By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Shaunodon said:
DonFerrari said:
So PS4 will have to prove itself to get those middle level games? Yep, all a conspiracy theory against Nintendo.

"Switch's one ideal platform to put middle-range games, which got tough to achieve business success."

In their words, seems PS4 has already proven that it's not a great place for middle-range games (I don't see NieR:Automata as one).
They at least gave it a fair go.

I'm quite sure if it was talking about Nintendo we would have rage... like 3 or 4 gens of games selling bad on Nintendo HW doesn't warranty any company to wait for Switch to prove itself to be able to sell 3rd party SW before committing... any middle range game SE launched on PS4 that failed that you would like to put? Because he didn't say PS4 or X1 isn't good for it, he said Switch IS IDEAL.

NintendoPie said:
DonFerrari said:
So PS4 will have to prove itself to get those middle level games? Yep, all a conspiracy theory against Nintendo.

It's only fair.

Yep. PS have proven record of middle range games failing, all those 100k sellers in Japan.

Miyamotoo said:
shikamaru317 said:

I agree that their AAA western exclusives won't see the light of day on Switch. Graphically demanding games like Tomb Raider, Deus Ex, Hitman, and the upcoming Marvel games would take alot of extra effort to downgrade enough to run on Switch properly, and the sales likely wouldn't be enough to make it worth the time and effort. Their big Japanese series like KH and FF are definitely more likely, and I do personally believe we'll see FFXV and KH3 on Switch and possibly even a KH 1.5/2.5/2.8 collection and FF7 Remake after it's timed PS4 release.

But like Square said, most of their Switch effort will be on mid-range titles moving forward, they are less graphically demanding and therefore will take less work to get running on Switch. 

You do realise that Rise of Tomb Raider is running on Xbox 360 thats weaker than Switch!? They also said "Switch's core architecture similar to PS4/Xbox One. Some adjustment necessary, but multi-platform games not impossible".

They loud and clear said "we won't rule out any IPs", so you basicly dont have nothing to backup claims like "that their AAA western exclusives won't see the light of day on Switch", or that "the sales likely wouldn't be enough to make it worth the time and effort". Espacily when all reports we have until now most of 3rd party games are selling good on Switch. If Bethesda ported Doom and its porting Wolfenstein 2 I dont see why we couldnt see games like Deus Ex, Hitman and espacily Rise of Tomb Raider.

Also they didn't said that most of their Switch effort will be on mid-range titles, just they want to be more aggressive about mid-range games. Also funny how you act like they wrote only that part about mid-range titles, while you completly ignoring they wrote "When consider games for Switch), we won't rule out any IPs. Those include new ones, currently active ones, currently not-active ones." and "probably other platforms will get these too as part of multi, but we would aggressively make games for Switch".

So now can you help and shut all those guys that keep saying there is a conspiracy against Nintendo by all 3rd parties?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."