Quantcast
Nintendo looking to support the Switch for more than the traditional 5-6 year period

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendo looking to support the Switch for more than the traditional 5-6 year period

Hiku said:
Miyamotoo said:

No, I didnt talking strictly about solutions, but my point is far more general, like I wrote at end everything comes to profit, if there Switch and games for Switch are still selling, some 3rd partyes will still make ports for Switch.

Because devs are currently devolping games for PS4 and Pro or XboxS and X, and that would be similar like Switch/Pro, maybe its not best comparison to PS5/X2, but my point is that devs already working on wide range hardware that has difrent power.

You didn't mention anything else in your direct reply to Pegan where he only asked about port solutions:


You even specify how it (porting games from PS5) "totally makes sense" because it's a unified platform and will have revisions.
And you have not explained how "support the same games" is this relevant?

Profits is a different subject, but on that note though, Wii was very profitable for Nintendo and a lot of third parties supported it. But usually not with the latest entries of their main franchises. It happened some times, but it was the exception rather than the rule. Resident Evil 5 and 6 for example came to PS3 and 360, but Wii only got a port of Resident Evil 4, which was an old Gamecube game.
Power wise it will essentially be almost two generational gaps from undocked Switch up to PS5/XB2. No matter how profitable Switch is, just like with Wii, if some games are too difficult to port, they'll likely instead support it with other games.

That said, I don't think missing out on those games is necessarily going to be crucial for Switch. 3DS for example essentially had a library of it's own for the most part. Switch can have titles like that and many ports from the current gen consoles that 3DS couldn't handle.

Yeah, and I later further explain my point.

Talking about Wii and Swtich comparision, huge difference is that Wii had generation old tech/architecture compared to PS3/360 and didnt support almost any new APIs or engines, also devs need to make games with use Wii Remote and Nunchuk controls. On other hand, Switch has very modern tech/archicture, and support for all modern engines, APIs, tools...also power difence is much closer to PS4/XB1 than that was case with Wii compared to PS3/360, so making and porting games for Switch is easier.

I also dont think that Switch missing some huge 3rd party games will be crucial beacuse its not even now, but I am sure there will some 3rd party ports in any case.

 

 

curl-6 said: 

I feel like people forget that there's more to third party support than just high end AAA games.

Switch may miss out on a lot of those titles, but it will still likely get a lot of mid-tier games, particularly the Japanese support the 3DS/Vita got, stuff like Octopath Traveler, Valkyria Chronicles 4, Shin Megami Tensei 5, etc.

Yeah, we can expect those kind of mid-tier games, plenty of last gen ports/remasters, along side with Indies and of course Nintendo games, and some of current gen ports.

Last edited by Miyamotoo - on 06 February 2018

Around the Network

No, Nintendo! BAD game compsny! Bad!
Why does every taste of success cause these idiots to,declare "now is the time for a 10 year console cycle"? and by these idiots, I mean all console devs. At least MS comes by it honestly, they think they're in the PC market and they can just upgrade incrementally forever.
Of course Nintendo doesn't have to do what it says, this could refer to keeping Switch around after the next console launches, but I believe sticking to this plan would open Nintendo up to counterattack; they just gave Sony 9 years to figure out its next move.

edit: actually, it is not 9 years to figure out the next move, its more like a promise not to have any timely response if Sony comes up with a great console in the next 3-8 years.  Of course, the next great console is going to take some imagination, not just a hp upgrade, IMO.



couchmonkey said:

No, Nintendo! BAD game compsny! Bad!
Why does every taste of success cause these idiots to,declare "now is the time for a 10 year console cycle"? and by these idiots, I mean all console devs. At least MS comes by it honestly, they think they're in the PC market and they can just upgrade incrementally forever.
Of course Nintendo doesn't have to do what it says, this could refer to keeping Switch around after the next console launches, but I believe sticking to this plan would open Nintendo up to counterattack; they just gave Sony 9 years to figure out its next move.

edit: actually, it is not 9 years to figure out the next move, its more like a promise not to have any timely response if Sony comes up with a great console in the next 3-8 years.  Of course, the next great console is going to take some imagination, not just a hp upgrade, IMO.

