Switch Online Service.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

Yoshi178:

Seth Carter:

Yoshi178:
so called PS4 "exclusive" Crash Bandicoot N-Sane trilogy.

You keep bringing that up, but was that ever somehow confused? The announcement literally said "coming to PS4 first".

i don't see any words along those lines in this trailer

*snip*

Yeah, even the Playstation trailer (which is not the Activision announcement) omits the "Only on" that's used exclusives in its stingers. Its got the same stingers Destiny had in TV spots because Sony tossed them a bunch of money for specific promotion of their platform.

I didn't bother with the rest of the lot particularly, given the second link is literally titled PS4/Switch/Xbox One in the title itself.

Seth Carter:

Yoshi178:

Seth Carter:

You keep bringing that up, but was that ever somehow confused? The announcement literally said "coming to PS4 first".

i don't see any words along those lines in this trailer

*snip*

Yeah, even the Playstation trailer (which is not the Activision announcement) omits the "Only on" that's used exclusives in its stingers. Its got the same stingers Destiny had in TV spots because Sony tossed them a bunch of money for specific promotion of their platform.

I didn't bother with the rest of the lot particularly, given the second link is literally titled PS4/Switch/Xbox One in the title itself.

my bad . that second trailer i didn't pay enough attetion. i just searched into youtube PS4 Crash Bandicoot trailers and tried to pick out a bunch of old trailers from 2016 and 2017. missed that one being released in 2018. edited and removed that one from the post.

but it'd be good if you could link me an Activision specfic trailer from 2017 or 2016 that shows indicates that "coming to PS4 first" line. all i remember is those early trailers Sony was promoting originally for the game didn't show any indication of the N-Sane Trilogy coming to the other platforms as well as PS4

Yoshi178:

Phoenixmgs:
Again, gamers want CURRENT/NEW 3rd-party games. Getting the 1st Dark Souls or Skyrim or SFII isn't helping much in that regard.

you literally just said this:

Phoenixmgs:
The type of games that do get played basically exclusively by people are not the type of games Nintendo makes but yearly releases or service type games like a COD, FIFA, CSGO, still WoW, Fortnite, GTA Online, etc.

CSGO and GTA V are both extremely old games. JUST like Skyrim and Dark Souls are.

I'll give you the other 3 games you listed. but don't act like it's impossible for the Switch to get COD or Fortnite. Fortnite is actually a frequent title that's been popping up in rumors and leak discussions recently, the rumour is that Epic Games plans to announce a Switch version of it at E3, and before you say "they're just rumours" to me, Crash Bandicoot N-Sane Trilogy for the Switch and Xbox One was also just a rumor until it was officially revealed a couple of months ago.
And COD isn't announced to be coming to Switch yet of course, but that's the key word *yet*. sure COD may not be on the Switch at the moment, but that franchise was on the Wii and even the Wii U. but the Wii U didn't have any where as much sales and Support as what Switch already has now did it?

you're just being impatient and want every single 3rd Party franchise on Nintendo Switch immediately otherwise in your eyes "Nintendo doesn't get 3rd Party support". Business doesn't work that way though, Nintendo needs to build confidence in 3rd Parties that the Switch will be a good system to invest money & development resources into so that 3rd Parties can actually make a Profit by making games for Switch. that doesn't happen overnight.

But Nintendo has already made very good progress with 3rd Parties with the Nintendo Switch so far. sure there's some ports of old games like Dark Souls 1 and Skyrim on there, but there's also modern stuff that's been getting announced for the system as well like DOOM, Wolfenstein II, South Park the Franctured but Whole and even so called PS4 "exclusive" Crash Bandicoot N-Sane trilogy.

and the Switch has only been out the market for 15 months now. the library will only get bigger and bigger. and i would put money on more 3rd Party stuff coming to the Switch getting announced at E3 in 2 weeks.

The main point isn't that Nintendo doesn't have older games like CSGO or GTA Online, but will it get the next CSGO or GTA Online (RDR2 Online)? Very doubtful. Maybe the Switch does get Fortnite, but will people have moved on to a different game by then or will the Battle Royale fad have cooled by that point? Will there be enough people playing Fortnite on Switch to have a thriving community? Battle Royale modes require a big community to be successful because you're looking at 100 in a match instead of like 12 (in a 6v6 game). Even eventually getting those games down the line isn't that big of a get because millions of gamers are already playing those games (or have played them out) on a different platform (making friends/clans/squads/guilds) and why would they switch platforms along with re-buying the game?

Nintendo getting 3rd-party support has a low ceiling because of the Switch's hardware. Wolfenstein 2 is the only game so far that has gotten a port to the Switch that didn't already get a graphical downgrade due to VR edition (which Wolf 2 might be getting and thus why it's on the Switch), had low hardware specs to begin with, or was a game from last-gen. You know what would allow a Nintendo system getting 3rd-party support basically overnight? Nintendo simply making a system that has similar power to the competition with x86 architecture. That's literally all Nintendo would have to do and support would come flooding in.

Yoshi178:

CSGO and GTA V are both extremely old games. JUST like Skyrim and Dark Souls are.

