When it was announced that Halo was coming to Playstation, it didn’t really come as a shock. We’ve been seeing it coming for weeks. What’s more, the news comes weeks after Microsoft announced their new pricing for Game Pass, which faced immense backlash for how high the price was for what was offered in return, and was an obvious attempt to keep the Xbox financially steady.

And through it all, there have been rumors going around of retail outlets no longer stocking Xbox consoles, though it seems that may have been a bit exaggerated.

But still, it seems as though Microsoft is quietly looking for ways to allow Xbox to fail out of the console war, while keeping Xbox alive as a brand. The first not-so-subtle hint was with the “This is an Xbox” ad campaign, which touted the ability of non-Xbox hardware to play Xbox games, which kinda renders an Xbox system itself superfluous.

People are speaking of the console wars as though they’re over, but that’s technically not true, as Sony and Nintendo are still in the race. But the two are so different from one another that they aren’t much seen as direct competitors.

But what’s potentially vexing is that old media, particularly news outlets, might take the Xbox failing out to mean that no one is interested in consoles anymore, even though Playstation 5 has an install base in the tens of millions, and the new Switch 2 is still flying off shelves.

While this can be chalked up to old media being out of touch, the likely reason why corporate media would use Xbox as a bellwether for interest in consoles is because the American company Microsoft is more likely to be a corporate sponsor than Japanese companies such as Sony or Nintendo. It’s another example of the world making more sense when you factor in incentives.

Yet, in the history of video games, a bias against Japanese companies is sadly relevant. When video games were invented, they were an American invention. And for a long while, the American company Atari was the market leader. However, a bunch of poor business decisions on the part of Atari had led to a crash in the video game market, and it was the Japanese company Nintendo, and later the Japanese company Sega, who would step up to the plate.

However, the timing wasn’t altogether great for Nintendo, as Japanese companies, particularly those that made electronics, were widely regarded with suspicion by American lawmakers. The reason? The Japanese economy was thriving, particularly due to Japanese electronics, to the point of Japan briefly becoming the world’s number 2 economy. And there was concern that Japan could have unseated the U.S. as the world’s dominant economy.

This turned out to not be the case. But at the time, it got to the point that American lawmakers expressed their displeasure by publicly destroying Japanese consumer electronics. They also accused Nintendo of price fixing, an accusation which was repeated by the corporate information media, even though the accusation had no weight to it.

By now, you could probably guess it was Democrats.

It was into this environment that Sony came along with their Playstation, further cementing the console market for the Japanese.

By the time Microsoft came along with their Xbox, it was a valid question whether an American company could thrive in a market which was dominated by the Japanese. And, as it turns out, they were able to carve out a niche, for a while. Except in Japan, where Xbox consoles basically just participated.

As far as my opinion of the Xbox goes, it depends on which of their consoles we’re talking about. The first one didn’t interest me. For one thing, it didn’t really have much to play, and while it was consensus that Halo was a great game, it seemed like people said so just because so many other people said so. Microsoft put a lot into Xbox’s X-treme brand image, including partnerships with Mountain Dew and Taco Bell. Coming from any other brand, the cringe would be unreal. But because it’s Microsoft we’re talking about here, the “hello fellow children” vibes were off the charts.

It was against our own better judgment that the original Xbox outsold the GameCube, even if just barely. People really will fall for shallow marketing.

When Microsoft made the Xbox 360, it actually seemed respectable. I still didn’t get one. Putting aside what Nintendo made, which you would go for if you’re a fan of what they do, Microsoft was up against the PS3. Microsoft didn’t do much to differentiate the 360 from the PS3, the latter of which seemed a better choice, even if from the perspective of finding an established brand safer. Also, as much as we picked on the PS3 back in the day, after the slim model was made, it became a great system.

Then there’s Xbox One. It had a great controller, which I’ve used to play PC games up until recently. That’s about it.

And that brings us to the current Xbox consoles, the Xbox Series X/S. I kept forgetting that those ones even existed. Even when talking about video games, it just hardly comes up, even as Xbox failing out of consoles is topical.

As choices, we have Nintendo, who delights us with imaginative interactive worlds and novel hardware features, and we have Sony, whose console is a multimedia powerhouse. Compared to them, Microsoft with their Xbox Series systems are about as fun as an ESG score.

So, what is the future of Xbox? Who knows? Even if it’s hard to imagine them attempting with another console, that doesn’t mean that they aren’t going to do so, anyway. Remember that Microsoft is the company that got rich, not by making something innovative, but because Bill Gates thought like a lawyer and got a big idea from Xerox. As they are now, Microsoft has a lot more money than sense, and there’s no telling just how much more investors are willing to put up with.