Nintendo never before said anuthing similar, but with point that Switch is unified Nintendo platform and that we have mid gen upgrades, it make sense.



Nintendo doesn't exactly have the best track record for supporting consoles for the "traditional" period...
Though I suppose this time around they're only developing for one console, so that will make things easier...
I still wouldn't blame anyone for being skeptical though...



Have a nice day...

Miyamotoo said:
DélioPT said:

 

Again you are wrong. Not single one console failed when had such a strong 1st year similar to Switch, PS1, PS2, DS, Wii and PS4 are all consoles that sold around 15m in first year same like Switch. Switch concept is selling itself, also games like Zelda BotW, MK8D, Splatoon2 and Mario Odyysey will keep selling Switch in this year, but offfcourse there will be some other good and big Switch games in 2018. and future years, you act like Switch dont have nothing for this year.

Yes 1H compared to last year is weaker if we talk about big titles and hardly that Nintendo will ever have repet in 2017. year if we talking about strong games, but actualy Switch this 1H will have more games than Switch last year in 1H, and those games will most likly be enugh to keep Switch momentum.

Man you really don't know anything, Switch is not PS4, they are selling from different reasons, Switch is selling of first place beacuse great concept and great Nintendo games, PS4 is selling on first place because multi platform games. Switch will continue to have great and big Nintendo games offcourse. Also talking about 2017. Switch sales, dont forget that most of time Switch in 2017. had stock problems, and we arleady know that Nintendo plan to sell around 20m Switch units in 2018.

How Nintendo sustained Wii success or DS success!? You can look Nintendo past consoles and only in last 3 generation you will see that Nintendo consoles that were selling from start ended successful consoles, consoles that struggling with sales from start failed (GC and Wii U), Switch is obviously success, but you still fail to see that.

Everything you wrote is wrong, negative, ignores clear facts, so I relly dont want to bother reply to you any more, keep living in world where Switch doesnt sell like crazy, where Switch is not success and Nintendo don't have anything to continue to support Switch this or next years..

"Not single one console failed when had such a strong 1st year similar to Switch, PS1, PS2, DS, Wii and PS4"  

When you make such a claim, why don't you further elaborate?
DS and Wii sold so well because of a different market (now gone); PS1, PS2 and PS4 sold very well for the same reasons: great 3rd party support and marketing to attract, let's call it, "core gamers".
In which of those scenarios can you, honestly, put the Switch. The answer is, none!

Just because it worked for other consoles, doesn't mean it will happen for Switch.

 

How are a bunch of ports and two "minor" franchises the best way to keep momentum?

 

It's true, Switch is selling great because of concept and great 1st party games. But unlike Sony, Nintendo needed 4 of it's biggest IPs to achieve PS4 like results.
In other words, Nintendo had to do more than Sony to get the same results. Which, MAY resulting in a weakness for Nintendo in the future. Whereas Sony managed to be more consistant throught it's success.
See the difference? 

 

"keep living in world where Switch doesnt sell like crazy, where Switch is not success and Nintendo don't have anything to continue to support Switch this or next years.."
  "you act like Switch dont have nothing for this year."

This has become your problem in our conversations: you don't read what i write and then go and create a narrative that isn't real.

      

 

 

 

RolStoppable said:
DélioPT said:

 

Nintendo didn't drop support for the 3DS, they only scaled back on the Wii U. The 3DS got plenty of first party games in 2017.

That's a problem in this discussion. You diminish, disregard and discount Switch games for arbitrary reasons.

Microsoft simply doesn't care anymore. They entered the console business because they believed PlayStation could usurp Windows, so they wanted to become the all-entertainment-in-one-box themselves. Given that the Xbox One is a failure and that it's clear that such a convergence box won't work when the more convenient smart devices are omnipresent, there is no reason anymore to continue a defensive business strategy against PlayStation. I wasn't refering to a lack of first party games on Xbox, I was talking about the lack of Xbox-exclusive games. Microsoft has changed their strategy and publishes everything on PC and Xbox, meaning that nobody will have to buy an Xbox for Microsoft games anymore. That's a clear sign that selling as many consoles as possible is not important for Microsoft anymore.

