By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Johnw1104 on 22 June 2017
Edit Thread
RolStoppable said:

I gave up reading at the halfway point because you had already engaged in too many fallacies.

Switch continues the line of Nintendo home consoles and Nintendo handhelds at the same time, that's just how it is. I am willing to provide you with a smackdown for each of your points, if you are interested in getting shown the light.

Here's the response to your first point: The comparison to the GBA and DS is indeed faulty because Switch was never called a third pillar. When the DS launched, we truly had a situation where Nintendo supported GC, GBA and DS in 2005, hence why it was justified that they called the DS a third pillar. If the DS had failed, they could have fallen back on the Game Boy brand as if nothing happened, because the GBA got supported appropriately.

But Switch could never be a third pillar because it was already a given that Wii U support would end as soon as NX launched. You can't have a third pillar when there are only two platforms (Switch and 3DS). After this is established, it's necessary to look at the support that Nintendo's platforms are receiving. The 3DS isn't sitting as pretty as the GBA did. The GBA got more high profile software than the DS in 2005 while the 3DS is without a doubt getting second rate treatment in comparison with Switch.

Feel free to do so, talk is cheap after all... at least without additional talk that supports the claims of the initial talk :D

As for your first criticism, the Nx being described as a third pillar in all but name was something I only discovered while researching this thread. When first announced, Iwata told people the launch of the Nx would not spell the end of support for the 3DS and Wii U, and that they were talking with developers to make sure the Wii U and 3DS continued to receive releases and software once the Nx launched. This obviously proved to be largely untrue as far as the Wii U is concerned, but it was a claim that Nintendo felt it had to make to keep people buying Wii U's in the meantime. The rest of your paragraph is essentially exactly what I stated, so we don't seem to be disagreeing there.

Otherwise, I've never bought the "Third Pillar" claims and certainly don't believe Nintendo could maintain three hardware platforms simultaneously. I'm not sure where you got that impression, but I was merely mentioning how they've marketed things in the past to hedge their bets. Regardless, you seem to be ignoring the crucial backwards compatibility of the DS with GBA games, rendering the GBA virtually pointless. That's a key difference that guaranteed the GBA would be phased out unless the DS was absolutely rejected by consumers.