Without online functionality, the system might as well be bricked. I’m not 100% so someone can fact check but I’m reasonably certain it will refuse to let you play any software you’ve downloaded and only allow you use physical carts without the option to update them. When 90% of a console is built around online activity, being able to remotely disable that makes the console useless.
Thats bullshit. The switch 1 also had all of this functionality and nobody complained…
Physical media ftw btw
First lookup what youre saying, seriously. None of what you said is true. If it was, a system that had no internet could not start any downloaded content, which it can…
Backwards comparability obviously might not work because it needs the title update to get possible fixes if not big part of the gpu shaders that were recompiled for switch 2 ( which is needed because the switch 1 and switch 2 gpu’s are not compatible ). Iirc from my sources within the switch homebrew community it tries to trans compile them but might not always work, hence title updates.
And if you got the console banned, you did some serious bad shit haha
When a switch 2 cannot reach online services, all your physical 3rd party “Game Keycards” become useless to you, as they require the game to be downloaded from nintendo online services.
A brick is very specifically a device that cannot be used for its intended purpose at all. This is a banned console that has limited functionality, not a brick. The terminology matters because people are misunderstanding just how much power Nintendo has because of it. I thought that Nintendo made it unable to get past a boot screen when I first heard the term used.
If there is over a 50% chance the device will not do what it is supposed to do (play your game) then nobody will want to use that device.
We are just arguing over semantics here.
I hope you see this as a not good thing for nintendo to do… “Samus”
Oh, I fully agree - banning an account is one thing, but banning at a hardware level is complete and utter bullshit. I’m arguing against using inaccurate terminology for what they’re doing, not supporting them in any way. As my username implies, I used to be a fan of theirs. They’ve always had a shady side, but since Iwata died and Reggie left, it’s all pure corporate greed there now.
Without online functionality, the system might as well be bricked. I’m not 100% so someone can fact check but I’m reasonably certain it will refuse to let you play any software you’ve downloaded and only allow you use physical carts without the option to update them. When 90% of a console is built around online activity, being able to remotely disable that makes the console useless.
Thats bullshit. The switch 1 also had all of this functionality and nobody complained…
Physical media ftw btw
First lookup what youre saying, seriously. None of what you said is true. If it was, a system that had no internet could not start any downloaded content, which it can…
Backwards comparability obviously might not work because it needs the title update to get possible fixes if not big part of the gpu shaders that were recompiled for switch 2 ( which is needed because the switch 1 and switch 2 gpu’s are not compatible ). Iirc from my sources within the switch homebrew community it tries to trans compile them but might not always work, hence title updates.
And if you got the console banned, you did some serious bad shit haha
When a switch 2 cannot reach online services, all your physical 3rd party “Game Keycards” become useless to you, as they require the game to be downloaded from nintendo online services.
This is a brick
Yet you could put in a Mario Kart World game card and play the game offline. This is a console with restricted utility, but it is not a brick.
Yes most 1st party published games are on the cartridge yes, but the majority of the library is/will be 3rd party…
So being generous this is a “majority brick”
A brick is very specifically a device that cannot be used for its intended purpose at all. This is a banned console that has limited functionality, not a brick. The terminology matters because people are misunderstanding just how much power Nintendo has because of it. I thought that Nintendo made it unable to get past a boot screen when I first heard the term used.
If there is over a 50% chance the device will not do what it is supposed to do (play your game) then nobody will want to use that device. We are just arguing over semantics here. I hope you see this as a not good thing for nintendo to do… “Samus”
Oh, I fully agree - banning an account is one thing, but banning at a hardware level is complete and utter bullshit. I’m arguing against using inaccurate terminology for what they’re doing, not supporting them in any way. As my username implies, I used to be a fan of theirs. They’ve always had a shady side, but since Iwata died and Reggie left, it’s all pure corporate greed there now.