Nintendo Switch has sold 4.7 Million units to date.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT
 

kilenem:

WeepingAngels:

kilenem:

I think Zelda being a Damn near perfect game helped create the hype. There is the dope Nintendo will continue to produce games at that standard

Zelda is a Wii U game ported to the Switch. It was even crippled on the Wii U because of the Switch (2nd screen features were removed). The hype for Switch existed before anyone had reviewed Zelda.

I think the hype got way bigger after the game came out and everyone found it was legit good and it wasn't just Zelda fans dick riding the series. Many Zelda themed Amiibos were on clearance at quite few different store before BOTW came out. Then there was a shit show on ebay a couple days later. The Switch didn't even sell out the first day. I got mine, the store I went to still had like 10 at 1 am and my back up store called me let me know they still had some in stock.

Pretty sure the Switch was sold out most places on launch day and still is.

Johnny Novgorod:

RaikuFA:
This whole thread was doomed the second the big N was mentioned.

Nanomachines?!

Actually it's Narwhals.

CritialGaming:
I can't really tell if the OP understands the difference between support, and ports. The first example given is Minecraft, like that game hasn't been on everything under the sun. Hell it's even on fucking phones.

i find it even funnier that you're bragging about having all this 3rd Party "Support" and shaming the Switch for not having all of that exact same type of "Support" yet even though it's only been on the Market for 4 months.

When the Xbox One and Especially the PS4 were still in their first launch year, at least 90% of all the 3rd Party stuffed released on those systems you keep bragging about also happened to be on guess what!? oh i don't know, two little machines i like to call the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 as well as being on the PS4 and Xbone.

it's only been about a year and a half or so since we've started to stop seeing shitloads of Dual Release's from 3rd Parties on both the Xbox One/PS4 and the 360/PS3.
Don't give me all this garbage having a go at Switch just because it's only getting Ports because guess what? a hell of a lot of the early PS4 and Xbox One launch year titles from 3rd Parties were "Ports" as well as you like to say. i'd even go so far as to say about 95% of 3rd Party Releases that came out during the PS4 and Xbox One launch years were also on the PS3 and 360. hell it still happens today technically since i'm pretty sure things like COD, Ass Creed and all those shitloads of sports games still have 360 and PS3 versions released for them.

Yoshi178:

i find it even funnier that you're bragging about having all this 3rd Party "Support" and shaming the Switch for not having all of that exact same type of "Support" yet even though it's only been on the Market for 4 months.

When the Xbox One and Especially the PS4 were still in their first launch, at least 90% of all the 3rd Party stuffed released on those systems you keep bragging about also happened to be on guess what!? oh i don't know, too little machines i like to call the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 as well as being on the PS4 and Xbone.

it's only been about a year and a half or so since we've started to stop seeing shitloads of Dual Release's from 3rd Parties on both the Xbox One/PS4 and the 360/PS3.
Don't give me all this garbage having a go at Switch just because it's only getting Ports because guess what? a hell of a lot of the early PS4 and Xbox One launch year titles from 3rd Parties were "Ports" as well as you like to say. i'd even go so far as to say about 95% of 3rd Party Releases that came out during the PS4 and Xbox One launch years were also on the PS3 and 360. hell it still happens today technically since i'm pretty sure things like COD, Ass Creed and all those shitloads of sports games still have 360 and PS3 versions released for them.

I think that, unless Switch is a massive success like the Wii, third parties will not make an effort to port their more demanding games to the Switch, purely for horsepower reasons and it will end up like the Wii U in mainstream third party support. There may be ports of lighter games and some unique stuff like there was for Wii and Wii U, but Call of Duty only had various Wii ports because each of them sold 1 million+ copies and it justified the expense, we have to wait and see if the Switch can replicate that.

Yoshi178:
When the Xbox One and Especially the PS4 were still in their first launch, at least 90% of all the 3rd Party stuffed released on those systems you keep bragging about also happened to be on guess what!? oh i don't know, too little machines i like to call the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 as well as being on the PS4 and Xbone.

it's only been about a year and a half or so since we've started to stop seeing shitloads of Dual Release's from 3rd Parties on both the Xbox One/PS4 and the 360/PS3.
Don't give me all this garbage having a go at Switch just because it's only getting Ports because guess what? a hell of a lot of the early PS4 and Xbox One launch year titles from 3rd Parties were "Ports" as well as you like to say. i'd even go so far as to say about 95% of 3rd Party Releases that came out during the PS4 and Xbox One launch years were also on the PS3 and 360. hell it still happens today technically since i'm pretty sure things like COD, Ass Creed and all those shitloads of sports games still have 360 and PS3 versions released for them.

Are you serious? Do you not know what a port is? You think Watch Dogs, Shadow of Mordor, Dragon Age Inquisition, etc. were developed for PS3/360 and then ported to PS4/Xbone? The PS3/360 versions were the "Ports" and were greatly downgraded. And guess what system got almost none of those "Ports"? The Wii U besides for a 6-month late release of Watch Dogs that unsurprisingly didn't sell at all. The Wii U is on par with the PS3/360 power-wise and still didn't get any ports. You think the Switch is going to end up getting versions of "current-gen" games while having last-gen specs with PS3/360 no longer getting releases?

Again, Nintendo is fine with doing its own thing separate from the rest of the platforms, which is fine and it works for Nintendo. To expect the Switch or any Nintendo system to be a gamer's primary platform just isn't going to happen because of how many games you'd miss out on if you only gamed on a Nintendo system. The vast majority of gamers that do have/want a Switch will have another system whether it be PS4/Xbone or PC, thus they will buy multiplatform games on another platform. Thus, it makes no sense for publishers to even bother with the Switch if it's not an exclusive game for the system. The one way the Switch could become a huge success if it becomes the goto portable system for gamers and basically becomes the new DS, which I'm not sure if that's Nintendo's goal to overtake their own market. If the Switch doesn't do that, then it'll carve out a smaller but probably successful market somewhere between what the Wii and Wii U accomplished as I doubt the Switch will become the fad that the Wii did nor will it be as disappointing as the Wii U.

meant to edit last post not quote my bad*

Phoenixmgs:
You think the Switch is going to end up getting versions of "current-gen" games while having last-gen specs with PS3/360 no longer getting releases?

Phoenixmgs:

Yoshi178:
When the Xbox One and Especially the PS4 were still in their first launch, at least 90% of all the 3rd Party stuffed released on those systems you keep bragging about also happened to be on guess what!? oh i don't know, too little machines i like to call the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 as well as being on the PS4 and Xbone.

it's only been about a year and a half or so since we've started to stop seeing shitloads of Dual Release's from 3rd Parties on both the Xbox One/PS4 and the 360/PS3.
Don't give me all this garbage having a go at Switch just because it's only getting Ports because guess what? a hell of a lot of the early PS4 and Xbox One launch year titles from 3rd Parties were "Ports" as well as you like to say. i'd even go so far as to say about 95% of 3rd Party Releases that came out during the PS4 and Xbox One launch years were also on the PS3 and 360. hell it still happens today technically since i'm pretty sure things like COD, Ass Creed and all those shitloads of sports games still have 360 and PS3 versions released for them.

Are you serious? Do you not know what a port is? You think the Switch is going to end up getting versions of "current-gen" games while having last-gen specs with PS3/360 no longer getting releases?

Are You Serious? You think if this hype and momentum the Switch has currently had for last 4 months keeps going for the switch, other developers won't want a slice of the profit pie too? even if only just to make exclusive 3rd party games for the Switch? 3rd Party exclusives like Bayonetta 2 i mean.

i don't even know why you want all the same crap you can already buy on the Xbox One and PS4 to be on the Switch as well rather than using the Switch Library as an alternative to those libraries. Xbox One and PS4 libraries are pretty much exactly the same anyway save for a few 1st party exclusives lol.

edited to make the post sound less harsh*

Nintendo has been promising and not really getting 3rd party support for 20 years. That you guys are actually arguing about it instead of just saying 'I'll believe it when I see it' really is the epitome of giving Nintendo the benefit of the doubt. If the console weren't once again underpowered...but it is. It's like repeating the same thing over and over again expecting different results. Remember, the Wii's success was not due to it's library.