I might have made this comparison before, but Xbox is kind of like that guy who stays seated at a poker table for a long time, not because he’s any good at it (because he’s not), but because he approached the table with an immense pile of chips, and the intermittent victory allows him to convince himself to remain around for just a little while more.

When a Halo game was announced for Playstation, it was as though that poker player started to think he was playing Go Fish, and he let another player take the best card in his hand.

To get right to it, something is going wrong with attempts to play Super Smash Bros. Ultimate online using Switch 2 systems.

The problem might occur when a player attempts to use one character in specific: the Mii Fighter.

In SSBU, the Mii Fighter is a customizable character. In fact, you can use a Mii that is associated with your Nintendo account. This gives the character a personal element.

So, what’s the problem? When a player with a Switch 2 attempts to use a Mii Fighter in an online match, the match might immediately end. Why? I’m not sure, but it might have to do with a change to the customization options for the Mii avatars so players can no longer choose a gender for them.

Nintendo has given a provisional solution to the issue to players: by asking players to refrain from using the Mii Fighter in online matches.

Perhaps Nintendo is working on a patch. It’s hard to imagine that they’d want to leave things as they are.

As I see it, if the problem is with the change to the Mii customization option, that’s the problem to address, preferably by reverting to allowing for the option to pick between male and female. The issue shouldn’t be with Super Smash Bros. Ultimate, considering that it worked online just fine on Switch prior to the launch of Switch 2.

If messing with the gender choices of the avatars is what’s causing the issue, it sounds like another example of messing with something that shouldn’t have been messed with, resulting in undesirable consequences.

Recent attempts to blur the distinctions between the sexes in competitive sports comes to mind.

Nintendo’s Switch 2 has joined the list of things that have gone from urban legend to merchandise. And having spent some time with the new console/handheld hybrid in my hands, I can give a first impression of it.

The TL;DR of it is that it rules, but there’s some room for improvement. And that improvement will come in the form of software which is expected to come at some point in the future.

Nintendo’s latest lotus eater machine is basically the same as their last one, but with significantly improved performance, and some other quirks as well. This is basically what I would have wanted, and the safest move on Nintendo’s part to avoid alienating those who have built digital libraries on the Switch ecosystem.

My impression of the physical dimensions out of the box is that Switch 2 is kind of a big machine, as far as portables go. That means a bigger screen, but it also means slightly decreased portability. I think the Switch 2 has hit the sweet point with respect to screen size and portability. That sweet point would be different if the console/handheld were intended to fit in ones pocket, but for something to be transported in a carrying case, it’s just right. If Nintendo were to make an OLED model a couple years down the line, they’d be doing us a favor by not messing with the size of the device.

After a simple setup, I got into playing an updated version of a game I was really curious to see running on the new hardware, Pokémon Violet, which, along with Scarlet, became the first Pokémon games to run at 60 FPS since Pokémon Emerald on the GBA.

I was jarred by how significant the improvement was. I’m not new to high framerates, but when you’re expecting a certain game to run a certain way as a fact of life, when you see it running super smooth, it’s uncanny. And it’s not just the framerate, navigating the menus is snappy. While I did not measure it, it seems like loading from fast-traveling is a lot faster. Anyone care to confirm?

EDIT: It seems Centro LEAKS has an answer, but without video and with conveniently round numbers:

Pokémon Scarlet and Violet loading times comparison

➡️ Flying between the same region:

Switch: 8 seconds
Switch 2: 2 seconds

➡️ Flying between different regions:

Switch: 20 seconds
Switch 2: 3 seconds pic.twitter.com/p5Q8MiTFNu

— Centro LEAKS (@CentroLeaks) June 4, 2025

Then there’s the sheer amount of Pokémon that spawn in, even at a distance. For shiny hunters, this is a massive win. I had no problem finding a shiny Porygon 2 (which I nicknamed Switch 2), simply by leaving the spawn area then returning until I found a shiny one.

The caveat is that the grainy environmental assets still weren’t terribly impressive. But even with that, my current favorite Switch 2 game was an updated version of a game I already had.

The updated version of Pokémon S/V does put a new light on an old leak:

Speaking of updated games, I also played the two open world Zelda games in their Switch 2 form, BotW and TotK. I noticed the improved framerate, which again was uncanny considering my expectations. But because I’ve only played the Switch 2 versions of those games for a few minutes each, my analysis of those games would be far from comprehensive.