I'll give you the other 3 games you listed. but don't act like it's impossible for the Switch to get COD or Fortnite. Fortnite is actually a frequent title that's been popping up in rumors and leak discussions recently, the rumour is that Epic Games plans to announce a Switch version of it at E3, and before you say "they're just rumours" to me, Crash Bandicoot N-Sane Trilogy for the Switch and Xbox One was also just a rumor until it was officially revealed a couple of months ago.
And COD isn't announced to be coming to Switch yet of course, but that's the key word *yet*. sure COD may not be on the Switch at the moment, but that franchise was on the Wii and even the Wii U. but the Wii U didn't have any where as much sales and Support as what Switch already has now did it?

you're just being impatient and want every single 3rd Party franchise on Nintendo Switch immediately otherwise in your eyes "Nintendo doesn't get 3rd Party support". Business doesn't work that way though, Nintendo needs to build confidence in 3rd Parties that the Switch will be a good system to invest money & development resources into so that 3rd Parties can actually make a Profit by making games for Switch. that doesn't happen overnight.

But Nintendo has already made very good progress with 3rd Parties with the Nintendo Switch so far. sure there's some ports of old games like Dark Souls 1 and Skyrim on there, but there's also modern stuff that's been getting announced for the system as well like DOOM, Wolfenstein II, South Park the Franctured but Whole and even so called PS4 "exclusive" Crash Bandicoot N-Sane trilogy.

and the Switch has only been out the market for 15 months now. the library will only get bigger and bigger. and i would put money on more 3rd Party stuff coming to the Switch getting announced at E3 in 2 weeks.

That and the more I think about it the more it's coming off like a sloppy double standard. Because guess what, the PS4 and XB1 get old games CONSTANTLY. Heck, SEGA just announced PS4 ports of Yakuza 3, 4, and 5. Dark Souls Remastered just came out for the PS4 and XB1 with the usual fanfare and we're going to continue seeing ports and remasters for the foreseeable futures.

And the more I think about trying to dismiss classic titles, the more I realize it's really insulting to the medium. That's like saying there's no point in putting Metropolis on Blu-ray because it was made in 1927 or that there's no point in putting Led Zeppelin IV on iTunes. Treating games as that disposable is really dumb, especially when many of those games are fine and critically lauded.

At the end of the day, a lot of this bitching about 3rd parties seems moot considering how well the Switch is selling and how well Nintendo is doing. I really don't get why people are so hung up Nintendo when they could leave at any time. It's not like there aren't other options for entertainment

Aiddon:

Yoshi178:

CSGO and GTA V are both extremely old games. JUST like Skyrim and Dark Souls are.

I'll give you the other 3 games you listed. but don't act like it's impossible for the Switch to get COD or Fortnite. Fortnite is actually a frequent title that's been popping up in rumors and leak discussions recently, the rumour is that Epic Games plans to announce a Switch version of it at E3, and before you say "they're just rumours" to me, Crash Bandicoot N-Sane Trilogy for the Switch and Xbox One was also just a rumor until it was officially revealed a couple of months ago.
And COD isn't announced to be coming to Switch yet of course, but that's the key word *yet*. sure COD may not be on the Switch at the moment, but that franchise was on the Wii and even the Wii U. but the Wii U didn't have any where as much sales and Support as what Switch already has now did it?

you're just being impatient and want every single 3rd Party franchise on Nintendo Switch immediately otherwise in your eyes "Nintendo doesn't get 3rd Party support". Business doesn't work that way though, Nintendo needs to build confidence in 3rd Parties that the Switch will be a good system to invest money & development resources into so that 3rd Parties can actually make a Profit by making games for Switch. that doesn't happen overnight.

But Nintendo has already made very good progress with 3rd Parties with the Nintendo Switch so far. sure there's some ports of old games like Dark Souls 1 and Skyrim on there, but there's also modern stuff that's been getting announced for the system as well like DOOM, Wolfenstein II, South Park the Franctured but Whole and even so called PS4 "exclusive" Crash Bandicoot N-Sane trilogy.

and the Switch has only been out the market for 15 months now. the library will only get bigger and bigger. and i would put money on more 3rd Party stuff coming to the Switch getting announced at E3 in 2 weeks.

That and the more I think about it the more it's coming off like a sloppy double standard. Because guess what, the PS4 and XB1 get old games CONSTANTLY. Heck, SEGA just announced PS4 ports of Yakuza 3, 4, and 5. Dark Souls Remastered just came out for the PS4 and XB1 with the usual fanfare and we're going to continue seeing ports and remasters for the foreseeable futures.

And the more I think about trying to dismiss classic titles, the more I realize it's really insulting to the medium. That's like saying there's no point in putting Metropolis on Blu-ray because it was made in 1927 or that there's no point in putting Led Zeppelin IV on iTunes. Treating games as that disposable is really dumb, especially when many of those games are fine and critically lauded.

At the end of the day, a lot of this bitching about 3rd parties seems moot considering how well the Switch is selling and how well Nintendo is doing. I really don't get why people are so hung up Nintendo when they could leave at any time. It's not like there aren't other options for entertainment

What double standard? Getting any games on any system is always good, more options are always better. The problem is when other systems are getting basically EVERY game (regardless of ports of old games or new games) and another system is only getting a small fraction of that. Guess which system I'm not going to buy?

It's like Blu-ray has far more movies than HD-DVD, why would I buy an HD-DVD player?

Here's the 3rd time I'm asking this... Why can't Nintendo make a system with power on par with the competition and the same architecture? That's all that is literally being asked of Nintendo.

