| Bandorr said: An odd thread. On one hand - no Switch will probably not get the big AAA until they reach a point where they can't be denied. That will take years though - assuming it happens at all. On another it is fairly funny to see people responding with lists of Nintendo exclusives. While disproving one point - it proves another. Don't really understand the timing of the thread. This isn't new. Very few people actually expected RDR2 on the switch. |
It really is odd.
We have people implying that the Switch can't manage without major 3rd party support, even though Nintendo has had success without major 3rd party support in the past. That's not even considering that the Switch is a different kind of console, one that includes the handheld side of the equation, which has never depended on those franchises.
Then again, we have people trying to rationalize the situation by saying that those blockbuster 3rd party releases don't matter and that Nintendo didn't want them to begin with. Of course they matter, there is no business that doesn't want to make more money. We know for a fact that Nintendo reached out to Bethesda and others and that they've improved their 3rd party support to be more proactive, which leaves the theory that Nintendo excludes 3rd parties on purpose in ruins. That doesn't mean they need them, though.
The Wii U was a self-defeating device, a failure of design. It doesn't signify very much about the Switch. This is a different kind of console, so I think the best bet is to watch what happens rather than make pronouncement based on past systems.