WeepingAngels:
the Wii's success was not due to it's library.

that is very true, i still find hilarious when people shit on the Wii's library all the time though. when most people looked at the Library all they saw was cheap shovelware type games like Carnival Games. if people actually bothered to look hard though there were quite alot of solid gems in there. i own alot more Wii games than any other system i own because of this.

Yoshi178:
that is very true, i still find hilarious when people shit on the Wii's library all the time though. when most people looked at the Library all they saw was cheap shovelware type games like Carnival Games. if people actually bothered to look hard though there were quite alot of solid gems in there. i own alot more Wii games than any other system i own because of this.

The library was pretty weak though compared to the 360 and the PS3. The main problem was that the Wii Remote didn't work so well on many genre's. People hated it's use in Twilight Princess and many had trouble with it in Skyward Sword. I can't imagine playing a long RPG with waggle forced in. The Wii Remote sold the Wii along with Wii Sports but outside of the sports genre, the Wii Remote was far less helpful and sometimes even a hindrance.

Yoshi178:
We already have Zelda, Arms & Splatoon 2 all great titles and all new 1st party games, then we have Mario & Rabbids at the end of next month, Then Mario Odyssey in October, and we still have Fire Emblem Warriors and Xenoblade 2 set for 2017.

"Great titles" is subjective. Of the list, I care about Zelda, but buying a Wii U for it would be cheaper. Fire Emblem Warriors is a coin flip between my apathy towards Warriors-style games and the IP, not to mention that there's a lot of tonal disconnect between the two styles (SRPG vs. hack n' slash - something like Hyrule Warriors strikes me as being a bit more congruent). Xenoblade 2, absolutely.

Every console has its list of exclusive IP's, it's simply a question of how much money you're willing to fork over to get them.

Yoshi178:

what games exactly do you want?

Keeping this to Nintendo IPs - I already own an Xbox One and PS4 (that I haven't opened yet, got it on sale), but I guess I could nominate:

-Advance Wars (but you might as well have it on the 3DS if it makes a return)
-Golden Sun
-Star Fox (a gimmick-free Star Fox, to be exact)

And...that's it. Every other Nintendo IP I care about has either had a recent release (e.g. Zelda, Fire Emblem) or will get a future release (e.g. Metroid, though I'm 50/50 on that franchise). But that list up above is unlikely to be fulfilled anytime soon.

But basically, the only reason to get a Switch is to get a first party game. Looking at the list of Switch first party games, I can see around five I'd be interested in, only two of which I'm unquivocal about (Breath of the Wild, Xenoblade 2), and the former I could get on the Wii U. I mean, if stuff like the Switch is the price we have to pay for Nintendo to develop games, then fine, but I and many others would rather see Nintendo drop out of the console race. Nintendo's good at making games. Hardware is another matter. The Switch being portable is a nice idea, but not a system seller for me personally.

Yoshi178:

No i don't know which games you're talking about because the games Gamers used to scream and cry about for years were F-Zero, Metroid and Starfox and we've got 2 out of 3 of franchises back. Starfox came back on the Wii U and we're getting not 1, but 2 Metroid games coming now after gamers bitched and moaned for a decade about not getting a new "proper" metroid game.

Star Fox is basically in the same boat as Metroid was at this point. Star Fox Zero bombed commercially, and was mixed critically. It's arguably placed the franchise in the same place that Other M put Metroid in, only Other M has sold over twice as many copies (.43 million vs. 1.35 million). Granted, those figures are of 2017, so Other M has had longer, but even so, those are pretty pitiful sales figures for a AAA publisher/designer. Even something like Metroid is iffy, since we know nothing about Prime 4, and Samus Returns is a remake. Could be a good remake. Could sell well. Hope it does in both cases, but it's a remake nonetheless.

Yoshi178:

if you expect Nintendo release a game in every franchise all the time, why do gamers not expect new games in every Sony and Xbox franchise to be released all the time? last i checked Sony hasn't made a new Spyro, Medievil or Devil Dice Game. and Xbox hasn't released a new Conker, Perfect Dark or Banjo Kazooie Game recently at all.

Let's go through these:

-Spyro: No-one expects Sony to release a Spyro game, because Sony hasn't held the rights to Spyro since 2000; the rights reside with Activision, who's happy publishing the Skylanders series. Now, people are pissed about that to be sure - it isn't hard to find people complaining. It also doesn't help that most people seem to love the Insomniac Spyro games most of all (least those that complain the loudest), but Insomniac doesn't own the rights.

-MediEvil: Is there much of a call for this? I mean, I never see MediEvil get brought up much, and I don't think it's because its audience is quieter than other fandoms, just that its audience is pretty small. I mean, Sony is the people to complain to I guess, but its developer got shut down.

-Devil Dice: Had to look up what this even was. Again, is the lack of clamour due to respect for Sony, or that it's niche?

Point is, far as the Sony games go, either the fanbase is vocal in its demands (e.g. Spyro), or the game is too niche to generate the same clamour (e.g. MediEvil). Nintendo is no different. There's a reason why people are vocal about F-Zero as opposed to, say, the Ice Climbers. If there's a difference, it's that Nintendo owns the rights to its own IPs, while with those other examples, Spyro and MediEvil run into issues with rights ownership and how the original developers are no longer involved.

I mean, I can look at the Microsoft examples if you want, but hopefully the point's been made.

Phoenixmgs:

How long ago was the last good Sonic game?

Speaking personally? Sonic Rush Adventure in 2007. Speaking in terms of critical consensus? Probably Sonic Generations, in 2011.

I mean, I don't take much comfort in those facts, even if Rush Adventure was the last Sonic game I completed, but, well, you did ask... :(

stroopwafel:

No one really wanted a remaster of Crash Bandicoot; a mediocre PS1 launch title that only got remastered b/c it was made by the same developers as the massively popular Uncharted series. A bland game don't all of a sudden gets exciting b/c it receives a reskin. I was skeptical about the SotC remaster as well but it actually looks really, really good and contrary to Crash this is actually a genuinely iconic Playstation game that will now also be available for PS4 instead of just the obsolete PS 2 and 3. Don't know about Spyro. Other than some nostalgia enthusiasts I don't think it's a game many people will be interested in. Most people who enjoy those games will most likely buy a Nintendo.

Wait, what?

I know that Shadow of the Colossus is a cult classic, but Crash Bandicoot has had far more presence in the cultural zeitgeist. You might be right in that people weren't clamouring for a remaster, but I have seen people clamouring for new Crash games.

Not that I'm overly invested in either, but Crash strikes me as benefitting far more from a remaster than SotC - PS2 graphics have aged far better than PS1 graphics.

Yoshi178:
that is very true, i still find hilarious when people shit on the Wii's library all the time though. when most people looked at the Library all they saw was cheap shovelware type games like Carnival Games. if people actually bothered to look hard though there were quite alot of solid gems in there. i own alot more Wii games than any other system i own because of this.

I can't speak for everyone, but what put me off the Wii was its control system more than the proliferation of stuff like Wii Sports.

People can consume what media they want to, it's none of my business. But it is my business when games that were previously controller-centric become tethered to a control system that...isn't the greatest, to say the least. Yes, there's Wii games that used the standard controller, but, well, let's just say that of the seventh generation consoles, I got the Wii last, and have the fewest no. of games for it for a reason.

WeepingAngels:

kilenem:

WeepingAngels:

Zelda is a Wii U game ported to the Switch. It was even crippled on the Wii U because of the Switch (2nd screen features were removed). The hype for Switch existed before anyone had reviewed Zelda.

I think the hype got way bigger after the game came out and everyone found it was legit good and it wasn't just Zelda fans dick riding the series. Many Zelda themed Amiibos were on clearance at quite few different store before BOTW came out. Then there was a shit show on ebay a couple days later. The Switch didn't even sell out the first day. I got mine, the store I went to still had like 10 at 1 am and my back up store called me let me know they still had some in stock.

Pretty sure the Switch was sold out most places on launch day and still is.

I should probably add I check a websites like Cheapassgamer, slickdeals and I know how to use brick seeker. My ability to find a items is much better then the average consumer. You can get a Switch for MSRP by being patient. Its in stock in various places.

