EA is not committed to Switch, they don't understand the Switch market yet.

[DonFerrari]

burninmylight said:

DonFerrari said:

That is exactly my point. PSVita already had the console games on a portable platform and was a failure. Nintendo is doing and now is the best thing ever for the Nintendo userbase. A lot of people put the reason to own Switch as to play console games on the go, but it actually is to play Nintendo games on the go.

You know why, because 3DS wasn't trying to be the console games portable, while PSVita was. PSvita was shunned while now Switch is adored. So the point that it is good because it is Nintendo stand.

That's far from the reason that the Vita failed and the 3DS thrived. I'm sure you know what they are, so I'm not going to waste time listing them. But just to indulge you, why would the 3DS try to be the "console games portable" when the Wii and Wii U existed? And are you denying that it didn't have console games on the go, like Xenoblade Chronicles, Donkey Kong Country Returns, Smash, Metal Gear Solid 3, Resident Evil: Revelations and plenty of other games that either existed on home consoles or would have worked just fine on them?

I never did like the "Vita tried to be a like a home console so it failed, 3DS didn't so it succeeded" argument. This isn't the original Game Boy days, where there was a thick line of demarcation between what you could expect on a  home console and portable system. If a portable has good games that people want and comes with the right price, people will get it.

If the console games on the go isn't what made PSVita fail, then it also isn't what makes the Switch succeed, period.

Switch is thriving because it is a Nintendo Handheld (yes we can call it a hybrid and that it play on TV), but most here want it for portability. So it isn't thriving because it is a console being portable.