By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
potato_hamster on 19 January 2017
Edit Thread
zorg1000 said:
potato_hamster said:

None of those points are the same point. Sometimes the same product had multiple unexpected decisions to go along with it. As for your second statement regarding who is developing what, there are numerous internal and second party teams at Nintendo whose projects have not been announced. You're simply peering into the unknown and making the assumption that it is the same as what is known. That is unless it's Pokemon. That's obviously being developed for the Nintendo Switch because wishful thinking.

Yes, many of them are.

Expensive accessories is a single point.

Questionable online service is a single point.

Some of the points dont even apply, they either werent unexpected or arent really a negative aspect. Like no 3D Mario at launch, sure a few rumors and people thought it was going to make launch but it was in no way a big shock that its not.

1-2 Switch should not be that unexpected, Nintendo is known to release mini game compilations at or around launch to show of their systems unique features, WarioWare, Wii Sports, Wii Play, Nintendo Land are a few examples.

No pack in title is not that unexpected or necessarily a bad thing. Half of Nintendo's systems released without a pack-in title and PS/XB very rarely launch with a game bundled, thats something they usually do later.

So essentially your list of 14 unlikely and negative points comes down to 2-3.

As for my post about who is developing for what, note that i said CURRENTLY KNOWN GAMES, i said based on the currently known Nintendo IP coming to 3DS & Switch, most are interally developed, big IP for Switch while most are outsourced, smaller IP for 3DS. That is a true statement. Of course it could change if Nintendo starts announcing a bunch of internally developed big IP for 3DS but as of now the games we know about provide a clue (not proof) that Nintendo's big studios & games are on Switch.

First off, let's clarify one thing. I wasn't stating that all these were negative, or bad things, just things that were unlikely that Nintendo did. Not packing in a game or not launching with Mario aren't necessarily bad things, but most people expected Nintendo to do both of these at launch. That was my main point in that list.

So because Nintendo some of these you can encompass with vague wording, it doesn't mean that these were unexpected decisions? Nintendo decided to make many of their accessories overpriced . All of those accesories prices were reasonable decisions Nintendo could have made for those specific products and they chose not to. Notice how I didn't bring up the price of the steering wheel 2-pack? No one is complaining about that because Nintendo decided to price those reasonably. If I mentioned Nintendo accessories being overpriced as one larger point, that would be inaccurate because not all of them are.

Questionable online service is also not a single point, when that point also encompasses many terrible decisions Nintendo made. "Questionable online service" doesn't even accurately describe the clusterfuck of unexpectedly bad decisions Nintendo has made about its online services for the switch. They made multiple unexpected decisions regarding even specific aspects of the Nintnedo Switch

How is the fuck was 1-2 Switch expected? It's a VIDEO GAME that doesn't use VIDEO! You virtually milk cows for fuck's sake. That game is indefensible. Period.

As for what's being developed internally and externally, how much internal focus has ever been on handheld games vs internal focus on home console games. The shift your seeing may be slight, or it just could be because we don't what the announced games are. The fact that they just announced a 3DS exclusive Fire Emblem might point to this not being as substantial as you think.