Hawki:
I and many others would rather see Nintendo drop out of the console race. Nintendo's good at making games. Hardware is another matter. The Switch being portable is a nice idea, but not a system seller for me personally.

See it's statements like this that i see around not just the internet, but from people local to the area i live in as well that really annoys me. If someone prefers Buying Playstation and Xbox hardware and playing those games, then ok that's fine whatever. even people criticizing Nintendo stuff about thinking things like motion controls being crap and the person not liking is fine.

people saying they want Nintendo to drop out of the hardware race and play all the Good Nintendo games on Playstation and Xbox irritates me though because alot the reason why quite a lot of Nintendo games are so good is because Nintendo use's those "gimmicks" to their advantage. sure, there are times when games like Star Fox 0 may not have had the best control set up, but the actual game itself wasn't bad though. it was an experimentation that didn't pay off for Nintendo and that sucks but oh well.

games like Pikmin 3, The Wonderful 101, Splatoon, Metroid Prime 3 and the Metroid Prime Trilogy Collection wouldn't be half as good as what they are without these so called "gimmicks" that Nintendo has used in them. it's amazing how during both Splatoon and Splatoon 2 launches pretty much everyone was hesitant about whether the Gyro controls were actually a good thing for a Shooter like that game, then when people use the gimmick for a day or two they then come to the realization that "Hey! these Gyro controls are actually pretty good!"

Sure there have been missteps with these gimmicks like with Starfox, but without the continued experimentation that Nintendo does, none of all those other titles would be as good as what they are.

If Nintendo dropped out of the hardware race and just simply put those franchise's on Playstation and Xbox the only progress we would see is in the Picture quality. that's basically all Sony and MS seem to care about doing, making the prettiest games on the most powerful boxes they can just because it makes them money. sure Nintendo is a business as well and is focused on making money, but the fact they focus on expanding actual gameplay methods and control elements is a big part of why i keep going back to them.

Yoshi178:

See it's statements like this that i see around not just the internet, but from people local to the area i live in as well that really annoys me. If someone prefers Buying Playstation and Xbox hardware and playing those games, then ok that's fine whatever. even people criticizing Nintendo stuff about thinking things like motion controls being crap and the person not liking is fine.

Plenty of people criticized the PlayStation Move and Kinect. It's not Nintendo doing motion controls I dislike, it's motion controls in general. Or, to be specific, forcing in motion controls on franchises that didn't use them previously and doing a poor job of it. All three are guilty of this.

Yoshi178:

people saying they want Nintendo to drop out of the hardware race and play all the Good Nintendo games on Playstation and Xbox irritates me though because alot the reason why quite a lot of Nintendo games are so good is because Nintendo use's those "gimmicks" to their advantage. sure, there are times when games like Star Fox 0 may not have had the best control set up, but the actual game itself wasn't bad though. it was an experimentation that didn't pay off for Nintendo and that sucks but oh well.

games like Pikmin 3, The Wonderful 101, Splatoon, Metroid Prime 3 and the Metroid Prime Trilogy Collection wouldn't be half as good as what they are without these so called "gimmicks" that Nintendo has used in them. it's amazing how during both Splatoon and Splatoon 2 launches pretty much everyone was hesitant about whether the Gyro controls were actually a good thing for a Shooter like that game, then when people use the gimmick for a day or two they then come to the realization that "Hey! these Gyro controls are actually pretty good!"

I've never played a motion control game where I found the motion controls added to it to any significant extent. Best-case scenario was Phantom Hourglass, which controlled okay, basically on par with a d-pad, but it didn't inherently elevate it. Worst case scenario are games like Metroid Prime: Hunters, which gave me hand cramps due to the control scheme, or Star Fox Command, which was borderline uncontrollable. The one case I can think of where motion controls added to a Nintendo game was A Link Between Worlds, where you could use the stylus to mark places on the map, and even then, "motion controls" is a bit generous for that.

That's not even getting started on the Wii itself. Played three games, two of which I found unplayable due to the motion controls.

Yoshi178:

Sure there have been missteps with these gimmicks like with Starfox, but without the continued experimentation that Nintendo does, none of all those other titles would be as good as what they are.

If Nintendo dropped out of the hardware race and just simply put those franchise's on Playstation and Xbox the only progress we would see is in the Picture quality. that's basically all Sony and MS seem to care about doing, making the prettiest games on the most powerful boxes they can just because it makes them money. sure Nintendo is a business as well and is focused on making money, but the fact they focus on expanding actual gameplay methods and control elements is a big part of why i keep going back to them.

If your game needs a gimmick to carry it, it doesn't say much about the game itself. Sony and Microsoft tried their hand with motion controls, and thankfully, those fads have mostly died off. It comes off less as Nintendo wanting to innovate, and more fix what isn't broken. So far, the Nintendo franchises I am invested in have mostly been spared this (Star Fox notwithstanding), but I have sympathy for the F-Zero fans, who, according to Miyamoto, will only get a new F-Zero "when the right controller interface becomes available." Now, I was never the biggest F-Zero fan in the world, and I've only ever played the first two games, but control was never an issue with those games for me. If you want to expand on the mechanics of F-Zero, could you, I dunno, introduce craft customization beyond what's already available? Add new racers? Introduce new mechanics and hazards within the tracks themselves? Nup. Motion controls it is.

Hawki:

If your game needs a gimmick to carry it, it doesn't say much about the game itself.

it's not about NEEDING gimmicks. it's about using said "gimmicks" to make already great games even better.

Metroid Prime is praised as arguably the best Metroid Game over Super Metroid, and just like Super Metroid, is a game that frequently ranks quite high up on lots of Best game of all time lists.

The game was amazing on the Gamecube and it didn't NEED motion controls at them. but adding Metroid Prime 3's control system to Prime 1 & 2 in the Trilogy Collection only made those 2 games even better than what they already were on Gamecube.

Yoshi178:

it's not about NEEDING gimmicks. it's about using said "gimmicks" to make already great games even better.

Metroid Prime is praised as arguably the best Metroid Game over Super Metroid, and just like Super Metroid, is a game that frequently ranks quite high up on lots of Best game of all time lists.

The game was amazing on the Gamecube and it didn't NEED motion controls at them. but adding Metroid Prime 3's control system to Prime 1 & 2 in the Trilogy Collection only made those 2 games even better than what they already were on Gamecube.

You've given me one example of a pre-existing game that was adjusted to have motion controls. ONE. How many other examples exist where motion controls were welded onto a foundation versus being built around them?

You're also kind of making my point for me. By this rationale, Metroid Prime is still a great game without motion controls. Personal thoughts aside on the game or Metroid series as a whole, it's an exception to basing a game entirely around motion controls or a non-standard interface and seeing it suffer for it (per the examples I gave earlier). As someone who doesn't like Metroid Prime, motion controls wouldn't solve the issues I have with the game. And even where Wii motion controls have been tolerable (e.g. Skyward Sword), I'd have preferred at least the option to use a standard configuration.

Yoshi178:

Not sure what the point of this is - wasn't this about motion controls?

Yoshi178:
Are You Serious? You think if this hype and momentum the Switch has currently had for last 4 months keeps going for the switch, other developers won't want a slice of the profit pie too? even if only just to make exclusive 3rd party games for the Switch? 3rd Party exclusives like Bayonetta 2 i mean.

i don't even know why you want all the same crap you can already buy on the Xbox One and PS4 to be on the Switch as well rather than using the Switch Library as an alternative to those libraries. Xbox One and PS4 libraries are pretty much exactly the same anyway save for a few 1st party exclusives lol.

What about the Wii and it's momentum and hype? It didn't net 3rd party support. You're nuts to think the Switch is going to be anywhere near the anomaly that was the Wii. Part of the momentum and hype is artificial because Nintendo purposefully doesn't supply enough product to meet demand. The PS4 sold 1 million in the 1st 24 hours with no games, that's more momentum than the Switch is ever going to get. The only way the Switch keeps rolling and becomes a huge success is if it overtakes Nintendo's own portable market and becomes the new goto portable. And Bayonetta 2 was funded by Nintendo, it's not a 3rd party game. The Switch could sell double/triple/quadruple the Xbone and it's still not getting 3rd party support and the Xbone will continue to get it.

