| Wyrdness said: It's a given it's a successor to 3DS it's as clear as day don't worry about what some higher up says because they previously said DS wouldn't replace GB or that Wii U has a lot more games on the way. Half the sales of the DS is 70m that is in line with what handhelds normally sell and would still place a platform in the top 10 selling platforms of all time, DS is also the best selling platform in history selling half of its total is a huge success especially in the modern market, people should get over the notion that not selling DS numbers is bad because that platform was an anomaly even among successful platforms only other platform that compares to it is the PS2. 61m 3DS owners may not translate to that but then the is no other alternative for dedicated portable gaming, both Vita and 3DS owners have only one option so the is a very high likely hood of a high percentage migrating to Switch. Developer incentive here is simple they saw the Wii take off and many missed the boat and tried to get in on the success by releasing shovelware that got shotdown by consumers, now they see a potential success with another possible sizable userbase and want to be on board with legitimate efforts to try and tap into a userbase that is fresh for the picking, why do you think we have multiplatforms to begin with, they want as many options to sell on. A developer isn't looking at it like you are they're asking themselves one question what is the chance of a Nintendo portable device doing well, most of this userbase will be experiencing a new jump as the games will be all console like and that has the potential for good success for developers. Wii was written off that's why it didn't have support equivalent to sales yet the success was hard to ignore hence why several tried jumping on board later on, many had commited already to PS3 only and later had to add 360 and PC into their plans, you'll have to have a short memory to not know the situation because for 2 years people were claiming Wii would stop selling as it's a fad and when it's success continued and increased a lot of people who wrote it off fell silent. No one saw it's success coming, this is why right now developers aren't going to risk missing an opportunity. |
I believe it's the successor to the 3DS, nothing else makes sense, that wasn't really the point.
I have no illusions that PS2 and DS level sales are the norm or that anything below is bad, I'd consider anything above 50 million sales a success, if I were to choose an arbitrary number. Trust me; I'm perhaps the biggest critic of lofty thinking in here and have been spending the last 3-4 years arguing against those who think the PS4 will sell 150 million units or more, citing several arguments as to why it's near impossible for consoles to do that in the modern market.
As for inheriting installed bases; whatever happened to the majority of handheld gamers from the 7th gen? Between them, the Vita and DS had about 230-240 million users, yet about 150 million or more of those seem to have simply disappeared. And the home consoles are in general and combined tally selling considerably slower than the 7th gen contenders as well, so they haven't jumped ship and landed there either. Whose to say this can't happen to a significant portion of the 3DS audience? Fringe consumers will find other pastures to graze, like the vast majority of the Wii's installed base did. You claim I see things in black and white, yet you don't realize that you yourself do that very thing by simply assuming that 3DS owners will jump into a proxy of the 3DS, despite massive and very recent evidence that handheld customers are seemingly more likely to go elsewhere. At this point; the Switch is looking like a tablet, why aren't typical Nintendo like games huge on existing tablets and why would handheld consumers want a hybrid? Why would more tech interested consumers want a 720p tablet or a home system that is considerably weaker than the competition? Why would Wii U fans automatically like the Switch? Who exactly are they aiming the Switch at? These are all relevant questions, and I fear that the Switch as a concept is making the same mistake the Wii U did; trying to appeal to widely different demographics with one single platform.
My point with the Wii success and lack of support was a simple one; developers talk, words are cheap, action speaks etc. Let's wait and see what they're actually going to offer and not go crazy over a list of logos and studio names, it means next to nothing.
