DS was around 130 million units sold when that was released, right? I'm sure if the Switch comes anywhere near those numbers it'll get a CoD release.

Nah it won’t be a problem anymore with streaming coming.

AC, Resident Evil 7 are already available in japan for example.

I’m expecting Red Dead 2, The next Skyrim, Starfield, Cyberpunk and GTA6 will all be available on switch in the next years.

You guys can save this post for future reference. Thx.

Its true that Switch still dont has CoD while Wii U had two CoD games, on other hand Wii U had only Fifa and only one NBA games for instance while Switch already has two Fifa and NBA games, and same games like Skyrim, Doom, Wolf2, Dark Souls, Diablo 3, CiV6, like 8 Final Fantasy games announced...that Wii U never had. So, Switch is getting continued 3rd party support from 3rd party even that 3rd party support is still much weaker compared to XB1/PS4, and we will have more and more similar announcements and support, asome noticeable games that Switch recently received/receiving, Fortnite, Paladins, Crash Bandicoot, Cities: Skylines, Arena of Valor, Valkyria Chronicles 1/4, Warriors Orochi 4, Warframe,  Dragon Ball FighterZ, Fifa 19, NBA 19, Diablo 3, CiV6, Starlink, Team Sonic Racing..

Also, when we talking about really big 3rd party games like RDR2, CoD, AC, BF...those games require plenty of development time, all those games were in development even before become obvious that Switch will be success with strong install base. I dont saying we could see all those games on Switch, but some big 3rd party games could come to Switch, for instance CoD.

Why would Nintendo even try explained point that plenty of 3rd parties dont come to Switch!? Its very obvious that from plenty of aspects Switch is a quite difrent compared to XB1/PS4, not to mentione its not like first time that Nintendo dont have full 3rd party support, they didnt had full 3rd party support after SNES. So implying that Nintendo should explained that dont make sense.

That's a weird statement. Do you think that the PS4 is some kind of an FPS haven? Sure, it gets all the big FPS titles but those are a miniscule portion of all the games. The PS library is actually the most diverse and expansive of the three, so if you can't find anything of interest in there, it's just a bias that you have. And that's fine, I'm all about single platform gaming as well, but let's not distort things here. That's like me saying Nintendo has nothing for me, because it seems to be mostly FPS games like Doom and whatnot :D

Although your comparison is fair, it'd be fairer if you could make a comparison with 2018 releases on all platforms. Skyrim, Dark Souls, Diablo 3 and FF are very old games. These games could get an iPhone release at this point if they haven't yet.

Besides games like Fortnite and Minecraft, that many are pointing out, are games that have been released on everything, like phones, toasters and fridges and such. If those games weren't on Switch that would be an awful fail for Nintendo. They don't count as third party showcases in my opinion.

All you mean Nintendo's policy of price-gouging third parties and limiting the number of titles they could release on NES/SNES per year while not limiting the number of titles they published themselves? Or maybe it was when they started to censor what kind of content third party developers could publish on their platform to a point where Mortal Kombat games couldn't even feature blood? Those kinds of things Nintendo thought they could get away with when they were the only real option. Is that the kind of "bias against Nintendo" you're referring to? And it's not like it got any better from there. Just look into Nintendo's history with Argonaut games.

Third parties never liked working with Nintendo, they've always been by far the most difficult to work, the most anal about shit that really doesn't matter. Getting a game certified by Nintendo was like pulling teeth. Third parties worked with Nintendo for the NES because they had little other choice. it was the only real viable platform at the time. But when other first parties like Sega, Sony and Microsoft gave third parties viable options to work with, third parties didn't have to put up with Nintendo's shit anymore, so they didn't. It's taken over 20 years, but Nintendo's finally started to lighten up and be more willing to work with third parties, but you know, it's a bit late.

TL;DR Nintendo were giant dicks and no one wanted to work with them, not the other way around.

All you mean Nintendo's policy of price-gouging third parties and limiting the number of titles they could release on NES/SNES per year while not limiting the number of titles they published themselves? Or maybe it was when they started to censor what kind of content third party developers could publish on their platform to a point where Mortal Kombat games couldn't even feature blood? Those kinds of things Nintendo thought they could get away with when they were the only real option. Is that the kind of "bias against Nintendo" you're referring to? And it's not like it got any better from there. Just look into Nintendo's history with Argonaut games.

Third parties never liked working with Nintendo, they've always been by far the most difficult to work, the most anal about shit that really doesn't matter. Getting a game certified by Nintendo was like pulling teeth. Third parties worked with Nintendo for the NES because they had little other choice. it was the only real viable platform at the time. But when other first parties like Sega, Sony and Microsoft gave third parties viable options to work with, third parties didn't have to put up with Nintendo's shit anymore, so they didn't. It's taken over 20 years, but Nintendo's finally started to lighten up and be more willing to work with third parties, but you know, it's a bit late.

TL;DR Nintendo were giant dicks and no one wanted to work with them, not the other way around.

Since your rebuttal closes with the admission that third parties hold a grudge against Nintendo and that being the reason why certain AAA publishers don't bother with Switch, there's not really much else I need to say. Not making games because of a grudge falls in the category of bias.

I don't have pity for third parties getting put restrictions of them, because American third parties crashed the American video game market by flooding it with shitty and buggy games. Nintendo's restrictions in the 1980s made success in the business a matter of quality, because quantity wasn't allowed. This gave rise to Japanese developers in a sustainable console market, so of course certain Americans were angry at Nintendo, just like certain Americans were incredibly upset when Japan conquered the American car market. Gamers don't look at those restrictions as something negative, because the results speak for themselves; we got great consoles with awesome games.