You pick gaming forum perception how it is convenient for your argument. There are many more people who don't view Microsoft favorably, but all of that is really moot. A much better metric to judge what's going on is to look at sales. Switch wipes the floor with the Xbox One, so it's not Nintendo who is in a troublesome position. The few people who beg for ports of AAA third party games are irrelevant because the sales of those games don't point at big real world demand for such games.

Your point is fundamentally flawed. Remember how you criticized the Wii U for not being good enough to the draw the attention of the gamers you insist Nintendo needs to cater to? The Wii U was actually a more capable machine than what those gamers had at home, but they didn't care about Wii U. Switch is less capable than consoles that were released 3.5 years before it, but for some reason you cling to the belief that Switch could do what Wii U could not. Nevermind that in 2016 and 2017 even more powerful PS and Xbox consoles released, increasing the gap in processing power even further. You are crazy.

According to this site (http://www.nintendolife.com/3ds/games/browse?sort=popular&year=2017&style=cover), these are the number of 1st party games 3DS got - as in, from actual subsidiaries (Retro, NST, ND Cube, 1 Up Studio, Monolith):  2
The titles are: Hey, Pikmin, from Nintendo and Mario Party; The Top 100, from ND Cube. 


But what about the affiliates (Grezzo, Good Feel, etc.), for example or even Pokémon Company?
They released 8 games. Of those 8, only Pokémon, Kirby, Ever Oasis, NSB 3 and Mario Sports, were original titles. The rest were ports.

Nintendo's affiliates managed to do almost 3x better than Nintendo itself.
Also, if Nintendo had kept the support going since, at least, 2016, we would be seeing games announced for 3DS, but their release schedule is just 2 1st party (probably both online) titles: a new Dillion game and Sushi Striker: The way of Sushido.

If this isn't a sign that Nintendo dropped support for 3DS, i don't what is.

 

The reason for putting their games on PC isn't because they don't care. They know that not everyone will buy their consoles, so putting them on PC is a good excuse to make more Money.
If they wanted to actually quit the HW business, they wouldn't have released the X, nor would they still be selling consoles in Japan.
Lack of exclusives can easily be explained by a) bad planning on their part; b) not being able to convice studios to do so, or a mix of both.

 

"You pick gaming forum perception"
 Never said i heard it on forums. It's that, but not exclusive to forums. I've been seeing it a little bit all over.
Switch swipes the floor now. But it's more than clear that this is Nintendo at it's very best and MS in a non good shape.
Thing is, people already know what MS brings to the table, what they can - and will - do to please the mass market consumer. So, even if MS isn't doing well, it's easy, in theory, for them to turn the tides. But people don't see Nintendo in the same way.

First, power was one of the many Wii U's problems.
Second, only a few months after Wii U was out, Sony unveiled the PS4. Need i say more?
And i stand by what i wrote: Switch is being perceived in a completely different way than Wii U. It's userbase is the same as the one that buys PS4s and XB1s and you don't think that's reason enough to at least conceive the possibility that, this time, Nintendo is better equipped to seriously attract those gamers?
I think it is. Don't know if it will, but i see a really good opening.



Around the Network
DélioPT said: 

According to this site (http://www.nintendolife.com/3ds/games/browse?sort=popular&year=2017&style=cover), these are the number of 1st party games 3DS got - as in, from actual subsidiaries (Retro, NST, ND Cube, 1 Up Studio, Monolith):  2
The titles are: Hey, Pikmin, from Nintendo and Mario Party; The Top 100, from ND Cube. 


But what about the affiliates (Grezzo, Good Feel, etc.), for example or even Pokémon Company?
They released 8 games. Of those 8, only Pokémon, Kirby, Ever Oasis, NSB 3 and Mario Sports, were original titles. The rest were ports.

