As per the company’s recent quarterly fiscal report, the Nintendo Switch has sold 33.34 million units in Japan to date, which means it is now the region’s highest-selling console of all time. It has leapfrogged the Nintendo DS (32.99 million units sold) and the Game Boy / Game Boy Color (32.47 million units sold).

Of course, in terms of worldwide sales, things take a different shape. As mentioned, the Switch has sold 139.36 million units worldwide, which puts it third in the all-time rankings, behind the PlayStation 2, which has sold over 155 million units, and the Nintendo DS, which has sold over 154 million units.

Leaks have claimed that Nintendo’s next console is set to launch in the second half of this year, but if the Switch continues to sell past its successor’s launch – even if it does so at a diminished rate – it has a good chance of climbing further still in the worldwide all-time rankings.

While initial reception to these games was more divided than to any other set in the series, over time, fondness for these games has grown too. These games are decidedly different from the rest of the series in some almost intangible ways – from the bold (if controversial) story decisions that Apollo Justice (the first one in this trilogy) makes to some increasingly contrived plotting in the later games, these ones do not feel as cohesive or as tightly written as either the original Ace Attorney trilogy, or The Great Ace Attorney. 

"While initial reception to these games was more divided than to any other set in the series, over time, fondness for these games has grown too. "

That’s not necessarily a bad thing – for one, it means if you don’t like one of these, you have a higher chance of liking the others, which isn’t something you can say about the other two sets of games. It also means that each of the games feels distinct – the characters and their motivations and statuses change across games, the settings change across games, and in fact, since the original games straddled two generations of hardware, we even get a dramatic bump in presentation in the later two games, with a move to surprisingly well realized 3D models, more dramatic camera angles, and full anime cutscenes. The later games bring their own gameplay gimmicks, with the standout being Spirit of Justice’s Divination Seances.

There’s something to be said for the distinct flair of these games – while a lot of fans were originally outraged at how Apollo Justice handles certain characters, for example, it feels refreshingly bold and unconstrained by the framework of the earlier games with a lot of the narrative and character decisions that it makes. Dual Destinies introduces a fascinating new character in Athena (arguably one of the best characters in the series, in fact), and has a sharp, arrestingly compelling narrative that might have some of the best payoffs in the series. Spirit of Justice narratively feels the most redundant and the most contrived, but is flat out the best one to play through, and the Seance mechanics make each case extremely interesting. The lack of cohesion is a knock against these games, don’t get me wrong – but that also comes with its own unique strengths that imbue these games with a flavour the rest of the series is yet to have.

"The unique and distinct character these games have, both narratively and mechanically, makes them well worth experiencing, even with their foibles. "

All three of these games were well worth playing with their original releases, and the final cases in the later games (especially Dual Destinies) are among the best the series has had. Which means that this release of the Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney Trilogy is well worth playing, especially if you are a newer fan who discovered this series later, and never played these games before. The unique and distinct character these games have, both narratively and mechanically, makes them well worth experiencing, even with their foibles. 

If you are a fan of the original releases on DS and 3DS, these are greatly incentivized re-releases. The graphics look great upscaled to full HD, the bonuses such as the art gallery, the music gallery, and the movie gallery are all great for fans to dig in to. There are many other QoL additions as well – a new Story Mode lets you simply get through the narrative if you don’t want to deal with the puzzles and gameplay segments, for example, and numerous UI improvements from the later games were back ported to Apollo Justice as well. The games are even set up to let you jump right into the chapter or case you want from the get go if you just want to replay the greatest hits – no need to go through the whole game just to get to the parts you wanted.

"If you are a fan of the original releases on DS and 3DS, these are greatly incentivized re-releases. The graphics look great upscaled to full HD, the bonuses such as the art gallery, the music gallery, and the movie gallery are all great for fans to dig in to. "

There are some tradeoffs that have had to be made to bring these games to modern hardware though. The original titles, especially the 3DS entries Dual Destinies and Spirit of Justice, made some great use of the hardware’s unique dual-screened nature that obviously was not possible to translate as-is to either PC, Xbox, PlayStation, or Switch. And so those gameplay segments are a bit different because none of these systems have two screens. Functionally, it comes out to being roughly the same thing – you still have to keep track of footage and evidence across two independent but correlated displays – but for purists who do care about the authenticity of the original experience, that’s still something to take note of. 

Those tradeoffs aside, the games are brought over pretty much as-is. They are extremely faithful reproductions of titles that have only gotten better with age and with some distance from the circumstances of their original releases. If you liked them then, you’ll like them now. If you didn’t like them then, you may find yourself more receptive to them this time around. And if this is your first time discovering them, then you’re in for a ride either way. 

With the Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney Trilogy, the developer has finally finished bringing over the entirety of the Ace Attorney series to modern platforms, in multiple languages and localizations. These once niche but now iconic games are finally accessible to anyone who may be interested, with all sorts of QoL perks and bonus content celebrating these games included to boot. Getting to go through this series again on modern systems has been great, and has only served as a reminder of the brilliance of the gleefully deranged anime courtroom drama series. All of this is to say, I sincerely hope an Ace Attorney 7 is around the corner. I am glad we got to play these great games again in their best form yet – but rather than whetting my appetite for more, they only served to make it even more ravenous. Hopefully the next major entry in this franchise is coming soon – but until then, Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney Trilogy is a great release for new and old fans of the franchise alike.

This game was reviewed on Nintendo Switch.

As of right now, these consoles are the primary consoles PlayStation and Xbox sell; their supply issues, which were protracted and lasted for almost two years, in no small part due to the global supply chain and production disruptions in the havoc wreaked by COVID-19, are beginning to recede. They are, finally, almost thirty months after first being introduced, beginning to get some great, next-gen exclusive titles.

This means that as of right now, these machines are in the full swing of things. Or they should be, but Xbox is struggling, in part due to a lack of supply for the higher end Series X console (which seems to be what the market wants more of, rather than the cheaper, lower end Series S), and in part because Microsoft has thus far failed to make a convincing case to buy the Xbox Series consoles that has resonated with the broader market (this comes down to the lack of must have games, but that is an oft had discussion that this is not the place for).

But the PS5, the PS5 is now finally hitting its stride. As Sony’s flagship console at the moment, it is selling with all the momentum, volume, and pace that a successful PlayStation console in the prime of its life does. We are, finally, past all the caveats of generation transitions, launch shortages, and the COVID disruptions, and we can finally start to assess PS5 sales on their own merits, and ask the obvious question: is PS5 going to outsell PS4 in the long run?

Every company obviously wants every new system to do better than the last one, but that situation is inherently unrealistic – there are only a finite number of customers in the addressable market, and only finite resources. Just because your previous product sold a certain amount does not mean that the follow up will match or exceed it. And, in fact, the games industry is filled with such examples – Nintendo went from 154 million units of the DS sold to 75 million units for 3DS; Sony went from 156 million PS2s, to 80 million PS3s. And, on the flip side, we see reversals in the opposite direction, such as the Switch selling more than 120 million units (and counting), coming right after the Wii U, which sold under 14 million.

Put simply, each console’s sales are ultimately a product of the circumstances and broader market conditions that it finds itself in, and the performance of a predecessor, while certainly instructive, has limited use in informing discussions about how successors or subsequent follow ups might do. In other words, just because the PS4 sold 115 million, it does not necessarily mean the PS5 will do that as well.

There is a reasonable (though not overwhelmingly likely) chance that the PS5 ends up falling short of the PS4’s final tally. If this were to happen, it would come down to a fair few factors – the PS5’s higher entry point will serve as a barrier for the broader mainstream to adopt the console, once the enthusiast rush dies down (the broader mainstream market is what takes a console from being reasonably successful, like the Xbox One or Nintendo 64, to being a 100 million plus massive success, like the PS4 or Nintendo Switch, so it cannot be ignored in this discussion). Especially given the context of the broader global economy, and how it continues to circle the drain with more impending recessions, and runaway inflation, the PS5’s price could end up being more and more prohibitive as the mass market constitutes a larger and larger portion of the system’s sales.

