KungKras said:
To be honest, I didn't follow the conversation from the start. It has always botherd me when owning all three systems is presented as some moral high ground, as if everyone has the time for, and can afford three machines with three libraries. |
Well now. Someone asked, or rather made a suggestion, and I simply answered.
| Mr Puggsly said: I'm confused, did this thread come back because the Switch has tons of AAA 3rd party support? |
Seems a celebration that it's better then the Wii u. Not exactly cause for celebration. 3rd party support is very limited.
OTBWY said:
I am fully right, but thanks for at least partially admitting. Regions don't matter. If I wanted, I would get it. Simple as that. If I wanted, I could play P.T on the PS4 even though it was not available anymore (I think it is now). The length of how far someone is willing to go to be able to play a difficult to get game is a complete non-issue, and only arguing for the sake of arguing because of some arbitrary list someone made in order to have a stick against the Switch. Good day, Barkley. |
Nope, it isn't that easy. You could get AC Odyssey on Switch sure, but outside of Japan the lag will be too big, to have much fun playing it. To be relevant the cloud-service has to expand beyond Japan.
Kerotan said:
Seems a celebration that it's better then the Wii u. Not exactly cause for celebration. 3rd party support is very limited. |
Actually it is not that limited. I already pointed out that some games just are ignored, because people on this forum only know stuff on consoles. Big games on PC or mobile fly under their radar. But they are relevant. Therefore Civilization for instance is a big game, which is just ignored by some people here, although it is a bigger franchise that many games they regard as big on PS4 or XB1.
OTBWY said:
Well now. Someone asked, or rather made a suggestion, and I simply answered. |
Oh now I see. You only quoted the guy.
Well, consider my reply as a reply to the guy that you replied to then.
I LOVE ICELAND!
Kerotan said:
Seems a celebration that it's better then the Wii u. Not exactly cause for celebration. 3rd party support is very limited. |
No idea why they would think that. in terms of AAA 3rd party titles the Wii U is currently way ahead of the Switch.
Megiddo said:
No idea why they would think that. in terms of AAA 3rd party titles the Wii U is currently way ahead of the Switch. |
The main difference here is that Wii U support dried up after the 1st year while Switch support is increasing with no signs of slowing down.
When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.
zorg1000 said:
The main difference here is that Wii U support dried up after the 1st year while Switch support is increasing with no signs of slowing down. |
Good point. Yes, the longevity will definitely favor the Switch and of course its catalog will eventually surpass the Wii U's titles. The Wii U had the advantage of being the home system after the massive popular Wii and all the publishers wanted to get behind what they thought was the gravy train. Whereas the Switch has the publishers naturally more tepid but will churn out more content over time.
Mr Puggsly said:
Wow, what a list! 1. A good chunk of that list is Japanese games. Frankly, they don't make a lot of cutting edge games and that's partly why their content scales well to Switch. Switch is also a popular platform in Japan so they will cater to that audience. 2. You started with the most impressive ports, Doom and Wolfenstein. That engine was built to scale well and even hit 60 fps on 8th gen consoles. So again, partly why scales to Switch well. 3. You list towards the second half starts to fall apart because those are not by any means AAA games and some aren't even technically impressive for the hardware. 4. The Switch is naturally gonna get better support than the Switch Wii U of the larger userbase. But studios clearly aren't that motivated to bring their AAA experiences to Switch. Frankly, a game like Soul Calibur VI should have worked on Switch, but evidently it wasn't worth the effort Namco. |
This entire argument is completely baseless considering that his direct quote only says "third parties", not technically impressive, non-Japanese or AAA ones.
"They’ve been so underpowered [in terms of hardware] that they don’t have the support of third parties because they’re all making games for PC, PlayStation 4 and Xbox One. And the Nintendo Switch is no different."
He was saying the Wii U was so underpowered that it missed out on third parties. Well.. maybe the guy was just flat out wrong in his assessment that you need power to get third parties. Switch is obviously underpowered compared to the PS4 and XBO but that hasn't stopped it from getting far more relevant support of third parties than the Wii U ever did, even barring independent devs. Sometimes devs are just plain wrong, they don't need you doing damage control for their misguided statements.
Last edited by Raven - on 22 October 2018
Megiddo said:
Good point. Yes, the longevity will definitely favor the Switch and of course its catalog will eventually surpass the Wii U's titles. The Wii U had the advantage of being the home system after the massive popular Wii and all the publishers wanted to get behind what they thought was the gravy train. Whereas the Switch has the publishers naturally more tepid but will churn out more content over time. |
On top of that I would also say that Switch already completely destroys Wii U in terms small-medium sized games, things like indies, Japanese games and AA titles.
When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