Nintendo's affiliates managed to do almost 3x better than Nintendo itself.
Also, if Nintendo had kept the support going since, at least, 2016, we would be seeing games announced for 3DS, but their release schedule is just 2 1st party (probably both online) titles: a new Dillion game and Sushi Striker: The way of Sushido.

If this isn't a sign that Nintendo dropped support for 3DS, i don't what is.

 

The reason for putting their games on PC isn't because they don't care. They know that not everyone will buy their consoles, so putting them on PC is a good excuse to make more Money.
If they wanted to actually quit the HW business, they wouldn't have released the X, nor would they still be selling consoles in Japan.
Lack of exclusives can easily be explained by a) bad planning on their part; b) not being able to convice studios to do so, or a mix of both.

 

"You pick gaming forum perception"
  Never said i heard it on forums. It's that, but not exclusive to forums. I've been seeing it a little bit all over.
Switch swipes the floor now. But it's more than clear that this is Nintendo at it's very best and MS in a non good shape.
Thing is, people already know what MS brings to the table, what they can - and will - do to please the mass market consumer. So, even if MS isn't doing well, it's easy, in theory, for them to turn the tides. But people don't see Nintendo in the same way.

First, power was one of the many Wii U's problems.
Second, only a few months after Wii U was out, Sony unveiled the PS4. Need i say more?
And i stand by what i wrote: Switch is being perceived in a completely different way than Wii U. It's userbase is the same as the one that buys PS4s and XB1s and you don't think that's reason enough to at least conceive the possibility that, this time, Nintendo is better equipped to seriously attract those gamers?
I think it is. Don't know if it will, but i see a really good opening.

So Nintendo released ten 3DS games in 2017, the year the Switch launched. You might want to look at other console manufacturers and count how many games they released after a successor has been out.

The Xbox One X isn't proof that Microsoft is still putting the same effort as before into the console business. After all, Sony launched a Vita revision at a time when things were already pointing towards their exit from the handheld market; likewise, Sony kept selling Vita when it was already set in stone that they wouldn't make another handheld. The lack of Xbox-exclusives cannot be explained with either a) or b); Microsoft's plan is to not release any Xbox-exclusive anymore as all of their games will be made available on PC and Xbox.

Once again you go with perception rather than reality. Number of generations in which Nintendo didn't have a successful console since their entry in the market: 0. Number of generations in which Nintendo had at least one successful console since they entered: 7, i.e all of them. Microsoft has failed twice and succeeded only once. Reality is that Nintendo can mount comebacks, but Microsoft has had only one successful generation and even that one needed major blunders from Sony. Microsoft has never been successful when Sony has been successful. That's reality.

You need to post proof that the Switch userbase is the same as the PS4's and XB1's. So far nothing indicates that there's more than minor overlap which means that the demand for AAA third party games is negligible and therefore does not need to be pursued by Nintendo.

EDIT: Almost forgot about the most important part, the one that I heavily emphasized in your post. Only one post ago I told you that Switch has less processing power than the PS4 which was released in 2013. In the meantime, the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X have been launched to increase the gap further. A Switch revision that could be on par in processing power with the PS4 from 2013 could optimistically arrive by 2020, but by then the PS5 would already be out. For some reason you are oblivious to the fact that you want Nintendo to do the Wii U strategy all over again.

Last edited by RolStoppable - on 06 February 2018

Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

DélioPT said:
Miyamotoo said:

Again you are wrong. Not single one console failed when had such a strong 1st year similar to Switch, PS1, PS2, DS, Wii and PS4 are all consoles that sold around 15m in first year same like Switch. Switch concept is selling itself, also games like Zelda BotW, MK8D, Splatoon2 and Mario Odyysey will keep selling Switch in this year, but offfcourse there will be some other good and big Switch games in 2018. and future years, you act like Switch dont have nothing for this year.