Then there’s was the Switch 2 version of Link’s Awakening. I didn’t notice any difference. But hey, it was improved in some way, right?

I also decided to try out a multiplatform, 3rd party game which was on the Switch, Made In Abyss: Binary Star Falling Into Darkness. I was expecting basically the same game, and that’s pretty much what I got. The best I realistically expected was far faster loading of areas when traveling, but the game still didn’t run the same as it does on my PC as far as that goes. I remember that loading on the PC version was nearly instantaneous, which made it my favorite version of Binary Star. It seems we can’t expect overly dramatic improvement from games which weren’t specifically optimized to run on Switch 2.

As for my first Switch 2 specific game, I went for Mario Kart World. After my first two grand prix, and some time on the open world, I’m left with a question: Is there a point in which this game is worth its steep price tag?

Nintendo’s strategy of not messing with what works has definitely been put into practice, here. MKW seems nearly identical to MK8, though the new feature of grinding on rails is admittedly pretty cool. There’s some new power-ups, and the races seem to have been mechanically changed to increase the possibility that players who fall behind could catch up, and it doesn’t come off as cheap (though that players that fall behind tend to get the better power-ups isn’t a new convention).

But then there’s the open world, which is supposedly MKW’s main selling point. It has challenges to clear with rewards, and lots of exploration with plenty of off-road. But MKW’s open world doesn’t seem to have a whole lot going on. Maybe we’re not supposed to compare it to the rich experience of TotK, where you can go in with no clear objective, but then get distracted by this, that, and the other thing, and soon have a mental list of things to do. But considering the price point, I think it would have been reasonable to expect some depth.

I appreciate that GameCube games were added to the NSO+, especially considering that the initial collection includes Wind Waker and Soul Calibur, a couple of my favorite games from back when people unironically said “roxor”, which is something that those games certainly did. I’m looking forward to the Genius Sonority Pokémon games, and if they have the capacity to transfer the Pokémon that you catch, that would be even better.

In addition to the console, I scored a Switch 2 Pro Controller. It might become my favorite controller. I’m liking how quiet the controller is. I noticed how, when you fully push the stick in a direction, the sound is dampened. This decreases the potential to distract from the action on the screen, or disturb the people around you.

I was kinda concerned about those programmable buttons on the underside of the controller, but it seems like they’re easy to ignore.

The price of the controller was steep, but if it’s going to be at least as durable as the Switch Pro Controller, it’ll be worth the money.

When a new console launches, it often goes that initial enthusiasm for it hinges largely on the launch library. For GBA, the main day-one system sellers were Castlevania CotM and a Mario 2 remake. Great choices, but more than a few probably went for it anticipating a Pokémon game. GameCube had Luigi’s Mansion and Rogue Squadron. It was rough for a while, but we eventually got SSB Melee and Metroid Prime.

That’s often how it goes with day-one console purchases, in that they start out slow, but become worthwhile with time, as more software becomes available on the platform. But in Switch 2’s case, we have plenty to play on day one, even if much of it is upgraded versions of games that we may already have in our collections. And it was played in such a way to stoke legitimate enthusiasm. What’s more, we know that Donkey Kong Bananza, Metroid Prime 4 and Pokémon Legends Z-A are coming, all in the next few months. But even before then, we do have quite a bit to hold us over, such as Street Fighter, Cyberpunk, and Hogwart’s Legacy. Add this all together, and Switch 2 has a strong day one library and launch window.

And if you’re a digital player, there’s a  benefit to mention: the eShop runs a lot faster. But there’s another that would be significant if a report about it is true. Reportedly, reading from a Micro SD Express card is faster than reading from a game card. Perhaps most might not notice, but it might be a small benefit to digital bros.

EDIT: I found a comparison of bootup of Mario Kart World from internal memory, SD Express, and from the game card. For fast boot up times for games that you intend to play a lot, it seems like keeping a digital version on internal memory is the best choice.

Switch 2 load time comparison is kinda of interesting

Internal memory, SD express, game card pic.twitter.com/fw5gfe3AUW

— Nintendeal (@Nintendeal) June 7, 2025

To wind this article down, I’ll go on a very brief tangent about an accessory I didn’t buy: the Switch 2 camera. There doesn’t seem to be much of a point, and it’s hard to picture using it very often. Maybe the cameras would be great for a Mario Kart party. But if you’ve played with family members, it’s usually when you’ve gathered together. If you want to conference with people you know while playing an online game, it’s usually over the phone or Discord. The group chat feature is neat, but I don’t care much for it.