Of course, Sony will by then reduce the price – but by how much? The PS4 never got a major permanent price drop (it went down from $399 to $299 and then stayed there), and in general, it appears the broader strategy across the market right now is to hold console prices to the extent possible, outside of some smaller, limited time promotions or offers. In fact, one could even argue the industry is likelier to increase prices rather than drop them right now – just in the last two years, we saw Nintendo increase the price of the Switch $50 via the OLED model, and we saw Sony go one step further and raise the price of the PS5 by $50 in all markets around the world except the U.S., without revising or updating the hardware.

Assuming, however, that at the very least a PS4-style cadence of price drops and discounts is possible, the PS5’s price should not be a significant deterrent in the long run. It will certainly be a factor for some proportion of its would-be buyers, but on the whole, it shouldn’t factor in as much.

What does factor in is that the PS5 is fighting in a far more crowded field than the PS4 ever did. The PS4’s competition was the Wii U, which is one of the worst selling consoles of all time, and the Xbox One, a console that fumbled its launch so badly, the brand is still trying to recover from the aftereffects to this day. Eventually the Switch launched, and the PS4 did have to content with it, but the Switch launched three and a half years after the PS4 did; it had a clear playing field for almost half its life.

The PS5, on the other hand, is facing… well, it’s still not facing any meaningful competition from the Xbox side of things, to be fair, but it is facing far more credible and meaningful competition from Nintendo and the Switch. Now in its seventh year, the Switch is putting forth an unprecedented run of sales, and continues to routinely divert customer spending towards it over the PS5 in most major markets even now. Without getting the chance to be the only console there is any meaningful customer spend towards in markets such as Japan, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Canada, or even the UK, the PS5’s sales pace is naturally impacted to at least some degree by the presence of the Switch. Assuming the Switch can maintain its momentum until whenever Nintendo decides to launch the successor, the PS5 may never get a totally clear playing field to itself, which by definition reduces the slice of the addressable market that it gets to sell to for itself.

And while some nonsensical classifications by the CMA in the UK may have ruled that Switch is not really competing with the other two, ultimately that’s not really true, especially not at the broader level of mainstream sales necessary to achieve the kinds of scales we are discussing here. Millions of people bought a cheap PS4 to play Minecraft and Fortnite and FIFA; right now, if they can, instead of a $550 PS5, get a $200 Switch and still get to play those games, plus other mass market friendly games such as Mario Kart or Animal Crossing or Pokemon, then they absolutely will pick that cheaper option with more games that appeal to their segment. Yes, the Switch versions look or run worse, but they obviously don’t care about that. If the performance or graphics were a consideration, the Switch would never have sold that much to begin with.

There is also the fact that there will certainly be some level of “spillage” of the customer base for PS consoles with the PS5; put simply, with Sony porting their games to PC with a frequent regularity now, and third party PS exclusives increasingly available on PC and Switch, there may be many who decide they simply don’t…need the PS5, and that what they do want from it can be addressed with a PC; the PC getting an increasingly console-like experience thanks to innovations such as the Steam Deck also means that PC gaming is no longer as intimidating or friction inducing as it once was. While the broader console market is never going to be swayed by PC gaming, no matter what Valve or anyone else does, a small but significant chunk might be – and that might be what keeps the PS5 from reaching PS4 numbers

All of this might make it sound like the PS5 is not going to match or exceed the PS4, but as I mentioned, it’s likelier that it does than not. At the very least, I think matching the PS4 is a given. Fundamentally, I think this will come down to one reason – while the factors I mentioned previously all hold true, I think collectively, they won’t actually impact the PS5’s final tally that much. I can see it shedding some 10-15% of its audience from the PS4, which would still bring the console in the 100-105 million units sold range; and that difference, I think, can be easily covered up for by the fact that I think this is going to be a longer generation than the previous ones.

While the past two PlayStation generations have both been seven years long each (eight and seven years for Xbox), I think this generation is going to go on a bit longer. The aforementioned geopolitical and global circumstances, such as the economy, the supply chain and shortages, the pandemic, all of that, I think, means that Sony, Microsoft, AMD, and Epic will all want to keep this generation going a bit longer than usual so they can recoup their investments and R&D costs better. This is not at all unprecedented – we already saw this happen in the Xbox 360 and PS3 era, which went on eight full years before their respective successors were introduced (as opposed to the 4-5 year window for new console generations that had been the norm until then), because of the 2008 recession severely impacting and disrupting market dynamics globally. Sony very literally just needs to keep the PS5 going for 1-2 years more than the PS4; meaning, not introduce the PS6 until 2028 at the earliest, and maybe even 2029; and that 10-15 million projected shortfall compared to the PS4 is easily accounted for right there; in fact, that is probably enough for the PS5 to mount a small lead over the PS4 of its own.

All of which is to say, while the PS5 faces a far more challenging environment than the PS4 ever did, I think its broader success is assured, and that it will manage to at the very least match the PS4’s final numbers, if not exceed them, regardless. This comes down to a longer generation for it, yes, but also because of the sheer brute force of its success, and the success of the PS brand as a whole, where even with so many difficulties, the PS5’s sales pace has not been blunted nearly enough to have any real impact. While it is unlikely the PS5 will match the PS2, DS, or Switch, we can, at the very least, expect it to end in the same tier of sales as PS4 and the Game Boy – and that’s a very great success for it regardless.

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.

With the excellent Pokemon Legends Arceus marking what looks to be the start of a whole new era for the franchise, this felt like as great a time as any to stop and take stock of the state of the franchise as it stands at the present moment in time. And so, we decided to go ahead and rank the Pokemon games. To be clear, we didn’t rank all of them – that would be insane, and also redundant, since so many games in the series are just slight variations of each other. 

Instead, what we did was take the best representative for each campaign and used it as a stand in for all other games that are also based on the same campaign. Put simply, this list doesn’t rank Pokemon Red/Blue, Yellow, FireRed/LeafGreen, and Let’s Go separately – it just takes what we think is the best one out of those, and ranks that one. (As for which one the best one is, you’re going to have to find that out for yourself now, won’t you?).

Is that clear? Great. Then let’s get started.

10. POKEMON X/Y

Pokemon X/Y was probably the first game in the series that caused wide scale disappointment among the fans – everyone had some complaint or the other with it. It makes sense – the game, which marked the series’ long awaited jump to 3D, was definitely a letdown on many fronts. The story was baffling and banal (even by Pokemon standards), the difficulty level was ramped down to such absurd levels that you could very literally finish the game without even paying attention to what was happening on screen, the region was extremely linear (and lacking in dungeons to a severe degree), there was nothing in the way of a post game, it pandered far too much to the first generation of Pokemon games, and it introduced the smallest roster of new Pokemon to date.

But there was also a lot to like about it – the Player Search System it introduced remains the single best online suite in any Pokemon game to date, and really, one the best multiplayer suites out there, player character customization was a hugely beloved feature that went on to become a series mainstay, it took the first steps towards making Pokemon training and team composition easier and more transparent by giving players direct control over the growth of their Pokemon, it added a brand new type that upended the meta game almost entirely, the Mega Evolutions battle gimmick was really fun, the design of the new Pokemon was uniformly excellent, and it looked charming as all heck with its chibi style 3D graphics. In hindsight, X/Y have become the most inessential Pokemon entries, because almost everything they did well went on to be appropriated by future games in the series, who would do it much better – and its shortcomings never got the chance to be fixed by an expansion or re-release, as would happen for so many other games in the series. But in spite of that, they’re very fun games, and probably exemplify the sentiment that even a “bad” Pokemon game remains an extremely well made, charming, and satisfying game to play through.

9. POKEMON BLACK 2/WHITE 2

The fifth generation of Pokemon was a wild time for the franchise, rife with experimentation and all sorts of new things the series had never dared attempt until then. One of those was a direct sequel – the first and only direct sequel to a game taking place in the same region the series has seen to date.