You don't get it. It's not that we want the same crap, it's that we want to choose to either buy a console based on Sony's, Nintendo's, or Microsoft's exclusives. If you are a gamer and don't have any platform, you're not going to choose a Switch for your first console (besides the Nintendo fanboys) because you'd be missing out on over 90% of the games. You're going to choose between the PC, PS4, and Xbone. Then, if you still have the luxury of having the extra income and extra time, you will consider buying the Switch to play the maybe 5% of games that the Switch has (will have) that you want to play and can't play on another platform (although the PC does exist...). If Nintendo's system was on par power-wise with the other platforms, it would probably get every multiplatform title and then there's a real choice for a gamer that wants a console, do I prefer Sony's or Nintendo's 1st party games more and that's the console I'll buy (because Microsoft is really dropping the ball with 1st party games). That is not what the current situation is and why Nintendo is basically off in its own world. Nintendo doesn't care about competing with the other platforms anymore, which is apparent by their last 3 consoles.

Yoshi178:
games like Pikmin 3, The Wonderful 101, Splatoon, Metroid Prime 3 and the Metroid Prime Trilogy Collection wouldn't be half as good as what they are without these so called "gimmicks" that Nintendo has used in them.

My friend that's a diehard Zelda fan, he even has a tri-force tattoo, has finished every single game besides one. Guess which Zelda that is? Skyward Sword because of the stupid motion controls.

Hawki:
Speaking personally? Sonic Rush Adventure in 2007. Speaking in terms of critical consensus? Probably Sonic Generations, in 2011.

I mean, I don't take much comfort in those facts, even if Rush Adventure was the last Sonic game I completed, but, well, you did ask... :(

My point was people don't really care about Sonic anymore. Probably the last time a Sonic game was a "killer app" were the Dreamcast games.

WeepingAngels:
Nintendo has been promising and not really getting 3rd party support for 20 years. That you guys are actually arguing about it instead of just saying 'I'll believe it when I see it' really is the epitome of giving Nintendo the benefit of the doubt. If the console weren't once again underpowered...but it is. It's like repeating the same thing over and over again expecting different results. Remember, the Wii's success was not due to it's library.

Has Nintendo been promising 3rd party support? Because I don't really think they are, they are content with the market share they have carved out for themselves. It's just an impossibility to get 3rd party support when your console is not on par hardware-wise with everyone else. Publishers are not going to go out of their way to port and downgrade their current-gen games to a system they know the games won't sell on. The most Nintendo has ever "promised" was getting games that are years old that everyone has played like Batman Arkham City or Mass Effect 3 on Wii U or Skyrim now on the Switch. Nintendo has never said their console will be home to the FUTURE installments of COD, GTA, Fallout/Elder Scrolls, [insert any major game series], etc. since that Resident Evil Gamecube deal and PS2 still got RE4. You buy a Nintendo system for the Nintendo games and nothing else. Does anyone not actually know that?

Hawki:

Not sure what the point of this is - wasn't this about motion controls?

the point of it was making consoles super powerful and making games look pretty in 4K isn't the most important thing in the world like Sony and Microsoft act like it is.

there are other factors to consider when making games more marketable. Nintendo has now currently decided to go with the "gimmick" of making their next gen console something that can be used as both a home console and something portable you can take on the go with you as well which has proven extremely popular with the market so far. Pretty graphics and 3rd Party games aren't the only things people want when buying a console.

Phoenixmgs:

Has Nintendo been promising 3rd party support? Because I don't really think they are, they are content with the market share they have carved out for themselves.

Yeah. Here I Googled it for you. https://www.google.com/search?q=Nintendo+promises+third+party+support&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 Read as many links as you like. They always promise better third party support when a new console is releasing but it never really works out for them.

I can't believe that after 20 years of Nintendo being unable to attract third party developers like their competition does that people are still saying 'They will get third party support this time'. The odds are against them due to their console being underpowered. They always manage to cripple their consoles somehow. N64 - Carts hurt them, Gamecube - Less storage on mini discs hurt them, Wii - Underpowered and the controller hurt them, Wii U - Same as Wii, Switch - Underpowered and poor battery life.

They never learn.

Phoenixmgs:

What about the Wii and it's momentum and hype? It didn't net 3rd party support.

The Wii had a tonne of 3rd Party support thanks very much.

games like No More Heroes 1 & 2, MadWorld, Epic Mickey, Trauma Center, Sonic Colors, Ghost Squad it even got versions of a bunch of Call of Duty titles.

sure none of those are MUST HAVE AAA titles like you want Nintendo to have but it is still technically 3rd Party support. same with all the shitloads of shovelware we saw on the system like carnival games. but don't forget PS2 had craploads of shovelware too and PS4 gets heaps of shovelware at the moment too. whereever sales are, 3rd Party support and shovelware follows.

the Big difference here is that the gap between the Switch and Xbone & PS4 isn't anywhere near as big as what the gap between the Wii and 360/PS3 was. same with the Wii U just that console failed to sell. Like Chiguy even said in his video i posted above, "i played both the 4K and 1080p versions of Rise of the Tomb Raider, and honestly i thought it looked much better in 1080p 60FPS than it did in 4K 30FPS". and Switch handles 1080p 60fps just fine when playing in single player for the majority of its games.

The switch is still a piece of shit console with crap specs. It was poorly thought out, poorly put together.

I did just totally buy the new 2DS though. Just kinda wish it didn't take them 4 years to figure out that people wanted a 2DS that actually folds and which you can carry around. Even when Nintendo makes good business decisions they could have made them faster and more effectively, and it's to fix a dumb business decision they made earlier.

Phoenixmgs:

What about the Wii and it's momentum and hype? It didn't net 3rd party support. You're nuts to think the Switch is going to be anywhere near the anomaly that was the Wii. Part of the momentum and hype is artificial because Nintendo purposefully doesn't supply enough product to meet demand. The PS4 sold 1 million in the 1st 24 hours with no games, that's more momentum than the Switch is ever going to get. The only way the Switch keeps rolling and becomes a huge success is if it overtakes Nintendo's own portable market and becomes the new goto portable. And Bayonetta 2 was funded by Nintendo, it's not a 3rd party game. The Switch could sell double/triple/quadruple the Xbone and it's still not getting 3rd party support and the Xbone will continue to get it.

You don't get it. It's not that we want the same crap, it's that we want to choose to either buy a console based on Sony's, Nintendo's, or Microsoft's exclusives. If you are a gamer and don't have any platform, you're not going to choose a Switch for your first console (besides the Nintendo fanboys) because you'd be missing out on over 90% of the games. You're going to choose between the PC, PS4, and Xbone. Then, if you still have the luxury of having the extra income and extra time, you will consider buying the Switch to play the maybe 5% of games that the Switch has (will have) that you want to play and can't play on another platform (although the PC does exist...). If Nintendo's system was on par power-wise with the other platforms, it would probably get every multiplatform title and then there's a real choice for a gamer that wants a console, do I prefer Sony's or Nintendo's 1st party games more and that's the console I'll buy (because Microsoft is really dropping the ball with 1st party games). That is not what the current situation is and why Nintendo is basically off in its own world. Nintendo doesn't care about competing with the other platforms anymore, which is apparent by their last 3 consoles.

For starters, the Switch is already successful. Nintendo is the only company that sells their consoles at break even or profit at POS. 4.7 million units sold until the end of June ... the Switch has already made a profit for them. There's a reason Nintendo doesn't like to play nice with third party in general minus a small collection of studios it treats preferentially. Nintendo is a weird company, in that taking its games and the fact that it has a dedicated fan base that it will never exit the console race. Because people will buy it. It's the Apple of consoles, because more often than not total performance of their units hasn't been a deciding factor of their market model.

3DS trouned Vita. Wii trounced PS3 and XB and no one can compete with them in terms of portable gaming. I have a good laptop, but I still carry around my 3DS because it's so much easier to use and the plethora of games, whether multiplayer or not is there.

