@hanabi Same issue. Legitimately the most fun in a game I had this year. Was planned originally to also be available as a stand-alone release, but that didn't mesh with the design of the game leading you into multiplayer, so they just released printable covers for it on My Nintendo instead.
Posts made by Mbun
RE: Let's Vote for out GOTY 2018!
RE: Censorship topic (out of the news thread)
I'm literally talking about the games that have been censored, or games that feature lewd content with loli characters.
All you've said so far is that you don't believe the age the characters are claimed to be, and you haven't done any job justifying why beyond Body Type or personality.
I have not once compared loli fetishists to actual pedophiles. If you think that I have, then I am sorry but those are your projections and not mine.
You're clearly not interested in participating in this discussion and instead are just going to continue with your victim complex
You clearly aren't intending to change your offensive behavior either, since you still reply with stuff like
beating off to underage anime girls
to try and sway people on allowing you to body shame grown women and the people who find them attractive.
I want you to re-read every message from the top and realize you've clearly misinterpreted them and over-reacted.
I've read them. I've reread them. I've read between them. Unless you can point out where and why you feel I have overreacted, there's nothing more I can do for you. You left your arguments, and I've responded to them fairly and as clearly as I can without you pointing out specific parts for me to be even clearer about. I feel bad that you've gotten mixed up defending someone who shows no remorse and clearly intends to keep acting this way. The only reason I won't respond to every single line of something you say is that it would make this even unnecessarily longer, and even when I did respond to what you wanted me to respond to, it just made you more unimaginably upset. If you disagree with me, that's a take. I'm not playing games or twisting words as you're making me out to. I'm responding to topics as part of a larger discussion.
Edit: Either way, I do feel this has gotten down to a personal level, and I regret that the heated topic took us there. I very much cannot complain about having my personal character attacked (seriously tho, I'm not trying to twist anybody's words, I just want us to discuss our opinions on this stuff as clear as possible) while I present @El-Shmiablo 's actions the way they have come off from my perspective, but all I can do is promise that going forward I am going to try my hardest not to hold any sort of lingering grudge towards him. Fair warning, that might be tested if he keeps acting as he has previously though.
And to you @Axel I've tried my best to explain why I feel this way and assure you that this isn't some kind of deflection or whatever. Tried to even directly address what you think he meant and express why I disagree with that take on it to no avail sadly it seems. Even though you see this his way, your actions have not been the same as his, and for that reason I bear you zero ill will currently or going forward and take this as more of a misunderstanding between the two of us that hopefully we can work out or just let go eventually. You're your own person and allowed to believe what you will, but from my perspective there's no outward beef in your direction.
This is a sensitive topic of many facets, so I hope we can stay patient with one another while trying to discuss our opinions.
RE: Censorship topic (out of the news thread)
I know it doesn't help your argument to include the parts of my post where I specifically state I enjoy fanservice and hentai
I don't think that matters when you act the way you act regardless of it. Equivalent of a racist saying they have a black friend.
As a fan of anime I am allowed to be critical of it.
just because she is "officially over 18 the creator said so" that these characters are not meant to pander directly to loli fetishism
Again, I'm not talking about Doujins that take known underage characters and apparently "age them up" even though you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Those things are banned from sites for very good reason. We're talking about when there's a flat chested anime character next to one who's chest defies the laws of gravity and you give people who dare to enjoy the flat chested one shit and liken them to people who are abusive to and dangerous around actual children, who deserve to be removed from society and possibly put down depending on their past actions. Have you ever noticed how you don't have a problem with the big breasted ones even if they act the exact same as the other one? It is extra fucked up when you consider girls develop way before they turn 18, so really there should be no difference between the two body types. If you're questioning one, you should be questioning both.
RE: Censorship topic (out of the news thread)
Please, stop twisting my words and extrapolating.
Not my intention. I tried to follow what you were saying closely and point out the specific things you said I was responding to so we could avoid any confusion like this.
I was simply addressing your rant towards @El-Shmiablo that I felt was out of line and had nothing to do with what he said.
And I addressed you addressing my rant. (this is getting confusing) Maybe it seems out of line solely from what I quoted this time, because I'm not quoting every single other instance of him doing this, but he's always likening anime girls with specific body types to little underage girls and shaming them.
