By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Will Switch get third party support post PS5?

 

Will Switch get AAA support after 9-th gen consoles launch

Yes, as good or better 25 34.25%
 
Yes, but less games 18 24.66%
 
Yes, Switch will get exclusives 11 15.07%
 
No, just spinoff games 9 12.33%
 
No, Switch will get dropped 10 13.70%
 
Total:73
DonFerrari on 12 February 2020
0D0 said:
DonFerrari said:

If we believe Xbox is now gen-less it should

I hope so. I really hope it works. But making games for the Series and downgrading it all the way to S, or vice versa, is something quite extraordinary. Even so it'll be when Series X successor comes out in the future, and on and on..

Yep I'm curious to see how much that will impact both versions versus a Sony 1st party designed for PS5.



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

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
Chicho on 12 February 2020

PC games have done adjustable setting for a long time so it could work for xbox.



curl-6 on 12 February 2020

Nintendo should definitely be aggressive in pursuing third party exclusives and partnerships going forwards; secure more stuff like Octopath, Astral Chain, Deus ex Machina, Bayo 3, etc, moneyhat some ports if they have to, etc. They're sitting on a pile of gold to make Smaug envious after all. 



Nu-13 on 12 February 2020
curl-6 said:

Nintendo should definitely be aggressive in pursuing third party exclusives and partnerships going forwards; secure more stuff like Octopath, Astral Chain, Deus ex Machina, Bayo 3, etc, moneyhat some ports if they have to, etc. They're sitting on a pile of gold to make Smaug envious after all. 

That's a poor business practice that we've never seen from nintendo. Wouldn't expect it.



curl-6 on 12 February 2020
Nu-13 said:
curl-6 said:

Nintendo should definitely be aggressive in pursuing third party exclusives and partnerships going forwards; secure more stuff like Octopath, Astral Chain, Deus ex Machina, Bayo 3, etc, moneyhat some ports if they have to, etc. They're sitting on a pile of gold to make Smaug envious after all. 

That's a poor business practice that we've never seen from nintendo. Wouldn't expect it.

I don't see why it'd be bad. It might not sell a whole lot of consoles but it would help keep fans happy by filling in the gaps between big releases.



Around the Network
Nu-13 on 12 February 2020
curl-6 said:
Nu-13 said:

That's a poor business practice that we've never seen from nintendo. Wouldn't expect it.

I don't see why it'd be bad. It might not sell a whole lot of consoles but it would help keep fans happy by filling in the gaps between big releases.

Sell consoles? It's a bad move to pay for ports, period. Nintendo never did it because it is bad business.



curl-6 on 12 February 2020
Nu-13 said:
curl-6 said:

I don't see why it'd be bad. It might not sell a whole lot of consoles but it would help keep fans happy by filling in the gaps between big releases.

Sell consoles? It's a bad move to pay for ports, period. Nintendo never did it because it is bad business.

Why is it bad? It could bring in some games they're currently missing.



Nu-13 on 12 February 2020

curl-6 said:
Nu-13 said:

Sell consoles? It's a bad move to pay for ports, period. Nintendo never did it because it is bad business.

Why is it bad? It could bring in some games they're currently missing.

Paying for something that is meant to be free is bad. Nintendo won't do it.



curl-6 on 12 February 2020
Nu-13 said:
curl-6 said:

Why is it bad? It could bring in some games they're currently missing.

Paying for something that is meant to be free is bad. Nintendo won't do it.

But if it's gonna miss out otherwise, I don't see what's wrong with, say, Nintendo slipping Platinum a fiver to port Nier Automata for example.



Nu-13 on 13 February 2020
curl-6 said:
Nu-13 said:

Paying for something that is meant to be free is bad. Nintendo won't do it.

But if it's gonna miss out otherwise, I don't see what's wrong with, say, Nintendo slipping Platinum a fiver to port Nier Automata for example.

In that case, wouldn't it be Square enix? Anyway, no company will pay for what must be free and that's what is wrong with the idea.