By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mar1217 said:
DonFerrari said:

Nope. If there were a thread I either didn't participate or don't remember it. Still, would you agree that we get more attacks on games not going to Switch than to other systems? Same as we get more defense for game going only to Switch and not on others?

And that basically because userbase of Nintendo is a little bigger and also PS fanbase already receive a lot of games so less care given to the few games that don't go there without any attacks to the devs being dumb or hating the platform?

You could have used the case of Bayonetta, that is one that usually had complains from selected users from Xbox and PS.

That was during the WiiU era. There wasn't much people to whine about the fact not much 3rd party games were coming to the console (and even less on the exclusivity front),specially since the WiiU never ended up as a success thus justifying it's non-support from them.

Switch is a complete turnover though, which completly justifies why it gets stuff of it's own like the PS4 did throughout it's lifetime. Simple as that, there's no matter of getting defensive here.

I have no issue with games going exclusive to Switch, some perhaps doesn't make sense to skip PS4 imho, but I understand that devs and pubs are making the decision they think will bring most profit. They don't avoid a system just for giggles.

And believe or not there were plenty of people that complained that the 3rd bayonetta wasn't multiplat, go figures kkkkk.



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

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."