You say I'm "hung up on the acting part"
You specifically bolded "and acts" and claimed I was purposely omitting discussion around it, when I didn't think it was worth going into before. Then I go into it, and you seem upset I went into it. I'm getting mixed messages on what you want from me here.
all I did was explain what he meant in his message
I don't need to go back into it, but his message is harmful to grown women with those body types. That's why I "got hung up on the looking part". To be fair, it was a rant that's been building for some time, but this if the place, if anywhere, to go into that with someone who might not realize the things he's saying can emotionally damage people.
pretending it's all ok because they're "officially" over 18 is extremely disingenuous
We're not talking about a Card Captor Sakura Doujin with "The characters contained within are 18+" inside the cover. Everyone knows that's bullshit. We're talking about anime girls in video games. Maybe there's some games where they're designed to be much younger appearing then their listed age, but most will label them as the exact ages they meant to be, (unless it is localized differently for the west) and usually go so far in depth about their personal profile that you'll know all kinds of useless fluff like their Blood Type. My point though, is that it often is a difference in Body Types. I don't want to racially stereotype Japanese people, but it is no secret that compared to some western races, their Body Types tend to differ in ways in which they are often smaller in frame and stature. Anime characters are often based on Japanese people, so they often share these traits. Outside Japan, it seems this often leads to confusion. Especially when paired with stuff like chibi styles and such.
That's it, that's all he meant in an exaggerated way. Nothing about body-shaming, sexual harassment towards petite girls and whatnot.
Intended or not, that's what he's doing. That's why I pointed it out finally. Fine intentions or not, you have to point out when people are acting in a way that's offensive if you want to see any change in their behavior.
I have no problem with these things existing.
I find that hard to believe with how far you go out of your way to put people down who enjoy those things. Your very next line is:
I personally think they are incredibly cringey and awkward
Just let people enjoy what they choose to enjoy if it isn't hurting anyone. You don't need to bully people over it based on your own views of what is being enjoyed. I can't tell you not to do this, but when you say you have no problem with it existing, that doesn't line up with the way you've acted.
If you like to rub on some lolis, hey man you do you, but please don't pretend that it is something other than what it is: softcore porn.
I don't think anyone is denying that this stuff is basically porn. That's why everyone agrees it should be rated M and kept away from minors. I mean some people definitely enjoy it for the goofy dumbness of the spectacle and not for "release", but I don't see anyone here ignoring the sexual sides of it. It is hard to generalize though, because if we talk about patting your troops or whatever that they took out of Fire Emblem, I remember people being upset, not that they couldn't physically interact with their troops anymore, but because of the lore social interactions locked behind this that were no longer accessible with the removal of that feature. That had nothing to do with "porn" and everything to do with story elements locked behind a dumb thing being stripped from the game. There's a whole spectrum censorship can affect, even when it only targets a thing most don't even care about.
And for the love of god please don't take C.S. Lewis that out of context ever again.
It wasn't out of context. I was explaining specifically that adults don't have to act mature and uptight all the time, which extends to intimate activities they engage with their also of legal age partners.
There is a mountain of difference between enjoying childish things and beating off to underage anime girls.
Again, just because they're of a certain body type doesn't make them underage. Your examples even included a girl overtly expressing she was NOT underage. So please stop throwing out words for the sake of shock value when that is not what is being discussed here. That is not what I was talking about when I brought up the quote.
I've yet to watch Game of Thrones after someone told me around the time the third season (I think it was the third) that "Theres like 3 rape scenes an episode"
I don't remember quite that many, but I do remember some intense sexual scenes in GoT that made me momentarily uncomfortable. Thankfully, I don't remember any lingering on too long. The show has many disturbing implications and actions throughout though. Viewer discretion is advised.
I think my SO wanted to watch that but we could never find a place to. If it is really that disturbing, then I'm kinda glad we never did.
RE: Censorship topic (out of the news thread)
Going from "It's fucked up to fantasize about 7-year-olds"
That's not what he said. He said they appear to be 7 years old to him, which is judging them based on a body type. That is directly implying those body types make a fully grown woman look as though she's a kid, and because that weirds them out, nobody should be allowed to view it sexually.