Yes 1H compared to last year is weaker if we talk about big titles and hardly that Nintendo will ever have repet in 2017. year if we talking about strong games, but actualy Switch this 1H will have more games than Switch last year in 1H, and those games will most likly be enugh to keep Switch momentum.

Man you really don't know anything, Switch is not PS4, they are selling from different reasons, Switch is selling of first place beacuse great concept and great Nintendo games, PS4 is selling on first place because multi platform games. Switch will continue to have great and big Nintendo games offcourse. Also talking about 2017. Switch sales, dont forget that most of time Switch in 2017. had stock problems, and we arleady know that Nintendo plan to sell around 20m Switch units in 2018.

How Nintendo sustained Wii success or DS success!? You can look Nintendo past consoles and only in last 3 generation you will see that Nintendo consoles that were selling from start ended successful consoles, consoles that struggling with sales from start failed (GC and Wii U), Switch is obviously success, but you still fail to see that.

Everything you wrote is wrong, negative, ignores clear facts, so I relly dont want to bother reply to you any more, keep living in world where Switch doesnt sell like crazy, where Switch is not success and Nintendo don't have anything to continue to support Switch this or next years..

"Not single one console failed when had such a strong 1st year similar to Switch, PS1, PS2, DS, Wii and PS4"  

When you make such a claim, why don't you further elaborate?
DS and Wii sold so well because of a different market (now gone); PS1, PS2 and PS4 sold very well for the same reasons: great 3rd party support and marketing to attract, let's call it, "core gamers".
In which of those scenarios can you, honestly, put the Switch. The answer is, none!

Just because it worked for other consoles, doesn't mean it will happen for Switch.

 

How are a bunch of ports and two "minor" franchises the best way to keep momentum?

 

It's true, Switch is selling great because of concept and great 1st party games. But unlike Sony, Nintendo needed 4 of it's biggest IPs to achieve PS4 like results.
In other words, Nintendo had to do more than Sony to get the same results. Which, MAY resulting in a weakness for Nintendo in the future. Whereas Sony managed to be more consistant throught it's success.
See the difference? 

 

"keep living in world where Switch doesnt sell like crazy, where Switch is not success and Nintendo don't have anything to continue to support Switch this or next years.."
  "you act like Switch dont have nothing for this year."

This has become your problem in our conversations: you don't read what i write and then go and create a narrative that isn't real.

      

 

 

 

RolStoppable said:

Nintendo didn't drop support for the 3DS, they only scaled back on the Wii U. The 3DS got plenty of first party games in 2017.

That's a problem in this discussion. You diminish, disregard and discount Switch games for arbitrary reasons.

Microsoft simply doesn't care anymore. They entered the console business because they believed PlayStation could usurp Windows, so they wanted to become the all-entertainment-in-one-box themselves. Given that the Xbox One is a failure and that it's clear that such a convergence box won't work when the more convenient smart devices are omnipresent, there is no reason anymore to continue a defensive business strategy against PlayStation. I wasn't refering to a lack of first party games on Xbox, I was talking about the lack of Xbox-exclusive games. Microsoft has changed their strategy and publishes everything on PC and Xbox, meaning that nobody will have to buy an Xbox for Microsoft games anymore. That's a clear sign that selling as many consoles as possible is not important for Microsoft anymore.

You pick gaming forum perception how it is convenient for your argument. There are many more people who don't view Microsoft favorably, but all of that is really moot. A much better metric to judge what's going on is to look at sales. Switch wipes the floor with the Xbox One, so it's not Nintendo who is in a troublesome position. The few people who beg for ports of AAA third party games are irrelevant because the sales of those games don't point at big real world demand for such games.

Your point is fundamentally flawed. Remember how you criticized the Wii U for not being good enough to the draw the attention of the gamers you insist Nintendo needs to cater to? The Wii U was actually a more capable machine than what those gamers had at home, but they didn't care about Wii U. Switch is less capable than consoles that were released 3.5 years before it, but for some reason you cling to the belief that Switch could do what Wii U could not. Nevermind that in 2016 and 2017 even more powerful PS and Xbox consoles released, increasing the gap in processing power even further. You are crazy.