I think the Switch could attract more 3rd party support. Primarily because of their organised release profile. The competition for shelf space and consumer attention isn't there, so a lot of 3rd party developers could be incredibly enticed. But therein lies the problem. Nintendo doesn't want to have to compete for shelf space on its bank breaking 1st party, nor does it want to scare away obvious big ticket 3rd Party devs of games like Xenoblade and Fire Emblem. Part of the selling point to these devs is the fact that Nintendo is going to give them preferential stor exposure, with a solid install base of Switches, thatis basically "In this month, you're going to be a star..." with what is essential going to be well over 5 million units of which the owners of, as you point out, are quite monetised already.

If you're a cash strapped gamer, certainly the Switch isn't going to interest you. Particularly if you're not into portable gaming... at least not yet... but Nintendo have never been about cash-strapped gamers. They know their audience. What is almost a sadistic display of testing Nintendo fans, how many companies do you know that can make manufactured scarcity a selling point? Nintendo is like that abusive parent you have that you fight tooth and nail for them to respond to you. But it works! Time and again. Because when they show a smattering of affection theyare rewarded with an almost Sempai noticed me level of gratitude and further consumer support.

It's weird ... but I suppose if you're good at it and it's working, you can't blame them for it. I think? Hooray for capitalism and hyperconsumerism, as well as validation theory ... I guess.

And this is the clever strategy that Nintendo has come up with while taking onboard its failures withthe WiiU where it went into the WiiU thinking; "Fuck it, games will come out on it when they come out." Instead what the Switch did was; "Okay, so we have a console that is in the end not going to cost us as much to produce as competitors, we know people will buy the console ... what we should do is concentrate on release schedule."

The 3rd Party games Nintendo will get will be much higher quality than your usual 3rd Party offerings on the PS4 and XB1. And that's the lverage they're looking for with trusted parties. Nintendo have effectively said to trusted parties; "These are going tobe the times we aren't going to release our big ticket items. In exchange for not fighting with us for shelf space and consumer attention, we want you to invest more into your games in order to earn that hot item exclusivity on sales..."

And it's working ... even with side project weirdness with Arms has broken 1.2 million already, I believe? Arms is basically a game Nintendo made that is literally saying to third party developers; "You bet your sweet arse you'll make bank. Just need a good commitment from you and a willingness to work to our schedule when you're ready to release..." You're not going to be seeing the same quantity of games through the Switch. That's a given, but then again it doesn't need that licencing money. More over, the greater competition for shelf space in stores and online might even scare away bit ticket developers making that Xenoblade.

So yu're not going to see the same volume of games. Full stop. Of course Nintendo will say; "Hey, look at the third party support we have this time..." But that's because of the critique every person rails against Nintendo for not haveing for every one of their platforms. But sheer volume of third party support has never been Nintendo's market model, nor has it necessarily meant their failure to release a successful console and make steady profits.

You're talking about a company that routinely has money to work on four Zelda games at once, even if they knock back every one of them and use nothing of what those teams have worked on, and not cause a dent in their fiscal earnings.

The way that Nintendo do business ... They may never sell s many of their consoles, but they'll still be the biggestand most profitable game company on the market. Because they'll always have that sense of exclusivity. They hold the reins to huge numbers of consoles, and their competitors will simply not have that preferential exposure that Nintendo enjoys. As huge as Sony and Microsoft are, they make meagre profits out of videogames compared to Nintendo's fat stacks.

There is a reason Nintendo will never stop selling consoles. Because to stop doing so is to lose exclusivity. We all know of the gamesmakers that fell out of making their own consoles. They did't do well for a reason.I remember I wrote on the Switch in the first month ...and everybody was saying thiswasgoing to be a dead console, somehow, and it was going to be Nintendo's last ... without actually looking and understanding the economics involved. Nintendo will never stop making consoles to concentrate on making games, because the still make money out of nearly allof their consoles, and that guarantees them huge volumes on units sold of their games alone.

Take their Amiibos alone, Amiibo is so successful there are organised crime syndicates in Russia and China making mint moving bootleg versions of it. A heap piece of injection mold plastic that they can sell for upwards of $15USD. When Nintendo is genius, they are indisputeably genius. I mean it's hyperconsumerist crap that speaks to some of the worst aspects of our psychology, but hey ... I appreciate good salesmanship, no matter how insidious it is.

I study this shit, and I don't get the mechanics of psychology and sociology involved in how the fuck Amiibos make so much bank. I just want to shake the hands of the marketing and strategic planning gurus they have because it's a masterpiece of corporate thinking and lateral monetisation on IP.

Phoenixmgs:
Has Nintendo been promising 3rd party support?

Since day one, not that anybody fell for it.

WeepingAngels:
They never learn.

They do not.

WeepingAngels:

Phoenixmgs:

Has Nintendo been promising 3rd party support? Because I don't really think they are, they are content with the market share they have carved out for themselves.

Yeah. Here I Googled it for you. https://www.google.com/search?q=Nintendo+promises+third+party+support&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 Read as many links as you like. They always promise better third party support when a new console is releasing but it never really works out for them.

I can't believe that after 20 years of Nintendo being unable to attract third party developers like their competition does that people are still saying 'They will get third party support this time'. The odds are against them due to their console being underpowered. They always manage to cripple their consoles somehow. N64 - Carts hurt them, Gamecube - Less storage on mini discs hurt them, Wii - Underpowered and the controller hurt them, Wii U - Same as Wii, Switch - Underpowered and poor battery life.

They never learn.

I'm mainly asking if Nintendo has ever promised 3rd-party support to where they say you will be able to play basically all multiplats on our system like PC/Xbone/PS4. Sure they always say devs are interested in the system and the do get ports of older games like a Batman Arkham City or Skyrim. But Nintendo has yet to promise their system could ever be a primary gaming platform like the other platforms can be.

Yoshi178:
The Wii had a tonne of 3rd Party support thanks very much.

games like No More Heroes 1 & 2, MadWorld, Epic Mickey, Trauma Center, Sonic Colors, Ghost Squad it even got versions of a bunch of Call of Duty titles.

sure none of those are MUST HAVE AAA titles like you want Nintendo to have but it is still technically 3rd Party support. same with all the shitloads of shovelware we saw on the system like carnival games. but don't forget PS2 had craploads of shovelware too and PS4 gets heaps of shovelware at the moment too. whereever sales are, 3rd Party support and shovelware follows.

the Big difference here is that the gap between the Switch and Xbone & PS4 isn't anywhere near as big as what the gap between the Wii and 360/PS3 was. same with the Wii U just that console failed to sell. Like Chiguy even said in his video i posted above, "i played both the 4K and 1080p versions of Rise of the Tomb Raider, and honestly i thought it looked much better in 1080p 60FPS than it did in 4K 30FPS". and Switch handles 1080p 60fps just fine when playing in single player for the majority of its games.

3rd party support is getting all the multiplats and on the same day of release (or pretty damn close to it). If someone just had a Wii U and wanted to play Watch Dogs, they had to wait 6 months later to play the game. If someone wanted to play Prey on Wii U/Switch, they can't. That's the thing. They won't be able to play RDR2 when it comes out either. Until that happens, a Nintendo console will never be any gamer's primary gaming platform. That's the thing that separates Nintendo from everyone else. It's not that the Switch is bad and won't be successful, it's just not competing against everyone else.

Shovelware, are you serious? No one cares about getting bad games, they care about not getting the games they want to play. If shovelware was a serious problem for a gaming platform, PC gaming would be as dead as you can get. You can like not buy the games you know are bad.

And since when does Zelda run at 1080p and 60fps? Games with simpler graphics are a breeze to run at 1080p/60fps regardless of console. You're actually bringing up resolution and framerate when the Switch is running on tech that is literally 2 generations old? The Switch is technically "next-gen" past PS4/Xbone yet has similar tech as Wii U, PS3, and 360 and thus 2 generations behind the curve.

The reason Nintendo is seen in a negative light by gamers on the whole is because to play a small handful of games that are really good, they are forced to buy hardware that they really don't want. And, Nintendo isn't that consumer friendly either. They aren't on the level of the big publishers (EA, Activision, etc.) that everyone hates but they are far from beloved and on the level of say CDPR either.

