mine gets plenty of play time, but I'm always amazed at the lengths some people go through to not call a spade a spade.

[Einhander1971]

Totally agree, long live Nintendo the true innovators.

[FadedWolf13]

Yeah long live Nintendo with their scummy consumer business tactics,over priced games and gimmicks sprinkled with nostalgia pixie dust retards eat it up

[Chocoburger]

People treat Nintendo the same way they treat Apple, as blind sheep.
Nintendo didn't innovate jack squat. SEGA and Sony did it first, but Nintendo 'did it first' in the eyes of their sheep.

Same way Apple sheep believe iPhone did 4G first, which is hilarious.

[Magog]

Switch is basically a high powered low resolution Android phone. What is revolutionary about that, exactly?

[VariantAEC]

It's not even that powerful compared to today's phones and even right after launch there were phones that seemed capable of outperforming Switch while docked.

The Samsung Galaxy S8 is one such example. In synthetic benchmarks it's CPU was superior to that found inside the Nvidia Shield TV which is Switch's older and more powerful cousin "born" just two years earlier in 2015.
I decided to look at Shield TV vs PS3 and discovered games running on Shield TV with Android version 5, 8 and 9 all looked best on PS3. Yeah except Doom 3 which was just a terrible port. As Digital Foundry also inadvertently discovered repeatedly in a growing number of software analysis. Switch is weak as crap!

GRID Autosport finally shipped on Android and my god does it look gorgeous for a game running on phones. On my android phones I can push the graphics much further than Switch could ever hope to attain but the critical point is that the good old S8 runs the game more stable at 720p than Switch does. The issue is the GPU is weaker than that found in the Switch and as a result 1080p is pretty demanding and runs badly (though iIrc ultimately it doesn't run much worse than on Switch).

Adreno 540 runs GRID at 1480x720 (slightly higher than 720p) at 30FPS without an issue even inside a case while recording the game output internally it runs fine in practice. Though the internally recorded videos come out lacking and while recording at 1080p the device will throttle framerates in warm ambient conditions within 15 minutes nerfing 60FPS performance. To play consistently at 60 on an S8 while using a shock resistant case like the Otter Box I used the ambient temperature needs to be at or below 20°C (68°F). Considering there are no moving parts in phones that's pretty neat in my opinion and on that device you can have the same visual fidelity Switch sees in portable or "handheld mode".
Newer hardware is more powerful that Tegra X1 and it shows allowing for higher than 1080p resolutions with 30FPS and some settings pushed out to high and Ultra (equal to PCs maximum settings in some cases).