| zorg1000 said: You're one of my favorite posters on this site but.........that is one of the strangest leaps of logic I have ever read. Improved sequels to 3DS games will not appeal to 3DS owners because PS4/XBO are better than Vita????? How can you honestly make sense out of that? Fans of Monster Hunter, Fire Emblem, Animal Crossing, Bravely Default, Yokai Watch, Tomodachi Life, Shin Megami Tensei, Professor Layton, etc. will not want sequels because PS4/XBO are better than Vita. I can have Assassin's Creed & New Super Mario or Call of Duty & Nintendo Land or FIFA & Pikmin or Batman & Wind Waker HD did very little for Wii U so I dont see why you think having multiplats is such an important aspect when the most popular Nintendo platforms of all time had few multiplatform titles. |
And you one of mine.
I'm not saying that fans of those franchises won't want sequels and I'm not saying that the Switch won't do better with those games than it would without them. I'm saying that the boost will not equate to approaching 3DS levels. The 3DS was in a market with the Vita. If you bought a 3DS, you bought it not just because it had MH, FE, AC, BD, YW, TL, SMT, PL, etc, but because the only competing alternative had absolutely nothing that could compare to that line up. PS4 and XBO do. That's what I'm saying.
Most people don't have a "buy both" attitude. Compared to Assassin's Creed, Call of Duty, Uncharted, Bloodborne, Destiny, Red Dead, Mass Effect, Nioh, Far Cry, Deus Ex, The Division, Watch_Dogs, Horizon, etc, that line up is nothing. It just is. With muliplats, the playing feild is way more even, and Nintendo's value proposition actually blossoms.
I never claimed that multiplats alone were the silver bullet to success. Wii U had a ton of problems preventing its success and the success of multiplats. It wasn't getting most new multiplats as they came out, multiplats weren't being marketed for the Wii U, and it wasn't getting exclusive software that convinced the audience of those multiplats that the Wii U was a viable place to get multiplats. And on top of all that, it was the Wii U, so it had all the issues that came associated with being that console.
If Nintendo wanted to be software independant from multiplats, they wouldn't have built a system who's value proposition depends on multiplatform games to resonate. Having portable Zelda doesn't appeal to anyone who didn't already want vanilla Zelda and didn't already but a Wii U for Zelda. It doesn't add anything, because they were already going to buy a Switch for Zelda, regardless of if it was portable. Having portable GTA can appeal to anyone who wants vanilla GTA because they can't (theoretically) have portable GTA unless they own a Switch. It does add something because before, they had no reason to buy a Switch.
Nintendo needs multiplats for portability to be a sellable feature to something you otherwise may not have wanted, rather than a bonus feature to something you were always going to get. And because it puts them on an even playing field with the PS4 and XBO, which the Switch is and will always be compared to so that their exclusives are actually looks at as the tie breaking reason to buy a Switch instead of the either or reason, in which case the PS4 and XBO will always win because they have more games that appeal to the western demographic that buy these platforms.