Phoenixmgs:
Why can't Nintendo make a system with power on par with the competition?

but it is on par with the competition.

i don't see people taking their PS4's or Xbox Ones on the go with them. Switch has that complete advantage over the xbone and PS4.

and don't even try to pretend that PS vita remote play is the same thing. it's not. you have to buy to a completely separate system to the PS4 to even take advantage of that.

as for the power side of things, sure the Switch isn't as powerful as the PS4 or Xbone. but it's hardly noticeable to the majority of normal people/casuals. DOOM doesn't look as good on the Switch as it does on the PS4 sure. but i've played it and it still looks pretty bloody good. you'd only be able to tell the difference if you did a side by side comparison.

Yoshi178:
but it is on par with the competition.

i don't see people taking their PS4's or Xbox Ones on the go with them. Switch has that complete advantage over the xbone and PS4.

and don't even try to pretend that PS vita remote play is the same thing. it's not. you have to buy to a completely separate system to the PS4 to even take advantage of that.

as for the power side of things, sure the Switch isn't as powerful as the PS4 or Xbone. but it's hardly noticeable to the majority of normal people/casuals. DOOM doesn't look as good on the Switch as it does on the PS4 sure. but i've played it and it still looks pretty bloody good. you'd only be able to tell the difference if you did a side by side comparison.

That and we've all seen that argument dismantled about five thousand times. Trying it once more with feeling isn't going to make it viable. It's a zombie argument. If power was such a deciding factor the Switch wouldn't be selling as well as it is nor would 3rd parties be putting their upcoming titles on it or bringing product in general to it.

Aiddon:

Yoshi178:
but it is on par with the competition.

i don't see people taking their PS4's or Xbox Ones on the go with them. Switch has that complete advantage over the xbone and PS4.

and don't even try to pretend that PS vita remote play is the same thing. it's not. you have to buy to a completely separate system to the PS4 to even take advantage of that.

as for the power side of things, sure the Switch isn't as powerful as the PS4 or Xbone. but it's hardly noticeable to the majority of normal people/casuals. DOOM doesn't look as good on the Switch as it does on the PS4 sure. but i've played it and it still looks pretty bloody good. you'd only be able to tell the difference if you did a side by side comparison.

That and we've all seen that argument dismantled about five thousand times. Trying it once more with feeling isn't going to make it viable. It's a zombie argument. If power was such a deciding factor the Switch wouldn't be selling as well as it is nor would 3rd parties be putting their upcoming titles on it or bringing product in general to it.

But all the third party products coming to Switch are 2, 3, 6 or 7 years old. There's no upcoming cross-platform title that will also be on Switch that isn't a port of some sort. Like the next in any given AAA series that isn't Nintendo's is never on Switch.

Yoshi178:

Phoenixmgs:
Why can't Nintendo make a system with power on par with the competition?

but it is on par with the competition.

i don't see people taking their PS4's or Xbox Ones on the go with them. Switch has that complete advantage over the xbone and PS4.

and don't even try to pretend that PS vita remote play is the same thing. it's not. you have to buy to a completely separate system to the PS4 to even take advantage of that.

as for the power side of things, sure the Switch isn't as powerful as the PS4 or Xbone. but it's hardly noticeable to the majority of normal people/casuals. DOOM doesn't look as good on the Switch as it does on the PS4 sure. but i've played it and it still looks pretty bloody good. you'd only be able to tell the difference if you did a side by side comparison.

Yeah, complete advantage for people that do have a decent amount of time to kill on the go. Nintendo is competing with themselves with the Switch because they make the dominant portable gaming system already. Not to mention phones are becoming a great platform for gaming. Fortnite is definitely releasing on mobile with only rumors of a Switch version for example. Also, the huge boom of digital board games means my phone has better games than the Switch as most board games are way better than most video games. Video games are shit compared to most board games in gameplay mechanics; I'd take Through the Ages or Sentinels over prized Sony exclusives like Uncharted or God of War any day of the week. My most anticipated mobile game release is Terraforming Mars, I can't wait to play that anytime and anywhere. And I can play all that on a bottom tier phone that retailed at $150 when it released (which I got for free) vs the asking price of a Switch.

Nintendo fans were bitching about Xenoblade 2's performance undocked. Even Xenoblade 2 docked, there's a night and day difference between its graphics and say FFXV. The Switch isn't nearly that close to PS4/Xbone in power, which is why you don't see current-gen games getting many releases on the Switch.

Aiddon:
It's a zombie argument. If power was such a deciding factor the Switch wouldn't be selling as well as it is nor would 3rd parties be putting their upcoming titles on it or bringing product in general to it.

Then why are new games releasing same day on PC/PS4/Xbone and not on Switch? Switch is selling far faster than Xbone ever sold, why is Xbone getting like every game? Switch sold faster than PS3, why did PS3 get like every game? The Wii sold so much more than PS3, why didn't the Wii get more games than PS3?

Phoenixmgs:
Then why are new games releasing same day on PC/PS4/Xbone and not on Switch? Switch is selling far faster than Xbone ever sold, why is Xbone getting like every game? Switch sold faster than PS3, why did PS3 get like every game? The Wii sold so much more than PS3, why didn't the Wii get more games than PS3?