It made sense, though – the excellent Pokémon Black/White (which we’ll get to later on in the list) left a lot of sequel hooks in their story, and Unova was an amazing setting that clearly had more to offer. Pokémon Black 2 and White 2 deliver on that, but the adventure we get is decidedly inferior to the original games. While these are still excellent games, and essential for anyone who enjoyed the original Black/White, the campaign eschews a lot of the boldness and novelty that made the original games stand out so much, squandering the narrative opportunities hinted at by the originals (and in some cases it outright undermines them), and mechanically don’t really expand on the original games enough to really stand out on their own. They do offer a meaty, hefty post-game, and a frankly absurd amount of content – and all of it is absolutely great. But when you play through all Pokemon games, these ones tend to stand out less than the others – because very honestly, most of what they do was already done better by the original Black/White just one year prior, and they don’t really bring enough unique stuff of their own to the table to make up for that.

8. POKEMON ULTRA SUN/ULTRA MOON

Pokemon Sun/Moon were extremely interesting games – bold and ambitious, willing to experiment with the structure of the franchise, doubling down on a pointed narrative and storytelling focus, and giving us the most fleshed out and believable look at the world of Pokemon to date. They offered a lot of excellent stuff – Alola is a great region with a lot of personality and a distinct aesthetic, the new Pokemon designs are amazing and contextualized in extremely believable ways as part of a larger ecology and even the story and characters were interesting. But Sun/Moon were extremely flawed games, with their story falling apart towards the final act, extreme linearity and railroading making for the least player driven Pokemon game to date, an overabundance of cutscenes with trite and repetitive dialog that you could not ever skip, an online suite that was a shocking regression on the excellent X/Y, and, yet again, an acute lack of post-game content.

Ultra Sun/Ultra Moon… well, they don’t really fix Sun/Moon, but they patch them up to a level that they are no longer the worst games in the series (if Ultra Sun/Ultra Moon didn’t exist, yes, I would have absolutely placed the original Sun/Moon at the bottom of this list). They tweak the story and characters to be less bizarre towards the end, the cutscenes spacing and story pacing is improved, areas get bigger, allowing for more exploration (though overall progression remains extremely rigidly linear), the post game gets a hefty chunk of new content to sink teeth into, and they add an absurd amount of content to the original game as well. They are also among the most difficult games in the series, with a certain specific fight near the end being legendary for how brutal it is.

Sun/Moon, much like most other games in the series in the 3DS era, are flawed and a tale of missed opportunity – but Ultra Sun/Ultra Moon existing at least makes that missed potential slightly easier to swallow, if only because it hints at what might have been had developers Game Freak taken the time to properly flesh things out with their games.

7. POKEMON SWORD/SHIELD

The single most controversial entry in the franchise, Pokemon Sword/Shield became flashpoints for controversy. There were loads of reasons for this – a decade of resentment building over repeated disappointing entries, poor communication by the developers and publishers for taking away a lot of content that players expect from these games, and extremely poor graphical quality, even considering Pokemon has never been a technical showpiece, all became easy latching on points for the backlash these games generated.

I would argue that to a very large degree, the backlash was not undeserved. Pokemon Sword and Shield are not bad games at all, but they are very clearly products of a rushed and troubled development cycle. The new region they introduced was visually distinct and hints at lush beauty and interesting lore, but the games never get around to it. There was, at launch, a total paucity of post game content again. The games forced further mechanics that trivialized the difficulty even further, making for the easiest games in the series at the time of release. The Wild Area concept, a mini open world region for players to explore and catch Pokemon in, was conceptually sound, but fumbled in execution. The online functionality was a baffling step back from the 3DS era. They cut down almost half of the roster of Pokemon.

But in spite of that laundry list of complaints, the core campaign was extremely compelling and fun, and knew to get out of the players’ way to let them enjoy the adventure at their own pace (something the Alola games had categorically failed at); new mechanics such as Max Raids were excellent, and giving players full control over how their Pokemon grow was game changing. The characters are excellent. And while the Wild Area was underdeveloped, and the story never fleshed out, both managed to stumble upon some rather unforgettable moments nevertheless, with a certain late game story development still ranking as one of my favorite story moments in the series. And all of this is before we consider the excellent expansions, which actually addressed a lot of the complaints players had with the base games – they added in another couple hundred of the missing Pokemon back in, they delivered fully fleshed out open world areas that properly leveraged 3D space and delivered a believable patchwork of biomes and ecosystems that rewarded player exploration, and they offered some actual meaningfully difficult battles as well; plus, given that they are meant to be post-game content, they naturally address the absence of post-game in the base titles too.

Even with the expansions, Sword and Shield are an unfortunate tale of missed potential (I’m sure you’re picking up on this being a running theme) – but in spite of what their troubled reputation might suggest, they are very good games, and absolutely worth playing regardless of their many stumbles. What they do well, they do really well, and ultimately, their take on the core Pokemon formula, while finally beginning to strain at the seams by this point, still delivered a compelling, engaging, and fun adventure.

6. POKEMON EMERALD

This is likely to be the most controversial entry on this list, because Pokemon Emerald is beloved by a army of Pokemon fans. You can see why – Emerald, building upon the good but flawed Ruby/Sapphire, is arguably the apex of Pokemon games in almost every regard. The campaign was long and challenging; there was a ridiculous amount of side and optional content; the Hoenn region in Emerald is extremely memorable, with some standout locations, excellent dungeons, and fantastic level design; the story and characters were the best the series had seen at the time Emerald came out; the post-game was meaty and over-delivered, marking the debut of the fan favorite Battle Frontier (the absence of which in every new game in the series is lamented to this day).

Pokemon Emerald was absolutely amazing, and honestly I have nothing bad to say about it. Why, then, is it ranked so relatively low on the list? The answer is simple, we have now gotten to the part of the list where every single game is an amazing, excellent title and could justify placement at the top, depending on how you choose to classify and rank things. Basically, we’re now looking at six, amazing, excellent games, and trying to rank them is a bit like splitting hairs – no matter what you do, you’re still left with six amazing games. Emerald ranks lower than the others in this bunch because I feel the ones higher on this list than it did everything better for my liking. But that doesn’t take away from how incredible Pokemon Emerald is. It’s an amazing game, and legitimately one of the best RPGs of all time – everyone owes it to themselves to check it out.

5. POKEMON BLACK/WHITE

Pokémon Black/White marked the fourth new Pokemon entry on the DS, an at the time unprecedented volume of mainline games on a single system. Game Freak knew that to make these games stand out, they would have to work hard to give them their own identity. And they decided to do just that, in the process delivering among the best, and probably still among the most ambitious, games in the series to date.

Everything about Pokémon Black/White was so incredible – Unova as a region, basing itself on the urban aesthetic of continental United States, was a breath of fresh air after four regions based on Japan; a massive roster of new Pokemon (the single largest new batch to date, in fact) headlined these games, with Pokémon Black/White making the bold decision to only have new Pokemon in the game for the duration of the campaign – you’d be able to bring in your older pals, but they’d be limited to post-game content, meaning every new encounter was fresh and exciting in a way it hadn’t been for over a decade by the time Black/White came out.

And speaking of post-game, the post-game was fleshed out and meaty (the last time a new generation would deliver on this front). As good as that post-game was, it paled next to the campaign, a blisteringly fast story driven adventure (yes) that actually raised troubling ethical questions about the concept of catching and battling Pokemon (yes), with some legitimately well written characters and antagonists (yes), pulling in and recontextualizing the regular “win badges and beat The Pokemon League” conceit into the framework of a broader story (yes), delivering some legitimately surprising story developments and twists (yes), and culminating in an incredibly epic final act and a hell of a conclusion (yes).

All this, and I still haven’t talked about how this game marked the first time the series did away with the annoying HMs as a progression mechanic, the new experience curve mechanics that worked so much better for game balance than the EXP All that the games would force on the players in future entries, how much optional content there was, how excellent the region and dungeon design was, the new battle styles the games introduced (Rotation and Triple battles, I miss you…), how it simultaneously managed to represent the series’ first forays into 3D spaces, while delivering eye catching and attractive sprite art that remains arguably the best aesthetic the series has had to date… honestly, I can gush about these games forever, they were utterly excellent, thoroughly compelling, and so perfect, so great, so ambitious, that at the time they painted a bright picture for the future of the franchise.