You're purposely omitting a very important part of his message: "looks and acts like a 7-year-old".
If you're hung up on the acting part, I don't know what to tell you. That's a whole separate conversation about policing people on how they're allowed to act. I'm personally not into the fake ditzy, cutesy acting types, but some girls obviously lean hard into that because there are guys who find it attractive, and I'm not going to judge either side for that. People have different ideals for personality in partners, and I certainly don't understand some of them, but I don't think people are wrong for liking tsunderes or whatever, even if that stuff is a bit silly.
portray girls as innocent, shy, vulnerable, obedient and just overall childish, and at the same time sexualize them
I don't see the problem with any of this if the fully grown, of age girls are choosing to act like this or just are naturally like this despite their age. If you're turning this to be about how men write female characters to act in some of these mediums for the sole sake of coming off as easy and vulnerable, that's another argument for another topic, and one I'd actually probably take the same side as you on. If it is justified for the character or in a game with a wide range of characters representing a wider spectrum of female forms, then I don't see this as a problem however.
Being an adult doesn't mean you have to be super serious and mature all the time. You can still maintain a playful attitude, and depending on your life to the point can maintain shreds of innocence. Have a quote I like from C.S. Lewis:
"Critics who treat 'adult' as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
That is to say you aren't forced to stop having fun once you're an adult. Look at Kyle Bosman. He's constantly trying to stir up the ordinary and mundane by making little bits and games with it. There's nothing wrong with that. He's choosing to make fun in his life this way while maintaining his adult responsibilities. Likewise, if people choose to act a certain way in the bedroom that makes them feel more comfortable, who are we to judge? Long as all parties involved are consenting adults, it really is none of our business what they're doing in there.
Naturally those types of people wouldn't mind equal representation in media, and sure there's always the scare of these kinds of things making their way into the wrong hands and leading to underage people experiencing things they shouldn't and filling their heads with ideas they're not mature enough to handle, but this is and always has been a department where game ratings and good old fashioned parenting come in to prevent this, not censorship. Likewise, it is just as easy for a kid who's parents aren't on point to get their hands on overly violent video games currently, and the potential consequences of that are much harsher in the long run since once someone is dead that's it. But our society takes that chance and trusts parents to watch their kids closer. Should be no different with sexual media. For adults but controlled to keep away from kids.
Sure, you can lie to yourself and say "Nuh uh, her official bio says she's 18", but we all know what's going on here.
So what will you say to the real life fully grown women with those body types who choose to act that way? I mean, when it isn't being exposed to or harming actual children, I'm not going to go around policing people on how they're allowed to act. Personally, I think those people are just better at separating fantasy from reality than you.
What game can I torture a "7" year old, none because of censorship.
True, most games don't allow harming children, because people rightfully find it disturbing. When really, all violence against fellow human beings should be seen as disturbing but people are so desensitized to it from media. There's definitely games with underage characters being harmed by the world around them though. Ellie is originally 14 in The Last of Us and goes through all kinds of twisted shit due to the setting of that franchise.
You know what? You're right. There is absolutely no difference at all.
Not familiar with those games. Just looks like random kink stuff to me. Second pic even says she's a "mature young woman" which implies she's of age even if her body type appears otherwise to you.
the tone of some people here is really despective (not you mbun) and I feel that's low even if I agree with the arguments, so I would say we should try to keep low blows out of the arguments
I can agree with that. Sorry if I come off that way. Sometimes I get irked reading stuff people say when I've had close friends through my life who have dealt with the kind of complexes that develop when the body you're naturally given doesn't match up with societies standards for acceptable beauty and get a little heated trying to make people understand why the things they're saying can actually be very negative and emotionally damaging to such individuals who just want to be treated like anyone else and not feel like people are wrong for feeling attracted to them or they're not allowed to maintain adult relationships.
my problem with sexuality in games is not because of the content itself, but more because of context and tone
Always a case by case basis that's hard to judge from the outside, so I try not to be overly judgmental on this, but I can definitely agree on this front. I've seen things that do it from a very disrespectful, offensive standpoint where the characters are written to be nothing more than sexual objects, and sure that's sometimes the nature of what's essentially porn, but even in that field I think it is important to craft your characters to be less one dimensional.