According to this site (http://www.nintendolife.com/3ds/games/browse?sort=popular&year=2017&style=cover), these are the number of 1st party games 3DS got - as in, from actual subsidiaries (Retro, NST, ND Cube, 1 Up Studio, Monolith):  2
The titles are: Hey, Pikmin, from Nintendo and Mario Party; The Top 100, from ND Cube. 


But what about the affiliates (Grezzo, Good Feel, etc.), for example or even Pokémon Company?
They released 8 games. Of those 8, only Pokémon, Kirby, Ever Oasis, NSB 3 and Mario Sports, were original titles. The rest were ports.

Nintendo's affiliates managed to do almost 3x better than Nintendo itself.
Also, if Nintendo had kept the support going since, at least, 2016, we would be seeing games announced for 3DS, but their release schedule is just 2 1st party (probably both online) titles: a new Dillion game and Sushi Striker: The way of Sushido.

If this isn't a sign that Nintendo dropped support for 3DS, i don't what is.

 

The reason for putting their games on PC isn't because they don't care. They know that not everyone will buy their consoles, so putting them on PC is a good excuse to make more Money.
If they wanted to actually quit the HW business, they wouldn't have released the X, nor would they still be selling consoles in Japan.
Lack of exclusives can easily be explained by a) bad planning on their part; b) not being able to convice studios to do so, or a mix of both.

 

"You pick gaming forum perception"
  Never said i heard it on forums. It's that, but not exclusive to forums. I've been seeing it a little bit all over.
Switch swipes the floor now. But it's more than clear that this is Nintendo at it's very best and MS in a non good shape.
Thing is, people already know what MS brings to the table, what they can - and will - do to please the mass market consumer. So, even if MS isn't doing well, it's easy, in theory, for them to turn the tides. But people don't see Nintendo in the same way.

First, power was one of the many Wii U's problems.
Second, only a few months after Wii U was out, Sony unveiled the PS4. Need i say more?
And i stand by what i wrote: Switch is being perceived in a completely different way than Wii U. It's userbase is the same as the one that buys PS4s and XB1s and you don't think that's reason enough to at least conceive the possibility that, this time, Nintendo is better equipped to seriously attract those gamers?
I think it is. Don't know if it will, but i see a really good opening.

You don't make sense again, making wrong points and conclusions, so like I wrote I want reply to you any more (beacuse there is no point), but talking about Wii Us 1st year linuep, even Wiis, compared to Switch, take look at this link.

http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2018/02/06/switch-has-three-times-as-many-games-as-wii-u-did-at-this-point-and-theyre-better

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=234652&page=1#



RolStoppable said:
DélioPT said: 

 

So Nintendo released ten 3DS games in 2017, the year the Switch launched. You might want to look at other console manufacturers and count how many games they released after a successor has been out.

The Xbox One X isn't proof that Microsoft is still putting the same effort as before into the console business. After all, Sony launched a Vita revision at a time when things were already pointing towards their exit from the handheld market; likewise, Sony kept selling Vita when it was already set in stone that they wouldn't make another handheld. The lack of Xbox-exclusives cannot be explained with either a) or b); Microsoft's plan is to not release any Xbox-exclusive anymore as all of their games will be made available on PC and Xbox.

Once again you go with perception rather than reality. Number of generations in which Nintendo didn't have a successful console since their entry in the market: 0. Number of generations in which Nintendo had at least one successful console since they entered: 7, i.e all of them. Microsoft has failed twice and succeeded only once. Reality is that Nintendo can mount comebacks, but Microsoft has had only one successful generation and even that one needed major blunders from Sony. Microsoft has never been successful when Sony has been successful. That's reality.

You need to post proof that the Switch userbase is the same as the PS4's and XB1's. So far nothing indicates that there's more than minor overlap which means that the demand for AAA third party games is negligible and therefore does not need to be pursued by Nintendo.