Addendum_Forthcoming:
If you're a cash strapped gamer, certainly the Switch isn't going to interest you. Particularly if you're not into portable gaming... at least not yet... but Nintendo have never been about cash-strapped gamers. They know their audience. What is almost a sadistic display of testing Nintendo fans, how many companies do you know that can make manufactured scarcity a selling point? Nintendo is like that abusive parent you have that you fight tooth and nail for them to respond to you. But it works! Time and again. Because when they show a smattering of affection theyare rewarded with an almost Sempai noticed me level of gratitude and further consumer support.

It's weird ... but I suppose if you're good at it and it's working, you can't blame them for it. I think? Hooray for capitalism and hyperconsumerism, as well as validation theory ... I guess.

Take their Amiibos alone, Amiibo is so successful there are organised crime syndicates in Russia and China making mint moving bootleg versions of it. A heap piece of injection mold plastic that they can sell for upwards of $15USD. When Nintendo is genius, they are indisputeably genius. I mean it's hyperconsumerist crap that speaks to some of the worst aspects of our psychology, but hey ... I appreciate good salesmanship, no matter how insidious it is.

I study this shit, and I don't get the mechanics of psychology and sociology involved in how the fuck Amiibos make so much bank. I just want to shake the hands of the marketing and strategic planning gurus they have because it's a masterpiece of corporate thinking and lateral monetisation on IP.

I'm not arguing the Switch will be a failure or a success. I'm just saying the Switch isn't in the same category as the other platforms. You don't buy a Nintendo console as your primary gaming platform since the Gamecube. Nintendo doesn't care about competing with the other platforms, they are content where they are. Nintendo is fine in their own world making their share of the money. Hell, you can say they even fine-tuned their strategy to an extent with the Wii U being a bit of a hiccup although it did usher in the Amiibos so it could've been more successful than the Wii when it's all said and done. The Amiibos probably have the profit margin of soft drinks at a fast food restaurant.

Phoenixmgs:
I'm mainly asking if Nintendo has ever promised 3rd-party support to where they say you will be able to play basically all multiplats on our system like PC/Xbone/PS4. Sure they always say devs are interested in the system and the do get ports of older games like a Batman Arkham City or Skyrim. But Nintendo has yet to promise their system could ever be a primary gaming platform like the other platforms can be.

A little before launch a corporate press release from Nintendo provided this image:

image

A couple of months in, this is the reality:

No Anthem
No Assassins Creed Origins
No Call of Duty WW2
No Destiny 2
No Dishonored
No Far Cry 5
No Kingdom Hearts 3
No Life is Strange 2
No Middle Earth Shadow of War
No Monster Hunter World
No Need for Speed Payback
No Ni no Kuni 2
No Red Dead Redemption 2
No South Park Fractured But Whole
No Star Wars Battlefront 2
No The Evil Within 2
No Wolfenstein 2
And so on

In summary, never believe Nintendo when they tell you they're totally going to get 3rd party support.
In hindsight it should be obvious: the Switch is underpowered by one or two generations. No fucking way the devs want any part in it. I suspect their "support" boils down to porting 7th gen games like Skyrim rather than keeping the Switch stocked with current-gen games. So once more Nintendo is cornered into their teeny neck of the woods with a novelty gimmick, a single killer app (that is available on a previous console anyway) and marketing stunts like limited edition crap and artifitial scarcity scalper fodder.

Johnny Novgorod:
A little before launch a corporate press release from Nintendo provided this image:

image

A couple of months in, this is the reality:

No Anthem
No Assassins Creed Origins
No Call of Duty WW2
No Destiny 2
No Dishonored
No Far Cry 5
No Kingdom Hearts 3
No Life is Strange 2
No Middle Earth Shadow of War
No Monster Hunter World
No Need for Speed Payback
No Ni no Kuni 2
No Red Dead Redemption 2
No South Park Fractured But Whole
No Star Wars Battlefront 2
No The Evil Within 2
No Wolfenstein 2
And so on

In summary, never believe Nintendo when they tell you they're totally going to get 3rd party support.
In hindsight it should be obvious: the Switch is underpowered by one or two generations. No fucking way the devs want any part in it. I suspect their "support" boils down to porting 7th gen games like Skyrim rather than keeping the Switch stocked with current-gen games. So once more Nintendo is cornered into their teeny neck of the woods with a novelty gimmick, a single killer app (that is available on a previous console anyway) and marketing stunts like limited edition crap and artifitial scarcity scalper fodder.

Fixed the image link. It's kinda weird that there's game engines on there but whatever.

I'm sure those publishers/devs will release a game or more (like Ubisoft's Just Dance) on the Switch but what I'm saying is when is the last time Nintendo said in any manner that their system will basically have that list of games (the upcoming highly anticipated AAA games) outside of maybe the Gamecube? I really don't think Nintendo has attempted to "trick" people and if they have, I can only see people getting tricked by the Wii as it was the 1st console Nintendo decided to not compete with the other platforms. I guess the Wii U was in the best place to get 3rd party support for like a year (as it was on par with PS3/360 in power) but everyone knew the PS4/Xbone was a year out and once that transition happens, publishers aren't going to bother downgrading games for older hardware (even the PS3/360 let alone Wii U).

Dirty Hipsters:
The switch is still a piece of shit console with crap specs..

so the same as every single other gaming console in existence then?

image

Johnny Novgorod:

A little before launch a corporate press release from Nintendo provided this image:

image

A couple of months in, this is the reality:

No Anthem
No Assassins Creed Origins
No Call of Duty WW2
No Destiny 2
No Dishonored
No Far Cry 5
No Kingdom Hearts 3
No Life is Strange 2
No Middle Earth Shadow of War
No Monster Hunter World
No Need for Speed Payback
No Ni no Kuni 2
No Red Dead Redemption 2
No South Park Fractured But Whole
No Star Wars Battlefront 2
No The Evil Within 2
No Wolfenstein 2
And so on

In summary, never believe Nintendo when they tell you they're totally going to get 3rd party support.

That's funny. i don't see any single place on that photo that promise's/confirms literally ANY of those game you just listed that aren't on the Switch. just an image that confirms Switch games are currently in development with those 3rd Party companies.

you must be confused.

Phoenixmgs:

Yoshi178:
Switch handles 1080p 60fps just fine when playing in single player for the majority of its games.

And since when does Zelda run at 1080p and 60fps?

Way to completely miss the part where i said THE MAJORITY of it's games. nice cherry picking there.

Johnny Novgorod:

No Anthem
No Assassins Creed Origins
No Call of Duty WW2
No Destiny 2
No Dishonored
No Far Cry 5
No Kingdom Hearts 3
No Life is Strange 2
No Middle Earth Shadow of War
No Monster Hunter World
No Need for Speed Payback
No Ni no Kuni 2
No Red Dead Redemption 2
No South Park Fractured But Whole
No Star Wars Battlefront 2
No The Evil Within 2
No Wolfenstein 2
And so on

In summary, never believe Nintendo when they tell you they're totally going to get 3rd party support.
In hindsight it should be obvious: the Switch is underpowered by one or two generations. No fucking way the devs want any part in it. I suspect their "support" boils down to porting 7th gen games like Skyrim rather than keeping the Switch stocked with current-gen games. So once more Nintendo is cornered into their teeny neck of the woods with a novelty gimmick, a single killer app (that is available on a previous console anyway) and marketing stunts like limited edition crap and artifitial scarcity scalper fodder.

Yeah, but do we actually want those titles? Barring Monster Hunter World. Sure as shit I'm going to pick that up ... but I have other platforms to play for that.

But the reason I love Monster Hunter is local co-op and in genral single player portable gaming. And as much as it furiates me that they turned around and said MH XX isn't coming to the West, I'm hoping they reverse that decision and I can just play the Japanese version ... but ehhh. I know people in my gaming group that have MH and we play MH local co-op because being able to organise in the flesh is so much fun. As much as I know I'll love World, a part of me will be sad I can't take tht adventure on the go or play with friends in the flesh 40 minutes before we settle down to some pen and paper goodness on the 3DS.