A new console is usually a step forward for what game makers can express. But the Switch was an odd case where it was far more popular than the other consoles of its generation, in spite of being about 2 or 3 generations behind in terms of specs. Compared to the current gen, as far as processing power goes, the Switch 2 is still one generation behind. Yet, it does change the game industry in a sense, in that game companies don’t have to hobble their multiplatform games nearly as much if they want to reach out to a huge portion of the market. Yay, progress!

Still, the Switch was an awesome game system, and definitely an excellent case in the point that gamers care less about their games being polygon-pushers than they do about games being fun.

And at this point, it wouldn’t be at all surprising if the Switch 2 continued Nintendo’s momentum, and continued to prove that point.

We got the sales numbers for Xbox in 2024, and they’re not looking too hot for Microsoft. If things continue on this trend, Microsoft might just fail out of the console wars, and it would’ve happened about two decades after I thought it might.

But then, Microsoft has an immense amount of money that they can throw at their problems, thinking that that might make them better.

Microsoft is kinda like the guy who bellys up to the poker table, and eventually beats out all the other players, not for any skill they’d have at the game, but because they have a small mountain of chips and can therefore just keep betting until the other players eventually fold.

Except that, in the console wars, that didn’t happen.

As reported by CBR, Xbox sold about 2.7 million Xbox units in 2024 in the United States. Considering that that’s their greatest market, those are not great numbers. In Europe, they moved only 290,000 units in that same time. In Japan, the Xbox brand gets a participation trophy.

The waning sales numbers of the Xbox brand comes fresh after Microsoft’s eyebrow-raising ad campaign in which they proclaimed that a variety of devices are Xboxs.

Here I thought that if I wanted an Xbox, I could buy an Xbox console. Turns out, I don’t have to. But when it comes down to it, who really does? If a variety of devices could fulfill the functions of an Xbox, then it’s hard to sell Xbox as a dedicated console.

If my smartphone is an Xbox, why buy an Xbox console? Would the games run better on the console by reason of being optimized? And if a phone’s hardware proves insufficient to run an Xbox game, then why not a gaming PC, or maybe even just a PC?

And maybe that’s the point. Perhaps the Xbox consoles are becoming just an expense for Microsoft. For a long time, console manufacturers (with possible exceptions) have been selling their consoles below cost, with the idea of making the money back through the games that gamers purchase. Perhaps Microsoft is realizing that they might be better off just selling software.

That’s one of the reasons why consoles are usually a pretty sweet deal for gamers; they often get better hardware than they pay for.

But I’m getting the idea that Microsoft is trying to bury the Xbox console, in an effort to keep the green brand in the green (assuming it was ever there).

I might come off as a fanboy, but that’s mainly because I don’t like Microsoft’s corporate image. There’s also the fact that Xbox seems to be marketed towards x-treme gamers, the kind that chug Mountain Dew, think that sports cars are practical, and think that graphics make games great as they play this month’s FPS, with a color pallate of gray, brown, and gun-muzzle flare.

I like playing games because they’re fun. Which is, you know, the whole point.

But it seems like I’m not the only one seeing through the crass marketing of a software conglomerate. The 2.7 million sales figure can be largely explained by the likes of niche gamers who buy everything because they have more money than sense, and speculative investors who aren’t very bright. But we probably have to rely on Microsoft to tell us how many of these things are actually connected to the internet, and aren’t just hacked to run Linux by hobbyists who are bored.

Before the Nintendo and Sony fanboys start high-fiving each other, it can be pointed out that having one less competitor in the console war isn’t necessarily a good thing. Competition discourages companies from behaving like monopolies. If you thought that the PS5 Pro was expensive, just imagine how expensive it would be if Sony had no competition. Then there’s how long Nintendo might plug away with decade-old tablet technology, if not for pressure from investors. We could call the Nintendo Switch 2 the Nintendo People Kept Begging Us To Make New Hardware So We Did.

I don’t like Microsoft, but I recognize that a Sony with less competition would not be great for gaming. Sony wants to integrate media under a monolithic name (their own). With less competition, they are closer to that. Sure, Nintendo is currently beating PlayStation in sales, but what Nintendo does doesn’t seem to have much effect on Sony’s decisions. Nintendo and Sony may be competitors in the console market, but they behave as though they are in their own separate worlds.

Whether Microsoft withdraws from consoles remains to be seen. But, at this point, they seem to be going the route that Sega once did. Except, in this case, they took a lot longer getting there.