Quantcast
Microsoft should put Halo on Switch

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Microsoft should put Halo on Switch

S.T.A.G.E. said:
DonFerrari said:

And the games Nintendo put on phones were smaller cost simplified version of the Nintendo IPs. So it certainly is different to compare MS putting their best IP full for switch against Nintendo making taste version of their games on phones. Also it isn't restrict to one platform or devaluating Switch itself.

I cannot give Microsoft even that much credit, for as much money as they have, they have little curiosity to delve deeper as to what it means to live and die as a console maker. Microsoft has realized they cannot beat their competition anywhere, so they need to corner a market where the competition isnt as strong. Thats where google and multiplatform gaming is.

I think what MS is doing is something like diversifying, creating many revenue streams.

You don't need to beat the competition per se to have a relevant platform or make an endeavor worthwhile.

Sony has found themselves in a position where they are living and dying as a console maker because its kinda all they do objectively well.



Recently Completed
Crackdown 3
for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
curl-6 said:

Again, it would come back to Nintendo being more dependent on their IPs than MS, and MS already moving towards being more platform-agnostic with the release of Xbone games on PC and games like Cuphead coming to Switch.

Still MS doesn't release in all platforms besides Minecraft that was already multi or cuphead that is a very small game. From that to Halo is a very big step, even if you portray it as not the latest Halo., and you put as if that would be the best decision for MS.

I think supporting Switch with Halo:MCC wouldn't be seen as a big leap because its old content, maybe it could be seen as a marketing decision to bring people to Xbox somehow. Switch isn't a direct competitor with Xbox like PlayStation is. If anything, Switch is bigger competitor to Playstation given Switch can steal some of their audience especially in Japan.

Halo on Switch would come with Xbox Live software in it and potentially used to encourage users to play more Halo games on Scarlett. It would be profitable and could create more fans for the IP, without helping a direct competitor per se. I personally see it as good move for the IP.



Recently Completed
Crackdown 3
for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

DonFerrari said:
curl-6 said:

Again, it would come back to Nintendo being more dependent on their IPs than MS, and MS already moving towards being more platform-agnostic with the release of Xbone games on PC and games like Cuphead coming to Switch.

Still MS doesn't release in all platforms besides Minecraft that was already multi or cuphead that is a very small game. From that to Halo is a very big step, even if you portray it as not the latest Halo., and you put as if that would be the best decision for MS.

I think it'd be a win for MS; in the same way as Nintendo putting their IPs on smartphones, not only do they gain revenue, but as Puggsley says, having the older Halos on Switch could be a taster that could peak the interest of some and get them to invest in the new ones on Scarlet.



curl-6 said:
DonFerrari said:

Still MS doesn't release in all platforms besides Minecraft that was already multi or cuphead that is a very small game. From that to Halo is a very big step, even if you portray it as not the latest Halo., and you put as if that would be the best decision for MS.

I think it'd be a win for MS; in the same way as Nintendo putting their IPs on smartphones, not only do they gain revenue, but as Puggsley says, having the older Halos on Switch could be a taster that could peak the interest of some and get them to invest in the new ones on Scarlet.

Just not having Nintendo put their games on other consoles though, right?.

Sounds like an iffy "they're the same" comparison, considering how you don't see mobile as a threat, but another console. Why not put them on PC as well, or do you consider that a threat?.

And before you type it, yeah, I've seen your jargon for "why" Ninty has to keep their IP's under lock n' key from other consoles.



                                       

Chazore said:
curl-6 said:

I think it'd be a win for MS; in the same way as Nintendo putting their IPs on smartphones, not only do they gain revenue, but as Puggsley says, having the older Halos on Switch could be a taster that could peak the interest of some and get them to invest in the new ones on Scarlet.

Just not having Nintendo put their games on other consoles though, right?.

Sounds like an iffy "they're the same" comparison, considering how you don't see mobile as a threat, but another console. Why not put them on PC as well, or do you consider that a threat?.

And before you type it, yeah, I've seen your jargon for "why" Ninty has to keep their IP's under lock n' key from other consoles.

MS and Nintendo simply aren't the same. Nintendo only does gaming, and their IPs are the central pillar of that. The same simply can't be said of MS. It's apples and oranges.