EDIT: Almost forgot about the most important part, the one that I heavily emphasized in your post. Only one post ago I told you that Switch has less processing power than the PS4 which was released in 2013. In the meantime, the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X have been launched to increase the gap further. A Switch revision that could be on par in processing power with the PS4 from 2013 could optimistically arrive by 2020, but by then the PS5 would already be out. For some reason you are oblivious to the fact that you want Nintendo to do the Wii U strategy all over again.

No, Nintendo released 2 games. Other released more.
And 2018 isn't looking like it will be any better.

None of Vita's changes enhanced games. Xbox One X did that with better, more powerful hardware.

Even if there aren't more Xbox exclusives, that doesn't mean it will affect gamers the same way. For console only gamers, XB will be the only choice aside from PS and Switch.
MS just stopped putting all their eggs in a single basket and has diversified. Diversified and not annulled one of their "baskets".

Nintendo home consoles that were successes: NES, SNES and Wii
Nintendo home consoles that were failures: N64, GC, Wii U
You could call it a tie, but then again, Wii can't really be counted with the context in this conversation in mind, can it?

XB360 might not have sold so well as it did if PS3 didn't start as it started, but the same thing can be said for this generation: XB1 would have sold more and PS4 less, if not for MS's blunders.
It goes both ways.

The userbase age for Switch, PS4 and XB1 is, the same: late teens, young adults; Switch awesome sales haven't made a dent on PS4 and XB1's sales - as both are up (PS4 more than XB1).
To me, that's a clear indicator that PS4 and XB1 users are indeed buying Switch. If that weren't the case, we would see Switch causing a substantial decrease in sales of it's rivals.

I don't know why you keep insisting that i want a Wii U.
If Nintendo has a hot platform on its hands, if it's userbase is also the userbase that buys PS4 and XB1, what i want is Nintendo doing it's best to not let that go to waste. 
Which means that they should do the best they can to bring certain games to their platform and not let the gap grow further, as that would put in risk the first part.



DélioPT said:
RolStoppable said:

So Nintendo released ten 3DS games in 2017, the year the Switch launched. You might want to look at other console manufacturers and count how many games they released after a successor has been out.

The Xbox One X isn't proof that Microsoft is still putting the same effort as before into the console business. After all, Sony launched a Vita revision at a time when things were already pointing towards their exit from the handheld market; likewise, Sony kept selling Vita when it was already set in stone that they wouldn't make another handheld. The lack of Xbox-exclusives cannot be explained with either a) or b); Microsoft's plan is to not release any Xbox-exclusive anymore as all of their games will be made available on PC and Xbox.

Once again you go with perception rather than reality. Number of generations in which Nintendo didn't have a successful console since their entry in the market: 0. Number of generations in which Nintendo had at least one successful console since they entered: 7, i.e all of them. Microsoft has failed twice and succeeded only once. Reality is that Nintendo can mount comebacks, but Microsoft has had only one successful generation and even that one needed major blunders from Sony. Microsoft has never been successful when Sony has been successful. That's reality.

You need to post proof that the Switch userbase is the same as the PS4's and XB1's. So far nothing indicates that there's more than minor overlap which means that the demand for AAA third party games is negligible and therefore does not need to be pursued by Nintendo.

EDIT: Almost forgot about the most important part, the one that I heavily emphasized in your post. Only one post ago I told you that Switch has less processing power than the PS4 which was released in 2013. In the meantime, the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X have been launched to increase the gap further. A Switch revision that could be on par in processing power with the PS4 from 2013 could optimistically arrive by 2020, but by then the PS5 would already be out. For some reason you are oblivious to the fact that you want Nintendo to do the Wii U strategy all over again.

No, Nintendo released 2 games. Other released more.
And 2018 isn't looking like it will be any better.

None of Vita's changes enhanced games. Xbox One X did that with better, more powerful hardware.

Even if there aren't more Xbox exclusives, that doesn't mean it will affect gamers the same way. For console only gamers, XB will be the only choice aside from PS and Switch.
MS just stopped putting all their eggs in a single basket and has diversified. Diversified and not annulled one of their "baskets".