I don't have any issue with having some character sex appeal being used in a game or for suggestive content if it is well justified and not a core aspect of the experience, for instance I like Bayonetta or even Lollipop Chainsaw, however when there's a mini game specifically designed around groping characters or the whole premise of games like Gal Gun, yeah that makes me uncomfortable.
Exactly! Couldn't agree with you more. Only thing I'd add is I still see games like Gal Gun as just dumb fun, but I'd hope the creators of such games would equally provide for consumers who would want the same dumb fun with male characters instead. I think often those games don't happen, because in the west at least there seems to be a much smaller audience for it currently, but Otome games sell pretty damn well in Japan, so I think it could be big here too if people got adjusted to the concept and we all stopped making fun of each other for daring to enjoy games like this.
On the side of violence, first I think it rarely reaches a similar point where the violence is so extreme that I have an issue with it
The recent examples I can think of would be the modern Tomb Raider series that people described as "torture porn" and even worse that one extremely violent Last of Us II Trailer that didn't land the way they expected it to with people I guess? I forget what event that was shown at, but that was too much for the general public imo. One thing if you buy a mature game and see that, but you shouldn't see that level of violence during a press conference.
doesn't involve humans (ex Doom)
Specifically in the case of Doom, we know we're slaying evil demons, but even for stuff like Monster Hunter I get a little sad if the justifications for hunting the wild monsters isn't there, although thankfully they usually are. I guess another example would be James Cameron's Avatar where humans are okay obliterating the Na'vi for their resources because they're just seen as monster savages. That movie clearly paints the humans as the bad guys for good reason there, which is league above most media involving humans versus nonhumans.
it is an unfortunate truth that child porn is a reality and there's a big market for it, and people that are looking to consume it
Unfortunate is an understatement. There's no forgiving people who perpetuate that business. I hate to spin your point, which I agree with, this way, but murder is also a reality in our world. People murder one another every day, and overly violent media does in some part enable this behavior from people by normalizing violent acts. We can do our best to control it with age ratings, but at the end of the day there's lots of factors in how people develop mentally, so it is going to happen. Even if we censored and prohibited all violent media, people would still murder one another, and the same goes for this kind of sexual media.
I'm perfectly ok with a private company taking what measures they find necessary to provide the content they find acceptable
I think the most important side here is that they're doing this to placate an audience who disapproves of this type of media which is ultimately more profitable for them than allowing these experiences on their platform. Also, I think there's an inherent difference to getting upset at Sony for not themselves making these kind of games they aren't personally interested in versus simply allowing developers who are to release their vision of their games on their platform. Nobody is telling Sony to start making lewd games. I take issue with Sony policing other devs on what they should be making.
What if someone did try to release a game with children involved in such a way? Should censorship step in then?
No, because those devs should be locked up for the rest of their lives and any existing version of that content should be destroyed as soon as possible. Real children should never be exposed to that sort of stuff. I get uncomfortable when child actors have to be exposed to fictional situations like that in television and movies, but that's another topic too.
Those "against" censorship in this thread would probably draw a line in the sand at some point too.
I draw a line with stuff, especially sexual stuff shoved into a game that didn't market itself as such, but I never think censorship is the solve. I think critics and users flaming the devs for what they've done is the solution. Let their vision come out, but if it is a really bad vision, let people flame it and let the devs lose alot of money for how poorly their game performs for pulling a bait and switch. The only censorship I'm personally on board for is promotional censorship. Censored trailers, censored box art, and so on for both overly violent and overly sexual games as to not expose people to things they don't want to see in passing. In the case of box art though, it is good for devs to be mindful and offer things such as printable / reversible covers or special editions not offered in normal marketplaces for people who do want the raunchy covers.
there's also a lot of slippery slope thought patterns that seem to be attached to it as well. I'm always opposed to that sort of fear-mongering (it's prevalent in politics) because the actions of now don't always lead to the ideas of tomorrow
I agree, but in the reverse line of thought as you take that. I don't think overly violent media on it's own leads to an increase of murdering psychopaths, and I don't think overly sexual media of young looking characters on it's own leads to an increase of pedophiles. It is all about context, warning labels, control of where the product lands, proper societal discussion on the important topics, etc.
