Quantcast
Why is the Switch still not getting big games from 3rd parties?

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Why is the Switch still not getting big games from 3rd parties?

Kai_Mao said:
The Switch’s third party support will eventually improve as time goes on and it continues to sell well. I don’t think most third parties and indies can no longer ignore something that’s selling this good and attracting mainly a demographic (teens and young adults) that will be attracted to their games. Plus the Switch appears to be less complicated to make games for than Wii U and supports most of the modern game engines (i.e., Unreal 4 and Unity). Time will tell.

Plus the Japanese developers will more likely make games for the Switch or do Switch/PS4, especially since the console is putting a stranglehold domestically despite the PS4 having a more established install base. I mean, Splatoon 2 is the first 2 million seller on home consoles since Wii Party back in 2010. Even Final Fantasy, Tekken, Street Fighter, Persona, and Dragon Quest, popular franchises in Japan, could not come close with their latest mainline installments on PS4. So even with Monster Hunter World coming soon, I think the Switch will continue to grind it out despite a rocky start this year due to shortages (on both hardware AND software)

Probably not.
Market is what? 3.3m Switch's and 6m PS4's in japan.
So Switch accounts for 1/3rd of the total home console market there.

And in another ~2 years, it ll probably be about equal to the PS4 in sales numbers (thus being ~1/2 of the market).

 



Around the Network
Nogamez said:
Pretty sure most 3rd party want games on swutch now but yeah grphically its gonna be hard to be stripped back so much compared to xbox one X. I believe most 3rd party will be ports or switch exclusives aka Mario x rabbids

This.



Proud to be the first cool Nintendo fan ever

Number ONE Zelda fan in the Universe

DKCTF didn't move consoles

Prediction: No Zelda HD for Wii U, quietly moved to the succesor

Predictions for Nintendo NX and Mobile


Pavolink said:
Nogamez said:
Pretty sure most 3rd party want games on swutch now but yeah grphically its gonna be hard to be stripped back so much compared to xbox one X  *To the PS4/XB1. I believe most 3rd party will be ports or switch exclusives aka Mario x rabbids

This.

Yep.

Too much work to downgrade, too big downgrades for developers feeling comfortable porting their games.
Its  gonna limit what "can" realistically be ported to the switch.

Its not because 3rd party hate nintendo, as some have written.
if its easy to port (hh+dock mode, make it harder) and can add extra sales, 3rd party will be there. If there not, its beacuse its not worth the effort to port it.



u got doom. And everything else is more like a interactive movie than a game.



Mnementh said:

Or the PS3. Really, people forget the strange design of the PS3.

But really all I read from your explanation is, that it isn't about architecture, it is about power. I agree in a way, since the Wii Nintendo decided to have lower specs than the competition. There is a reason the PS3 and the 360 were called HD-twins: power was similar enough to make porting games between easy enough (such low-effort ports usually left the PS3 at disadvantage, the strange architecture needed special consideration to fully utilize, so low-effort ports perfomed bad).

But generally people completely go bonkers on the name of the CPU. I'm a programmer, and I can say I couldn't care less. The compiler makes every CPU the same, except you need some special programming, as the SPEs of the Cell in the PS3 did (for which reason they were often ignored or underutilized). For gaming also graphic is more important, but this century the programmers less and less use the graphic card directly but instead using high level APIs. And as you said, Nintendo home consoles had pretty standard graphic chips.

So in conclusion: neither Wii, nor WiiU or Switch used an especially strange architecture that makes porting difficult. They all had less power than their competition, which indeed can make porting difficult. Also, Wii and WiiU had bad engine support (Switch has surprisingly good support in that department), which actually has WAY more impact than the CPU. Unreal Engine for instance supported Playstation since the 2, XBox since the 360, but no Nintendo console before the Switch.

I never understand why non-programmers get excited about the selection of the CPU-architecture, as every programmer don't care anymore as compilers support everything. The LLVM compiler targets X86, X86-64, PowerPC, PowerPC-64, ARM, Thumb, SPARC, Alpha, CellSPU, MIPS, MSP430, SystemZ, and XCore. The GCC targets even more, including some strange things. And there are many more C++-compilers out there (these are only very forthcoming with informations).

I don't get that much exited about the name of the architecure. But at the time when Wii U release there were some not so bad low power x86 CPU at the market. And you still have to do different optimizations.

Making ports as easy as possible doesn't seem to be a bad idea.

The Switch architecure being a more or less stock Tegra also seems to have made engine porting faster, easier and cheaper than on Wii U.



Around the Network

These are 2 things involved here.
1)These are Holiday sales, so of course the system will sell.
2) This is relatively still considered a NEW CONSOLE LAUNCH.

Give it till lets say march when sales come back to normal, then lets see how the Switch does. Developers have been burnt by Nintendo consoles in the past you know.



sabastian said:
These are 2 things involved here.
1)These are Holiday sales, so of course the system will sell.
2) This is relatively still considered a NEW CONSOLE LAUNCH.

Give it till lets say march when sales come back to normal, then lets see how the Switch does. Developers have been burnt by Nintendo consoles in the past you know.

You sound like Switch was launch few months ago, Switch was launch on 3. March last year, that means Switch is around 10-11 months on market, and from moment Switch is launched its selling good and sales seems that are good even in January and nothing points that sales will slow down any time soon. If you want to compare it to Wii U, Wii U start selling terrible only 2 months after launch.



spurgeonryan said:

Some would say Rocket league and Doom should count. Obviously there are other games as well that I did not list. 

But at this point,  with months of news about the Switch outselling nearly everything out there,  why is it not getting better games? At this point when a new Far Cry or Tomb Raider or even CoD comes out the Switch could be attached. 

Coming to PC,  iOS,  PS4, Xbox One,  and Switch should be on nearly every box and news article. But that is not the case. The switch should have developers lining up to port their top games from the past two years but it is still hit or miss which games come over. 

What else is it going to take to be listed with the other boys on every game announcement?

I realize that many more announcement include switch,  and I have skipped a few big announcements. 

I just want more and I do not even own a switch!

There are couple of reasons:

-Nobody really could predict that Switch will be so much successful, espacily beacuse Switch come out after worst selling Wii U console ever, so most of 3rd party take "wait and see" approach with Switch, to see how successful Switch will be before start making games for it. So 3rd party were conceived about Switch success only last few monts and than they probably start making/porting games for it.

-Porting and espacily making brand new games takes time.

-Switch will not have in any case big 3rd party support on level of XB1/PS4.

 

With all that on mind, we will have plenty one 3rd party announcements this year (much more than we had last year), espacily in 2H of 2018, but again that will not be on pair with PS4/XB1.



OT: Switch is considerably weaker than the competition. Porting to it is not as simple as droping the resolution and framerate. Those big triple AAA games barely run on OG PS4 /XONE in an acceptable performance. Bringing to Switch would require some severe downgrades,which goes against the idea of "graphical parity" or working with the same assets across all the platforms(Something Devs do to decrease dev time and $$)

Combine that with the fact that,historically speaking, Nintendo consoles sell Nintendo games(even the mighty Wii had this problem) and you can see why big western companies will avoid porting to switch regardless of the install base.



To be fair, there were only a handful of big third party games last year. Switch has NBA 2K18 and FIFA which are two of the highest selling. Not to mention ports of previously big games like Doom, Minecraft, Rocket League, and Skyrim.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.