The Switch is not another Wii U!

[bdbdbd]

Wyrdness said:

Again your argument is flawed here, PGO and SMR for a fraction of the budget have generated revenue on par with software that has to ship 3m on a dedicated platform, that flat out highlights what they've done is good.

Because those small games don't sell and push dedicated platforms and they don't make the library competitive.

No it isn't flawed. How do you know they were done with a fraction of the budget? 

ps4tw said:

In what world was Wii 3rd party support any good? The best it had was watered down versions of Call of Duty, while missing out on BF3, and all Unreal engine games. Same goes for Wii U - no Borderlands, no Battlefield, no Battlefront, no FIFA pass 2013. These game series have been some of the largest in the past few years, and all were absent from the Wii U...

With regards to trends, while Nintendo might be dipping it's toes into the waters of mobile gaming, their IPs remain largely unchanged for the last 30 years!! Gaming has dramatically changed and is considered more mature today, yet Nintendo still have a heavy focus on IPs that are considered childish. If it wasn't for the ~10 million strong crowd of hardcore Nintendo fans that are happy to buy anything with the Nintendo stamp on it, Nintendo would have been dead years ago. 

The AAA industry hasn't been dying - what the hell is that based on?? Ubisoft, Blizzard, Microsoft, Sony have all reported an increase in '16 revenue over '15. 

Yes, it has been dying. Just take a look how many developers and publishers have closed in 2000's. Despite increase in revenue, they're still closing studios. Besides, isn't it Activision you should look, and not Blizzard. 

Actually, Nintendo have been making quite a few new IP's in the last decade or so, that's not their problem. I'm not so sure if gaming is really considered more mature today that it was 30 years ago. Nintendo did have a huge impact on kids of the time, but there's still the audience that grew up with 70's computer- and videogames. What have changed is, that in the 80's gaming could still be considered something for the whole family.

Nintendo haven't been kiddy until very lately, roughly starting from 3DS.

padib said:

As much as I'd love to agree with you, for some people those were the games to talk about.

The way he worded it is wrong, the Wii had a ton of 3rd party support. Just in a certain type of game, it was completely lame. And for many people who buy PS and XB, those were the games to talk about and Nintendo wasn't part of the party.

But the part where he said only people who are happy to buy the same old Nintendo da da da. That was just a really bad dogma that just keeps getting propagated. Nintendo created a ton of new IPs especially during the Wii era. Most of the games in Nintendo's main series are constantly evolving, feeling like different games many times. The most notorious series on this chameleon style of creation are Mario and Zelda.

Saying that Nintendo makes games for everyone doesn't make their games childish. It's just that they are for everyone. And since when is that a bad thing? People could say that Sony always makes games for older people, games that lack originality and follow money trends. But even if there might be a portion of truth to that, why would it be a bad thing? Each company brings their strength to the industry and that is perfectly fine.

Pretty much the only reason why I have a Wii U is because of the AAA games suitable for kids.

In all honesty, NSMB series have just been more or less rehashing the same game over and over again. 3DWorld was similar non-content game, this time in 3D. Seeing the Wii U sales, people really aren't interested in bad content.

Yeah, but you can hardly say 3rd party support is bad if there's just one game or one types games missing from the library.