Quantcast
View Post
potato_hamster said:

 

DonFerrari said:

Yes, but it points to a much better situation than on previous systems.

I've already addressed that idea, multiple times.

No one is arguing against the idea that the third party support on the Switch is better than the Wii U and the Wii in some ways. In fact I state it explicitly in the post you responded to, and in other posts. That still doesn't mean the Switch is getting good or even passable third party support. It just means it's better than the terrible support other recent Nintendo consoles received.

Being good or acceptable would be totally subjective, so if the customer base think it's good we may disagree but it's true to them. Even more when they accept and say it is much lower than PS4/X1. If they said it is great, perfect or cover most AAA games then we could put it as wrong.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994