Some people have criticized Super Mario Party and a few other Switch titles for the lack of Pro Controller support. The thinking is that because the Switch allows them to play on TV with a traditional controller, or in handheld mode, they should be able to play it that way for every game, whether it fits or not. But that's actually a very narrow way of thinking about the Switch. The Switch isn't like other console's or mobile devices, it allows for a wide variety of gameplay styles and possibilities thanks to its modularity. There are somethings that work better to different play-styles than others, so that sometimes means locking down play options to ensure a better experience. The vast majority of Switch games at the moment support all play-styles, so there's no reason to complain when a game comes along that requires the Switch be used in a seemingly foreign way, because it's not like that's most of the console's lineup. Besides, Super Mario Party is already selling really well despite its lack of Pro Controller and Handheld support, so all those complaints are irrelevant to most Switch owners. 

Basically, Let Switch developers make games the way they want. If that's not how you use the Switch, find something else to play. Only when there's genuine problems with the play style that it should be criticized. Otherwise, there's no right or wrong way to make a Switch game. 

The complaints ARE relevant. There are some Switch owners, like myself, who only has one set of Joy-cons and a Pro controller. Another thing about the Pro controller is that it fits my hands perfectly. It's why I prefer it. I understand the dynamics of this particular game caters and utilizes the Joy-cons to the fullest. Still, I wouldn't say that it's irrelevant to "most" Switch owners. Maybe some, but not most.

" vast majority of Switch games at the moment support all play-styles, so there's no reason to complain when a game comes along that requires the Switch be used in a seemingly foreign way, because it's not like that's most of the console's lineup"

What? We shouldn't complain about lack of control options in Mario party because OTHER games have them? What kind of logic is that? xD

It's a valid criticism, especially as so many of the minigames are just analogue and buttons. It'll be a few months before I'll be able to play Super Mario Party, and that's sad.

A simple option that disable minigame that require joycons functionality would be a very nice and user friendly feature to add.

While there are Switch owners who would rather play on TV with the Pro Controller, they aren't the majority of the console's user-base, especially when most Switch owners use the console in both docked and mobile forms. The target audience for a game like Super Mario Party probably doesn't even own a Pro Controller, nor do they care about buying one, so to them, these complaints are irrelevant. Nobody complained about lack of Pro Controller support in 1-2 Switch, Just Dance or Labo, so I don't see why it suddenly becomes a problem here.

I'd understand the complaints if the controls weren't responsive, but that doesn't seem to be a problem for most people.

Oh I dont have a problem with using a joycon, I'm sure it plays fine. My issue is I have only the two that came with the system. I spent my money on pro controllers for local multiplayer, now they want me to fork out £65 for another set of joycons to play Mario party? I've spent too much on switch controllers already. Joycons are very expensive. I can't justify spending £99.99 (the cost of the game and joycon bundle) to play one game.

I didn't say that the majority of Switch owners are those who prefer the Pro Controller. At the same time, you also can't say that the complaint is irrelevant. Obviously the outcry proves that there's some relevancy. I'm not one of the complainers, but I did dislike the fact that it didn't have Pro Controller support. The other Mario Party used other controllers that weren't motion controlled just fine.

As for games like 1-2 Arms and Just Dance. They were specifically designed for motion control. That's why you don't hear complaints about that versus a game that never need motion controls in the past.

I was with you until the bolded. Is the tap-translate { all: initial; } @keyframes translation-button-slide { from { transform?  Or is tap-translate .translation-button.m-corner .translation-button_image? You can't have it both ways.

I understand that not everyone has $80 lying around, and I do feel that Nintendo should've brought that Joy-Con bundle in Japan and Europe to the US. That being said, it's not just buying a Joy-Con pair for one game, it's buying 2 additional controllers for nearly any Switch game that supports 4-8 players. So you'd have 4 Joy-Con for Mario Party, along with Smash Bros, Mario Kart, Overcooked, Just Dance, and a host of other games, in addition to the Pro Controllers you already have. Expensive? Yes, and I get that some people are hesitant about it, but considering what you get out of that $80, I'd say its a pretty good value. I'd say the Switch is the cheapest 4-player option available on the market at the moment. 

It never hurts to give options lol. You don't have to use them, but someone will.

On another note, this was worst with Wii. Some developers just didn't know what to do with the motion controls. Strangely enough some of the best motion control games were the launch games like Godfather from EA and the earlier COD games. Then when COD come out on Wii U, for some reason their wii controls went to shit lol. It is like they gave up on them instead of just copying the code from the Wii games

It's a $60 party game. Of course people are going to care about small issues that you think are "overblown". 

Anyways, the OP is incredibly ironic. He's essentially calling others narrow-minded but then saying that it's ok for one of Nintendo's biggest games of the year to only support one controller. Uh, irony. Not only that, but he mentions that almost every Switch game supports all styles of play, so he doesn't understand why people are upset about this game not doing so. You answered your own question. People expect consistency from Nintendo, especially when it comes to their big games. Even Arms, a game almost exclusively promoted as a joycon movement based experience, gave options for regular control schemes.

Also: "Besides, Super Mario Party is already selling really well despite its lack of Pro Controller and Handheld support, so all those complaints are irrelevant to most Switch owners."

I've never understood the argument that x is selling well already so consumers don't care about y. Most of the time, it's about features or restrictions that people literally have no idea about until they actually play the game. AngryJoe didn't even know Halo 5 lacked splitscreen until he got the game. Why? Because that game isn't advertising it's lack of splitscreen. In reality, there are probably a few people that were disappointed after the game came out by the lack of Pro support, sales numbers don't automatically mean otherwise.

I actually agree with you too, funnily enough. The Switch has so many capabilities with it's joycons, I wouldn't mind something that restricts the players to just joy cons if it's done well. But the way you argued it was ... bad.