The decade that would follow would not deliver on their promise – in part because Black/White remain the lowest selling mainline entries in the series to date, I assume. And that really sucks, because until very recently, Pokémon Black/White was the last time the series managed to deliver a truly great game. If you can, I urge you to track these down and play them – they are amazing, not just at being Pokemon games, just at delivering incredible RPGs.

4. POKEMON FIRERED/LEAFGREEN

Pokemon Red/Blue were borderline perfect – which is a terrible burden for games launching a series developed by a small, boutique development house that clearly was unprepared for how big their passion project would become. But let’s put aside that broader context for a second and just talk about Pokemon Red/Blue as games assessed on their own merits. To this day, those titles hold up. Oh sure, their primitive and rudimentary graphics are a bit of an adjustment, and they are so buggy that they would make a Bethesda game blush. But holy crap, did they nail the game design side of things perfectly. They took players on an amazing adventure, simultaneously breezy and challenging in just the right amounts, with a great campaign, amazing and memorable creature designs, wonderful lock and key progression, and a lot of optional content for players who went off the beaten path.

Pokemon FireRed/LeafGreen, which remade Red/Blue, are all of that but better. Modernizing the original games to bring them to the standard of the then-current third generation of Pokemon, they polish away the bugs, modernize the graphics, add even more optional content, introduce a lot of QoL and UX functionality the original titles were missing, add a ridiculously hefty chunk of post-game content (the one area the originals were, understandably, lacking in), flesh out their world and region even more, and do so all while remaining incredibly faithful to games that were played and beloved by 40 million players worldwide. They also started off the series’ now longstanding tradition of revisiting older titles via enhanced remakes, and they set the bar incredibly high, delivering the definitive take on the Kanto saga, a take so definitive that even the more modern Pokemon Let’s Go games, which are also remakes of the original generation, did not supplant them.

FireRed/LeafGreen are perfect. As I mentioned earlier, we’re splitting hairs at this point.

3. POKEMON LEGENDS: ARCEUS

Ten years of constant disappointment and unfulfilled promises, mismanagement and rushed development cycles, ten years of consistently managing to lower the bar, and still not meeting it. There’s no wonder that people had no confidence coming into Pokemon Legends: Arceus, because the last decade has been a difficult one for Pokemon fans.

But Game Freak finally threw off the shackles of 25 years of tradition and reinvented Pokemon in a bold new format – and managed to nail it, hitting the ball out of the park on their very first go. A lot like the original Pokemon Red/Blue, amusingly enough. 

Pokemon Legends is such an incredible game. The open world design lends itself beautifully well to the Pokemon franchise, The Pokemon themselves are recontextualized as dangerous, lethal wildlife, the world is harsh and unforgiving and requires the player’s wit and ingenuity to traverse, the maps beckon and invite player exploration and discovery, the Pokemon are delightfully well realized as living and breathing flesh and blood members of a larger ecosystem, the changes to the battle mechanics work well for the game, the new additions such as crafting and Pokedex research all contribute to a self perpetuating, ridiculously addictive gameplay loop, the story is surprisingly fun with some great characters, the action RPG segments actually work surprisingly well, there are several dramatic leaps forward in so many areas (from QoL to mechanics to structure) and there is a ridiculous amount of content thrown in, with, yes, a very hefty post game. It is a shockingly accomplished take on an entirely new formula, and like with Pokemon Red/Blue, Game Freak comes dangerously close to getting it perfect on their first go.

Yes, it has flaws – most notably, it is a bad looking game, with the technical aspects and art style never coming together (somehow, it is still a better performing game than something like Sword/Shield, however), and there are a fair few bugs and glitches here. But ultimately, Legends is a bold new step for the series, and one that it manages to take with a surprising amount of confidence and and dexterity, delivering one of the best games on the Switch, and one of the best games in the series in the process.

2. POKEMON PLATINUM

Sinnoh is very legitimately one of the greatest game maps of all time. It’s a masterpiece of design, with ridiculous amounts of visual and location variety (swamps, mountains, snow, beach and coastal areas, forests, small pastoral villages, big urban cities), and an incredible lock and key design that, while overly reliant on an annoying HM mechanic, leads to the best sense of adventure and discovery the player ever gets in the Pokemon franchise. It’s also backed with some amazing lore and backstory, and massive areas that beg to be explored, tucked away with dozens upon dozens of hidden dungeons and optional quests that you could miss for years without even knowing they exist.

Sinnoh, being the region that Pokemon Platinum is set in, is a huge part of why this game is so great. When you have a map this well designed, and progression through it this well designed, you end up with an unforgettable game. But even beyond that, Platinum was just mind blowingly incredible – it has an excellent campaign, a shocking amount of multiplayer modes, great post game (the Battle Frontier returned!), just the right amount of challenge (people tell horror stories about Cynthia to this day), some great and iconic player designs, major strides forward for the series (including the Physical/Special attack split, as well as the introduction of online play), as well as polishing up the considerable rough edges Diamond/Pearl had – those games suffered majorly from the transition from GBA to DS, and are borderline impossible to go back to because of their bevy of technical issues (including a frame rate so low it’s like walking through treacle). 

Platinum remains the definitive take on Sinnoh to this day (even the recent remakes Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl do not supplant it), and is honestly peak Pokemon. Or at least, it would be, were it not for…

1. POKEMON HEARTGOLD/SOULSILVER

You knew this was coming. There is one thing constant in Pokemon lists and fans – HeartGold/SoulSilver are always at the top. And with good reason – these games are literally, legitimately, perfect, absolutely flawless at every single thing they do, while managing to deliver the biggest and best Pokemon games ever. The original Gold/Silver games were already extremely notable for their massive campaign (set across two regions, 16 gym badges, and two separate Pokemon League challenges) and the introduction of several major and mind blowing mechanics for the franchise, including real time time of day and week impacting in-game events, berry farming, Pokeball crafting, shiny Pokemon, trainer rematches, roaming Legendary Pokemon, held items for Pokemon, weather effects in battles and arenas, and the introduction of Dark and Steel Type Pokemon.

HeartGold/SoulSilver have all of that, plus an additional ridiculous amount of content (mainline, post-game, and optional), gorgeous pixel art graphics that keep these games looking the best ones in the series to this day, almost a decade and a half after their original launch, the availability of every single Pokemon at the time all in one game, plus the inclusion of Platinum‘s Battle Frontier, a brand new Safari Zone, brand new mini games, major QoL and UI enhancements (these games are the only ones that can be played almost entirely via touch screen!), full featured (for the time) local and online multiplayer, and the definitive take on one of the most epic final battles in any game ever. Excellent world and dungeon design, some actual challenging battles, an emphasis on player driven exploration and discovery, a non linear campaign that allows players to break sequence multiple times, and snappy and sharp writing. These games are perfect. There is no flaw to them. They represent among the best games ever made, not just for Pokemon, but in general. 

If you are going to play one Pokemon game, make it this one. 13 years after their initial release, and they still have not been topped. They probably never will be.

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.

That has never happened with a 3D Sonic game, but some have come closer to achieving greatness than others. None have come closer than Sonic Colors did, when this unassuming title launched exclusively on the Wii over a decade ago. So it makes sense that, in celebration of Sega’s mascot’s 30th anniversary, this one Sonic game comes the closest to distilling the essence of Sonic at the peak of his powers, and realizing them in a 3D game would be the one that they turn to. And so, we get Sonic Colors Ultimate. 

Ten years later, it still mostly holds up – that’s what happens when the core game design was actually good, rather than relying on gee whiz gimmickry that won’t stand the test of time. While Sonic Colors always had issues, and those issues are exacerbated with the passage of time so they stick out in Ultimate more, it’s still a fundamentally good time and an engaging game.

"While Sonic Colors always had issues, and those issues are exacerbated with the passage of time so they stick out in Ultimate more, it’s still a fundamentally good time and an engaging game."

