By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
TheMisterManGuy said:
Cobretti2 said:

Well they could make more games, lower costs of carts to 3rd party so they want to pt their games on the system and we as the gamers don't need to download 3/4 of the game and maybe if the game is complete on cart we will buy them and you know what they will make money from the sale.

From what I can tell, Nintendo is eating as much cost as they can on the larger Switch cartridges. And if not, well they're not going to loose a ton of money off of trying to resolve a complaint that most publishers don't really have TBH. 

WhatATimeToBeAlive said:

Yeah, just like Microsoft and EA are "broadening the audience" with games as a service model. Will you be defending them if I say that GAAS-model sucks?

This is just a short-sighted strategy caused by creed. Stop damage controlling it.

GaaS is not an inherently bad model, it's just often badly executed. Overwatch, Splatoon 2, among others show how this model can work when done right. And Nintendo wanting to broaden the audience of the Switch isn't greed, at least not the scummy kind of greed. It's just a way for Nintendo to get the Switch into more people's hands and make more money. 

AlfredoTurkey said:

They can't have it both ways. Many have tried, all have failed. 

Except they can, they have the cash and resources to do so. They did it on the DS, they can do it on the Switch. 

Yeah, they did that "get it into more people's hand" tactic with the Wii. That wasn't the best result from a core-gamer's perspective. And how do you make casual-/mobile games that are any good compared to hardcore games?



"The rumours of my death have been greatly exaggerated."

- Single-player Game