Nautilus said:
For the first bolded:
Stop saying Im moving goalposts.Its getting old and just make you look bad.Im not saying that games that are releasing now cant or wont have ports later.Im saying that by not releasing them early, not only they are dumb because they may lose sales because of this initial momentum that the Switch has and the "few" titles consumers has to choose between(like the gold rush analogy some indie developer talked about), but they also lose the chance to create brand loyalty for said brand since early in that system, since a game they release have more exposure and if its any good, it will turn more heads.PS4 had much less of this wait and see approach, because companies that usually published game on PS, like Activision, EA and so on had their annual franchises in there, or if it didnt have the games ported already, they were announced for it.And dont be so fixated about MHW or Fighters Z.They are just the biggest offenders and are just examples.Ni no Kuni II, Secret of Mana remake are others that should have already been announced for the Switch, because it makes sense.And MH XX is just a poor attempt at support.
For the Second bolded:
Already kinda answered in the first paragraph.You lose potential sales because of the early life of said console, and you hurt the consumer trust on the company.Im not blinded or anything that the support wont come.It obviously will, no company will ignore the success of a system and not capitalize in it.The whole point that you are missing and passing through your head is that I am saying that they are stupid for not taking a small risk of offering some true support early in the Switch lifecycle, instead of taking this wait and see approach.Not releasing a version for the Switch day and date as the others systems is just asking to lose sales and goodwill, that could translate to more sales in other games of the same company(much like what Bethesda is trying to do now with Doom and Wolfenstein).The reason why Pokemon and 3DS games are not ported over to the Switch is because the work required to port over is much greater than getting a game from PS4 that can work on the Switch and bring over.You dont need to rework the graphics, the game is not outdated graphically etc.There is a reason XX did not do extremely well sales wise(outside of the reason of being a port of a port).
For the third bold:
I used western devs for the PS4 because they are the usual suspects to support the system, at least since the PS3, while for Nintendo it has been mostly the japanese developers.PS4 got supported by its usual allies, while Nintendo was not supported by its usual supporters.Hence the comparison.Again, not moving any goalposts.
For the last part:
Your missing the point.Im not angry over companies that dont have a recent title to support Nintendo.After all, you cant support a system if you are not releasing anything in 2017 or close to it.My problem is with companies that had such games, had time to develop a version for the Switch, was a safe bet(as safe as it can get) because it was a game/franchise with an audience on Nintendo platforms, and yet the company choose to ignore such oportunity.
|