My favourite console game of the last generation was Xenoblade Chronicles X. I probably sunk more into that than any of my other games not merely on the WiiU but on the PS3 or PC. Over 3/4s of the games you have on this list ... I'd probably have more fun spending 3 hours getting Close Combat: A Bridge Too Far to work on my mini-laptop I bring to work and uni with me.

What I want Nintendo to do with the Switch is give us something like ... the original Jagged Alliance 2, but with a versus mode that you can basically local player almost as if an infinitely better form of Battleship if you have two Switches. Move squads around, clash, set up ambushes, manage reinforcements, etc. There's an unserviced demographic of video gamer that loves social games (not just 'party games', there is a difference) ... things that we can play with other people in the room with them. Something tht Nintendo can do better than anybody else, and will cater to far better than 4k gaming and buggy public servers and bullshit DRM. Plenty of social gamers, who would love some means to painlessly dive into and compete with/against.

I love board games, I love my nights out playing Netrunner with other people at the LGS ... I have more fun with Netrunner than any video game on the market ... 4K graphics and a faster processor need not apply.

If you gave me the means to tap into more social games, where I can compete with what I'm sure is a flesh and blood person and offer easy mobility and easy 'drop in' and 'drop out' ... I'll love it. Because that's not something any other platform is going to be able to provide. Tere's a reason why I love board games, and why the entertainment of going into a board game like Rex is going to outstrip any of the games that you put on that list.

If the Switch and the 3DS show us something ... it's that there's a whole lot of video gamers out there that want mobility and like to be social creatures. Fancy that .... 89% of humanity registeringas extroverts maybe also liking video games that make it easy for them to involve people right next to them. Who da thunk it?

I know board gamers that are gamers, precisely because they like intelligent gameplay, but also value social interaction, healthy competition, and human contact... and they don't get that by having powerful rigs or obtusely sized bricks they can't take with them places.

Phoenixmgs:
It's kinda weird that there's game engines on there but whatever.

Well, the engine logos pad the image nicely. I imagine that's why they're there for.

I'm sure those publishers/devs will release a game or more (like Ubisoft's Just Dance) on the Switch but what I'm saying is when is the last time Nintendo said in any manner that their system will basically have that list of games (the upcoming highly anticipated AAA games) outside of maybe the Gamecube?

No idea, but I think 1) it's in their best interest and 2) the release of that image proves it. They know most people regard Nintendo consoles as their own little niche thing, they know very few people outside of Japan actually "main" them and they know nobody expects them to keep up with AAA titles. The opportuny cost of buying a Nintendo console is immense because you miss out on most games. By releasing that promo image they're basically trying to reassure the peoples "Don't worry, they've got our backs this time around". Except not quite.

Addendum_Forthcoming:
Yeah, but do we actually want those titles?

Most people do. I'm not saying Nintendo doesn't have good games, or that everything that comes out on PS4/Xbone is pure gold. But if it comes down to having to choose only one, it would seem you miss out on more by buying Nintendo. If I had to choose between a Switch and another platform my thought process would be: Do I want to play Breath of the Wild, or do I want to play everything else?

Johnny Novgorod:

Most people do. I'm not saying Nintendo doesn't have good games, or that everything that comes out on PS4/Xbone is pure gold. But if it comes down to having to choose only one, it would seem you miss out on more by buying Nintendo. If I had to choose between a Switch and another platform my thought process would be: Do I want to play Breath of the Wild, or do I want to play everything else?

But that's tribalistic garbage. Most consumers don't go into a product thinking; "I love Fantasy Flight Games... therefore I'll only play Fantasy Flight board games." Actually, funnily enough I kind of like all types of board games ... you know, that aren't made by Hasbro and actually have comlexity.

I have a 3DS, a Switch, PS4, a decent gaming rig (thinking of tearing apart its innards and replacing some stuff) ... I have a decent laptop and a mini laptop I nuse for studying or for note taking that I'll spend time teaking with that I can play truly golden classics from the past (like the aforementioned and immortal Close Combat: ABTF)...

The Switch has its strengths solely on appealing to social people like me that like to involve living humans I'm with into the gameplay... or having a device I can take anywhere with minimal stress. The Switch is a great console at what it does. Probably the best console at what it does. The capacity to simply pick up and go, involve other people on the fly, or whether because you just want to have a cigarette or a drink outside, or because you have to be somewhere and you're waiting for the train or bus.

Honestly I have no complaints about it as a system. What we kind of need is more social games that allow for singleplayer and social player interaction at the drop of a hat.

Board gamers are infinitely smarter than video game developers in this regard, and particularly so in recent games over the last 6 years. Like Fantasy Flight's new Arkham Horror living card game, where you can play solo or co-operatively with up to 4 players. Smart mechanics, nuanced card abilities, phenomenal class restriction rules, and the deckbuilding and the character specific cards within them .... Masterpiece!

Seriously, fuck off anybody that thinks video game copanies understand basic gameplay when you examine what game developers do with cardboard. Video game devs should be able to prove themselves thinking up a board game and comparing it to what is on the board gaming scene before pretending like they can actually make a videogame. Abundantly fucking obvious with garbage like Hearthstone that pretty much videogamers and videogamers only enjoy.

Point is ... the Switch isthe only electronic platform to deliver that sense of social gaming that I haven't seen without simply being called a 'portable'. And I have problems with this argument you run of 'most people do' ... because provably, 89% of people are extroverts. I know gamers that don't value play anything that requires a PS4, XB1, Switch, 3DS, etc ... pretty much board games are their jam for a reason. Most humans are social creatures, and enjoy games ... just that having better graphics alone isn't scratching that itch.

They like healthy competition, direct engagement, direct risk-reward that isn't merely 'Game Over'. Like in the game I mention, Rex ... I got beaten by someone who seemed as if the world was collapsing all around her. She couldn't move her armies to where they needed to be, various events seemed to be setting against her ... but she could lie through her teeth (as I discovered painfully). I learnt that she had completed her secret objectives and was halfthe time lulling the rest of us into a false sense of security that she hadn't actually won the game a turn or so back ... and ended up beating us all because of having skills that are beyond direct electronic input and keyboard shortcuts.

That defeat hurts more because a person beat me at being human. Lying and 'cheating' in a way that is fair. But it's also far more rewarding a defeat.

If the Switch could deliver something like that, and bring social dynamics into the mix then you'd probably see more electronic consoles looking like the Switch. But this leads into my next point ... video game developers are kind of bad at gameplay.

I like all types of games ... roleplaying, video games, board games, gambling, sports (playing, not watching) ... games are my jam, because I love the psychology and the fact they represent an esoteric idea of fun that is beyond simple human engagement with another. Itr's fascinating to me because it appealds precisely to why humans can categorically be seen as something beyond a common animal. Though ... you know, given corvines play structured games amongst themselves as fledgelings we might not have the title of 'best animal' after a few million years.

Addendum_Forthcoming:

Johnny Novgorod:

Most people do. I'm not saying Nintendo doesn't have good games, or that everything that comes out on PS4/Xbone is pure gold. But if it comes down to having to choose only one, it would seem you miss out on more by buying Nintendo. If I had to choose between a Switch and another platform my thought process would be: Do I want to play Breath of the Wild, or do I want to play everything else?

But that's tribalistic garbage. Most consumers don't go into a product thinking; "I love Fantasy Flight Games... therefore I'll only play Fantasy Flight board games." Actually, funnily enough I kind of like all types of board games ... you know, that aren't made by Hasbro and actually have comlexity.

I have a 3DS, a Switch, PS4, a decent gaming rig (thinking of tearing apart its innards and replacing some stuff) ... I have a decent laptop and a mini laptop I nuse for studying or for note taking that I'll spend time teaking with that I can play truly golden classics from the past (like the aforementioned and immortal Close Combat: ABTF)...

The Switch has its strengths solely on appealing to social people like me that like to involve living humans I'm with into the gameplay... or having a device I can take anywhere with minimal stress. The Switch is a great console at what it does. Probably the best console at what it does. The capacity to simply pick up and go, involve other people on the fly, or whether because you just want to have a cigarette or a drink outside, or because you have to be somewhere and you're waiting for the train or bus.

