Wii U had a great launch line up. Assassins Creed, CoD (which was amazing due to off tv multiplayer), Ninja Gaiden, Batman, Zombii U. Basically, it had pretty good western third party support as well as Nintendo Land (which I love very much) and New Super Mario Bros.. I think people want to poke holes in Wii U launch because the console was a failure when in reality, the console was a failure for reasons other than the launch line up.
This is not to say I am unhappy with Switch's offerings. I am just pointing out that the narrative that Nintendo needs certain titles to reach mainstream success (or success in general) is a narrative that should be ending any day now. Switch and Wii U had great games in their first six months. The difference was mostly in the types of games. Hell, while people can say, "Switch launched with Zelda and Wii U did not" I can say two things: 1) Zelda is not THAT big of a franchise and 2) The Switch Zelda is on Wii U as well (I bought it for Wii U) and is not exactly an exclusive anyway.
I think the narrative is being forced. The reasons why Wii U failed had a lot more to do with marketing and a lack of fundamental understanding of the direction the console should have gone (wanting all the major third party support but forgetting that the product was too different to truly garner said support) than the games that came out in the first six months.
Sure there was an overpriced Mass Effect on Wii U... don't most people call Ultra Street Fighter II overpriced on Switch? The same issues largely persist. The biggest differences are, as I previously stated, brand recognition, marketing, and identity. Nintendo has a clear plan and they are executing that plan to perfection.
01000110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01001001 01111001 01101111 01101100 01100001 01101000 00100001 00100000 01000110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01000101 01110100 01100101 01110010 01101110 01101001 01110100 01111001 00100001 00100000