MS putting some games on Nintendo is good for MS, they earn revenue without suffering ill effects. Nintendo putting their games on other platforms undermines their core business.

Comparing Halo on Switch to Nintendo IPs on Xbox/PS is a false equivalency. 

Last edited by curl-6 - on 06 August 2019

Around the Network
curl-6 said:
Chazore said:

Just not having Nintendo put their games on other consoles though, right?.

Sounds like an iffy "they're the same" comparison, considering how you don't see mobile as a threat, but another console. Why not put them on PC as well, or do you consider that a threat?.

And before you type it, yeah, I've seen your jargon for "why" Ninty has to keep their IP's under lock n' key from other consoles.

MS and Nintendo simply aren't the same. Nintendo only does gaming, and their IPs are the central pillar of that. The same simply can't be said of MS. It's apples and oranges.

MS putting some games on Nintendo is good for MS, they earn revenue without suffering ill effects. Nintendo putting their games on other platforms undermines their core business.

Comparing Halo on Switch to Nintendo IPs on Xbox/PS is a false equivalency. 

And yet, you want to take from the other, without giving in return. You try to excuse a one way street to benefit your platform of choice, but not the other. I mean, at least I game on PC and I don't mind games I play on PC going elsewhere. My only one requirement for that, is for the game to be made for PC first, and consoles second, so my version of the game isn't hindered in many ways.

The way a company operates isn't in relation to 1st parties going to other systems, because Sony already dabble in other areas themselves, yet their first parties are on PS now. 

Yeah, good for MS, in a way that supplies another competitor their library, yet once they "die" out, it becomes "oh well, they served us for a time, I'll go back to doing what I've always been doing" kind of gig.

It's not "false equivalency", and don't you dare pull that on me. MS came from PC, the very platform that makes your consoles and all games, and they also had a second market within the console space, just like Nintendo now have their second market in mobile, so no, they aren't radically different, not when both mobile and PC markets are so large, and end up using the same platform to get things done.



                                       

You'd find no argument here. Halo 1-3 were some of my favorite console FPS after Goldeneye and Modern Warfare & Black Ops. 



Mr Puggsly said:
DonFerrari said:

Still MS doesn't release in all platforms besides Minecraft that was already multi or cuphead that is a very small game. From that to Halo is a very big step, even if you portray it as not the latest Halo., and you put as if that would be the best decision for MS.

I think supporting Switch with Halo:MCC wouldn't be seen as a big leap because its old content, maybe it could be seen as a marketing decision to bring people to Xbox somehow. Switch isn't a direct competitor with Xbox like PlayStation is. If anything, Switch is bigger competitor to Playstation given Switch can steal some of their audience especially in Japan.

Halo on Switch would come with Xbox Live software in it and potentially used to encourage users to play more Halo games on Scarlett. It would be profitable and could create more fans for the IP, without helping a direct competitor per se. I personally see it as good move for the IP.

If Switch isn't a big competition to X1/Scarlet the opposite is also true, but OP wouldn't want Nintendo SW going to Scarlet. So you are basically defending MS give away but don't receive back. That is a very clear case of second class citizen or colonial relationship.

curl-6 said:
DonFerrari said:

Still MS doesn't release in all platforms besides Minecraft that was already multi or cuphead that is a very small game. From that to Halo is a very big step, even if you portray it as not the latest Halo., and you put as if that would be the best decision for MS.

I think it'd be a win for MS; in the same way as Nintendo putting their IPs on smartphones, not only do they gain revenue, but as Puggsley says, having the older Halos on Switch could be a taster that could peak the interest of some and get them to invest in the new ones on Scarlet.

And it would be the same win for Nintendo to go third party. They would have 100M PS4, 45M X1, 100+M PCs to sell to. And I'm sure you won't accept. As you already tried to caveat that putting old content on Switch would be marvelous to MS, but putting older content from Nintendo on anything besides HH would be unacceptable.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Nintendo should make their own first party fps.
They have more than enough money and should start spending some of it.



I would love it to be honest :)
would be amazing to play Halo on the go on my Switch!

And this would probably be a win for both side.