Development cycles are a thing. The release dates of SDK's are pretty cloak and dagger generally, but we'd only be seeing the earliest adopters doing Swtch releases because the system is that new.

The first seeming development of the "NX" was a hardware partnership in March 2015. The actual announcement was in October 2016. So maybe March 2016. They didn't show at E3 in June 2016 either.

Let's assume that despite the lack of fanfare, third-party devs got their SDK's in June 2016. Thats less then 2 years to put together a game that comes out a month from now. There's some variance depending how cut'n'copy you can get with code on it, but thats a pretty narrow wind. Even less if the publishers were holding off until N proved this one was a usccess (after ditching the Wii U in the trashbin early).

Sony and MS have always been pretty play by the rules as far as things go. Nintendo backed the wrong horse in CDs vs Cartridges, and torpedoed most of its third party relations back in the 64 days. The Wii success didn't bring many back because again, they were pushing their nunchuk wavey nonsense that most publishers didn't want to work around for the sake of one platform.

In a year or so, it may be proven otherwise. But if it continues on course, a slight lack of power isn't even going to phase most developers. Particularly if they're PC titles, capping framerate or turning off a few graphics options is one line of .Ini code away.

Phoenixmgs:

Here's the 3rd time I'm asking this... Why can't Nintendo make a system with power on par with the competition and the same architecture? That's all that is literally being asked of Nintendo.

but why ? Who ask that, except people who down own a switch and have no intention of owning one ?

Really, ps4 and xbox one are basically the same thing, they are wannabe pc that just compete to see who is getting the biggest dick. i dont think we need another player in this contest...

let's say that nintendo ditch the switch for a super duper beefy console that goes par in power with the other two. then what ? First it cannot be portable as well, because of power consomption and heating. so that goes off. then it will probably cost arond the same as the other two, so there goes the price arguement. so if i spend 600$ on an xbox one pro, do i want to spend another 600$ to get the new nintendo thing to get... the same exact games i could have on my xbox one ? nintendo exclusives are a selling point, but they are already on the switch, having a more powerfull console will probably not get them so much better...

and if you always had a xbox, your friends are on xbox live, you will probably get an xbox anyway, same thing for PS+...

so what nintendo have to gain my imitating the other two ? they have a lot more to gain by trying to be there own thing rather than just the number of 3 of 3 clones...

cathou:

but why ? Who ask that, except people who down own a switch and have no intention of owning one ?

Really, ps4 and xbox one are basically the same thing, they are wannabe pc that just compete to see who is getting the biggest dick. i dont think we need another player in this contest...

let's say that nintendo ditch the switch for a super duper beefy console that goes par in power with the other two. then what ? First it cannot be portable as well, because of power consomption and heating. so that goes off. then it will probably cost arond the same as the other two, so there goes the price arguement. so if i spend 600$ on an xbox one pro, do i want to spend another 600$ to get the new nintendo thing to get... the same exact games i could have on my xbox one ? nintendo exclusives are a selling point, but they are already on the switch, having a more powerfull console will probably not get them so much better...

and if you always had a xbox, your friends are on xbox live, you will probably get an xbox anyway, same thing for PS+...

so what nintendo have to gain my imitating the other two ? they have a lot more to gain by trying to be there own thing rather than just the number of 3 of 3 clones...

Plus there's the obvious answer: the numbers say otherwise. The Switch sold over 15 million units in a year and its pace is still going strong. If power were that much of a concern, then it wouldn't be doing as well as it is. And this is in spite of us being in the middle of a lull right now, as is the summer with the most recent big release being the port of Hyrule Warriors and the next one being Octopath Traveler in July. Indie developers also praise it, some even saying they've made WAY more profits on the eShop than on Steam (though that's more indicative of Valve's current incompetence than anything).

If 3rd parties are still slow in coming around, it's because the Switch's success caught them off guard. Hell, I can practically see spokespeople at places like CAPCOM, Namco Bandai, and Activision sweating bullets whenever they're asked "What about the Switch?" Some are coming around quicker, what with Koei Tecmo bringing over Warriors Orochi 4, NIS has Disgaea 1 Complete, Arc System Works releasing Blazblue: Cross Tag Battle, CAPCOM finally bringing Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate over to the West, and SEGA with Valkyria Chronicles 4. Plus E3 is only two weeks away, so we'll how the offerings are for the rest of the year.

Seth Carter:
Development cycles are a thing. The release dates of SDK's are pretty cloak and dagger generally, but we'd only be seeing the earliest adopters doing Swtch releases because the system is that new.

The first seeming development of the "NX" was a hardware partnership in March 2015. The actual announcement was in October 2016. So maybe March 2016. They didn't show at E3 in June 2016 either.

Let's assume that despite the lack of fanfare, third-party devs got their SDK's in June 2016. Thats less then 2 years to put together a game that comes out a month from now. There's some variance depending how cut'n'copy you can get with code on it, but thats a pretty narrow wind. Even less if the publishers were holding off until N proved this one was a usccess (after ditching the Wii U in the trashbin early).

Sony and MS have always been pretty play by the rules as far as things go. Nintendo backed the wrong horse in CDs vs Cartridges, and torpedoed most of its third party relations back in the 64 days. The Wii success didn't bring many back because again, they were pushing their nunchuk wavey nonsense that most publishers didn't want to work around for the sake of one platform.