For me personally? I'd much rather shotgun a demon in the face than rub an anime girl for affection points
Same, but I'd also rather pat a cute anime girl on the head than mow down waves of human opponents in a war game. Like you said, the context is very important.
RE: Censorship topic (out of the news thread)
@el-shmiablo But you'd be fine with violently torturing and murdering the same young looking girl because
I personally have never really had an issue with violence or gore, I can pretty easily separate fiction/reality so that extreme violence in games just doesn't really phase me
So why can't you guys just do that with sexual scenarios too? The fictional characters in question you're sexually stimulating don't actually exist, same as the characters you've been without batting an eyelash snuffing the life out of. Not to mention body types are a thing, and it is kind of offensive to consider any grown woman who isn't curvy, stacked, and THICC to "look like a 7 year old". That's the kind of fucked up logic that got petites banned from doing porn in some countries, because men are judging them as looking too close to something they've developed a societal fear of finding attractive. It is fine if your personal preference is the female form doesn't excite you unless she's rocking double Ds, a big bubble butt, and wide child-bearing hips, but there's many other girls of differing body types out there who also need love, and if they're of age we shouldn't exclude them and body shame them for how they naturally grew. This is exactly the kinda shit that leads girls of those body types to feel they need breast implements to earn the right to be found attractive. Please stop sexually harassing them with your expectations of what constitutes a proper grown woman.
RE: Super Smash Bros. Ultimate (Switch)
I don't know what to make of this topic going so quiet post release. Did people get their fill and move on already? Are they so busy playing the brick of content that they haven't taken the time to talk bout it yet? I think Smash has been more about the road to release than the final product since Brawl times, but I expected to see a couple people's impressions by now. Personally, I've only gotten a couple multiplayer hours in with friends, and I haven't gotten to try all the characters yet, but I've seen World of Light through to the end, experienced afew Classic Modes, tried Squad Strike, and done one Smashdown with three of us picking from an incomplete version of the roster.
Spirits and World of Light was basically most of my prelaunch fears come true, except leveling the Spirits isn't grindy at all. Glad difficulty is present, especially if you pick Hard. More of an RPG campaign than a fighting (or party) game campaign though, so depends more on your Spirits than anything. Won't go into details, but cutscenes were a big disappointment, although Sakurai wasn't wrong to go light on them knowing they'd just get datamined and people would watch them on Youtube. The dungeons were pretty basic despite having some beautiful overworld art. You get tired of so many fights in a row where every fight is just some form of take out your opponent, which is more boring compared to past Event Smash modes, and despite the fights telling you what game the Spirit comes from, there's no historical blurbs to dig into with your wiggling PNGs. The majority of the boss fights didn't blow me away and I think the choices for them were on the boring side. The overworld was really the best part, aside from one thing right before the end of the game that's SO GOOD, but sadly there's not much to do on there between fights. Haven't fooled with Spirit Board yet, but heard people say they don't want anymore fights after World of Light. While I'm always glad to see a NG+ option, I feel the structure of World of Light would lend itself better to just being able to replay individual fights instead of go all the way back through to replay one, so I wish that was different. I also think new life could be breathed into the mode if they would simply add the option for coop.