You know how it goes this time – another convoluted and contrived scheme by Dr. Eggman, and another attempt by Sonic to take Eggman down. In this specific instance, Eggman has set up an amusement park in low earth orbit, which appears to be a front for a sinister scheme in which he is leveraging the power of alien creatures known as wisps to further his plans for world domination. It’s a silly premise, but unlike so many other Sonic games, Colors knows to largely keep it out of the way, rather than providing overwrought context to the player and making the game buckle under the weight of its own unnecessary story. Sonic Colors is pretty lightweight as far as storytelling goes, which works to its benefit. The few cutscenes we do get are pretty snappy and quick, with some cute humor that will endear the game and the character to younger players especially.

Unlike so many modern Sonic games, this adventure is a solo outing – in that you only play as Sonic. None of the menagerie of creatures that form up his ever expanding group of friends is along for the ride (though Tails is in the game too), and you’re never controlling anyone other than Sonic – though of course, Sonic does end up imbibing the character of a lot of the wisps he is saving. All of this works greatly to the game’s benefit. The controls, move set, and levels are all designed around one baseline set of abilities. Rather than having to balance everything for a smattering of half-developed characters with their barely fleshed out distinct play styles, everything is designed around Sonic, how he is controlled, and the abilities he has, with or without wisps. This leads to an unusually strong showing in terms of level design, boss fights, and the like for a 3D Sonic game – remember, even the fan favorite Sonic Adventure games suffered from having to design around multiple characters. Colors is a look at how this series can benefit from having a leaner focus, and we get some of the strongest level design and mechanics we have seen in a 3D Sonic game as a result.

Of course, Sonic Colors did stand out at the time because it was among the first showings of what would go on to be referred to as the “boost formula”, and as mentioned, it was a pretty strong showing at that. The novelty of getting an actual good Sonic game in 3D after so long, plus one that was distinctly differently structured from the “Adventure” template the 3D games had followed through to then, did help raise the profile of the discourse and reputation the game enjoyed.  More than ten years later, we’ve had several 3D Sonic games following this same formula – with the last one, Sonic Forces, being among the lowlights in a series with some incredible lowlights – so that shine has worn off, and people also find themselves itching for a return to the Adventure style. While this does remove one of the factors that made Colors so well received at the time, it nonetheless does not change that the game itself is fundamentally well designed – in fact, arguably at its core, it’s better designed than any 3D Sonic game that followed, including Generations, because it is not juggling multiple play styles between Modern and Classic Sonic.

"We are looking at two fundamentally contradictory game design principles at play in Sonic – building speed and momentum, and precision platforming. Precision platforming obviously requires the player to slow down and consider things first, before then traversing the hazards they are presented with; building momentum and speed require you to run, run, run, without stopping."

This has helped Sonic Colors hold up pretty well. I would argue that the fundamental problems that lie at the core of every Sonic game – this includes the 2D games too, mind you, though I do feel said problems are significantly worse in the 3D games than the 2D ones, which can work around them better – do manifest in Colors too. Occasionally, these problems do hold it back at times. Most notably, we are looking at two fundamentally contradictory game design principles at play in Sonic – building speed and momentum, and precision platforming. Precision platforming obviously requires the player to slow down and consider things first, before then traversing the hazards they are presented with; building momentum and speed require you to run, run, run, without stopping. Sonic does expect you to memorize levels and run them again and again, the better to be able to imbibe and reconcile both these principles, but during your first run through any course, it can often be a tug of war between the two.

Of course, like I said, Sonic Colors does manage to turn even this into a strength. Finishing a course and getting slapped with a C or a D grade often acts as all the incentive you need to go back and run that course again, and again, and again, until you’ve memorized it so well you’re effortlessly getting the highest possible marks each time. Some expertly hidden collectibles add further replayability to each course. 

A lot of the attention of the “Ultimate” upgrade for Sonic Colors has focused on the visual side of it, which makes sense – the original was a Wii title, which means it’s a standard definition game remastered for HD for the very first time. On the whole, I would argue the visual update is clean and reasonable (if not astounding or worth the whole re-release in and of itself), though there are certain complaints I can foresee coming in from some quarters. As an example, the updates have very definitely changed the look and aesthetic of a lot of areas due to the differences in lighting and color (heh) saturation, and I can easily see many preferring how the original game looked as a result; but on the whole, I think the new aesthetic in those areas isn’t worse, just different.

"The game’s Wii roots are especially clear and apparent in cutscenes. However, the art style is strong, and that, along with a bump up to 60fps for the frame rate, helps keep the game look pleasant to look at."

The remastering is very clearly nowhere close to the more thorough facelifts we have seen in other similar platform re-releases; for example, this is nowhere close to the overhaul that Crash or Spyro saw with the N.Sane or Reignited trilogy releases. The game’s Wii roots are especially clear and apparent in cutscenes. However, the art style is strong, and that, along with a bump up to 60fps for the frame rate, helps keep the game look pleasant to look at. While it’s undeniable it could have looked even better, it’s still a pretty good looking game, that passes muster and scrutiny, if not as triumphantly as it otherwise could have.

That’s really the case with Sonic Colors as a whole – while its reputation may lead you to expect an all time great platform, it’s really not that. It is very good, mind you, and it’s compelling and engaging and probably the most smartly designed 3D Sonic game we have ever received. All of that alone makes it worth playing, particularly since Colors is without question the best implementation of the so called “boost” formula as well. The stumbles and blemishes that come along the way, well, that’s just part and parcel of being a Sonic fan at this point. Embrace them, and enjoy Dr. Eggman’s Wild Ride.

This game was reviewed on the PlayStation 4.

Parliament Of Serbia in Belgrade – Half-Life 2

City 17’s European-inspired architecture and aesthetics are fairly easy to recognize, though the Overwatch Nexus is perhaps the closest to being based on an actual building. As the main building for the Overwatch forces, the Nexus was formerly a political building before the Combine invaded. It turns out that it’s actually inspired by the Parliament of Serbia in Belgrade. The similarities between the two buildings, from their general structure to the opening archway are noteworthy, though the signature dome isn’t as defined on the Nexus. Though it’s not outright confirmed in-game, browsing through the texture files reveals the word “parliament” which further hints at the inspiration.

So when the Switch OLED was finally revealed with its built-in LAN report, new wide and adjustable back-stand, 64 GB internal storage and 7 inch screen, the lack of mention for any performance improvements was sobering. Nintendo further confirmed that the console didn’t have a new CPU or more RAM, remaining pretty much the same as its predecessor.

A more powerful Switch has been one of the bigger demands from fans over the years. It was obvious before the console’s launch that it was nowhere near as powerful as the Xbox One or PS4, let-alone their upgraded counterparts. The games were and continue to be top-notch and Nintendo still has plenty of exciting projects on the way, be it Metroid Dread or The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild’s sequel. One could compare this upgrade to Apple’s latest iteration of the iPhone or iPad, except more than four years later and with nowhere near the amount of substantial changes.

That being said, it makes perfect sense why Nintendo went this route. Take a quick peek at the Switch hardware sales – it’s sold over 84.5 million units worldwide as of May 2021 and regularly tops hardware sales in the United States, Europe and Japan. It’s still receiving strong software support and Nintendo has only just hit its stride with regards to indie offerings. A refresh, no matter how minor, is easy money for the company.

Nevertheless, it leaves a bad taste for multiple reasons. When Super Mario 3D All-Stars was released and touted to be available for a limited time to purchase, the ensuing FOMO helped it sell 9.01 million copies as of March 31^st 2021. Given the minimal changes made to the ports, it was a great way for Nintendo to artificially push demand and earn heaps of revenue. Titles like Metroid Dread and The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword HD have accompanying amiibos which grant actual in-game benefits. Both titles are likely going to sell well so why not earn a little more on the side from amiibo sales? It makes sense, even if it is kind of shady.