In a year or so, it may be proven otherwise. But if it continues on course, a slight lack of power isn't even going to phase most developers. Particularly if they're PC titles, capping framerate or turning off a few graphics options is one line of .Ini code away.

Sounds like a lot of Nintendo-centric problems. With the Wii, I don't think Nintendo would be mandating 3rd-parties utilize motion controls, that would be pretty asinine if they did. Though selling a game that requires an additional accessory (a real controller) to be played is probably not very appealing for 3rd-parties.

The Switch is more than just slightly underpowered compared to the rest. Most games are open world nowadays with lots characters and objects on screen at once. You have to do more than just downgrade resolutions or turn a few graphical options to low as seen with last-gen releases of early PS4/Xbone games on PS3/360. Something like a sports game that plays in a very small static world with a very set amount of character models on screen at once are easy to downgrade, which is why you still find them releasing on last-gen consoles, making them perfect for an underpowered system like the Switch. Many PC games are great for the Switch not because they are just lowering resolution and changing some basic graphical settings but because most PC games nowadays don't really push graphics that's why stuff like Divinity and Pillars are getting Switch versions. The only surprising release so far for the Switch has been Wolfenstein 2, which is a linear game vs open world, and might also be due to it getting a VR edition, which requires a graphical downgrade. I don't get why Capcom is doing RE7 on Switch via cloud streaming when they already had to downgrade it graphically for PSVR.

cathou:
but why ? Who ask that, except people who down own a switch and have no intention of owning one ?

Really, ps4 and xbox one are basically the same thing, they are wannabe pc that just compete to see who is getting the biggest dick. i dont think we need another player in this contest...

let's say that nintendo ditch the switch for a super duper beefy console that goes par in power with the other two. then what ? First it cannot be portable as well, because of power consomption and heating. so that goes off. then it will probably cost arond the same as the other two, so there goes the price arguement. so if i spend 600$ on an xbox one pro, do i want to spend another 600$ to get the new nintendo thing to get... the same exact games i could have on my xbox one ? nintendo exclusives are a selling point, but they are already on the switch, having a more powerfull console will probably not get them so much better...

and if you always had a xbox, your friends are on xbox live, you will probably get an xbox anyway, same thing for PS+...

so what nintendo have to gain my imitating the other two ? they have a lot more to gain by trying to be there own thing rather than just the number of 3 of 3 clones...

Like everyone who said 3rd-party support is the biggest factor in that poll Johnny posted in the thread the other day.

PS4/Xbone really didn't go all in trying to push graphics this gen like say Sony did with PS3. They made systems to be sold at $400 while also being profitable at launch. You're saying Nintendo can't utilize at least similarly powered tech of PS4 that is nearly 5 years old at the Switch's release?

Portability is a nice feature but Nintendo already sells a highly successful portable system. Not to mention phones and tablets are eating more and more of people's portable gaming time over portable systems that are only for gaming. Digital board games are better than most video games and they aren't on the Switch.

You just literally detailed my argument for why Nintendo systems aren't primary gaming platforms. Right now, like you say, people are buying Nintendo systems as their secondary system at best. Just imagine how much more money Nintendo can make if they just steal 10% of people away from Sony and MS. You can make a profitable console with current-gen power as Sony has demonstrated this gen. I get that Nintendo didn't want to make a system where they lost money on every sold system to then recoup money via licensing games (and whatnot) but they don't need to do that anymore to keep up with the competition. And, if Nintendo did do that, it's very possible I would jump ship to Nintendo because their exclusives actually compete with Sony. Also, what's stopping Nintendo for doing it's own thing while staying in the ballpark with regards to hardware power? Sure, portability is probably out, but that's really it, plus Nintendo prints money in the portable market already, Nintendo is really only stealing market share from themselves.

Aiddon:
Plus there's the obvious answer: the numbers say otherwise. The Switch sold over 15 million units in a year and its pace is still going strong.

Like I just said above, Nintendo is stealing market share from itself. For example, heavy on-the-go gamers that love Monster Hunter are going to migrate from the 3DS to the Switch with the Switch release of Generations. I really don't understand Nintendo's strategy unless they wanna phase out making a portable system and a home console and only make one system from now on that can do both basically. But mobile devices are heavily chipping into that portable market.

Phoenixmgs:
selling a game that requires an additional accessory (a real controller) to be played is probably not very appealing for 3rd-parties.

none of the Switch games require a Pro/*real* controller to be played though.

that's literally what the Joy Con Grip is for.

Yoshi178:

none of the Switch games require a Pro/*real* controller to be played though.

that's literally what the Joy Con Grip is for.

Heck, some of them are outright superior with the Joy Con due to gyro aiming. I can't play any other version of Doom after playing the Switch version with motion control.

Yoshi178:

Phoenixmgs:
selling a game that requires an additional accessory (a real controller) to be played is probably not very appealing for 3rd-parties.

none of the Switch games require a Pro/*real* controller to be played though.

that's literally what the Joy Con Grip is for.

That was in reference to the Wii, which you edited out of the quote.

Aiddon:

Yoshi178:

none of the Switch games require a Pro/*real* controller to be played though.

that's literally what the Joy Con Grip is for.

Heck, some of them are outright superior with the Joy Con due to gyro aiming. I can't play any other version of Doom after playing the Switch version with motion control.

actually the Switch Pro controller also has Gyro in it. i play Splatoon 2 with a Pro controller all the time.

i do prefer playing Mario Kart and Zelda with the joy con grip though.

