| bdbdbd said: So, are you now trying to say 3rd support don't matter, or what? If the third parties did not matter on Wii, why should they matter on Switch? Wii U failed because of the lack of third party support, when it in fact had much better 3rd party support at this point of time relative to release than Switch has, or Wii had. I don't know a single person, gamer or otherwise (despite you arguing gamers buying the Wii for it's controls) buying Wii for it's controls. And by looking at that pretty insane number of game sales on Wii, game sales support my side. |
Uh, the third-party support for the Wii was A) limited or B) nonexistent. That was already proven. The Wii was not a true next-gen console, in terms of performance. The exact same was true of the WiiU. That was already proven. The Wii used novel controls to sell to EVERYONE, hence all the grandmas and grandpas who ended up with a Wii. Gamers know this; we all know this. Some call it a design novelty; others call it a gimmick. Some call it clever; others call it a fluke. Nearly everyone on this forum agrees and is well aware that it was an aberration. This is regularly being proven.
The Switch has a novel design element (or "gimmick:" your choice), like the Wii and the WiiU. It's success hinges on the market's receptiveness to this novelty, which I've had to say here again and again and again and again. If it does not, it will be left to lean on mainstream gamers: the gamers who primarily buy multiplatform games. The pricepoint is too high to be an incentive. The performance capabilities are too low to be an incentive. Unless you missed the WiiU, PS3, PS4, X360, and X1 i.e. the last decade of gaming, you know that first-party support isn't driving console sales (like the Wii). It's third-party support or innovation.