Nintendo home consoles that were successes: NES, SNES and Wii
Nintendo home consoles that were failures: N64, GC, Wii U
You could call it a tie, but then again, Wii can't really be counted with the context in this conversation in mind, can it?

XB360 might not have sold so well as it did if PS3 didn't start as it started, but the same thing can be said for this generation: XB1 would have sold more and PS4 less, if not for MS's blunders.
It goes both ways.

The userbase age for Switch, PS4 and XB1 is, the same: late teens, young adults; Switch awesome sales haven't made a dent on PS4 and XB1's sales - as both are up (PS4 more than XB1).
To me, that's a clear indicator that PS4 and XB1 users are indeed buying Switch. If that weren't the case, we would see Switch causing a substantial decrease in sales of it's rivals.

I don't know why you keep insisting that i want a Wii U.
If Nintendo has a hot platform on its hands, if it's userbase is also the userbase that buys PS4 and XB1, what i want is Nintendo doing it's best to not let that go to waste. 
Which means that they should do the best they can to bring certain games to their platform and not let the gap grow further, as that would put in risk the first part.

Why would we exclude Wii or handhelds when talking about successful Nintendo systems? Oh thats right, because its fits your narrative!

 

The age group breakdown you are using is just for launch month, late teens/young adults are always going be the age group that buys new tech/gadgets at launch.

 

The conclusion you came up with actually doesnt support your argument. If Switch is selling to the same group of people that own PS4/XBO than it means they are buying it because it offers something that PS4/XBO dont, so getting  AAA multiplats is not nearly as important for Switch as you make it out to be.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

DélioPT said:

No, Nintendo released 2 games. Other released more.
And 2018 isn't looking like it will be any better.

None of Vita's changes enhanced games. Xbox One X did that with better, more powerful hardware.

Even if there aren't more Xbox exclusives, that doesn't mean it will affect gamers the same way. For console only gamers, XB will be the only choice aside from PS and Switch.
MS just stopped putting all their eggs in a single basket and has diversified. Diversified and not annulled one of their "baskets".

Nintendo home consoles that were successes: NES, SNES and Wii
Nintendo home consoles that were failures: N64, GC, Wii U
You could call it a tie, but then again, Wii can't really be counted with the context in this conversation in mind, can it?

XB360 might not have sold so well as it did if PS3 didn't start as it started, but the same thing can be said for this generation: XB1 would have sold more and PS4 less, if not for MS's blunders.
It goes both ways.

The userbase age for Switch, PS4 and XB1 is, the same: late teens, young adults; Switch awesome sales haven't made a dent on PS4 and XB1's sales - as both are up (PS4 more than XB1).
To me, that's a clear indicator that PS4 and XB1 users are indeed buying Switch. If that weren't the case, we would see Switch causing a substantial decrease in sales of it's rivals.

I don't know why you keep insisting that i want a Wii U.
If Nintendo has a hot platform on its hands, if it's userbase is also the userbase that buys PS4 and XB1, what i want is Nintendo doing it's best to not let that go to waste. 
Which means that they should do the best they can to bring certain games to their platform and not let the gap grow further, as that would put in risk the first part.

I've gone over all of your points before and you didn't want to listen. I'll address your main point.

The reason why Switch sales aren't cutting into PS4 and XB1 sales is either:

1. PS4 and XB1 owners are buying Switch. They do so because they are looking for something neither the PS4 and XB1 offer. They wouldn't be buying AAA third party multiplats on Switch because they already own a console that gets superior versions.

2. People who buy Switch don't own a PS4 or XB1 yet. Since they don't own a PS4 or XB1 after the four years those systems have been on the market, it's safe to conclude that they consider the PS4 and XB1 unappealing. After all, those consoles are cheaper than Switch. If they aren't interested in PS4 and XB1, it would be because of the games that those consoles have. This means that it can be ruled out that those people are looking to play AAA third party games on Switch.

Reason 1 and 2 are not mutually exclusive, but they both lead to the same logical result: AAA third party games are not in significant demand on Switch.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club