Johnny Novgorod:

But all the third party products coming to Switch are 2, 3, 6 or 7 years old. There's no upcoming cross-platform title that will also be on Switch that isn't a port of some sort. Like the next in any given AAA series that isn't Nintendo's is never on Switch.

The example most recently brought up was Dark Souls, but Dark Souls Remastered is not a port, and it released this year.

The same is true of the N. Sane Trilogy. Counting remasters with drastic upgrades in the same category as ports makes not a lick of sense. They're new releases.

Silvanus:

Johnny Novgorod:

But all the third party products coming to Switch are 2, 3, 6 or 7 years old. There's no upcoming cross-platform title that will also be on Switch that isn't a port of some sort. Like the next in any given AAA series that isn't Nintendo's is never on Switch.

The example most recently brought up was Dark Souls, but Dark Souls Remastered is not a port, and it released this year.

The same is true of the N. Sane Trilogy. Counting remasters with drastic upgrades in the same category as ports makes not a lick of sense. They're new releases.

Is Dark Souls or the N. Sane trilogy remasters the next game in any given AAA series?

Silvanus:

The example most recently brought up was Dark Souls, but Dark Souls Remastered is not a port, and it released this year.

The same is true of the N. Sane Trilogy. Counting remasters with drastic upgrades in the same category as ports makes not a lick of sense. They're new releases.

That and at the end of the day this is what matters: numbers. The sales and profits will decide whether or not they were worth putting on the system and if they were successful. Some balked at Skyrim, Ultra Street Fighter II, and Doom being put on the Switch, but Bethesda, CAPCOM, and ID said they were quite happy with the sales which is why we're seeing Wolfenstein II and The Street Fighter 30th Anniversary Collection making they're way over as well as CAPCOM finally localizing Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate. I'm also really surprised at how much indies are acclimating to Nintendo what with Ikaruga coming out on the 29th and all three entries in The Banner Saga being released over the summer (though Steam's recent blunders have also spurred stuff like that). So it's just a bit silly to act like the Switch is in any way failing when in fact all the data to the present shows otherwise.

Phoenixmgs:

Silvanus:

Johnny Novgorod:

But all the third party products coming to Switch are 2, 3, 6 or 7 years old. There's no upcoming cross-platform title that will also be on Switch that isn't a port of some sort. Like the next in any given AAA series that isn't Nintendo's is never on Switch.

The example most recently brought up was Dark Souls, but Dark Souls Remastered is not a port, and it released this year.

The same is true of the N. Sane Trilogy. Counting remasters with drastic upgrades in the same category as ports makes not a lick of sense. They're new releases.

Is Dark Souls or the N. Sane trilogy remasters the next game in any given AAA series?

AAA games. lol feels like most AAA games these days are more like loot box filled crap like Star Wars Battlefront 2

internet forums be like:

Why does Nintendo keep porting so many Wii U Games to Switch? Nintendo should be putting all of their development time into making New games. not just shoveling out old ones.

Nintendo be like lol this is why:

image

Aiddon:
Some balked at Skyrim, Doom being put on the Switch, but Bethesda said they were quite happy with the sales which is why we're seeing Wolfenstein II. I'm also really surprised at how much indies are acclimating to Nintendo. So it's just a bit silly to act like the Switch is in any way failing when in fact all the data to the present shows otherwise.

Uhh... Doom sold pretty poorly. Skyrim probably sold well because it's fucking Skyrim. Also, Doom and Wolf 2 were announced at the same time (before Skyrim even came out as well) so how did the sales of Doom or Skyrim influence Wolf 2 being ported? If Wolf 2 doesn't sell, I don't see Bethesda releasing many more games on Switch unless they are super popular already like Skyrim. Plus Bethesda has commented on the fact that porting games to the Switch "is proving to be quite a challenge due to the hardware." Why should it be surprising that the Switch is getting indies as indies should be fucking expected due to their lower hardware requirements vs AAA games? Getting indies is par for the course for any other platform whereas Nintendo is still double bogeying the hole. Sure, the Switch is a success for Nintendo, but it's still failing if you compare it to the other big 3 gaming platforms.

Yoshi178:
AAA games. lol feels like most AAA games these days are more like loot box filled crap like Star Wars Battlefront 2

Few AAA games actually have loot boxes. The only AAA game I've ever bought or played that has had loot boxes was Mass Effect 3. Did EA ever end up selling a single lootbox in Battlefront 2? I honestly don't know if it was ever possible to buy a loot box.

It feels like is rather factual that most Nintendo games have on-disc DLC.

Phoenixmgs:

It feels like is rather factual that most Nintendo games have on-disc DLC.

such as?

Phoenixmgs:

Is Dark Souls or the N. Sane trilogy remasters the next game in any given AAA series?

No, but that's not what we were talking about.

Phoenixmgs:

Few AAA games actually have loot boxes. The only AAA game I've ever bought or played that has had loot boxes was Mass Effect 3. Did EA ever end up selling a single lootbox in Battlefront 2? I honestly don't know if it was ever possible to buy a loot box.

https://www.giantbomb.com/loot-boxes/3015-9059/games/

That actually misses a few out too. AC:Origins it was a bit of a round trip, but you could buy drachmas to open the nomad's random treasure box from the money store. Destiny 1 started adding them in events after the Taken King release. Fortnite has them, but in the less often discussed co-op mode (granted its going to be free-to-play and they're bypassable). Paragon featured crates as well, but probably went under radar long before finally shutting down. Warframe is also F2P (they do include Orcs must Die and Paladins though) and dubious as "AAA", but does have lootbox mod packs available.