SpokenTruth said:
The difference here is that "unprecendented support" is ambiguous and vague. This is a very specific game being mentioned. As for why 3rd parties may have an interest, it's the portable factor. You can't take your PS3/4 or Xbox 360/1 on the go. Even a laptop is bulky and unwieldly for playing on the go. Do that means instant success and an influx of 3rd party support? Maybe, maybe not. But why downplay it when a game is likely being ported? |
Porting a 1 year old RPG (Dark Souls), porting a 5 year old RPG (Skyrim) and talking about "partnership" isn't ambiguous and vague? The Wii U had ports of Mass Effect 3, Assassin's Creed 3, Black Ops II, FIFA 13 and Batman: Arkham City, what happened next? FIFA 14 was scrapped, after both AC and AC4 tanked, they scrapped AC: Unity and other Ac titles on the platform, is the next Mass Effect available on Nintendo platforms, or even the two first ones? No, they're not. Batman games, none of the others appeared on Wii U (but the Telltale games actually appeared on iPad/iPhone, which says a lot on the situation). Call of Duty Black Ops III skipped the Wii U but appeared on the aging PS3 and 360, Advanced Warfare was the same story.
Are you seeing a pattern there? How about the Rayman debaccle when Ubi screwed Nintendo gamers over despite making sweet promises all along? My point is; one confirmed port of a 5 year old RPG and a rumor about a port of a 1 year old (will be one year since launch in March) tells us absolutely nothing about the level of commitment studios are willing to go into.
Ah, the portable factor, the very reason why 3rd party video game developers have been going nuts making and/or porting their main franchises and all their bigger efforts to tablets and phones. This isn't an incentive at all, and studios who have never or rarely worked on neither dedicated handhelds nor mobile devices are extremely unlikely to suddenly find this prospect enticing, especially with regards to their bigger efforts. As for the capabilities of the Switch; it doesn't appear to be able to do anything that most tablets, given attached controllers, won't also be able to do, probably even in higher resolutions and with more system resources and storage. And the choice to not flaunt online features and go for cartridges might not be a plus either, I hardly think that today's audiences are super excited about more gear and nick-nack's to carry around for the mobile devices and digital distribution is growing immensely large in the biggest markets. The one thing the Switch has over the others is Nintendo games, and that in and on itself is cool for the owner of a Switch, not so much a 3rd party developer.
Besides; "big gaming" in handheld form has already been attempted, it's called the PS Vita and we have first row tickets to its demise on this very site and forum, unless that somehow eluded you.
You claim I'm downplaying, but I want to flip the question back at you; what do we know besides one confirmed 5 year old port and one rumored 1 year old port and what does that say about future outlooks and efforts and why are people going nuts over a list of logos and names that tell us, in essence, nothing at worst and very little at best. Like I told another user; Nintendo have a Mario game for Apple devices now, making them a mobile gaming developer and Apple partner, does that mean they're going balls to the walls with support for Apple devices? No, and it's kind of in the same line of reasoning to claim so.
Miyamotoo said:
We don't know yet, Ubisoft said they have several Switch projects. Fact is that all around Switch is way more postive than it was for Wii U, even that list of partners and supporters is bigger than Wii Us list. Fact that Switch has Bethesda and From Software on board is very positive for Switch, Wii U didnt had them or any previous Nintendo platform. |
Ubisoft have said they have several Switch projects? What are these? Again, it's meaningless information, it could be anything, for better or for worse, and given Ubisoft's treatment of Nintendo platforms in the last 10 years or more, it's more than likely to be for the worse.
Again with the list of partners, it's a useless tidbit they've thrown out to cause hype, but it holds absolutely nothing by way of useful information. A list of names tells us nothing. From Software and Bethesda are talking about porting one game each, a 1 year old and a 5 year old port respectively, and the former is even just a rumor. This does in no way suggest that either studio is "on board" with the Switch, it sounds more very, very careful testing of the waters, which is better than nothing, granted.
Look, once again, I'm not trying to be evil or make anyone feel bad, but look at Nintendo's relation with 3rd parties over the decades and look at the big picture, words spoken versus action taken and try to take it with a grain of salt. We need actual, tangible information, dedications and confirmation of actual big efforts from the studios on this proverbial list for it to mean anything. For now, we are all Jon Snow, and know nothing.