The Nintendo Switch OLED is in the same boat especially when since the base Switch model isn’t getting a price reduction. It’s a pretty ingenuous strategy – the question isn’t whether the OLED model is worth $50 more or not but why you’d continue to pay for the same hardware when you could get it with a few new bells and whistles for a little extra. It’s the embodiment of The Simpsons’ “But she’s got a new hat!” moment.

Some fans may argue that this is par for the course for Nintendo which released several iterations of its handhelds over the years. Back in the day, there was the Game Boy Advance SP with a rechargeable battery and back-lit display…and then Nintendo released the AGS-101 model, which was the exact same but offered two brightness settings. And who can forget the lack of a headphone jack in the GBA SP, which necessitated purchasing special headphones or an adapter for extra? The Game Boy Advance sold 81.48 million units worldwide as of June 30^th 2009 and the GBA SP made up more than half that number so again, great business sense from Nintendo.

Of course, it’s worth noting that the Nintendo DSi was a significant improvement over the regular DS and released four years after the base model. It had a better processor, four times as much RAM and more storage. The New Nintendo 3DS followed roughly the same pattern, releasing more than four years later in the US after the base version and having a significantly better processor and more RAM. We’ll come back to this in a bit but both handheld lines were very successful, selling tens of millions of units.

As for the Switch OLED, things get even more intriguing when you consider the rumored Switch Pro. It’s apparently still a thing, completely separate from the Switch OLED. VentureBeat’s Jeff Grubb has been hearing that it will release in 2022 and have a more “efficient chip.” Dr. Serkan Toto believes that the new model appears more like “an interim model” than a proper upgrade. “This might just be a dummy upgrade until Breath Of The Wild 2 is ready and the component shortage is over next year,” he said on Twitter. One may dismiss any rumors about the Switch Pro at this point but this does make the most sense given how recent events have impacted the world over the past year.

You could argue that expectations for the Switch OLED are mismanaged because of the rumors – Nintendo never said it was working on a more powerful Switch so why should people be upset? It’s never been one to compete with the likes of Sony and Microsoft in terms of power. But if you look back on the history of the Nintendo DS and 3DS, it absolutely has offered more powerful hardware with its refreshes. Given the number of different models for both handhelds, whether its Lite versions, XL version, “New” versions, the Switch’s release pattern becomes a bit familiar.

Granted, Nintendo hasn’t released a major hardware refresh only one year after a minor one – even the New Nintendo 3DS launched three years after the 3DS XL and two years after the 2DS in the US. Maybe it wanted to launch the Switch Pro alongside the Switch OLED this year itself but component shortages forced a delay.

Taking all this into account, the Switch OLED will release this year, make a lot of money – both off of current Switch owners and new ones – and then Nintendo could roll out the Switch Pro next year for even more returns. One could also see the older Switch slowly being phased out while $350 becomes the new entry – a price reduction could happen but looks very unlikely at this point. Again, it’s the best scenario business-wise but from a consumer point-of-view, charging for a new Switch model this year and then again next year for the Switch Pro feels kind of scummy.

At any rate, even if a proper Switch Pro isn’t in the works, the Switch OLED indicates that Nintendo is more than happy for fans to pay for the same performance they’ve been experiencing since 2017. It’s also satisfied with the current status quo where some titles struggle to maintain a solid frame rate or offer resolutions higher than 900p (and in some cases, 720p). When it’s worked out so well in terms of sales, you have to just ask: Why not? Nevertheless, looking at the heated discussions about cross-gen titles and when games on the Xbox Series X and PS5 will start having those “next-gen visuals”, it’s funny to see Nintendo firmly planted in the previous generation, proudly boasting about its new hat.

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.

It’s in the tradition of pretty much all Nintendo portable systems in the past – the Gameboy got Gameboy Color, the DS got DSi, and the 3DS got the New Nintendo 3DS (that was its real name). And while it’s a concept that PlayStation and Xbox both embraced with the PS4 Pro and the Xbox One X, it seems like the Switch Pro (we’re sticking with that one till the official name inevitably requires us to call it something else, and presumably something much stupider) will be more along the lines of the old Nintendo handheld upgrades than the console ones.

We can say this because of what the reports that have leaked this system’s existence have told us – these reports have told us of a fairly massive upgrade over the existing Switch system, with a fairly thorough modernization of its capabilities and specs, compared to the more conservative PS4 Pro, for example. These rumours also claim that, unlike the Xbox One X and PS4 Pro, which were not permitted to ever have any exclusives – meaning that while games could look and run better on them, they would have to run on base consoles all the same – the Switch Pro will in fact be allowed to have those. In fact, it also sounds like at least a few ones from third parties may even be in the works, games that otherwise wouldn’t work on the Switch.

This all seems to be in line with the kind of upgrades we have been told the Switch Pro will have, which allegedly include major bumps to the SoC’s CPU cores and GPU capabilities, as well as memory bandwidth, thanks to a new chip that is rumoured to be based on the newer, cutting edge Ampere or Turing architectures. More importantly, the Switch Pro is also rumoured to include Nvidia’s vaunted DLSS 2.0 technology, which allows for image upscaling and reconstruction using machine learning, and very often delivering better than native rendered images for very little in the way of performance costs, thanks to specialized hardware. All of this stuff is supposed to make the Switch Pro a hefty update – for example, we know it will support 4K resolutions, though it appears more via DLSS than natively, to be fair. And none of this accounts for other exciting components of the systems that have also been leaked, including a larger OLED screen (versus the current 6.2 inch LCD one), as well as presumably better battery life thanks to a more efficient node for the SoC.

Hefty hardware upgrades, superior construction, and at least some exclusive software make the Switch Pro more than just a simple PS4 Pro style upgrade – while it’s not a full fledged next generation successor, these would bring the Switch Pro closer to that than a PS4 Pro style incremental step up would have been. There’s a reason I specifically invoked the Nintendo handheld upgrades, because, as mentioned, the Switch Pro seems to be following in their footsteps more than in PlayStation or Xbox’s.

The difference is that having substantial upgrades for cheaper handhelds that had been made with fairly obsolete tech to begin with is a fundamentally different proposition than what we are looking at with the Switch. It was easy for Nintendo to have a Gameboy Color that was a major upgrade over the Gameboy, while still being extremely cheap. It was very easy to have a DSi or a New 3DS that provided a substantial improvement over the base systems, while still being priced very similarly. But the Nintendo Switch was not made using cheap or outdated technology. While more console-minded players may often like to sneer at its relatively more limited capabilities, the Switch was using some of the most modern SoC tech available in 2016-17 at mass market prices. Many will probably point to their $1,200 iPhone or Galaxy S and say how it outperforms the $300 Switch – which it should! But that comparison is as facile as is comparing a $2,500 PC to a $500 PS5, and then laughing at the PS5 for being weak in comparison. At those prices, you’re getting some of the best tech there is.

With the Switch already being such modern tech, then, profit margins on it were slimmer. In and of itself, this isn’t really an issue – there was definitely high markup on accessories such as the Joycon controllers (which keep drifting, so you’re probably buying a fair few of them), and Nintendo game prices, as well as increasing digital revenues, have all helped make Nintendo have the single most profitable period any console manufacturer has ever had with the Switch. But the hardware itself, that’s probably harder to iterate on while maintaining profit margins, and keeping it in the same price range as the current Switch, which is generally how their previous portable upgrades have gone. So how do we reconcile that with the seemingly fairly ambitious sounding upgrade the Switch Pro is rumoured to be?

The simple answer here is that the Switch Pro will probably be expensive. By a fair bit over the current model, actually. While putting it in a whole different tier of pricing will be counter to how Nintendo has done things in the past, the Switch is not marketed or positioned as a portable, it’s positioned as a console. And the entire concept of more expensive upgrades is far more commonplace now than it was back in the time of the Nintendo DSi, thanks to annual smartphone and tablet upgrades, or even the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X. By allowing themselves to hit a higher price, Nintendo presumably leaves itself more room to make the Switch Pro more capable than they would have been able to make under their older paradigm as well.