Honestly I have no complaints about it as a system. What we kind of need is more social games that allow for singleplayer and social player interaction at the drop of a hat.

Board games are infinitely smarter than video game developers, and particularly so in recent games over the last 6 yearskb . Like Fantasy Flight's new Arkham Horror Living card game, where you can play solo or co-operatively with up to 4 players. Smart mechanics, nuanced card abilities, phenomenal class restriction rules, and the deckbuilding and the character specific cards within them .... Masterpiece!

Seriously, fuck off anybody that thinks video game copanies understand basic gameplay when you examine what game developers do with cardboard. Video game devs should be able to prove themselves thinking up a board game and comparing it to what is on the board gaming scene before pretending like they can actually make a videogame. Abundantly fucking obvious with fucking garbage like Hearthstone that pretty much video gamers and video gamers only enjoy.

Point is ... the Switch isthe only electronic platform to deliver that sense of social gaming that I have seen without simply being called a 'portable'. And I have problems with this argument you run of 'most people do' ... because provably, 89% of people are extroverts. I know games that don't value play anything that requires a PS4, XB1, Switch, 3DS, etc ... pretty much board games are their jam for a reason. Most humans are social creatures, and enjoy games ... just that having better graphics alone isn't scratching that itch.

I like all types of games ... roleplaying, video games, board games, gambling ... games are my jam, because I love the psychology and the fact they represent an esoteric idea of fun that is beyond simple human engagement with another. Itr's fascinating to me because it appealds precisely to why humans can categorically be seen as something beyond a common animal. Though ... you know, given corvines play structured games amongst themselves as fledgelings we might not have the title of 'best animal' after 10 million years.

I appreciate you and others have the itch for 24/7 gaming and that the Switch, shitty battery life notwithstanding, can scratch it. I personally prefer to set a special time for gaming (and reading, and listening to music - leisure in general). I also agree gaming can be a nice social experience - earlier today I was playing LittleBigPlanet 3 and Catherine's Colosseum mode with my girlfriend. Fun times! You brought up graphics at some point, not sure why. The bottom line is if the Switch doesn't have the games I want to play (and for the most part it doesn't, because practically nobody develops for it) then it can't do anything for me.

Johnny Novgorod:

I appreciate you and others have the itch for 24/7 gaming and that the Switch, shitty battery life notwithstanding, can scratch it. I personally prefer to set a special time for gaming (and reading, and listening to music - leisure in general). I also agree gaming can be a nice social experience - earlier today I was playing LittleBigPlanet 3 and Catherine's Colosseum mode with my girlfriend. Fun times! You brought up graphics at some point, not sure why. The bottom line is if the Switch doesn't have the games I want to play (and for the most part it doesn't, because practically nobody develops for it) then it can't do anything for me.

I get that, but it's hard to invalidate the idea people like social games. We play them constantly. As mindnumbingly simple, yet incredibly nuanced and deliciously devious as Ultimate Werewolf is ... it's merely setting out a foundation where lie to your friend's face and get validation for it and that's pretty much it beyond simple deduction puzzles.

I mean, technically you brought up graphics ... you were complaining about it being underpowered and I was bringing up thefact that shitloads of people out there find it infinitely more engaging playing with what is effectively cardboard like Avalon: Resistance. You could explain the rules of Avalon in 3 minutes. Explaining the metagame could take days. Explaining why explaining the metagame also invalidates older metagame that is previously unexplained is an exercise in Grand Unified Theory.

The best thing is you don't even need to explain the metagame, because in the end it's; "Lie to your friends, or tell the truth, or mislead them, or try to look like you're misleading them, or use socisl cues of aspersions against one player to build distrust against them, and bad guyd can win even if they start calling out other bad guys for being bad guys if it helps cover up their mistakes or another's. Just so you fuck up the group's quest. You may need to figure out who Merlin is, though, to get the potential assassin to kill them if SHTF."

The rest is intuitive and practice of being a conniving, sneaky, cowardly play actor of cartoonish dimensions that tries to appear as if the voice of reason, herself.

Because those games master gameplay in a way simple button presses could never do.

And I agree, the games aren't there. But I want to point out that none of the games you listed are social games to begin with.

I'm kind of glad a console and videogame maker out there isn't just trying to give us Shadow of Mordor. I'm also glad that they seem to be making money not simply giving us Shadow of Mordor. I have other things that can give me Shadow of Mordor. I want something that won't just give me more Shadow of Mordor.

Yoshi178:
Way to completely miss the part where i said THE MAJORITY of it's games. nice cherry picking there.

Who says a majority of PS4's games don't run at 60fps? Pretty much all PSN games run at higher resolutions and framerates and they also probably out-number normal AAA releases. And, AAA releases aren't going to run at 1080p/60fps because devs prefer getting more detail vs the 1080p/60fps. The choice of how high the resolution and framerate the game runs at is decided by the devs, not the hardware. Very few games are actually fast-paced enough to benefit from 60fps anyways like Zelda. The Last of Us played no different at 60fps or 30fps because Naughty Dog's camera is too slow for 60fps to improve aiming anyways.

Johnny Novgorod:
The opportuny cost of buying a Nintendo console is immense because you miss out on most games... If I had to choose between a Switch and another platform my thought process would be: Do I want to play Breath of the Wild, or do I want to play everything else?

That's exactly what I've been trying to tell Yoshi, they don't get it. A Nintendo system is a secondary console, which doesn't mean it sucks but it's just not in competition with everyone else. The Switch only becomes a main console in the portable market if it basically becomes the new DS.

Addendum_Forthcoming:
Board gamers are infinitely smarter than video game developers in this regard, and particularly so in recent games over the last 6 years. Like Fantasy Flight's new Arkham Horror living card game, where you can play solo or co-operatively with up to 4 players. Smart mechanics, nuanced card abilities, phenomenal class restriction rules, and the deckbuilding and the character specific cards within them .... Masterpiece!

Seriously, fuck off anybody that thinks video game copanies understand basic gameplay when you examine what game developers do with cardboard. Video game devs should be able to prove themselves thinking up a board game and comparing it to what is on the board gaming scene before pretending like they can actually make a videogame. Abundantly fucking obvious with garbage like Hearthstone that pretty much videogamers and videogamers only enjoy.

Point is ... the Switch is the only electronic platform to deliver that sense of social gaming that I haven't seen without simply being called a 'portable'... If the Switch could deliver something like that, and bring social dynamics into the mix then you'd probably see more electronic consoles looking like the Switch. But this leads into my next point ... video game developers are kind of bad at gameplay.

I play board games at least once a week and they are pretty great (I also work GenCon). However, comparing video games to board games and saying devs don't know how to make gameplay is definitely along the lines of apples to oranges. Video games usually strive for real-time action gameplay vs board games turn-based nature, thus the vast majority of the time a board game and a video game are trying to scratch a different itch. A video game is player skill in aiming or timing dodges vs a board game is rolling dice to determine hits/misses or just plain the decision making of a worker replacement. It's actually sorta the difference in physically playing baseball vs managing baseball. I will agree with you that video game devs are severely lacking when it comes to balancing, they can't even balance normal guns in a shooter when its so very easy. Lots of RPGs have horrible balancing/broken mechanics like say Witcher 3. If Witcher 3 was PnP RPG, it would be dropped faster than 5th Edition. No DM in their right mind would even allow a level 1 Geralt in their game.

I don't really think a video game is going to be able to deliver the type of social qualities found in the more complex board games. Most (probably all) of the social type of games Nintendo systems have had since the Wii are basically the equivalent of board game party games like Codenames or Telestrations; simple, quick, and fun for just about everyone. The main reason board games with such great gameplay work in their medium is because they really can't be done well in the video game medium. You wouldn't have the screen space to play like Twilight Imperium on a screen the size of a portable or even the Switch. Some games do work very well in video game form like Sentinels of the Multiverse. One game I could see translating really well to the Switch along with having a great social aspect is Captain Sonar as then each player's screen would be their station. And even then most party games are pretty light on the material required and rather cheap purchases so someone bringing Telestrations or Captain Sonar to a party/hangout is much simpler than 1) everyone going having a Switch and 2) them all bringing their Switch to with them.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 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