Generally playing the game is fun and feels great. My Pikachu main that felt weird to me in Smash 4 feels good to play again. Young Link is gloriously back and feels absolutely perfect to how I loved to play him back in Melee. Haven't gotten to touch my boy Luigi yet or newcomers like the Belmonts, King K. Rool, Ridley, or Incineroar. Tried out Inkling, and they're very hard to get the hang of, but I think with more time I'd really enjoy playing them. Splat bombs are especially fun to try and land. Isabelle isn't my jam, but her fishing pole is fun to troll with. So nobody feels blatantly over or underpowered to me so far, and that's nice for now. My favorite addition is Stage Morph, which usually kicks in right when you're getting kind of bored of the stage you're on, and I've seen it save people from falling into pits while dooming others to, which is always a fun shakeup like turning any stage into a traveling stage. Plus it means you can try out the massive amount of stages 2 at a time. Final Smash Meter is way too chaotic in 4+ player FFAs, but it works pretty well in 1v1s as a better way to get to use your Final Smash. I never touched Omega Forms of stages in Smash 4, but in Ultimate I've enjoyed visually how they can alter the way stages look, and Battlefield Forms do add a way I want to play them. Stage Hazard Toggle is a godsend for getting to play stages you enjoy with friends who normally hate them for annoying hazards that happen there. Love how easy it is to setup different custom rulesets and just take turns switching between them before every match to make everyone happy. Full button remapping and settings plugged to user profiles is another blessing.
Online is the mess I expected it to be. They've patched it to make it a little better, and learning while writing this from Friend Code you can use Background Matchmaking to force your play preferences more when looking for matches. It is still basically Smash 4's online though. Don't have too much more to say about it. Sucks you can't play with stuff like Squad Strike, Smashdown, Stage Morph, etc. online. Smash Ultimate is definitely best experienced locally with friends.
Squad Strike will probably end up the Smash Run of Ultimate, where it gets buried under for not being available online despite being pretty fun. I love how it has the Pokemon Stadium-esque way of picking order of your fighters before the match without your opponent being able to tell. Smashdown is a commitment, but it is also SUPER FUN, and it is a great way of forcing your tryhard friends off their main and testing everyone's general skill level with the game. There's so many mindgames you can play even just on the menu picking fighters faster than your friends so they can't pick them. Great addition that I hope stays in potential future games, and really benefits from and synergizes with the massive roster. Haven't touched Mob Smash, but I love the new Classic Mode. It is a little short, but that doesn't feel like a negative with the massive roster, and the way each one is themed to each character is a great touch. Sadly, the Race to the Finish type minigame that is part of Classic Mode isn't themed to each character, exact same for all 74, which is a big disappointment when there's no Break the Targets or anything in Ultimate. It is a short stage you can quickly run through, so it isn't too much of a slog at least. One of the few modes in Ultimate that lets you play coop too!
Last I'll say on an already lengthy post is I played my time using a Pro Controller, and it worked mostly fine for Smash. Had a couple instances where against friends, in a frantic fight I'd have a Side Special come out when I wanted a Neutral one because the Pro Analogue Stick isn't as springy as the GameCube Controller one, but that's really the worst of it. Getting to use a wireless controller with HD Rumble was worth that tradeoff for me, and it saves me money on not buying the Gamecube Adapter and a newage Gamecube Controller.
RE: What's the worst video game purchase you've ever made?
Switch is designed to be used in very specific ways.
If anything, it is the opposite, since it is a system that supports docked mode for your tv, handheld mode for playing on the go, and tabletop mode where you can set it on a stable surface away from home (or at home when the power is out) and play undocked. Most consoles only have the docked mode.
If you use it just like Nintendo want you to, then you have a great time. But if you want something else, the system can't support that.
Sorry, but this feels like a nothing argument I could apply to anything. If you use a toothbrush just like the dentist wants you to, then you have a great time! But if you want something else, the toothbrush can't support that. Well yeah, it is a toothbrush. It is designed first and foremost to brush teeth and anything else you figure out you can do with it is a bonus on top of that.
As I said above, Switch can already do more than most consoles that are stuck with one way to play the games on them. Of course there's downsides to the versatility it adds, but it lets you play how you want to play more than most systems, so strange to see this argued against it. Also, I think of Nintendo Labo. Sure they have the kits and software designed to build and do very specific things, but they also have the garage section to encourage designing and programming your own creations.
For example, Nintendo what you to use Joy-Cons, but I never take Switch outside of the dock, and Pro controller feels better in my hands. So I don't need Joy-Cons and I have to reason to charge them or keep them around.
I bought a Pro Controller with my Switch Day 1 and have used the Joycons a number of times I can count on one hand and only with the Snipperclips demo was I forced to interact with them. There's afew games that require them by the nature of how the games work like Super Mario Party, but those games are easy enough to avoid. Even Odyssey that was begging me to use them I nope'd at and used my Pro Controller with, and sure it felt stupid jerking my traditional controller directions during parts of the game, but it meant I never had to use the Joycons.