How expensive? That’s the (blank hundred dollar) question. There are several routes the company can take here. The first one is to have the Switch Pro take the current Switch’s $299 slot, while pushing the current model down to $249 (or discontinuing it); this, however, feels unlikely. As specified, the Switch Pro seems to be far too ambitious an upgrade to be able to hit a $299 price point while maintaining the kinds of profit margins on hardware Nintendo likes maintaining. Moreover, the same reports that have leaked the system’s existence have mentioned repeatedly that Nintendo is looking at pricing it in a higher tier than the current model.

So let’s go with that option for a second – it’ll be priced higher. Here, too, we have two possibilities. The first is that the Switch Pro takes a $399 price, while the current Switch retains its $299 price, and the Switch Lite keeps its $199 price. $399, however, would make the Switch Pro the most expensive hardware Nintendo has ever put out. It’s actually eye waveringly expensive, and puts it on par with the PS5 Digital Edition, and more expensive than the Xbox Series S. Then again, similar comparisons with the then-current PS4 and Xbox One never held back the original Switch, which was priced equal to the PS4 and Xbox One as well. There’s a possibility Nintendo may feel comfortable with this pricing model for a variety of reasons:

• It keeps things simple, clearly delineating and communicating an entry-, standard-, and premium-level tier to customers;
• $399 gives them higher profit margins than trying to keep the price similar to the current model would net them;
• Switch pricing relative to other consoles has not been an impediment to its success, as mentioned already;
• They probably feel comfortable with a higher price because of their understanding that the Switch Pro is aimed at a smaller niche, and their mass market movers will still be the standard and Lite models;
• It allows them to maintain the $299 and $199 pricing for the Switch and Lite respectively, which Nintendo really seems to be a fan of doing (because believe it or not, over four years in, the Switch has not received a single price-cut, the longest a system has ever gone in history without one).

This confluence of reasons makes this pricing model seem the likeliest. However, there is a chance that Nintendo chooses to keep that model, but with lower price points, in order to maintain some of their traditional price appeal with family friendly segments even with the more expensive Pro. In which case, I can see a Switch Pro coming in at $349, the standard Switch being dropped to $249, and the Switch Lite being dropped to $149. This model is essentially the same as the previous one, just with lower prices. It ends up retaining the elegant separation of tiers that that model has, although it does end up cutting into their profit margins across the board. Simultaneously, however, $349 is a more marketable price than $399 is – core, enthusiast players are likelier to buy a Switch Pro at a price where its cheaper than the PS5, even if it’s not by much, while that same price is also likelier to catch a lot of family purchases that may otherwise have not even considered the Pro and may have stuck with the standard model.

Simultaneously, dropping the prices of the standard and Lite models ends up opening those to a whole new demographic as well. The Switch Lite is actually extremely cheap at $199, but it’s still really expensive for a portable system, and $199 portable systems have traditionally been under performers compared to their cheaper counterparts. You have to assume that at $149, the Switch Lite can tap into a far bigger audience, particularly one that just wants to play, say, Pokemon or Animal Crossing, thus leading to substantially higher sales and revenue for Nintendo as well. Of course, $249 for the standard Switch helps it too – it’s a much more appealing price than the system’s current one, and again, more are likely to pick it up at that point than right now (not that the Switch has struggled to sell at its current asking price either, of course).

Here’s the thing, it’s hard to know what Nintendo will do. Not only are they a notoriously unpredictable company, but we’re in uncharted territory as far as the Switch Pro, and even the Switch itself, go. There are also a lot of variables at play, which make trying to divine any answer with any degree of certainty an exercise in futility. I don’t feel comfortable to committing to any specific prediction, other than saying that I feel like the Switch Pro will be priced much higher than the standard model – by how much, it remains to be seen. I’m personally a fan of the three tier pricing model for the Lite, standard, and Pro, separated by $100 each, but even that allows for a lot of variation (will the Pro be $399? $349?), and, again, is more down to my aesthetic preference for its symmetry more than anything else. 

It’s impossible to know what Nintendo is planning – assuming the Switch Pro is real to begin with (which, remember, officially it’s never been confirmed). Whatever they end up doing, presumably ends up going down well – with the Switch, Nintendo has exhibited uncanny business acumen, and the console is currently on a trajectory to end up as one of the highest selling systems of all time, and well above the PS4 or Wii ever managed. We’ll know soon enough, presumably by August or September at the latest, what, if anything, Nintendo has planned.

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.

Titanfall 2

For as brilliant as its multiplayer was at launch, Titanfall had some major issues with balance, content and post-launch support. The throwaway “story” didn’t help either and despite a positive critical reception, player numbers dropped off, leaving doubts as to whether Respawn would revisit the franchise. But not only did Titanfall 2 happen – even with how disagreeable some of the multiplayer changes were – it had an incredible campaign that stands as one of the best in the genre. Sadly, its sales and player count dipped even quicker and the series is more or less AWOL.

Ten years ago, Minecraft wasn’t a thing, Fortnite wasn’t a thing, Twitch wasn’t a thing, Game Pass wasn’t a thing, Xbox Live was the only service that charged for multiplayer, most games were linear cinematic titles leading to people to long for more open titles, Skyrim and Dark Souls hadn’t come out and irreversibly changed the landscape of games available on the market, Pokemon hadn’t even transitioned to 3D (!), Halo was still developed by Bungie, God of War hadn’t even completed its first trilogy (let alone begin its second one), Assassin’s Creed had just been reinvented for the first time with Assassin’s Creed II, Hideo Kojima was still working on Metal Gear with Konami, Diablo 3 had not yet come out, League of Legends hadn’t blown up in popularity yet, DOTA 2 didn’t even exist, BioWare was on top of the world with Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age Origins, Valve hadn’t even put out Portal 2 (let alone gone on a hiatus from making single player games that would become the stuff of memes), and Angry Birds was the most popular mobile game in the world.

That excessively long run-on sentence probably gives you some idea of just how different things were back then, because video games have honestly, legitimately, changed a lot in this period. It’s been a momentous and extremely important decade for the video games industry – new genres have been created, new stalwarts of popular genres have arisen, new IP has launched, beloved franchises have been reinvented, and so much more.

The incredible thing, additionally, is how much has happened to each of the three console makers this last decade/ But the best way to understand just how much things changed is to look at each part of the gaming market individually, and see what things were like back then, and what they are like now. So without further ado, we’re going to do exactly that.

PlayStation

In 2010, PS3 was still trailing Xbox 360 and Wii, but was on a strong upswing, thanks to a series of inspired exclusives (LittleBigPlanet, Metal Gear Solid 4, Killzone 2, infamous, and, of course, Uncharted 2). Sony had yet to introduce PS Plus, and on the handheld side of things, they had carved out an extremely sizeable portion of the market to themselves with the PSP, which had become the market leader in Japan in terms of third party support, if nothing else. The PS3’s reinvention had started a year before, with the PS3 Slim, a new logo, the “It only does everything” ads, and a renewed focus on Sony expanding its first party portfolio to account for the exclusives that third parties would no longer make for them (given the rising costs of HD development, and the encroachment on PlayStation audiences by Xbox 360), although the actual quality of their output was a bit hit or miss (if wildly experimental). Sony was publishing games for PC, via Sony Online Entertainment. PS Move had not yet come out, though Sony had announced it, and promised to support it in the long term. Which, I suppose, technically they did, given that it is now an indispensable part of the PSVR package. Finally, Sony’s big push at the time was stereoscopic 3D gaming, and they were trying to push sales of 3DTVs with 3D enabled PS3 games.

Things have changed for PlayStation immensely since then. PS4 is now the market leader, and the incumbent going into the next generation. Sony treats online services as an integral part of its PlayStation offerings (PSN made more money in 2016 than all of Nintendo). There is no PlayStation handheld on the market, thanks to the spectacular failure of PSP successor PS Vita. And Sony is now the publisher of some of the best games in the world, with almost every single year since 2012 having had a Sony published title be a Game of the Year contender. This is without counting the fact that several Sony games, such as God of War, Bloodborne, and The Last of Us, are widely considered among the best games ever made. Sony’s emphasis on gimmicks is now at a minimum, and they appear to have doubled down on a few core things that they know work – mostly, their home consoles, great single player games, deals with third parties, and VR (I suppose some may think VR is a gimmick, but that’s not where I am at). And, after almost a full decade of publishing games only for PlayStation – they sold off Sony Online Entertainment early in the decade, which would go on to become Daybreak Entertainment, and spectacularly miss the boat on battle royale games, even though they had a hand in pioneering that genre – they are finally going to start publishing PlayStation first party games on other systems. Titles such as Death Stranding and Detroit: Become Human have already hit PC thanks to third party publishing deals, but MLB The Show is planned for Xbox and Nintendo in 2021.