Silvanus:

Phoenixmgs:

Is Dark Souls or the N. Sane trilogy remasters the next game in any given AAA series?

No, but that's not what we were talking about.

Yeah, it was...

Phoenixmgs:

Silvanus:

Johnny Novgorod:

But all the third party products coming to Switch are 2, 3, 6 or 7 years old. There's no upcoming cross-platform title that will also be on Switch that isn't a port of some sort. Like the next in any given AAA series that isn't Nintendo's is never on Switch.

The example most recently brought up was Dark Souls, but Dark Souls Remastered is not a port, and it released this year.

The same is true of the N. Sane Trilogy. Counting remasters with drastic upgrades in the same category as ports makes not a lick of sense. They're new releases.

Is Dark Souls or the N. Sane trilogy remasters the next game in any given AAA series?

---

Seth Carter:

Phoenixmgs:
Few AAA games actually have loot boxes. The only AAA game I've ever bought or played that has had loot boxes was Mass Effect 3. Did EA ever end up selling a single lootbox in Battlefront 2? I honestly don't know if it was ever possible to buy a loot box.

https://www.giantbomb.com/loot-boxes/3015-9059/games/

That actually misses a few out too. AC:Origins it was a bit of a round trip, but you could buy drachmas to open the nomad's random treasure box from the money store. Destiny 1 started adding them in events after the Taken King release. Fortnite has them, but in the less often discussed co-op mode (granted its going to be free-to-play and they're bypassable). Paragon featured crates as well, but probably went under radar long before finally shutting down. Warframe is also F2P (they do include Orcs must Die and Paladins though) and dubious as "AAA", but does have lootbox mod packs available.

Most of that list weren't AAA games and quite a few are free-to-play games (microtransactions are literally why they are free-to-play). I'm not saying there aren't several AAA games with loot boxes but they definitely aren't in the majority, not even close. I buy AAA games squarely on whether I think the game will actually be good, and the only one I've ever played with them is ME3. Loot boxes don't even matter to me for the most part unless pay(loot box)-to-win scenario in a multiplayer game, and they haven't been hard to avoid without really trying honestly.

Yoshi178:

Phoenixmgs:

It feels like is rather factual that most Nintendo games have on-disc DLC.

such as?

Zelda BotW, Splatoon, Smash, Twilight Princess HD (bonus dungeon on-disc DLC), Mario Kart 8 ("Deluxe" release too), and more.

What Nintendo game besides Mario Odyssey allows you to unlock all amiibo content (literally on-disc DLC) without actually getting the amiibos?

Phoenixmgs:

Yeah, it was...

Read the sentence just before the one you bolded: "there's no upcoming cross-platform title that will also be on Switch that isn't a port of some kind".

That's the bit to which I was responding. It's simply not true.

So, no, whether or not those games count as the next in the series isn't relevant to the sentence I was responding to.

Phoenixmgs:

Yoshi178:

Phoenixmgs:

It feels like is rather factual that most Nintendo games have on-disc DLC.

such as?

Zelda BotW, Splatoon, Smash, Twilight Princess HD (bonus dungeon on-disc DLC), Mario Kart 8 ("Deluxe" release too), and more.

What Nintendo game besides Mario Odyssey allows you to unlock all amiibo content (literally on-disc DLC) without actually getting the amiibos?

Zelda botw- wait you're actually sad about missing out on a couple of costumes and some food that you can already get in game? LMAO!!!!

Splatoon- same thing. on disc stuff is just amiibo costumes LOL

Mario Kart 8- once again, just Mii costumes that make no difference to the actual gameplay LOL

Zelda twilight Princess HD- 1, it's literally just a hole with enemies you can already fight in game coming at you from it, with the end reward just being a bigger wallet lol.

2. we're talking about Nintendo Switch not Wii U LMAO

so basically you're just pissed off about missing out on Amiibo content that makes pretty much no difference to the gaming experience in the first place? that's actually really funny. i don't even use my amiibos for that stuff because most of it is so pointless lol.

Yoshi178:

Zelda botw- wait you're actually sad about missing out on a couple of costumes and food that you can already get in game? LMAO!!!!

Splatoon- same thing. on disc stuff is amiibo costumes LOL

Mario Kart 8- Mii costumes that make no difference to the actual gameplay once again LOL

Zelda twilight Princess HD- 1, it's literally just a hole with enemies you can already fight in game coming at you from it, with the end reward just being a bigger wallet lol.

2. we're talking about Nintendo Switch not Wii U LMAO

so basically you're just pissed off about missing out on Amiibo content that makes pretty much no difference to the gaming experience in the first place? that's actually really funny. i don't even use my amiibos for that stuff because most of it is so pointless lol.

Whether someone uses/ wants these things at all, isn't it fair to be irritated if a company sells you a physical object and doesn't allow you access to it in its entirety?

Disliking on-disc DLC is a matter of principle for me. It indicates a shoddy corporate attitude towards the consumer.

