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

[bigjon]

flashfire926 said:

bigjon said:

So in that "list" list of Zelda games you laid out 4 HD updates (not new games) and 3 spinoffs that have nothing to do with the main games. My point was that a new real Zelda or Mario is still a big deal an event you could say. There is a difference between a Mario game and a game with Mario in it. Or at least that is how I see it. Even say like Mario Kart, that is just branding. These days there are like 30+ racers in the game and the themes of the tracks span Nintendo's entire portfolio. They keep the name Mario Kart strictly for branding reasons. It is definitely not a "Mario" game.

I do agree you could count 2D Mario games, which I guess adds about 3 for console over the past 26 years... 

Well, this is not my argument lol. I don't think Nintendo is milking their IPS , mr puggsly  is. By my definition, it can't be called milking since they still deliver a high quality product with thought and effort ( with the exception of a few like Mario party). 

you see, my stance is they have done a good job of making it clear when it is a "real" Mario or Zelda game and when it is just a branding thing. 

I do agree that they have been a tab bit too lose with the licenses the past 8-10 years though. Back in the gamecube and n64 days having Mario on a game meant it was well developed and back in those days Zelda had not really been commercialized (Soul Caliber 2 was like the 1st time ever Link appeared in a non Zelda main line game...)