That said, they're always attached to the sides of my Switch, because why wouldn't you keep them there where they naturally charge anyways? It is both a charger and a holder so you don't lose them, plus it makes it easier to dock and undock the system, and it provides you with attached controllers for handheld mode. The only situation where I could imagine you not having them is if you were scheming to recoup cost of the system purchase by immediately selling your Joycon set, which I wouldn't recommend. The fact that you can even undock them to begin with, so you can swap them out for different color or special edition ones without being forced to buy an all new system just for that is actually another example of a freedom the Switch allows that stuff like the Vita or 3DS never did. If one of your buttons got mushy or a stick broke on that, you were mostly just screwed.
I know that very few people have issues with Switch, but I'm a weirdo with weird requests.
I feel like I've heard Community Comments / Showcase posts from you before, but maybe mixing you up with someone else. Either way, no no no. Many people have issues with the Switch. I'd argue almost every owner has something they don't like about it, whether it is a nitpicky thing like no Netflix app on the system or something serious like how horribly Nintendo has handled voice chat for their first party games, despite Fortnite showing you can simply do it the way everyone wants it on the Switch and it works just perfectly.
Again though, that's everything. Every console. Every product in general. I wish my phone had a better battery life, but if it did it would've costed much more, and I would've still gone for a model with a less stellar battery life out of budget restraints. Tradeoffs are everywhere. Nintendo expecting you to keep your Joycons around the base unit or snugly locked into it to charge them when you're not using it is not at all what I'd consider unreasonable or forcing you to use it a specific way. Having to use a Wiimote in conjunction with the sensor bar during the Wii era to navigate a menu to launch a classic game, that you could then take control of with a normal controller, now that was actually a hassle where you had to go out of your way to find a Wiimote! Switch is very intentionally designed for that to never be a problem though. Don't have to use Joycons for navigating the menus and a place to keep and charge them is built into the core of the system.
while I can satisfy all my requirements on other platforms
You can just as easily misplace your controllers with any other systems, and those don't even come with a place to physically attach them to the system to charge or just stay put. You can dangle them off a charge cord, but that's not the same thing.
Nintendo says to me: "No, we know better what you need, and you should play exactly as you told."
They've honestly been easing back on this lately. There's still some unique to them frustrating stuff like the voice chat kerfuffle, but outside that previous policies they had like not allowing you to voice chat or add random players is gone now. There's more options than just exchanging friend codes too thankfully. Nintendo is even openly allowing more mature games they would've denied in the past to appear on their platforms, when funnily enough Sony suddenly is looking like past Nintendo and trying to police devs on what they can and can't release on Playstation now that Sony has gotten too cocky from being on top this console generation and thinks they can get away with anything to boost overall sales.
Maybe it's profitable to ignore minority, but it doesn't make it any better for me.
Seriously sounds more like what Sony is doing right now to me. Also doesn't help that all the most interesting Sony stuff right now is locked behind an additional expensive purchase of VR while the base console itself just gets endlessly cinematic experiences. PS3 era was leagues better for consumer variety.
I seriously wonder what the fuck is going on at Nintendo HQ sometimes.
I think the out of touchness is the age of the higher ups at the company showing, and this is probably why Nintendo has startled hustling to train and transfer to these leading roles to younger people finally. Has been working out great for them so far, so hopefully it just gets better and better with time. Sakurai said Nintendo was picking the 5 Smash Ultimate DLC characters, and everyone naturally freaked out expecting them to pick awful things, then the very first one we find out about is Joker from Persona 5, which is extremely in touch with the kind of picks people do want. And this is coming right off the back of Sakurai putting a Piranha Plant with a reused asset Final Smash in the game. I respect the man, and the character looks admittedly fun, but if you're going to make me choose between them, then of course I'm going with the hip to what people actually want Joker from Persona 5 pick instead of the wtf pick Piranha Plant fighter that will forever annoy people, even if it somehow ends up being the most fun character ever added to Smash.