Of course, this shoddy corporate attitude exists throughout the industry, and stuff like amiibo costumes are comparatively small fry.

Silvanus:

Yoshi178:

Zelda botw- wait you're actually sad about missing out on a couple of costumes and food that you can already get in game? LMAO!!!!

Splatoon- same thing. on disc stuff is amiibo costumes LOL

Mario Kart 8- Mii costumes that make no difference to the actual gameplay once again LOL

Zelda twilight Princess HD- 1, it's literally just a hole with enemies you can already fight in game coming at you from it, with the end reward just being a bigger wallet lol.

2. we're talking about Nintendo Switch not Wii U LMAO

so basically you're just pissed off about missing out on Amiibo content that makes pretty much no difference to the gaming experience in the first place? that's actually really funny. i don't even use my amiibos for that stuff because most of it is so pointless lol.

Whether someone uses/ wants these things at all, isn't it fair to be irritated if a company sells you a physical object and doesn't allow you access to it in its entirety?

Disliking on-disc DLC is a matter of principle for me. It indicates a shoddy corporate attitude towards the consumer.

Of course, this shoddy corporate attitude exists throughout the industry, and stuff like amiibo costumes are comparatively small fry.

boycotting a company because they sell a few figurines that give you a little costume as a small bonus in game is pretty silly imo.

the majority of Amiibo owners don't even use the figures, they just sit on peoples shelves and look pretty for the most part. that's how meaningless the amiibo content is.

if it was locking out hour long story content or stuff like multiplayer maps then sure, have at it. but literlly none of it is significant content like that lol

hell at least the Amiibo figurines actually reward the buyer with some cosmetic stuff to use in game. what do these things do? literally nothing whatsoever lol

image

Yoshi178:

boycotting a company because they sell a few figurines that give you a little costume as bonus in game is pretty silly imo.

Who's talking about a boycott?

the majority of Amiibo owners don't even use the figures, they just sit on peoples shelves and look pretty for the most part. that's how meaningless the amiibo content is.

if it was locking out hour long story content or stuff like multiplayer maps then sure, have at it. but literlly none of it is significant content like that lol

Again, this would be compelling if I wasn't appealing to principle rather than scale. It is the attitude that's the issue, not specific instances.

Phoenixmgs:
Most of that list weren't AAA games and quite a few are free-to-play games (microtransactions are literally why they are free-to-play). I'm not saying there aren't several AAA games with loot boxes but they definitely aren't in the majority, not even close. I buy AAA games squarely on whether I think the game will actually be good, and the only one I've ever played with them is ME3. Loot boxes don't even matter to me for the most part unless pay(loot box)-to-win scenario in a multiplayer game, and they haven't been hard to avoid without really trying honestly.

Ah well, if you want that metric. Then anything EA makes (most recently Need for Speed and UFC have both had pay-to-win stuff delivered via lootbox), any of TakeTwo's 2K titles from 18 onwards. And on a fringe level Destiny 2, though the "advantage" was minimal (it sure sparked up a fire when it happened though).

In the non-lootbox pay-to-win section, there's GTA Online and Evolve in recent times that fell afoul of it (both by TakeTwo, go figure). Ark's had a bit of turbulence too, since extra maps are DLC and contain unique and oft time powerful new dinosaurs (though the game balance is Ark is a hysterical rollercoaster of nonsense, so its a bit of a tossup)

Silvanus:

Yoshi178:

boycotting a company because they sell a few figurines that give you a little costume as bonus in game is pretty silly imo.

Who's talking about a boycott?

the majority of Amiibo owners don't even use the figures, they just sit on peoples shelves and look pretty for the most part. that's how meaningless the amiibo content is.

if it was locking out hour long story content or stuff like multiplayer maps then sure, have at it. but literlly none of it is significant content like that lol

Again, this would be compelling if I wasn't appealing to principle rather than scale. It is the attitude that's the issue, not specific instances.

in principle Amiibo's are microtransactions for cosmetic items that make little to no difference to a games experience.

in fact Amiibo's are even better than microtransactions as the buyer gets a nice little figurine to go with your purchase and Amiibo's can be used for multiple games including games that have not been announced yet.

for example the Super Smash Bros Zelda figurines can be used in Zelda Breath of the Wild which is a game released 3 years after smash bros. people didn't buy the Zelda Smash amiibo's knowing that they could be used in future games like BOTW, people would have just bought them to use in Smash Bros when they came out obviously.

digital microtransactions are a single purchase for a single game that are tied to a single online account and has nothing tangible tied to it like the Amiibo's do.

Yoshi178:

in principle Amiibo's are microtransactions for cosmetic items that make little to no difference to a games experience.

in fact Amiibo's are even better than microtransactions as the buyer gets a nice little figurine to go with your purchase and Amiibo's can be used for multiple games including games that have not been announced yet.

for example the Super Smash Bros Zelda figurines can be used in Zelda Breath of the Wild which is a game released 3 years after smash bros. people didn't buy the Zelda Smash amiibo's knowing that they could be used in future games like BOTW, people would have just bought them to use in Smash Bros when they came out obviously.

digital microtransactions are a single purchase for a single game that are tied to a single online account and has nothing tangible tied to it like the Amiibo's do.

Yes, I know what amiibos are, thank you. None of this addresses a principled objection to on-disc DLC, does it?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here