It’s been a tumultuous decade for Sony, and at one time, the company was written off, and PlayStation assumed to be going defunct. But through those trials and tribulations, a much stronger Sony was forged, and today, PlayStation is the de facto leader of the console market, something that seems unlikely to change at any time in the near future.

Xbox

Believe it or not, Xbox has had an even more eventful ten years than PlayStation. In 2010, Xbox was the console leader in most big markets around the world, and enjoyed immense gamer goodwill thanks to Microsoft’s strong lineup in the first few years of Xbox 360’s life. The console had great exclusives from first and third parties alike, and the Xbox 360 S, a revision for the console, addressed its hardware deficiencies such as the Red Ring of Death. Microsoft was riding high on Windows 7, and planning on entering the smartphone arena with Windows Phone. Their franchises, such as Halo, Fable, and Gears of War, were among the best in the industry.

At the same time, however, Microsoft was starting to lose favor. Its exclusives were beginning to dry up, and Microsoft was falling into a pattern of relying on the same few franchises. It let a lot of partner studios who made Xbox exclusives, such as BioWare and Bizarre Creations, go. The company categorically refused to make any serious commitments to PC gaming. Xbox seemed to be far more interested in following the path to easy money with Kinect, which would be the bulk of their focus for the next few years. And Microsoft generally seemed far more interested in nickel and diming customers, with being the only company to charge for online play, and locking even basic functions such as browser and Netflix access, behind the Xbox Live paywall.

What a difference those ten years have made. Microsoft crashed hard with the Xbox One at launch, largely because it was a weaker console than the competition, but more expensive, thanks to an ordained focus on Kinect, plus media such as TV and movies, and little in the way of compelling exclusives. Microsoft continued to struggle with the Xbox One for years – the console had little in the way of actual meaningful exclusives, and third party games ran better on the competition without exception. Meanwhile, they regressed on most of the progress they had made in global markets with Xbox, to the point that Xbox became irrelevant in most non-Anglosphere markets. And Windows 8, which was their OS for the modern world, was an unmitigated disaster, while Windows Phone failed to take off.

It would take the company years to rebuild. Leadership changes across the board later led to a more focused Microsoft, more willing to do whatever was necessary to be successful. And so, to be successful, Microsoft ended up changing the rules to success. No longer was Xbox bound to hardware units sold as a metric for success. No longer would the strength of its lineup be defined by how many games it played that couldn’t be played anywhere else. Microsoft worked about on systemically reversing all their decisions that had hurt them so badly in the market: they reversed the perception that they were hell bent on nickel and diming, with several incredible initiatives such as Play Anywhere, Backward Compatibility, and Game Pass. They addressed the weakness in their console hardware, and the Xbox One X is the most powerful console in the world right now. They started supporting PC gaming in earnest, committing to bringing every single Xbox game to PC, reviving several PC-centric franchises such as Flight Simulator and Age of Empires, and even finally capitulating and not making their games exclusive to their store. Game Pass is even on PC now!

And most importantly, they finally invested in games. While Halo and Gears are still nowhere close to where they used to be, and Fable is flat out dead (though on the fast track for a revival, allegedly), they purchased almost a dozen studios to beef up their lineup of studios, placing them in a strong position to do well next generation. And, of course, with their savvy combination of Xbox Live, Game Pass, and bringing Xbox services to all hardware and platforms, including PlayStation and Nintendo, they turned the Xbox from a hardware based platform to a software based one, a transition that is looking to be key for the future, and that they are way ahead of the curve on. Xbox may never be the market leader in terms of consoles sold, but they’ve reinvented themselves and put themselves in a position of power to the point that that won’t matter for ensuring continued success anyway.

Nintendo

And, yes, Nintendo somehow manages to top even Microsoft in terms of how much happened to them these last ten years. In 2010, Nintendo was leading the market with the Wii, but it was a Pyrrhic victory – interest in the platform was declining, software sales were in free fall, and third parties had essentially abandoned them. The DS was too old to keep things going, and Nintendo had announced a brand new successor, the 3DS, which had bowled the world over with its promise of glasses-free 3D gaming. In terms of games, Nintendo was on top of the world – Super Mario Galaxy 2 is widely considered among the best games ever made, and on the horizon was Metroid: Other M, a promised cinematic action reinvention of the beloved franchise…

It all went to pot really soon. The 3DS tanked at launch, due to having nothing in the way of games, and an eye watering price of $250, causing Nintendo to slash its price by a third less than six months later. This aggressive move, along with doubling down on 3DS support, and putting out a slew of inspired games, such as Fire Emblem Awakening and The Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds, revived the handheld, and it would go on to sell a respectable 75 million units – which is still the lowest selling Nintendo handheld of all time, and lower than even the PSP.

In terms of consoles, the Wii was followed by the Wii U in 2012, which stands as the single greatest mainstream console failure of this century. Confusingly branded and terribly marketed, while straddled with an expensive controller the value proposition of which was apparent to no one, not even Nintendo, the Wii U ended up selling about 10% of what its predecessor had, and in spite of a short surge of third party games in its first year on the market, got dropped even worse than the Wii had. Nintendo themselves struggled to get anything out on the Wii U, especially because they were spread too thin trying to keep both it and the 3DS afloat single handedly, and, finally intuiting what their future would be, they decided to focus on their portable, allocating the bare minimum towards their console, and nothing else.

In terms of games, it has been such a roller coaster ride. Some of the lowest points of popular Nintendo franchises came this decade, such as Fire Emblem Fates, Pokemon X/Y, The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword, and Metroid: Other M. But Nintendo also proceeded to reinvent itself in a bold new image, and with games such as The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Super Mario Odyssey, Mario Kart 8, Super Smash Bros. Ultimate, Fire Emblem Three Houses, and the promised Metroid Prime 4, more than redeemed itself in the eyes of its jilted fans.

Nintendo finally awoke to the potential of services, first trying to put out a surprisingly competent first party social network on the Wii U, dubbed the Nintendo Network with a message board called Miiverse being its chief component; and then regressing from that in almost every way with the Nintendo Switch, still charging money for it, and… getting away with it?

And yes, the Nintendo Switch, let’s talk about that. One of the boldest, freshest, and most exciting consoles ever, the Switch is a hybrid home console/handheld, which can act as both, and owing to that and its modularity, is incredibly versatile. The console has been an incredible success, having already sold just shy of 50 million units in under three years, and outpacing the PS4, which is one of the highest and fastest selling consoles ever. The Switch has seen insane attach rates for Nintendo games, and some of the best entries in their long running franchises. But it has also seen third parties return to Nintendo, with western third party support being an unlikely bright spot – games such as Skyrim, DOOM, Wolfenstein, Crash Team Racing, Fortnite, Mortal Kombat 11, and The Witcher 3 of all things being on their console, and selling well.

And Nintendo has also finally understood it doesn’t exist in a bubble – the company has been uncharacteristically forward thinking with its embrace of things like cross-platform play, cross-platform saves, and even putting games in its beloved franchises on mobile, with Pokemon GO being a literal world conquering juggernaut, and Mario Kart Tour doing well for some reason I will never actually fathom.

To all appearances, Nintendo was doing well in 2010, but they were in a very precarious position that ended up undermining them for years afterward. Much like Sony and Microsoft, Nintendo learned from their mistakes, and came back much stronger. Going forward, as long as they don’t deviate from the script again (they will), they should be guaranteed a steady stream of assured success (they won’t).

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.